The problem comes when the people in charge are allowed to determine what they themselves should be paid. In order to pay themselves, they must outsource the jobs to other countries which pay their workers much less than they pay here in the US. What would happen if the shareholders decided they could get more for their money if they outsourced these high paying positions to other countries.

Over the weekend, we rented and watched the DVD "Maxed Out", which describes in excruciating detail how congress and the financial industry conspire to keep the poor eternally poor. I recommend it.

Aside from getting sidetracked above, I hear many moderate to even low income people espousing their support for Ron Paul. Well I don't think these folks are considering the ramifications that his economic policies would have on them! Many of Bush's schemes are, at least, cloaked in the language of privitization and "free market", we see how evil and corrupted they are through cronyism and nepotism!Its time to resurrect John Maynard Keynes!

Thank you Daniel David for your informative commentary and mentioning the Laffer curve, that bogus snakeoil which spawned the "Reagan Revolution"!Related to this topic of wealth skewing, is it just me or can you not go a quarter mile without seeing a fast food outlet? Of course they are saturated in middle and lower tier communities, they become more sparse when you start veering toward the gated communies and out of the way estates! It seems like unsafe low quality food is the new slow acting Zyclon-B for the untermench minimum wage types!After all the eugenics movement got its start here in the USof A with forced sterilizations of the "feebleminded" and those pesky southern and eastern Europeans!

A symptom of the disease called limitless capitalism.

Ugh...I'm not feeling too well...

As the day went by I realized that the best response should have been to chuckle privately to myself. I should have known better, but it was the first thing in the morning. I've had this kind of discussion with friends of mine, people I've known, and it's never gone anywhere.

The sad fact is that money and wealth is an imaginary construct so I wouldn't go counting on it as a measure of how much "work" has been done or that I've done or that you may do. The same goes for property, or place, or territory, or nationality. All of that could be gone in a day blown away by the slightest breeze and we who post here may find ourselves out on rt. 66 scrounging for our next meal.

Unless that is you are one with the group(s) that control wealth, property, and territory. If you are with them you are surrounded by the mightiest military and weaponry yet invented by human kind. But historically I would have to say that you have made a foolish choice if you think even that will save your ass, because there seems always to have been the Achilles heel, the chink in the armor.

But I will grant you, it is true that in some cases education can play a part in eating well, on the other hand, were you unfortunate enough to be starving, you might find that you were devoid of all rational thought only driven on by the pangs of your hunger, or else to die. Or more truthfully in this culture, you may not even realize the value of being educated - I mean, the question is, "what for? what's the purpose except for what someone else is telling me."

I wouldn't be able to make prophesies about "the progressive movement," or ascendancy of ignorance, or anything really, because I hardly know what will happen tomorrow. I can hazard a guess though. It does seem as though most of the "movements" have been around since the beginning whenever that was, so they might very well be around to the ending whenever that will be. So, sure, I'll continue to enjoy what is if I can.

Hello alreadygone,

I think that blaming people for their obesity, ignorance, and apathy only takes you about 10% of the way down the road toward explaining the situation and planning corrective action. Of course, individual agency is a factor in any situation. But, as a trained sociologist, I can tell you that structural/objective factors loom much larger as causative factors. I am talking about the filth known as mainstream media, the two-or three-tiered food system that promotes illness in the poor, and educational and healthcare systems that exclude or underserve the poor and racial minorities.

I agree that there is too little openness RE censorship at this site. I think there should be a special area where the moderators post some of the material that they've removed and tell us why.

I've been censored when I referred to the movie "Z..." [I couldn't post this with the title spelled out] and when I've gotten into a mode of argument using "God" as my defense.

If "enlightenment" is about anything, it is about openness and transparency, which includes shining a light on the moderating activity here. So I agree with you there, though I don't share your belief that "progressives" will share any different fate than other groups in the US. Politically and economically, we're all in this together.

cruxpuppy--

Cruxpuppy--

You can starve with a full belly. If you were a share-cropper in the 1800s, you would have been starving with a belly full of corn--and one of the symptoms would have been pellagra.

In the US, people are starving with a belly full of fats and refined carbs. One of the symptoms is body fat, but there are dozens of degenerative diseases and other health conditions that are symptomatic of nothing less than starvation here in the US.

cruxpuppy--

Obesity in America is due to starvation. The only foods available to the poor are fats and nurtient-stripped carbs.

They are starving as surely as Africans who subsist mostly on manioc.

The big stomachs are as much a sign of starvation as the big stomachs of kwashiorkor.

Ok, so I've read through some of your other posts.

"(I live in a border state with the oldest Hispanic population in the country)"

"I've planted trees in the Gila and Apache Nat'l Forests, I lived in the forest off and on for 30 days at a time."

This is just to save you time, you don't have to repeat this experience. Nothing against it, but you use the expression "dude," and "trippin." This might suggest to many of us a kind of typecasting, or at least a suggestion of your age. Expressions which were many of us to use would evoke a kind of nausea were we to use it in conversation.

I see that you also defend "the american worker," which is of course a concern for many of us, but your arguments are also suggestive of an ingrained idea of a preordained territorial justification for all the real and imagined injustices that you may feel have been acted upon your mortal existence???? Like, your birth at any particular moment in time and in any particular place somehow serves as a justification of a certain set of ideas, manners, thoughts, and actions???? Like, maybe, you deserve better than this???? key words being, "you deserve?"

Please, I would probably not go into my own life experience in a forum like this for one reason or another, but I would suggest that you support your thoughts with reasoned arguments rather than revealing descriptions. That's just my suggestion. Otherwise it might be interpreted as a kind of lack of security in your reasoning ability. Or as braggadocio or hyperbole.

habanero,

really, if you're not being tongue in cheek, you just made my day. It's as if you're suggesting all the prophets and wise and caring people from time immemorial have been wrong on a fundamental level. That would be a pretty out of your mind thing to do, in my very humble opinion.

you must have fallen for the hype, that's all I can think. . .

"I don't have much patience with the poor and uneducated anymore. The chain has to be broken by individual responsibility and by help given to those who help themselves." - habanero

Ok, are you being ironic? or do you sincerely believe this?????

If you believe this, without knowing you, you must have little or no experience with poverty or I'd hazard to say your experience of life is pretty damned narrow.

I've heard this kind of arrogance before. I have no doubt some of the other Illuminati of Common Dreams are going to rip into this, but I'd like to hear what experience you base this on in defense of yourself first? What observation outside of what someone has told you to believe or that appeals to some kind of atavistic dog eat dog interpretation of existence?

marymomgret
In cruxpuppy's defense I'd have to say that whole healthy foods are cheaper by far.
Look at the price of, say, a sack of pinto beans or any of the grain you can buy in bulk. Fresh fruits and vegetables can be bought inexpensively if you buy in-season.
I'm sorry, like cruxpuppy, I don't have much patience with the poor and uneducated anymore. The chain has to be broken by individual responsibility and by help given to those who help themselves.

From an old 1950's hit record Sixteen Tons."Saint Peter Don't You Call Me Cause I Can't Go-I Owe My Soul To The Company Store"

Watch the from the parking lot the rush of serfs to Walmart. Watch how their magic plastic cards gets them deeper and deeper in debt with each swipe.

Listen to those same serfs put down unions and say they do not trust their neighbors.

Look almost everyone on this planet laughs when some fool mentions the word conspiracy about any topic.
Yet lets think about what is going on with you reader in your life and your finances.
Do you really think you got the way you all by yourself?
You probably do so the rich will just keep on getting richer.And you will keep owing more to the company store.

Early Saturday morning I listen to a political radio show (Conservative What Else)
Anyway the show's leader was talking about how him and his wife pull themselves up with their bootstraps. How many times have we heard this?
Ok what wasn't said . This Bootstrap puller working 8o hours a week made his money by really overinflating his whatever product to we the brain dead got tho have what ever Zombies .
Then this same guy was yelling about welfare for the poor. Some of those poor he must have contributed in coming up Ala BootStraps.
I did not hear his theory on abortion .but I am 99.9 percent sure he is against it.

Funny isn't it ? This Radio guy is Pro Life Against Welfare Really Pro Capital Punishment.and hates taxes or government watching of anything .
Now how is a person like this good for any country in this world nevermind the USA?

His life's theory is whatever his is his and whatever mind is he wants part of.

Ah but getting back to the topic. The rich are getting richer because the masses are getting weaker. We are devided and conquered,and my bet is we will stay that way right up to the day this planet kills us all off compliments of The Rich Global Warming

IMAGINE THEY GAVE A VOTE AND NOBODY CAME !!!

Trillions of dollars is sitting in banks doing nothing while there are homeless children in the streets and millions without health insurance. America is bullsh*t. And I'm American.

Always remember; the rich get richer, the poor get poorer and the people in the middle pay the government until they run dry and join the poor.

The rich just get richer.

And this is for people who earn an income, we are not talking about the richest 2% whose income is not a wage. They own around 60% of the wealth very like the time of the Great Depression. Read Kelvin Philips book Wealth and Democracy.

After listening to a 5 part documentary from CBC Radio show Ideas (podcast)called "Market and Society" I ordered a book written by Karl Polanyi called "The Great Transformation" written in 1944. Polanyi explored the reasons for the two world wars and the market collapse in 1929. It really relates to what we are witnessing around the world these days. Interesting read!

Thank you, RuthK. Those pie-charts and bar-graphs say it all.

The securities industry is a racket. Invest in yourself, period.

This concentration of wealth is not a new phenomenon:

"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavour to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed." Abraham Lincoln - 1865

And the New Deal and the rise of unions (people/worker power) could only have happened with the destruction of the Oligarcy after a collapse of the American economy (the Depression of the 30's). And this is how history will repeat itself again. And IMHO, a major economic depression that wakes up the masses is really the first step on the way to healing our nation.

If you didn't see Bill Moyers Journal last night, take a peek over at PBS.org. It will give you some idea of how we got to this point. I believe the outcome is now unstoppable. The Fed will try to prop up the system for a while longer, but the arrows in their quiver don't really work anymore.

Hang on to your hats folks. It's going to be a very bumpy ride.

Let me have men about me that are fat;
Sleek-headed men and such as sleep o' nights:
Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look;
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.

"The Seven Deadly Sins:
Wealth without Work
Pleasure without Conscience
Science without Humanity
Knowledge without Character
Politics without Principle
Commerce without Morality
Worship without Sacrifice"

~Mahatma Gandhi

Income earned through investments should be taxed at a minimum double of the rate that labor income is taxed at. Raise the medicare and social security tax ceiling from $90K to an unlimited amount. Just for starters.

I've thought about what a sucker I am to be content with a 4-5% return on my investment (balanced funds, bank CDs). Rich Dad Poor Dad advises us all to develop properties and charge rents through the nose so we can get 20% returns. Are continuous 20% returns (like those "aggressive" international stock funds) "good" or sustainable? I don't think so. It's greed run amuck. I think it's preferable not having to screw people to get my McMansion and leased Jag.

Another link that provides charts similar to what amacd referred to is the Economic Policy Institute's "State Of Working America":

http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/tabfig_05.html

judi: "I just can't figure out why these rich Americans can't do something for the poor like buy some houses for the homeless, give money to the poor single parents working for peanuts, or pay medical insurance for families who can't afford it. What do these greedy rich to with all of their money? How much bigger do their mansions have to be, or how many houses do they have to buy? Does wealth equate with selfishness,and lack of compassion for others who are hurting?"

Paul Bramscher: "It must be like an addiction, perhaps they also obtain some pleasure from controlling people."

I completely agree. This absence of philanthropism is tantamount to evil. The "pie" is only so large, and at some point what you accumulate for yourself is done so at the expense of others. I think about the $25 or $50 I give to sites and causes like CD once in a while, and I compare that to what a comparable gift would be from someone like Gates in terms of proportion to income. Gates would have to give something like $250 million away as gifts every week to keep up with the generosity of many of us small time donors.

WE NEED A SERIOUSLY WELL FUNDED ALTERNATIVE MEDIA. Just think what a measley $100 billion could do for Democracy Now!, Flashpoints, and Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting. It would be an "in your face" slam dunk over FOX, The Times, and all of CNN's and Newsweek's fascist Murdoch wannabees. It would be EASY to have this nation catch fire if we could but provide it with the right information and make it compelling, "sexy," and absolutely confident in its socialist/populist/green point-of-view. The "data" always supports such a viewpoint; that's why there's a multi-billion dollar Elite spin industry to subvert it.

The USA is the world's most hideous bully and the #1 obstacle to world peace. Most of the increases in so called "wealth" for the rich in the USA have the blood of hundreds of thousands of little children, women, and other innocents on it, in varying degrees. So do our hard earned tax dollars. The world would be a better place without the USA.

What does it profit a person to gain a fortune and lose his sense of humanity?

-----------------------------

"From 1945 to 2003, the United States attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments, and to crush more than 30 populist-nationalist movements fighting against intolerable regimes. In the process, the US bombed some 25 countries, caused the end of life for several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life of agony and despair." William Blum

--------------

" The enormous gap between what US leaders do in the world and what Americans think their leaders are doing is one of the great propaganda accomplishments of the dominant political mythology. "
Michael Parenti, political scientist and author

-----------------------------------------

"I swear by the God of my parents, I swear by my nation,
I swear by my honor that I will not allow my soul to rest,
nor my arm to relax until I have broken the chains
that oppress my people through the will of the powerful.
Free elections, free land and free men, horror to the oligarchy."

Oath used by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez - the Great,
(when he was 28) and some of his revolutionary friends.
-copied from Page 80, !HUGO! by Bart Jones

==========

Take the oath and do what you can! To be complacent is to be complicit.

—————————

"Almost anything you do [to help humanity] will seem insignificant, but it's very important that you do it."
Mahatma Gandi

========================

What is going on in the world?

http://www.Share-International.org

=========================

For an alternative view to the U.S. mainstream media
about the state of American democracy, media, and foreign policy, see: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com

marymomgret
I was indulging black humor. The rich always point to the poor and say there's no problem because they're all fat. We know that isn't true, don't we?

mirf59, first post, was mocking the "conservative" line on global warming vis a vis the income gap.

This is truly another disaster indicator. Our economic system, by and for the rich, is in imminent danger of collapse. The Mad Hatters are setting us up for the Amero.

i live in a third world country=AMERICA

amacd,

Great post about the GINI Coefficient index. Thanks!

judi,

Interestingly, some of the very, very rich are not endlessly greedy. Some of them, such as Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, are brilliant, visionary and intensely competitive by nature in the "accumulation phase" of their lives. Then, as they get older, they deservedly delight in giving it away, but usually through foundations where they can control the destination and results.

Others don't. The new richest man in the world is Carlos Slim (not sure of spelling), of Mexico. He is reported to have said he believes that people like himself "should stick to their knitting, and not try to play Santa Claus", belittling Gates and Buffet.

Both Gates and Buffet have been a tad embarrassed by the extra wealth they have gained in recent years from tax cuts, and both of them have supported the idea of not ending the estate tax.

Some of the wealthy also delight in growing, growing, growing their privately-held companies in order to provide jobs to others. I worked for two guys with that view for 20 years. Then they died. Their heirs sold the company, and the new owners have a totally different view--about maximizing profits.

The good thing about high taxes in our old laws was that charitable people could always give their wealth away and take deductions for those gifts before the taxes were applied. Many did so and still do. Others, however, keep it and build dynasties that, in my view, are not beneficial to society.

jesus I knew some sort of funny business was going on.

The income gap is bad enough, yet the wealth (and power) gap is even worse.

This is true domestically between classes and internationally between countries.

It is totally immoral as it daily has deadly consequences.

The 'gold standard' for serious economic analysis of inequality is the GINI Coefficient Index (which, BTW, is never mentioned by the corporate controlled MSM (main-scam-media) here in 'Vichy America'.

The GINI Index runs from 0 (where there is no income or wealth inequality) to 1 (where all income or wealth is distributed to just one person).

Interestingly, on the GINI Index of income inequality the US sits at 0.46 (and rising fast) along with other high inequality countries such as: Argentina, China, Cameroon, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Iran, Kenya, Malaysia, Niger, Nigeria, New Guinea, Peru, Phillipines, Uruguay, and quite a bit higher in inequality than the oligarchy of Russia. However the US currently retains a 'bit' less income inequality than a few anti-democratic banana republics, oil monarchies, and dictatorships such as: Boliva (where they have 'privatized' water), Botswana, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala (where Rommey's illegal immigrant yard workers came from), Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Sierra Leone, South Africa. Zambia, and the worker paradise of Zimbabwe.

Unfortunately, the US GINI Index (of 0.46) is 'off the charts with respect to ANY of the worlds' industrialized democracies ---- all of which like all of Europe and Japan have very low GINI inequality indexes in the 0.20's to low 0.30's.

This is doubly unfortunate, because our own CIA, in their 'Country Factbook' warns that, "countries with a GINI Indexes above 0.45 of income inequality are subject to 'civil unrest' and revolution".

[Note: All of the above GINI Index figures are taken from the following source, in which the US figure is for 2004. Whilethere is no GINI data for the US in 2007 --- not that the MSM would mention it anyway ---- the current US GINI Coefficient has prpbably climbed even closer to Zimbabwe, in the low 0.50's].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality

Another point which renowned economist Paul Krugman has made repeatedly is that even the mention of the "top 1%, at a threshold of $364,000 income" which the MSM uses when they mention anything about this subject is itself a bit of a 'cover-up' and defusing of the issue. Krugman notes that the real obscenity in income inequality is really hidden in the data for the top 1/10th of 1% or 1/100th of 1%, where the real ruling-elite of only 13.000 families hide at their twenty, thirty, and fifty million per year averages.

kilgore: Yes, in a modern consumer/capitalist system the wealthy get rich from purchasing power of the many. But they also get rich through old-style (as old as civilization itself) oppression.

The peasant in the middle ages didn't really purchase much, and yet wealth abounded for those who were born into it. The oppression in question is based on forcible labor, tithing and tribute. It's always based on land as well. The wealthy inherit their land by birthright, whereas the majority need to pay a lifetime tribute to avoid being forcibly removed from it.

But the posters are right here about the wealthy, themselves, only being able to consume so much. I think there's a psychosis operating there. They seek far, far, far more than they need. It must be like an addiction, perhaps they also obtain some pleasure from controlling people. They say the largest ones float to the top.

I just can't figure out why these rich Americans can't do something for the poor like buy some houses for the homeless, give money to the poor single parents working for peanuts, or pay medical insurance for families who can't afford it. What do these greedy rich to with all of their money? How much bigger do their mansions have to be, or how many houses do they have to buy? Does wealth equate with selfishness,and lack of compassion for others who are hurting?

this article gives the numbers to what i already knew the "little" people are screwed...

funny you mentioned ross perot..i liked him..i like dennis kucinich..but now that you mention it..are they the same person ??

My experience is that trickle down economics works as it has always worked. It's just that what trickles down on us is GOPee. People have been duped for millenia with the false promises of 'success' or 'salvation' and squander their lives to fulfill other peoples dreams. Is it not time for Man to awake and begin living the life of a butterfly rather just dreaming of it?

As mentioned above the (few) rich make their money from the purchasing power of the (many)below. But the rich 1% can only consume so many houses,appliances,cars etc. It is the remainder of the society and their masses that keep the wheels turning by their purchasing power. What will happen when they no longer have the funds for that constant consuming; because that certainly seems to be where we are headed.

DANIEL DAVID__ Very good post, and I agree entirely with you.This country is getting so close to blowing up, and most of our citizens do not have a clue. They listen to the pols and special interest groups and think everything is going fine. I imagine it was this way in the 20`s before the great depression hit. You are right, we need another new deal to repair the damage that the Bushites have wrought. Socialism or Capitalism does not matter much when people have no home, job, food, and have lost hope. We are getting to the place after 7 years of "compassion and conservatism" that money is being allotted to patch holes in the dike to stop collapse of most of the nations business including infrastructure,social programs, armed forces, retirement and medical areas etc. There will be a place, if things are not reversed soon, that people will not meekly accept their fate. Watching what is taking place in Burma and other countries does not make one feel comfortable about our situation, especially since our Constitution and Bill of Rights have been trashed by our present government. All we need to explode is to wreck Social security and the Meds which the Republicans despise so much. All this administration has done since 9-11 is to rule by fear, which achieved their own selfish interests. They have driven us into a debt of almost 10 trillion and no end in sight, so America is now in great danger, thanks to a criminal administration.

Yeah, the gap gets bigger. Now your car insurance payments are also based on your credit score. This is war, but not one the people are, or really, can fight. Its one the super rich are fighting. In their minds, a half of a quarter of a hundredth of a percent more profit or loss is a big deal. That is normally a ten year salary for us under $100,000 a year. Think about it. Is my math wrong?

RuthK: Your link to show inequality data is fantastic.

Here is the direct link everyone to a treasure of data about periods of equality and inequality.

http://www.demos.org/inequality/numbers.cfm

This data confirms the theory of Charles Derber in Hidden Power that the progressive regime of 1932 to the mid-1970s was replaced by a corporate regime (the third in US history) from about 1976-1980 to present.

Time for a new progressive regime—the third in US history.

By the way, as an aside, I think one of the MSM network news shows this evening had a piece on our government today releasing another Social Security projection to tell young people they'll get back less than they pay in over time.

There is some perverse irony in the IRS releasing figures as quoted in the author's article above, while the Republicans try to again scare people into killing Social Security --on or about the say day, no less.

Wasn't it a guy named Pareto about a hundred years ago who postulated that 20% of the people, if uncontrolled, would amass 80% of the wealth in any society or culture? That they always had, anywhere and everywhere, and that they always would?

Didn't America itself see this effect in the robber baron days before 1913 and before the advent of progressive income tax? And didn't we see it mitigated to a degree with the New Deal through the '40s, '50s, 60s, '70s with very high taxes on very high incomes and estates?

What the heck happened? Well, Republicans got The White House in 1980, got the Congress in 1994, and got The White House again in 2000. Economist Art Laffer told them all that lower tax rates would actually increase tax revenues to the government, (for a while), without predicting where exactly on the curve that effect would fail and turn negative, and without telling the rest of us that the other result would be increasingly segmented society. Reublicans happily passed the bills, the last of which in 2003 was to ensure that capital gains would only be taxed at 15% (the main source of income for the super-wealthy) and estate taxes would go away altogether in 2010.

Then, since 1980, they increased the national debt by trillions, spent the entirety of the Social Security Trust Fund on other things, and are fighting wars mostly on supplemental spending bills kept out of the official budget.

I get criticized here for hyping Democrats, but the fact is we need a whole flock of them in both The White House and the Congress (at one time) to adjust the very problematic social trend which the article's author has clarified for us with data from IRS. Progressives would be fine for this task, as well,if you can elect enough to get the job done.

Conservatives will say, "now hold on here, anybody who earns it ought to get to keep it" as though every man's earnings come mostly out ofthin air. The fact is, most income into very wealthy pockets comes out of the pockets of other people and other classes. If you don't believe that, consider the very, very, very wealthy guy who started "Girls Gone Wild", and consider who it was that bought the videos (whether stupidly, or whatever.) Since the product was one that society never really needed, that involved exploitation of hundreds or thousands of drunk kids to produce it, and that extracted most of its revenues from a gullible middle, or lower-middle, or lower class of buyers, tell me why there is any reason on earth why the earnings from that should not have been taxed at 50% or more and reallocated to society. Consider that a similar argument can be made on most personal earnings over $500,000 or so (including, for instance, all pro athletes, most doctors, all hedge fund managers, etc.) Socialism, some will say. I say it is more like the prevention of America slip-slip-sliping away to a charade democracy where a few "royals" lord it over a mass of hapless subjects. (And where those "royals" pass it along--like to Paris Hilton--with no estate tax if Republicans rule.)

We need Democrats, a lot of them, and in 2008 when we may even have a chance to get them. Some will remain unconvinced of this. If so, please re-read the author's article on this thread.

It'll be curious to see how far the gap can go, and how long it may be maintained, in the modern world. Mass communications, high literacy, high technology available to many, etc. I predict something will snap severely before they manage to turn us completely back to the socio-economic stratification of the middle ages.

The other problem is that just because Al Capone was an effective gangster doesn't mean his children will be as ruthless. The system may be laid out, via inheritance, such that they inherit the mob kingpin position but they may not have the organizational "skills" of their parents. The upshot is that of all social classes, the wealthy can afford to be the most stupid and boorish. Until they lose it all, that is.

Fuck the oligarchy. DIRECT DEMOCRACY NOW!

This is straight up war. No shots are being fired, but lives are being decimated, there's a reason were seeing more security everywhere, people are pissed off, and for good reason.
It's one thing to know you're being screwed, it's another just to ignore it and go about doing the best you can day to day. It's a fight, this nation is so far gone the hapless serfs can't even imagine how badly they are being screwed over.

Thanatocracy is a term that I keep trying to push away... unsuccessfully.

Rarely mentioned in the rich-getting-richer articles is that it also means they rich are getting more powerful.

We've got 2 branches of the Plutocrat Party vying to heap yet more riches and power on the already obscenely rich and powerful. True, the Democrat branch feels compelled to let a few more crumbs dribble down. But not control.

The trajectory has been steady through both Republican and Democratic administrations and Congresses.

Even as we import record amounts, we are exporting good, middle class jobs and the future of this country. The mantra of "free trade" has been intoned not only by Republicans, but also by Clinton-Gore-Pelosi, all of whom heavily backed that disaster called NAFTA.

Anyone who's been paying attention will see that the laws being passed in Washington are UNIFORMLY in favor of the rich, putting their interests uber alles -- the recent farm bill, health care bills and proposals, military policy, trade policy, financial policy, energy policy, you name it, they all put the interests of the powerful ahead of communities, individuals and the planet.

Do poor people have flat-screen TVs? What % of the voters of GW were poor? How many more rich people must die before we pull out of Iraq?

Although ultimately proven somewhat of a nut case Ross Perot was dead on the money when he told us years ago this was happening. It's continuing at an advanced pace also. Where does it all end? When the majority of the populace are begging for bread and King W's ole lady is declaring, "Let them eat cake"? The 'boob tube' won't cut it when a hungry stomach is growling. "Let them (us) eat pop-corn!" Oh, I forgot, all the corn is now designated to go in the fuel tanks of the uncaring immoral wealthy driving their big SUV's & Hummers around. Wake up America, you're being grandly ripped off!!!

Cruxpuppy,

I'm surprised at you. The poor consume high fat, high carbohydrate, processed foods. Much cheaper to buy on a limited budget.

Your statement is worthy of Barbara Bush, or Marie Antoinette.

Yes, we need more data to be sure. When the poor stop jiggling when they walk, then we'll know something's wrong. Until then, let's not be hasty in our judgements.

The most disturbing thing is how they make it. Since they own most of the country, they don't have to work. Investments alone do the trick.

I know I have listed this site before, but please look at it if you have not done so.

http://www.inequality.org/

Click on "By the Numbers" and page down to the pie charts on wealth and stock ownership.

As of 2004, the wealthiest 1% owned over 30% of the wealth. Ditto for the next 9%. The least wealthy 90% of people owned only between 28% and 29% of the wealth.

For stock ownership, the numbers are worse. The least weathly 90% owned only between 21% and 22% of stocks.

Moreover, taxes on investments, capital gains, and estates have been reduced.

How could we have allowed the distribution of wealth to become so skewed? How much more lopsided will it get?

The richest get richier.
Ha!

After three decades or so of practice, I'm beginning to wonder if perhaps trickle down economics does not work. Maybe I'm being a bit hasty. Perhaps another 30 or 50 years of empirical data would be beneficial before we make any hasty adjustments.