Economic inequality and the lack of a (real) progressive party in the United States

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Last Friday, Chris Rock was interviewed on Bill Maher's show Real Time, and the subject of health care reform came up.

When Maher asked if he saw health care reform the prism of race and as a civil rights issue, Rock said no. He sees health reform as a “people rights issue.” Rock also recounted his family’s experience with the health care system – first when he was poor compared to when he was rich. “I had my father get sick when I was 22. And I was poor, alright. And my father had an ulcer, and it exploded and you know all these toxins get in your blood. And basically, my father died, whatever, 50 days after his ulcer. So I had a father get sick while I was poor,” the comedian recalled.

“My mother got sick when I was rich. And my mother, you know… I don’t really want to get into it, but my mother was sicker than my father. And my mother’s alive. My mother’s fine, OK? I remember going to the hospital to see my mother and wondering, ‘Was I in the right place?’ Like, this was a hotel, like it had a concierge, man. “… if the average person really knew the discrepancy in the health care system, there would be riots in the streets, OK? They would burn this motherf**ker down!”

(source)

But health care isn't the only arena where inequality exists in the United States, and frankly what's puzzling is why the average person doesn't understand this or isn't angered about it. American workers are responsible for higher productivity over the last 30 years, and are some of the most productive in the world, but their salaries have been essentially stagnant. Why the indifference? Case in point, nearly two years since the near collapse of the United States economy in October 2008, there **still** hasn't been a single law written by Congress to prevent this from happening again, with some of the firms responsible STILL giving out bonuses. Of course, both political parties are responsible for what has happened: the large infusion of money and lobbyists into the legislative process has prevented any real concrete action to prevent it. Democrats became the 2nd Republican party in a rush to the right after Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, for a variety of issues (that's another post). Bill Maher has stated it essentially correct "Over the last thirty years, Democrats have moved to the right, and the right has moved into a mental hospital." There really isn't a progressive party even with the Democrats, and Mr. Maher chastises the President and the party pretty harshly for that:

Here's some specific information in the form of charts on some of the worst cases of economic inequality in the United States. Be warned, it's very bandwidth intensive.

The gap between the top 1% and everyone else hasn't been this bad since the "Roaring Twenties"

One half of Americans owns only 2.5 percent of the total wealth:

Half of America has 0.5% of the stocks and bonds:

Look at that gap grow!

The last two decades have been great, unless you're a typical American worker!

Real earnings have not increased (for the typical worker) for 50 years:

And with that, any real chance of upward economic mobility:

Republican tax cuts have significantly increased the wealth gap in the United States:

While the richest households' income taxes are getting lower and lower:

If you're not in the top 1 percent, you're getting a bum deal!

Source with citations on where the information was gathered is also listed. I want to thank wes_wilson for his post in another community about this information!

Comments

[politikitty.livejournal.com]

Oh wah.

You know what's hilarious about your tantrum is that I'm a liberal who believes in safety nets. I believe that poverty is a real issue and we should try to pursue policy that alleviates the symptoms and attempts to lift people out of poverty. That doesn't mean that I am going to sit back and cheer lead when liberals trot out impressive looking graphs that don't actually say anything.

The rich have nothing to do with the poor. We do not live in a mercantilist society. So while it is entirely likely that the poor have not increased their standard of living, the wealth held by the rich has NOTHING to do with that.

And you're little tirade about women's rights? It's cute. Really. But even if there is discrimination at the heart of their low wages in the 70's, any increase is good news for the economy. When women join the labor force, that almost doubles the income in a household. That phenomena exists in all quintiles. Also women are more likely to finish college than men. And in 1/5 of households, women are the breadwinners. The discrepancy in pay of the youngest generation is almost entirely attributable to gendered careers (hint: teachers aren't going to make more money even if they have wangs) and taking time off to have kids.

I'm sick to death of the idea that liberal ideas are so intellectually inferior they have to fall back on stupid classist tropes and hating on the rich and corporations. I mean, come on. If that's the best we have, we deserve our ass to be handed to us in the midterms.

[ryder-p-moses.livejournal.com]

The rich have nothing to do with the poor! Rich people money, like, it isn't even the same as poor people money, they're two economies that never interact! I'm a genius, don't you see? [flails arms]

[politikitty.livejournal.com]

Seriously?

Jeez people like you make me weep for the midterms. It's like the entire electorate was granted permission to devolve into tea party activists.

The mercantilistic schtick simply isn't accurate. The rich did not steal from the poor to line their money baths. It is entirely possible that while the rich have done extraordinarily well in the current economy so has everyone else.

You have failed to understand that distribution of wealth has nothing to do with absolute wealth or real wages. And yet you accuse me of not understanding statistics. You ignore data that looks at the entire workforce because it makes you uneasy to admit that Women's Rights in the 70's helped raise all boats.

[ryder-p-moses.livejournal.com]

You are so incredibly fucking dense. Your posts are a terrible beauty, like the heart of a whirlpool or a city bombed to gravel. I think I love you.

I post a thorough breakdown of economic shifts in the past decades across demographics, using the real wages which you seem to think are some Magical Quality-of-Life Indicator from fairyland, and highlight the simplest, most relevant, most easily-read trend spanning that period (mens' wages) because I HAET WOMEN I HATE THEM SO MUCH AAAAAAA!

For vague, poorly-expressed reasons you don't like the idea that the capitalist class takes a primary role in driving the economy and has pretty decisive control over where the cashflow goes so therefore THE RICH DON'T EVEN EXIST IN THE POOR ECONOMY AND THE POOR DON'T EXIST TO THE RICH, TWO SOCIETIES TOGETHER BUT FOREVER SEPARATE LIKE MORLOCKS AND ELOI BUT REAL!!!!

Quick, what's your take on the War on Terror? How about abortion? Book censorship, buy-local programs, good god I must have more quickly don't stop

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

From observation of this thread, you appear to be the dense one, not understanding what she's saying.