And Now the Richest .01 Percent by Robert Reich

[Crewleader]

Monday, November 17, 2014

The richest Americans hold more of the nation’s wealth than they have in almost a century. What do they spend it on? As you might expect, personal jets, giant yachts, works of art, and luxury penthouses.

And also on politics. In fact, their political spending has been growing faster than their spending on anything else. It’s been growing even faster than their wealth.

According to new research by Emmanuel Saez of the University of California at Berkeley and Gabriel Zucman of the London School of Economics, the richest one-hundredth of one percent of Americans now hold over 11 percent of the nation’s total wealth. That’s a higher share than the top .01 percent held in 1929, before the Great Crash.

We’re talking about 16,000 people, each worth at least $110 million.

One way to get your mind around this is to compare their wealth to that of the average family. In 1978, the typical wealth holder in the top .01 percent was 220 times richer than the average American. By 2012, he or she was 1,120 times richer.

http://robertreich.org/post/102926070780

[daleanime]

1. K&R....

[nikto]

2. But the wealthy are morally superior, and are favored by GOD...

[zentrum]

3. They spend it on multiple houses

Around the world. New York, Gstaad, Monoco. For instance, wealthy Asians and Russians buy incredibly expensive condos in NYC---in the 30 to 40 million dollar range and up, and may never even stay there. They're called "bank accounts in the sky". They consider such purchases safer than investing in their own economies. Just an example of what the super rich do and how they think.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

4. Just shows that the system they set up for themselves

is working perfectly.

[stuffmatters]

5. And their political spending is largely tax free

So working, middle class Americans are forced to carry the tax load for all their propoganda and legal bribery.

Why can't the IRS change the language back on the PAC nondisclosure/tax protections to apply only to institutions which are "entirely" charitable, get rid of the "primarily" loophole that the IRS by itself substituted in Eisenhower years. No reason it can't be returned to the original language.

I don't think American taxpayers realize how much money they are "contributing" to these political campaigns and ads by allowing these
oligarchs to control our public voice with billions of their taxfree riches.

[redruddyred]

6. this is why I get so mad at people when they don't vote.

of course the system's rigged, but this is true of every aspect in life. at least in politics, we are guaranteed a voice. a muted one, but a voice nonetheless.

[DFW]

7. Paragraph 2 could apply to me as well

"In fact, their political spending has been growing faster than their spending on anything else. It’s been growing even faster than their wealth."

Now if only I were a billionaire, and my wealth were growing by 10% a year. As it is, I don't seem to have made much of a difference anywhere this time (well, maybe NH and MI Senate and a few House races, but that's about it--the rest was money down the well). Maybe if there had been 25 million more people along with me, but that's the disadvantage of being the party that stands up for the less affluent--we don't have the cash. All we do have is our votes, and if we don't use them, the motivated fanatics on the other side will get a result like, well, the one we just got.

[Crewleader]

8. Very well said DFW

"All we do have is our votes, and if we don't use them, the motivated fanatics on the other side will get a result like, well, the one we just got."