mark, How cares? Jealous or not how would that change the facts? You wish to argue with his figures or what?
On Sep 12, 3:36 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, “There’s a whole > > new breed of collector that has emerged in the last three-four years. > > Almost all make the kind of money you cannot comprehend.” > > > Yet great unease persists in these circles. A yacht broker told > > Associated Press that “a sea change in attitude among America’s > > superrich” has taken place in the wake of September 11. “Clients are > > telling me, ‘Hey, I could have been in the Twin Towers. That could > > have been me jumping out a window.’ The thinking among wealthy people > > now is, you can die anytime. Nobody can protect you. So you might as > > well spend your money now and enjoy it.” > > > Likewise, in its analysis of the trends driving the purchase of jumbo > > jets by wealthy individuals, Business Week notes: “Because of > > increased concern over security, especially post-September 11, some > > businesspeople now use their aircraft as a base of operations on > > overseas business trips. Rather than going to a hotel or office after > > landing, they just stay onboard... “ > > > The term “conspicuous consumption,” coined by Thorstein Veblen in The > > Theory of the Leisure Class (1899), hardly does justice to the current > > situation. There is a considerable element of recklessness, even > > desperation, in the obsessive spending. Throwing money to the wind > > hardly speaks to a sense of historic optimism or confidence among the > > elite in its own future or the general health of the American social > > order. > > > At the height of US global economic hegemony, in the 1950s, corporate > > directors were expected to lead rather sedate lives, modestly tending > > to the nation’s economy. Of course they lined their pockets, but they > > were not expected to live like pharaohs. > > > In 1957, Fortune magazine reported that some 250 or so individuals in > > the US were worth $50 million or more. The wealthiest of them, oil > > tycoon J. Paul Getty, stood all alone in the $700 million to $1 > > billion category. The equivalent of $50 million today—some $350 million > > —would not place an individual anywhere near the richest 400 people in > > the US, according to > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
