In general I’m not big on worrying about how we’re setting ourselves up for the next crisis; after all, we’re nowhere near done with the current crisis. Yet it is worth noting that current trends in our policy and political discourse, in addition to blocking efforts to promote recovery, are also setting the stage for a much worse crisis further down the line.posted by russilwvong at 1:22 PM on July 7, 2011 [11 favorites]
..trends seen throughout the world of wealth today: the rich keeping a lower profile, hiring $230,000 guard dogs, and arming their yachts, planes and cars with military-style security features.posted by stbalbach at 1:47 PM on July 7, 2011 [3 favorites]
Nearly every dime of federal government receipts goes to personal transfer payments. In theory, there should be no room for anything else, including wars, roads and bridges, and wages of federal employees. Personal Transfer Receipts examples: Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance.posted by stbalbach at 1:52 PM on July 7, 2011 [1 favorite]
What explains this opposition to any and all attempts [fiscal or monetary] to mitigate the economic disaster? I can think of a number of causes, but Kuttner [PDF] makes a very good point: everything we’re seeing makes sense if you think of the right as representing the interests of rentiers, of creditors who have claims from the past — bonds, loans, cash — as opposed to people actually trying to make a living through producing stuff. Deflation is hell for workers and business owners, but it’s heaven for creditors.posted by russilwvong at 1:58 PM on July 7, 2011 [13 favorites]
Modern-day liberals often theorize that conservatives use "social issues" as a way to mask economic objectives, but this is almost backward: the true goal of conservatism is to establish an aristocracy, which is a social and psychological condition of inequality. Economic inequality and regressive taxation, while certainly welcomed by the aristocracy, are best understood as a means to their actual goal, which is simply to be aristocrats.via digby
"The trends in value added per employee are consistent with the adverse movements in the distribution of U.S. income over the past twenty years, particularly the subdued income growth in the middle of the income range. The tradable side of the economy is shifting up the value-added chain with lower and middle components of these chains moving abroad, especially to the rapidly growing emerging markets. The latter themselves are moving rapidly up the value-added chains, and higher-paying jobs may therefore leave the United States, following the migration pattern of lower-paying ones. The evolution of the U.S. economy supports the notion of there being a long-term structural challenge with respect to the quantity and quality of employment opportunities in the United States. A related set of challenges concerns the income distribution; almost all incremental employment has occurred in the non-tradable sector, which has experienced much slower growth in value added per employee. Because that number is highly correlated with income, it goes a long way to explain the stagnation of wages across large segments of the workforce."Source
One measure of income inequality is the ratio of income received by the 20% of families with the highest after-tax income compared with the 20% of families with the lowest after-tax income.Roger Martin argues strongly that we also need to reform CEO pay to move away from stock-based compensation.
In 2003, for market income, this ratio was about 12.9 to 1.0. That is, the 20% of families with the highest after-tax income received about $12.90 in market income for every $1.00 received by the 20% of families with the lowest after-tax income.
However, taxes and transfers moderate the differences between the quintiles of the income distribution. After taxes and transfers, the one-fifth of families with the highest after-tax income received $5.50 for every $1.00 received by the one-fifth with the lowest.
Among unattached people, the one-fifth with the highest after-tax income received $21.60 in market income for every $1.00 received by the 20% with the lowest after-tax income. After taxes and transfers, this ratio fell to $8.40 for every $1.00.
« Older The Portable Rotary Phone is an original black rot... | American football player John ... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Benny Andajetz at 1:08 PM on July 7, 2011 [2 favorites]