In arguing for a heavier mix of government, he assumes that capitalism unfairly favors the rich, almost exclusively so, and fails to spread prosperity.
"The rich in America have little to complain about," he carps. "The distribution of wealth is skewed, and levels of inequality are now higher than at any time since the Gilded Age." Obama cites data showing a yawning gap between the income of the average worker and the wealthiest 1%. He thinks it's government's job to step in and close it — "for purposes of fairness" — by soaking the rich, among other leftist nostrums. "Between 1971 and 2001," he complains, "while the median wage and salary income of the average worker showed literally no gain, the income of the top hundredth of a percent went up almost 500%." But such a snapshot comparison would be meaningful only if America were a caste society, in which the people making up one income group remained static over time. Of course that's not the case. The composition of the rich and poor in this country is in constant flux, as the income distribution changes dramatically over relatively short periods. Few are "stuck" in poverty, or have a "lock" on wealth. Obama would discover this if only he'd put down his class-warfare manuals and look closely at the IRS' own data. Take those megarich he vilifies — the top hundredth of a percent. According to a recent Treasury study, three-fourths of them in 1996 fell out of the group by 2005. Meanwhile, more than half of those in the bottom income group in 1996 moved to a higher income group by 2005, with more than 5% leapfrogging to the richest quintile. (It's no fluke: The same high degree of income mobility is seen in prior comparable periods, as well.) On Sep 12, 6:03 pm, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's right Mark, you should have been a psychologist. > > On Sep 13, 7:50 am, mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > anyone who attacks the rich are just jealous that theyu themselves are > > not rich. and it always seems to be the leftwing socialists who do > > the most complaining. and why are these folk not rich? because they > > are either too stupid, or too lazy to make money. > > > On Sep 12, 5:26 pm, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Misfortune? > > > > The Poor in the U.S. Live in better conditions than the AVERAGE > > > European... > > > > Imagine that. > > > > On Sep 12, 2:17 pm, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Nothing to gloat over here, and less you like gloating over the > > > > misfortune of your own people. > > > > > On Sep 13, 6:37 am, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > He is very jealous, obviously... > > > > > > On Sep 12, 1:36 pm, mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > jealous? > > > > > > > On Sep 12, 4:35 pm, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > WSWS : News & Analysis : North America > > > > > > > The very rich in America: “The kind of money you cannot > > > > > > > comprehend” > > > > > > > By David Walsh > > > > > > > 19 April 2006 > > > > > > > > Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the > > > > > > > author > > > > > > > > “Let me tell you about the very rich,” F. Scott Fitzgerald > > > > > > > famously > > > > > > > wrote in a 1926 story, “They are different from you and me.” But > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > Fitzgerald could not have imagined how different “from you and > > > > > > > me” the > > > > > > > very rich would become in America eight decades later. > > > > > > > > The sums that the very wealthy have at their disposal in the US > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > almost unimaginable: Oil executive Lee Raymond receiving some $400 > > > > > > > million in a retirement package; the 2005 compensation of bank > > > > > > > chairman Richard Fairbank totaling some $280 million; Omid > > > > > > > Korestani, > > > > > > > head of Google’s global sales, exercising stock options providing > > > > > > > him > > > > > > > with $288 million last year. > > > > > > > > The accumulation is brazen. What once would have been considered a > > > > > > > somewhat discreditable fact of social life, the proliferation of > > > > > > > billionaires, is now hailed as a sign of America’s success. The > > > > > > > demise > > > > > > > of the Soviet Union and the supposed absence of any alternative to > > > > > > > capitalism, the putrefaction of the AFL-CIO trade unions, the > > > > > > > ignominious collapse of American liberalism and the lack to this > > > > > > > point > > > > > > > of broad-based, organized political opposition to the ruling > > > > > > > elite and > > > > > > > its two parties have rendered the American financial aristocracy > > > > > > > “dizzy with success.” These people have lost their heads. > > > > > > > > In the face of public outrage over oil company profits and soaring > > > > > > > gasoline prices, Exxon arrogantly defended Raymond’s hundreds of > > > > > > > millions, arguing that they were rewarding the executive’s > > > > > > > “outstanding leadership of the business, continued strengthening > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > our worldwide competitive position, and continuing progress toward > > > > > > > achieving long-range strategic goals.” The company added that it > > > > > > > considered Raymond’s compensation package “appropriately > > > > > > > positioned.” > > > > > > > > In a study published in October 2005, three accounting professors > > > > > > > reported that negative, even occasionally scathing press coverage, > > > > > > > “does not substantively change corporate behaviour with regard to > > > > > > > pay > > > > > > > packages.” The American establishment is all but impervious to the > > > > > > > sentiments of the broad masses of the population. In response to a > > > > > > > recent report detailing the immense and growing social gap, a > > > > > > > spokesman for New York state’s Business Council told a reporter > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > the incomes earned by his state’s rich were “something that > > > > > > > everybody > > > > > > > who cares about New York should be pleased about.” > > > > > > > > An insulated world of immense wealth exists as never before, at > > > > > > > least > > > > > > > in modern US history. The number of Americans with assets of $1 > > > > > > > million or more reached 7.5 million in 2004, according to a survey > > > > > > > conducted by the Spectrem Group. Beyond that, however, are those > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > possess “Ultra High Net Worth” (a mellifluous term invented by > > > > > > > Merrill > > > > > > > Lynch circa 2001): individuals in households with $5 million or > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > in net worth. In a country of 300 million people, the UHNW form a > > > > > > > very > > > > > > > small percentage of the population, but a not insignificant > > > > > > > number in > > > > > > > absolute terms. Economic, political and cultural life in America > > > > > > > is to > > > > > > > an enormous extent organized for their benefit. > > > > > > > > This is not simply obscene or unjust, it is socially irrational > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > immensely destructive. How is it possible to allocate resources, > > > > > > > repair and renew the infrastructure, carry out any type of > > > > > > > long-term > > > > > > > economic planning, cure any social ills, when the official guiding > > > > > > > principle is the ability of an oligarchic elite to accumulate > > > > > > > ever- > > > > > > > greater personal wealth? The gravitational pull of such wealth > > > > > > > asserts > > > > > > > itself in every aspect of life. > > > > > > > > The New York Times reported last year on a relatively new > > > > > > > phenomenon, > > > > > > > magazines oriented entirely toward the very wealthy. Absolute > > > > > > > Publishing, the Times noted, had just started up a publication > > > > > > > called > > > > > > > Absolute, “for distribution to New Yorkers with an estimated > > > > > > > annual > > > > > > > household income of at least $500,000.” > > > > > > > > The editor of Absolute, Ernest J, Renzulli, is aiming for an > > > > > > > audience > > > > > > > of only 60,000 New York residents. He found his target readership > > > > > > > “by > > > > > > > winnowing databases of the most affluent New York ZIP codes with > > > > > > > people who have bought houses for more than $2 million and people > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > have registered cars, boats or planes that cost more than > > > > > > > $75,000.” > > > > > > > > “It’s a small number,” the Times quoted Mr. Renzulli as saying. > > > > > > > “But > > > > > > > this is not a magazine that’s about mass reach. It’s about > > > > > > > reaching > > > > > > > the tip of the pyramid.” > > > > > > > > The Times take note of Michael Silverstein, an executive with the > > > > > > > Boston Consulting Group and co-author of Trading Up: The New > > > > > > > American > > > > > > > Luxury. Silverstein estimates that by 2010 Americans will spend $1 > > > > > > > trillion on luxury goods. The Times continues: “In an ever more > > > > > > > fragmented media world, the rich are becoming their own niche. > > > > > > > They > > > > > > > may be diverse connoisseurs of fashion, yachting or jewelry, but > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > share one important trait: a seemingly bottomless supply of > > > > > > > disposable > > > > > > > income.” > > > > > > > > It must indeed be a predicament to be saddled with tens of > > > > > > > millions or > > > > > > > hundreds of millions of dollars, or more—how is one to spend such > > > > > > > sums? Those “awash in cash” (the Times’ phrase) must rack their > > > > > > > brains > > > > > > > and devote hours to the problem. How could one ever rest? Would > > > > > > > not a > > > > > > > person require a certain degree of inventiveness to come up with > > > > > > > ways > > > > > > > of spending such a fortune? > > > > > > > > Judging by the results in published reports—no, not particularly. > > > > > > > By > > > > > > > and large, the fabulously wealthy have derived their fortunes from > > > > > > > inheritance, the stock market, the real estate bubble, fortunate > > > > > > > investments in technology or, perhaps, American militarism: in > > > > > > > short, > > > > > > > from semi-automatic economic and social processes associated with > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > lowering of living standards for millions in the US and the super- > > > > > > > exploitation of masses of people in impoverished countries in > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > parts of the world. They are not startling or outstanding in any > > > > > > > fashion, except perhaps in the depth of their greed and > > > > > > > shortsightedness. > > > > > > > > So we learn that Microsoft’s Paul Allen owns a $250-million, > > > > > > > 414-foot > > > > > > > “gigayacht,” with seven decks, two helicopter landing pads, a > > > > > > > swimming > > > > > > > pool, a basketball court, an infirmary, a garage for Land Rovers, > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > movie theater, a concert space for 260 and a recording studio. > > > > > > > Not to > > > > > > > be outdone, Larry Ellison of software giant Oracle had his giant > > > > > > > yacht > > > > > > > built 452 feet long. Ellison’s vessel has five stories, 82 rooms, > > > > > > > “a > > > > > > > wine cellar the size of most beach bungalows, a dozen yacht-length > > > > > > > tenders, and a generator capable of providing enough electricity > > > > > > > for a > > > > > > > small town in Idaho or Maine... Final cost: $377 million.” > > > > > > > (Associated > > > > > > > Press) > > > > > > > > The wealthy elite are also purchasing their own widebody > > > > > > > airplanes, > > > > > > > reports Business Week—Airbus A340s and Boeing 777s, which list for > > > > > > > over $100 million—as “airborne penthouses.” Customized outfitting > > > > > > > may > > > > > > > add $25 to $30 million to the cost. > > > > > > > > The “supercar” business is also thriving. Ocean Drive, one of the > > > > > > > new > > > > > > > magazines aimed at the affluent, carries a piece on Michael Fux, > > > > > > > whose > > > > > > > Sleep Innovations manufactures Memory Foam products. Fux has > > > > > > > collected > > > > > > > some 50 luxury cars. He recently took possession of a $2 million > > > > > > > Ferrari FXX, one of only 20 in the world. > > > > > > > > USA Today, in a piece describing the new “super-rich supercar > > > > > > > fanatics” who collect Ferraris and Maseratis and Bugattis, cites > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > comments of one auto broker in southern California, > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
