Americans see rich-poor gap worsening

[jefferson_dem]

Americans see rich-poor gap worsening

By MATTHEW BENJAMIN
BLOOMBERG NEWS

Americans overwhelmingly say the growing gap between rich and poor has become a serious national concern, a sentiment that may bolster Democrats' plans to narrow the income divide when they take control of Congress.

Nearly three-quarters of Americans believe inequality is a major issue, versus 24 percent who don't think so, according to a new Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll. Most of the concern is among Democrats and independent voters, though a majority of Republicans -- 55 percent -- also called the situation serious.

"Income inequality is widening quite rapidly," said Alice Rivlin, a former vice chairwoman of the Federal Reserve who's now a public policy professor at Georgetown University in Washington. "It does matter to people that there are such unequal chances to get ahead."

<SNIP>

Still, anxiety about the growing rich-poor divide unites Americans, crossing income and political divisions. Among those earning less than $40,000 a year, 84 percent called the gap a serious problem, with more than half saying it's "very serious." Among those earning more than $100,000, more than three in five said it's a serious concern. Those in the middle-income group making between $40,000 and $60,000 were almost as concerned as the least wealthy.

"The ultrarich and the rich continue to have mechanisms to make money, like the stock market and executive salaries," Kevin Godsea, an employee with the Fish and Wildlife Service, said in a follow-up interview.

"And the wages of middle-class workers are stagnant," said Godsea, 30, a registered Republican in Fort Myers, Fla., who considers himself middle class.

<SNIP>

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/295840_polleconomy14.html

[trotsky]

1. Repukes for years have been trying to sell this as being a good thing.

The old "trickle down" nonsense. OK, where's the trickle? Why is the gap GROWING? Maybe people are finally catching on.

[Lasher]

2. Supply side economics is just a scam to steal from the poor and give to the rich

Demand side economics is what we need.

[Megahurtz]

23. Liars!

Trickle down my ass. :grr:
Sucked up is more like it.
All the money gets sucked up from the bottom and goes to the top.
Just how the thieving Repukes want it.

I'd like to see them lose all their wealth by a redistribution downwards.

[RedRocco]

27. thought you knew..

"trickle down" means give it all to those at the top and piss on the rest of you

[Tanner_B.]

3. Oh, This Is Just Class Warfare!

Unfortunately, their class is winning it. :(

[gratuitous]

4. Americans see that only because it's true

Too bad the only people allowed to voice their opinions on our nation's airwaves are on the "rich" side of the rich-poor divide. But even the combined efforts of overrich conservawhacko commentators may not be enough to effectively defuse public demand for a new course.

[1932]

14. This is so true. The ONE thing you'll never hear in the media is a criticism

of the polarization of wealth.

And there's actually a really clinical reason for this.

In the very interesting book, The Health of Nations, there's a section on how countries with high levels of (after-tax) income equality have the lowest per capita expenditures by the private sector on advertising, whereas people in countries with high levels of income equality have the highest levels of per capita advertising expenditures.

The book then cites studies on how products are marketed. Products are often marketed in the first round based on exclusivity -- they're priced so that not everyone can afford them, and they're marketed in a way to imply that, if you buy the product, you enter a select group of wealthy people. Once the public broadly accepts that the product confers social status, the price is lowered slightly so that more people can afford it (but not too much, since people will be willing to stretch their budgets and be poor so long as they appear privileged) and more people buy the product.

Wealth inequality, therefore, is actually a key element of modern (or late?) capitalism in, particularly, America where there is tremendous income inequality. Exploiting the desire not to look poor in a society were there are huge differences between the wealthy and the poor is the way companies get people to buy things they don't really need and that, otherwise have low or no utility.

This is a lot easier for coprorations than making useful products that people only buy when they add real value, which is how capitalism works in countries with low income inequality. For example, imagine Sweden: if most people can afford a cell phone because everyone makes a similar amount of money, people aren't buying them because they confer status. They're buying them based on a rational decision about whether they need them, which is why advertisers don't waste their money trying to manufacture desire based on class anxiety. (In America, when you meet someone who doesn't own a cell phone, do you think it's because they made a rational decision about whether they need it, or do you think it's because they're poor?)

The Health of Nations doesn't talk about this, but, after reading the book, one conclusion I drew was that income equality would achieve two very important long-term goals our globe must pursue: it will reduce overconsumption of our resources, and it will stimulate useful innovation (ie, we'll stop wasting valuable time and resources making things people don't need, and capitalism would depend on the production of products that are socially valuable).

[gratuitous]

16. Interesting analysis

Unfortunately, again, the nation's airwaves (public airwaves, I might stress) are dominated by the voices of people making a lot of money off of income disparity and who have a personal stake in continuing the society of overconsumption and status-seeking. Books like The Health of Nations and Amusing Ourselves to Death might get a brief moment where the author talks about his book on some obscure talk program, but a serious, ongoing discussion of the way our society is structured is stifled because the "winners" monopolize the conversation.

[closeupready]

19. Also, they make tons of money, so the status quo obviously works for them.

People like Matt Lauer/Katie Couric, etc. form part of the traditional base of the GOP - the wealthy. Why would they want to see dems take control when that would ultimately mean that they would be required to pay more $$$ in taxes (millions more, for the top-earners)? It really makes sense, when you look at how the media provides political coverage. At least in my opinion.

EDIT: gratuitous just posted the same thing - brilliant minds, I guess. :D :hi:

[Tellurian]

26. The misnomer here is, it doesn't matter who is in power

whether it's the R's or the D's. The system will remain the same as far as wealth is concerned.
The Dem's first proposal will be to raise the minimum wage. By how much will that be.. $0.75/$1.00?
More taxable income to fill the coffers. Just another angle of looking at a glass half filled w/water.

[PeaceProgProsp]

28. Raising the minimum wage is actually an excellent wealth redistribution strategy

[Red Zelda]

5. And no one will do a thing to stop it

The sheep have no balls.

[MikeNearMcChord]

6. Actually they get directed to another "issue"

by the RW on the "War on Christmas" or how Gays are coming after their families and their marriage, or any other "cultural" issues.

[Tellurian]

7. The only way to stop it

is to do something about it yourself.

If you are inclined to waiting for someone else to help you get somewhere; that is the mentality they
are catering to. There is no help. You have to find your own way yourself.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

10. yep. Just pull yourself up by your bootstraps

must not be working hard enough, or something.


:eyes:

[Tellurian]

18. Basically, that is the gist of it..

Clinton is a prime example of just that.

[closeupready]

20. So then explain for me why we give all these tax breaks to people

who don't need it? How about making the playing field more fair? Would that be of no help?

There is no such thing as a purely free market.

[Tellurian]

21. Throughout the ages..

The rich were taxed according to their income bracket and so it went for all.
It only has been since Bush has inhabited the WH that the rule change has affected
the rich as dramatically. The Death Tax was the final loophole needing to be closed.

The way the system was viewed, the Rich paid their due at inheritance time. Which
was a palatable solution for the masses.

I just finished a seminar on finance. This is how our taxable income is structured.
in a nutshell. Anyone making $25K to $35K are considered the (working) poor and are
taxed heavily on their earnings. The middle income people making $150K to $250K a year
are the most heavily taxed. The rich are those making over $1M in income, will pay no
Tax at all.

So, this new system is designed to break the back of the middle income people as the
new working poor middle class until a new threshold is created leaving only a two
class system, The Rich and the Poor.

[closeupready]

22. Oh, I see. Sorry, I misinterpreted your message.

Thanks for 'splainin'. :D

[The2ndWheel]

8. And they say these things aren't zero-sum

Everyone can have everything. Well, if that happens, we'll pay for it somewhere else. Such as climate change, overconsumption, overpopulation, or whatever.

Some people get everything, most don't, and some get nothing. Well, then we still have poverty, and the middle class will not only want, but need, and demand more of what the wealthy have, as they have every right to it that anyone does(like China and India in relation to the US).

Or, the field is completely level, everyone gets a little bit of everything, but not everything of everything. Not sure what force will bring that about, at least not in this large scale world.

But most people want globalization(you have to take the good with the bad, that balance thing again). Most people seem to enjoy competition(you have to take the good with the bad again). Most people don't see much wrong with specialization(which helps the class structure remain firmly intact). There is a balance to this thing we call existence, and we just have to figure out which scale to use.

[rodeodance]

9. i see the effects everyday----most just "getting by"--"living to work"

[1932]

11. I think income inequality is the greatest threat to our country and our democracy

I think it's the most important political issue today and I think most every other significant political issue falls under this umbrella. For example, if there were less income inequality, there would be less concentration of political power in a few hands of those doing the bidding of coprorations and the powerful, and we wouldn't have the Iraq War and we wouldn't have the health care system we have now, and we wouldn't have a lot of the other problems that people tend to focus on to the exclusion of the more important, broader issue of concentration of economic power.

Today, I'm looking for politicians who recognize that this is the major political issue.

[Patiod]

12. Was heartened to see it acknowledged as a problem by Cons

Was watching one of the "roundtable" shows before the last election, and the question was "the economy is GREAT - why isn't that an issue in this election?"

A few of the dinosaurs said "because the press doesn't report a good economy - only bad economic news"

But some economist (from the WSJ?) said "because the average American isn't getting any of the benefits. Those benefits are accruing only to the top 10-20%, and the American people sense that, so the Republicans know that 'strong economy' isn't a winning issue for them, or we would have heard Republican candidates talking a lot more about it."

Wow! A public acknowledgment of the truth!!!! Wonder if he still has his job....

[HughBeaumont]

15. "The press doesn't report a good economy"??

You not only have to be a dinosaur, but a foot-in-the-grave catatonic to say something like that. There's NEVER bad economic news in BushCoMedia, Inc. And on it's chief channel, all the lemming goons at Faux like Cavuto, Asman and FrankenHume practically LEAP over each other praising the Bewsh Admin's economy.

Listening to them, it's like "Everything's spectacular - just LOOK at that unemployment rate! EVERYone has a job! EVERYone's earning at LEAST 16 bucks an hour! Jobs Jobs JOBS aplenty! Anyone in the middle class and poor castes who isn't profiting hand over fist is either not educated enough or is simply LAZY!!!"

[HughBeaumont]

13. Perfectly Legal

David Cay Johnston.

Everyone should read this book and be angered at just how they do it and how badly you're all getting screwed. Even the Repukes who aren't accepting their serf status and think they're rich.

[Megahurtz]

24. Grrrrrrrr....

makes me want to move to another Country. I wish it was so easy.:(

[maxrandb]

17. Pssssst! Hey, Americans

S-T-O-P
E-L-E-C-T-I-N-G
R-E-P-U-B-L-I-C-A-N-S!!

Can you hear me now?

[The Backlash Cometh]

25. Those Bush tax breaks are only one of many ways that they

keep their money and status safe. I say we go at them with impunity so they can see how unfair they've been to the poor. As a member of the Middle Class, it is my responsibility to restore balance to the universe. :-)

[lovuian]

29. Corporations have been stealing from the American worker

and Republicans have destroyed the Middle Class
This is what causes Depressions