Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Pathology of Inequality
Inequality is a disease of society, a cancer growing out of control at one end of the body while the rest of it withers away.
It's not just about the money, although income and wealth inequality have never been worse in the United States. It's also the pathological adherence to free market principles that have not worked for most of the country. And a bizarre idolization of the 'innovators' who have rigged the financial system in their favor.
(Photo: AP/Richard Drew)
High-priced schemers and swindlers and scoundrels roam free on Wall Street, while the downtrodden are condemned for trying to survive. "If you steal $10 from a man's wallet," observed former Secretary of the Interior Walter Hickel, "you're likely to get into a fight, but if you steal billions from the the commons, co-owned by him and his descendants, he may not even notice."
If you steal $10 from a man's wallet...
-- Leandro Andrade is serving a life sentence in California for stealing five videotapes from a K-Mart. He was convicted under the state's three strikes law, after convictions for petty theft, burglary, and possession of marijuana. Justice David Souter noted that Andrade "committed theft of trifling value...with no violent crimes against the person."
-- Sisters Jamie and Gladys Scott received double life sentences in 1994 for an $11 armed robbery, the first criminal offense for either of them. They spent 17 years in jail.
-- As of 2003 in California there were 344 individuals serving sentences of 25 years or more for shoplifting as a third offense, in many cases after two non-violent offenses.
If you steal billions from the commons...
-- The savings and loan fraud cost the nation between $300 billion and $500 billion, about 100 times more than the total cost of burglaries in 2010. The financial system bailout has already cost the country $3 trillion.
-- Goldman Sachs packaged bad debt, sold it under a different name, persuaded ratings services to label it AAA, and then bet against it by selling it short. Other firms accused of fraud and insider trading were Morgan Stanley, Bear Stearns, Bank of America, Countrywide Financial, and Wells Fargo.
-- The New York Times reported in 2008 that the Justice Department had postponed the bribery or fraud prosecutions of over 50 corporations, choosing instead to enter into agreements involving fines and 'monitoring' periods.
America is suffering from a "pathology of inequality," a term coined by Chilean economist Fernando Fajnzylber with regard to third-world Latin American countries that seemed autocratic and poverty-stricken at the time, but many of whom are now less unequal than the United States.
One percent of our body doesn't feel the pain. American Psychological Association research indicates that wealthier people "may just not be as adept at recognizing the cues and signals of suffering because they haven't had to deal with as many obstacles in their lives."
As the body gets sicker, thinking becomes incoherent:
"The financial system led us into the crisis and it will lead us out." -- Goldman Sachs chairman Lloyd Blankfein. "Western-style private enterprise...will lead the world out of the mess it led the world into." -- Chicago Tribune. "If capitalism is perceived to not be working in America...it's because the system isn't capitalist enough." -- Rachel Marsden
And dementia sets in.
22 Comments so far
Show AllIf you're gonna steal, steal big enough.....to pay the lawyers to keep you out of jail so you can enjoy the rest of the ill-gotten gains
>>Leandro Andrade is serving a life sentence in California for stealing five videotapes from a K-Mart. He was convicted under the state's three strikes law, after convictions for petty theft, burglary, and possession of marijuana. Justice David Souter noted that Andrade "committed theft of trifling value...with no violent crimes against the person
He should have joined the US Military. There you can shoot down civilians..rape women, steal their posessions at will , shoot children in the head and get off scott free.
How dare you besmirch the reputation of the US Army. if you get caught doing any of those things you'll be sentenced to a slap on the wrist.
Those slaps sting, so I'm told...
"The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better[1] is a book by Richard G. Wilkinson and Kate Pickett,[2] published in 2009 by Allen Lane. The book is published in the US by Bloomsbury Press (December, 2009) with the new sub-title: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger.[3] It was then published in a paperback second edition (UK) in November 2010 with the subtitle, “Why Equality is Better for Everyone”.[4]
The book argues that there are "pernicious effects that inequality has on societies: eroding trust, increasing anxiety and illness, (and) encouraging excessive consumption".[5] It claims that for each of eleven different health and social problems: physical health, mental health, drug abuse, education, imprisonment, obesity, social mobility, trust and community life, violence, teenage pregnancies, and child well-being, outcomes are significantly worse in more unequal rich countries."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spirit_Level:_Why_More_Equal_Societies_Almost_Always_Do_Better
the author says the banks have ripped off 3 trillion - not quite the full amount
try 1.2 quadrillion
"
One of the biggest risks to the world's financial health is the $1.2 quadrillion derivatives market. It's complex, it's unregulated, and it ought to be of concern to world leaders that its notional value is 20 times the size of the world economy. But traders rule the roost -- and as much as risk managers and regulators might want to limit that risk, they lack the power or knowledge to do so.
A quadrillion is a big number: 1,000 times a trillion. Yet according to one of the world's leading derivatives experts, Paul Wilmott, who holds a doctorate in applied mathematics from Oxford University (and whose speaking voice sounds eerily like John Lennon's), $1.2 quadrillion is the so-called notional value of the worldwide derivatives market. To put that in perspective, the world's annual gross domestic product is between $50 trillion and $60 trillion"
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/06/09/risk-quadrillion-derivatives-market-gdp/
bank of america has just dumped 75 trillion of worthless junk on the sleeping zombies called the sheeple
"Bloomberg reports that Bank of America (BAC) has shifted about $22 trillion worth of derivative obligations from Merrill Lynch and the BAC holding company to the FDIC insured retail deposit division. Along with this information came the revelation that the FDIC insured unit was already stuffed with $53 trillion worth of these potentially toxic obligations, making a total of $75 trillion.
Derivatives are highly volatile financial instruments that are occasionally used to hedge risk, but mostly used for speculation. They are bets upon the value of stocks, bonds, mortgages, other loans, currencies, commodities, volatility of financial indexes, and even weather changes. Many big banks, including Bank of America, issue derivatives because, if they are not triggered, they are highly profitable to the issuer, and result in big bonus payments to the executives who administer them. If they are triggered, of course, the obligations fall upon the corporate entity, not the executives involved. Ultimately, by allowing existing gambling bets to remain in insured retail banks, and endorsing the shift of additional bets into the insured retail division, the obligation falls upon the U.S. taxpayers and dollar-denominated savers."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/301260-bank-of-america-dumps-75-trillion-in-derivatives-on-u-s-taxpayers-with-federal-approval
amerikan public - suckers to the end of time
Thanks for the reference to that book. I always appreciate reading from real spiritual thinkers and writers any day.
medmedude:
I say that we cannot achieve an egalitarian society. Some such
redistribution of wealth was attempted under communism; it didn't
work out the way it was intended. Some people are just smarter,
luckier, more motivated, etc. than most of us could ever be.
What we should attempt is a distribution of wealth (or income)
in accordance with fairly extensive research over many years.
It finds an 80:20 rule of distribution of individuals' attributes and
possessions. That is, e.g. 20% of a population may be expected
to have 80% of the available wealth ; that would be so if available
possessions are accumulated by individuals' own efforts -- NOT
aided by a government's preferential treatment of a few individuals.
In the U.S., we've let the wealth get far beyond a "natural" 80:20
distribution. I've read that now 1% of the U.S. population holds
24% of the wealth. As Wilkinson and Pickett wrote, pernicious
effects result from excessive accumulation. I suggest that an
80:20 distribution may be found to be a "dividing-line" between
"domestic tranquility" and civic unrest. If a few rich individuals
push too far beyond an 80:20 dividing line, a revolution of some
kind awaits. I am thankful for your alerting myself and others to
the book by Wilkinson and Pickett. I intend to read it.
I agree that no society will achieve equality, but--- "Extensive research over many years"?
That sounds like a crock to me.
Where are your sources that vouch for this magical distribution? And let's be real-- why do we think that they arrived at it?
Hymenaea courbaril:
I have known about an 80:20 distribution for many years. I've found
and listed here a few internet sources regarding its actuality.
*First, consult:
http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
The more scholarly name for an 80:20 distribution is the Pareto principle.
The wikipedia article will give you several instances of applicability of the
Pareto principle.
**See also:
http://management.about.com/cs/generalmanagement/a/Pareto081202.htm
for a presentation of an 80:20 rule in managerial work. The applicability of
80:20 is widespread.
***See also
http://homepage.newschool.edu/~het/profiles/pareto.htm
for a short biography and a listing of Pareto's publications.
****Just Google any of several keywords, such as: Vilfredo Pareto,
Pareto principle, 80-20 rule, etc. You'll see statements by many
students and scholars that the distribution HAS been known about
for about a hundred years, and has been found to be extant in many
instances in many empirical studies.
As to your question: "Why do we think that they arrived at it?"
There might have been several motivations of Pareto and subsequent
investigators. The latter 1800's, when Pareto was born and studied as
a young man, were years of revolution in Europe. Pareto evidently had
philosophical and mathematical "groundings" for his thought, as did his
followers. I reckon he was interested in un-covering some numerical
standard for accumulation of wealth. As a rationalization of revolution,
in the latter 19-th century and the early 20-th century, when revolution
was going to happen anyway in consequence of a too-great enriching
of the few and a too-extensive impoverishing of the many, some rule
of what is the unavoidable [standard] degree of enrichment of the few
would have seemed to be a discoverable piece of knowledge.
It is (intellectually) unfortunate that Mussolini (temporarily) made use
of Pareto's works as some excuse for Mussolini's dictatorship in Italy.
I do not believe that Pareto ever advocated dictatorship or fascism.
Pareto was a scholar, whose motive was discovering new knowledge.
Some posters may hold the opinion that an 80:20 distribution is too
great an enrichment of the few. Taking such an opinion too far, so as
to advocate, e.g. a 50:50 distribution, would put such individuals into a
"school of thought" that leads to communism and it's ATTEMPTED
egalitarianism. Guess what? Communism FAILED in it's own purpose.
Consequent to that failure, we are left with a necessity of tolerating
some accumulation of wealth. The question is: How much of such
accumulation is to be permitted? The EXTENSIVE study of a Pareto
principle by MANY investigators is, I say again, an attempt to arrive at
some so-so fair [standard] degree of accumulation. Within the context
of the lead article of this thread, I was pointing out an empirical standard
of distribution of (extent of) efforts and effects of individuals who are in
a given population. In the spirit of free inquiry, that is something worthy
of open-minded persons' attention.
Good illustrations of this point from Buchheit... I encourage Common Dreams to carry more contributors like him, with honest credentials (in the trenches, as it were).
I might be so bold to add that along with the flawed mentality of normalizing inequality, the very richest members (or most empowered) of our society seem to feel their position excludes them from ever acknowledging their own wrongdoings. The conquered and defeated are told to 'just get over it' and move on... "This is the way it is now, and you have no choice".
Funny thing is, when it's they that have been victimised or slandered, however petty, the knives are drawn and the attack is disproportionate. In keeping with diagnosis of the article, this too can be noted as a symptom of psychosis. Thanks to their manipulative and self-promoting concerns, they've not only ensured their dominance, but conditioned a whole population of enablers as well. You have to admit... it's quite an achievement, though fiendish.
the beatings will continue until morale improves.
"American Psychological Association research indicates that wealthier people "may just not be as adept at recognizing the cues and signals of suffering because they haven't had to deal with as many obstacles in their lives.""
It's great that people are discussing the pathology of the elite but the APA is itself an elite group which cannot objectively critique them. It's likely that the above critique was concocted to deliberately divert the people away from the truth. "May just not be adept" is a speculation when in fact there is enough statistical data on human nature to explain the pathology of the elites.
We learn compassion and morality as young children. Through certain types of interaction, mainly with our mothers, we develop a certain strength of empathy. This is further strengthened or dampened through further life experiences. Compassion develops from empathy when our attention to the welfare of others is further strengthened, or reinforced. The emotional energy that feeds compassion is a generic resource that can be applied to a number of outlets, depending on situations, so for example if one often has opportunity to exhibit compassion, compassion will get the energy. The children of elites, and those overly-subjected to elite influences, get few such opportunities to exhibit compassion because they were shielded from the real word as children. Hence, their version of reality is missing the presence of the victims of elite oppression. Hence, no empathy, no compassion. Their energy was channeled instead to reinforce actions that benefit themselves, so further actions of this sort fuel the passions of the next generation elites (and elite apologists).
Armed with information about human nature, the people can walk in the correct direction, toward the political far-left to help support the agenda of the people.
Learning about the EZLN will be fascinating and humbling. We need humility but we also need courage to beat Goliath. The people have a lot of potential, which should feed their courage. Let's fuel that process, to achieve the potential, and the courage. I'm sure the EZLN has a lot of insight and the indigenous are owed a great deal of gratitude. One of the key agenda items for the people's movement is to rebuild indigenous ideas, systems and assets, such as locally-adapted seed, synergy with the celestial/natural, and a simple respect for the truth.
"We need humility but we also need courage to beat Goliath." I urge some rethinking and more careful use of symbols. When we spend years of our lives accepting and assimilating the dominant narrative as to who the good guy is and who is not it becomes harder to get a clear grasp on the truth. Just who was defending his homeland and who was the invader in the story of David and Goliath? Once you realize what was really going on, you might come to the same conclusion that I have, that we need to stop thinking of Goliath as the bad guy that we need to beat.
RTdrury: I recognize that your "thing" is localism, but the narrow psychological construct geared to the formation of compassion that you've portrayed entirely leaves out the socializing mechanisms--which are ubiquitous--inherent to our Mars-rules society. Due to that factor, boys learn quickly to put aside any sympathy or empathy they may possess for a child being bullied (or anything else) lest they gain the mark of "The Sissy," or worse. Feelings, especially of the connecting sort, are identified with the "weaker" sex and not considered very macho or adult.
If the whole of society worships warriors, even if Mom turned out to be a fairly compassionate and decent person, her influence will pale in the face of the greater society's want for and relentless march towards aggression.
Our system could be put into balance with a one tax policy. It works like this. No taxes on anyone while they are alive. When they die 100% of everything they own is redistributed back into the economy. If corporations are people then they should also die. A corporate charter should be time limited. let's say the average human lifespan, when the charter ends the corporations accumulated wealth should be redistributed back into the economy. The inequality of our current system is built in, it is intentional. There can be no profit if the worker receives the full value of the work. No profit, no upper class. The more accumulated wealth, the more inequality. Restrict the accumulation of wealth to one generation, and the profit can be shared with the workers by spending it to build a system that is not based on exploitation.
I care not how affluent some may be, provided that none be miserable in consequence of it." - Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice
In his final pamphlet, Agrarian Justice, Paine (the instigator of the American Revolution with his pamphlet Common Sense) proposed an inheritance tax to restore justice by the redistribution of the wealth accumulated from the private use of the commons. This money would be distributed as a one-time stipend to all young men at the age of 21, and as an annual stipend to the lame, the blind and the elderly.
"There could be no such thing as landed property originally. Man did not make the earth, and though he had a natural right to occupy it, he had no right to locate as his property in perpetuity any part of it; neither did the Creator of the earth open a land-office, from whence the first title-deeds should issue…"
"Personal property is the effect of society; and it is as impossible for an individual to acquire personal property without the aid of society, as it is for him to make land originally…All accumulation, therefore, of personal property, beyond what a man's own hands produce, is derived to him by living in society; and he owes on every principle of justice, of gratitude, and of civilization, a part of that accumulation back again to society from whence the whole came…"
"…for if we examine the case minutely it will be found that the accumulation of personal property is, in many instances, the effect of paying too little for the labor that produced it; the consequence of which is that the working hand perishes in old age, and the employer abounds in affluence."
The law locks up the man or woman
Who steals the goose from off the common
But leaves the greater villain loose
Who steals the common from off the goose.
The law demands that we atone
When we take things we do not own
But leaves the lords and ladies fine
Who take things that are yours and mine.
The poor and wretched don’t escape
If they conspire the law to break;
This must be so but they endure
Those who conspire to make the law.
The law locks up the man or woman
Who steals the goose from off the common
And geese will still a common lack
Till they go and steal it back.
- 17th century protest against English enclosure
Many people believe that non-human life is incapable of suffering pain. These are the same people-or the same kind of people-who believe the poor are not fully human.
As long as there are slaughter houses there will be wars.