I’m sure that most of you have seen it already, as it’s been all over the web today, but, just in case you haven’t, I’d highly recommend that you take a few minutes and watch this short animated video on the subject of wealth disparity in America.
I suspect that our readers on the far right will reject it offhand as the work of agitators looking to instigate “class warfare,” and our friends on the far left will find fault with the way in which Socialism is summarily written off as a non-viable alternative to our current system, but I think this is exactly the kind of straightforward, fact-driven, middle-of-the-road, non-partisan piece that we need more of. Now, if we could just find a way to incorporate an adorable squeaking frog doing the Harlem Shake, we’d be all set.
Here, for those of you who would like to dig deeper, are the references behind the video:
And, if you’re interested, our previous conversations on wealth inequality can be found here.
[Tonight’s post is brought to you by the Romney for Detroit campaign.]
32 Comments
Straightforward, fact-driven, middle of the road piece? You’ve got to be kidding. The distribution of wealth is not the function of government, nor is it equitable for the majority to take from those who have more.
Socialism is a non-viable alternative that creates dependency and reduces all opportunity for personal wealth. Except once it is widespread, the 99% will no longer have the option of protest or advocacy for change. We’ll all be standing in lines, hoping for a sliver of the ever diminishing pie.
Mark,
How come you have readers on the far right but friends on the far left? Why can’t we be friends?
EOS, the distribution of wealth TO the richest few has been an extremely large part of our government for 30 years now. They have gamed the system, spent future revenue and we now all feel the results. You label as “redistribution of wealth” the simple concept that we should all benefit from living in this very rich country we have all had a hand in creating and defending. Instead, fools like you are no longer able to see the difference between religious and political propaganda to the point where you think Jesus has a viable opinion about proper levels of defence spending and deficits. You’ve been snowed, man.
this meme went viral in 1848.
This is an issue of national security. Countries with this kind of wealth disparity are prone to upheaval and civil war. This should not be taken lightly.
The sadist in me would love to see Romney brought to Detroit to serve as our Emergency Manager.
Backing up my earlier point, this is from Forbes:
Social and political problems must arise sooner or later from this predicament. As Galbraith writes, (WE study inequality) “because it enables us to understand the economic world in which we live, in ways that were not accessible to us before. One of the most important of those ways is precisely the neglected linkage between inequality and instability, between finance and society, and between economic and social differences and the risks of financial crisis.”
Galbraith’s not the only one who feels that way.
Here’s the free market apostle Alan Greenspan in 2007 admitting that “you cannot have a market capitalist system if there is a significant mood in the population that its rewards are unjustly distributed.” Notice please the notion “unjustly distributed” from one of the policymakers who made it so.
And here’s one of the giant jurists of our history, Justice Louis Brandeis, who warned many many decades ago that “We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.”
So, ask yourselves whether the growing tendency for inequality of wealth could lead to unrest and less innocent political action than Occupy Wall Street. I know some academics who believe social unrest in three to five years is a very real possibility. Harvard economist Ken Rogoff, for example, has been predicting that as the federal budget is reduced, and there are reduced payments for Medicare and Medicaid as well as Social Security, there is bound to be social unrest from the pinched “have-nots.”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertlenzner/2012/07/20/increasing-wealth-inequality-is-a-warning-sign-of-instability/
Another article that may be of interest. This comes from Nouriel Roubini, professor of economics at New York University’s Stern School of Business.
Read more:
http://www.economonitor.com/nouriel/2011/10/17/full-analysis-the-instability-of-inequality/
As the world’s greatest CEO, Jesus Christ, once said, “The wealth will trickle down to those attractive young people willing to sell their bodies for cash.”
http://www.disinfo.com/2013/03/japanese-advertising-firm-rents-ad-space-on-young-womens-bare-legs/
EOS: “How come you have readers on the far right but friends on the far left?”
Mark has friends on the far left? NAME ONE. Mark is a center-right DP-apologist hack who seems to be unaware of how wildly-far to the right the entire national conversation has become during his lifetime. A moderate right-winger like him, or (say) Obama, is now considered “left”!
EOS: “Socialism is a non-viable alternative that creates dependency and reduces all opportunity for personal wealth. Except once it is widespread, the 99% will no longer have the option of protest or advocacy for change. We’ll all be standing in lines, hoping for a sliver of the ever diminishing pie.”
Precisely the opposite of the truth — par for the course, here in the right-dominated corporation-brainwashed U.S. of A.
Socialism was and is highly viable — for the 99%. Though, it is true, the benefits come at the cost of “opportunity” (for further theft and looting of society) by the already-rich. That is a big cost, indeed.
In case you had not noticed, half of us are ALREADY “standing in lines, hoping for a sliver of the ever diminishing pie” — a pie that has already been largely devoured by the elites and money powers. THIS is your wonderful “free market capitalism” (note the contradiction in terms), in action. THIS is the result, and it will get much worse. It is a FAILED SYSTEM, and in coming decades it will be impossible for even the likes of you to deny it.
Here’s a link for you, though I doubt that it will do much good. You will realize that we live in a failed system only when the collapse becomes much more acute. And even then, you’ll likely explain it all away using canned Faux-News “analysis” — blaming the “liberals”, or the decline in church attendance, or some such rubbish. But here goes, anyway. Try it! You might learn something:
http://gowans.wordpress.com/2012/12/21/do-publicly-owned-planned-economies-work/
Do Publicly Owned, Planned Economies Work?
Posted in Communism, Public Ownership and Planning, Socialism, Soviet Union, USSR by what’s left on December 21, 2012
Compared to capitalism, the USSR’s publicly owned, planned economy worked remarkably well.
By Stephen Gowans
The Soviet Union was a concrete example of what a publicly owned, planned economy could produce: full employment, guaranteed pensions, paid maternity leave, limits on working hours, free healthcare and education (including higher education), subsidized vacations, inexpensive housing, low-cost childcare, subsidized public transportation, and rough income equality…….. [continues at link]
You make it sound like the deck is stacked against the non-wealthy, like we’re slashing education budgets while protecting multi billion dollar giveaways for corporate jets and the like. If you really loved America you’d pay more attention to American Idol, and stories of our brave men fighting against godless Arabs.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/tax-reform/news/2013/02/14/53419/infographic-tax-loopholes-for-corporate-jets-or-investments-in-jobs-and-education/
Oh, what the hell? Here’s a few core paragraphs from the Gowans article. This is a response not so much to EOS, who is probably beyond hope, but to the right-winger who made the leading video — and could not get through it without a couple of idiotic and gratuitous swipes at “socialism” (about which he apparently knows nothing that he did not pick up from the WSJ or other CIA propaganda).
[attempting an html “blockquote” here…]
The Dow is way up today. They say it’s in spite of the sequester. I suspect, however, that it’s because of it. Smaller government means less oversight. Smaller government means less social spending. Small government means greater wealth transfer to the American aristocracy.
The big flaw of capitalism is that it concentrates wealth over time. The big flaw with socialism is that it can be very inefficient. So far, the best answer and most workable system seems to be a blending of the two economic systems. We already know that countries who have tried this (eg Sweden and yes, the USA) have been successful with it.
The trouble with the USA right now is that some people are doing everything they can to dismantle what bits of socialism we already have, such as education, while preventing areas of the economy, such as healthcare, from becoming newly socialized. It is frustrating for me because there really are things where the people are best served by socialism and where society is best served by making sure that everyone has their basic needs met at least. Income equality has many benefits including such luxuries as lower crime and lower stress and certainly less political upheaval.
What I wish I could figure out though is how the 1% has convinced so many in the 99% that wealth distribution is bad if it means taking from the rich and giving to the poor but it is perfectly ok when the wealth is being redistributed in the other direction. If you watch that video, you can clearly see that is the trend.
“The trouble with the USA right now is that some people are doing everything they can to dismantle what bits of socialism we already have.”
and yet we all sit staring at our facebook feeds, which comforts us with the knowledge that 98% of our friends are also apathetic
Really? You think Stalin, who killed between 20 to 60 million of his own people, had a better system? The mass starvation in North Korea is a fictional account of WSJ and the CIA? Read Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn if you really want to know how high the standard of living was in USSR and how happy the Soviet citizens were with their socialist form of government.
The current economic crisis has its roots in the Federal Reserve and Central Banks rather than any inherent failure of capitalism.
alan, you’re going to have a rough go of trying to defend Stalin. Seriously, the guy was a mass-murdering fuckhead. Just let it go.
That said, you make a very good point that a centrist like Mark is now considered some sort of lefty pinko whack job. That there is the power of marketing, folks.
I disagree wholeheartedly with anon, however, that we are a bunch of mindless drones “sit staring at our facebook feeds”. That’s horseshit. We are working folks who try to do our best at all times. We do what we’ve always done: take care of our families and vote once in a while. The system is so corrupt, however, that we voted for a centrist governor and got some crazy bastard and we voted for better schools and got three shitty leaders where one alone easily could have run the system into the ground by himself.
I, for one, can’t fucking wait to vote for our next drain commissioner. That’s some flippin’ sweet democracy right there.
EOS: “You think Stalin, who killed between 20 to 60 million of his own people, had a better system?”
And where, pray tell, did those numbers come from? You need not reply to that rhetorical question. I already know, in detail. For you, they came from Faux News or the equivalent (i.e. trashy low-brow right-wing “sources”). For them, i.e. for Faux News and its equivalents, they came originally mostly from Robert Conquest, a right-wing “historian” who popularized such absurd numbers. Actually, I cannot blame it all on Conquest, as his figures were, though wildly exaggerated, more reserved than that. Then along came the far-right fascist-sympathizers and propagandists, who exaggerated the exaggerations! Hence we have truly laughable claims of SIXTY MILLION murdered — this at a time when the entire population of the USSR was under thrice that! You would think that the idiots making such claims would pause for just a moment to compare the claims with the overall demographic context, in which light they are immediately identifiable as absurd. But nooooo. Anyway, I link below a fairly detailed discussion of the issue, including important information about Conquest and Solzhenitsyn; I urge you to read it.
“The mass starvation in North Korea is a fictional account of WSJ and the CIA?”
I did not say that. It is not fictional. It WAS, however, very much a product of policies promulgated by just such slime. If you want a great deal of essential background on N Korea, read Gowans’ blog, linked previously.
Here’s the link. Please read the sections on Conquest, Solzhenitsyn,
and the Russian prison system. Actually, you might want to read the
whole thing. Who knows? You might learn something that your
pro-fascist right-wing media handlers would rather you not know.
http://www.stalinsociety.org.uk/lies.html
Lies concerning the history of the Soviet Union
From Hitler to Hearst, from Conquest to Solzhenitsyn:
the history of the millions of people who allegedly were incarcerated and died in the labour camps of the Soviet Union and as a result of starvation during Stalin’s time.
brainless: most U.S. presidents are mass-murdering fuckheads. Where does that leave us? My “defense” of Stalin is less than meets the eye. I am mostly opposed to outrageous lies that are used to discredit a system that did, in fact, work for the 99%. My purpose was not to suggest that Stalin was a nice guy. Obviously he wasn’t. But then, he could not afford to be. There is this minor matter called “historical context”, which in that case included things like dealing (somehow) with legions of fanatical ideological enemies who could have, and nearly did, wreck the USSR from within, while at the same time fighting off the greatest military machine ever assembled on earth, which threw itself at the USSR with utter savagery and dedication to murder millions and lay waste… and that was BEFORE the Western powers took up the fallen cudgel of Naziism and continued to wage Barbarossa by other means, for decades after. I mean, seriously. Cut the guy some slack and stop buying-in to CIA/state-department pro-fascist, anti-communist propaganda. Don’t be a fucking patsy. Just let it go.
The guy narrating the video in question isn’t a right winger. When he talks about Socialism, and says “and we know that won’t work”, listen to the way he’s saying it. The point is, this video does a great job on not bringing in partisan Democrat/Republican politics. It just states the facts. And it’s worth noting that no one has called the facts into question. This is really happening, and we all know it. It’s like the gilded age all over again.
From The Atlantic:
“This is America, Now: The Dow Hits a Record High With Household Income at a Decade Low”
Read the article:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/03/this-is-america-now-the-dow-hits-a-record-high-with-household-income-at-a-decade-low/273719/
How many of the top .1% are so-called “self-made” men, and how many of them inherited wealth? I’d love to see that chart.
Mr X: “The guy narrating the video in question isn’t a right winger. When he talks about Socialism, and says “and we know that won’t work”, listen to the way he’s saying it.”
OK. I listened again, and you are right. His inflection COULD be interpreted as irony or subtle mocking. I guess I was going more with Mark’s description — “Socialism is summarily written off as a non-viable alternative”.
70%
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/many-forbes-400-really-self-204426982.html
Animations such as this one do a good job of helping people better understand income inequality — which can be a complicated concept for most people to grasp because of the enormous scale(s) involved.
What’s even scarier: Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has effectively ditched “one person=one vote” in favor of “one dollar=one vote,” it isn’t too hard to watch this video and imagine an increasing number of “landslide” victories on behalf of plutocrats.
WWLD: What Would Lemmy Do?
I’m with alan2012. Although Stalin certainly did kill a lot of people, there’s no evidence to suggest the number was anywhere approaching 60 million; most credible sources put the number between 3 and 18 million, depending partly on whether you include famine victims.
Speaking of credulous acceptance of CIA/State Dept. statements, yesterday one of my co-workers was laughing about how dumb the Venezuelans are to think that the US government gave Chavez the cancer that killed him. I mentioned the poisoning of Viktor Yushchenko (not by the US, but relevant as a modern assassination attempt against a prominent political figure) and the CIA’s numerous, and sometimes silly, attempts to kill Fidel Castro (exploding cigars, infected SCUBA suits, poison in cold cream, etc.). Not saying I think the CIA got Chavez, but it’s certainly not an absurd idea.
The Atlantic has a few ideas on how to address wealth disparity.
Read more:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/03/wealth-inequality-is-a-problem-but-how-do-you-even-begin-to-solve-it/273769/
CNN is taking notice.
Read more:
http://economy.money.cnn.com/2013/03/08/wealth-video/
About the Michael Norton and Dan Ariely research:
http://danariely.com/2010/09/30/wealth-inequality/
New research shows “Incomes of bottom 90 percent grew $59 in 40 years.”
During that same period, average income for the top 10 percent of Americans rose by $116,071 .
Read more:
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/25/incomes_of_bottom_90_percent_grew_59_in_40_years/
Obama addressed income inequality yesterday.
From the New York Times:
Read more:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/28/us/politics/obama-says-income-gap-is-fraying-us-social-fabric.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
Work hard, die young, make someone a lot of money.
One Trackback
[…] in action. The main thing is, we mustn’t stand in the way of this historically unprecedented transfer of wealth away from communal institutions and the working class… who, if they knew what was good for […]