Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Is the US Heading for 'Developing Nations' Inequality Levels?

By Paul Harris, The Observer UK. Posted July 30, 2007.


The American Dream of riches for all has turned into a nightmare of inequality: welcome to Richistan, USA.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Who's Paying for the Recession Most of All? Young Workers
Lizzy Ratner

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Do We Really Want to Enshrine Insurance Monopoly into Law? This and 5 Other Complaints About the Health Bill
John Nichols

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
How Biased Media Can Brainwash You
Melinda Burns

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
4 Ways the Stupak Amendment Deprives Women of Access to Abortion
Jessica Arons

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
How the Stupak Amendment Radically Undermines Abortion Rights
Rachel Morris

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
10 Suicides a Month at Ft. Hood -- War Stress Is Taking Soldiers to the Brink
Dahr Jamail

More stories by Paul Harris

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

On the surface, Mark Cain works for a time-share company. Members pay a one-off sum to join and an annual fee. They then get to book holiday time in various destinations around the globe.

But Solstice clients are not ordinary people. They are America's super-rich and a brief glance at its operations reveal the vast and still widening gulf between them and the rest of America.

Solstice has only about 80 members. Platinum membership costs them $875,000 to join and then a $42,000 annual fee. In return they get access to 10 homes from London to California and a private yacht in the Caribbean, all fully staffed with cooks, cleaners and "lifestyle managers" ready to satisfy any whim from helicopter-skiing to audiences with local celebrities. As the firm's marketing manager, Cain knows what Solstice's clientele want. "We are trying to feed and manage this insatiable appetite for luxury," Cain said with pride.

America's super-rich have returned to the days of the Roaring Twenties. As the rest of the country struggles to get by, a huge bubble of multi-millionaires lives almost in a parallel world. The rich now live in their own world of private education, private health care and gated mansions. They have their own schools and their own banks. They even travel apart -- creating a booming industry of private jets and yachts. Their world now has a name, thanks to a new book by Wall Street Journal reporter Robert Frank which has dubbed it "Richistan." There every dream can come true. But for the American Dream itself -- which promises everyone can join the elite -- the emergence of Richistan is a mixed blessing. "We in America are heading towards 'developing nation' levels of inequality. We would become like Brazil. What does that say about us? What does that say about America?" Frank said.

In 1985 there were just 13 US billionaires. Now there are more than 1,000. In 2005 the US saw 227,000 new millionaires being created. One survey showed that the wealth of all US millionaires was $30 trillion, more than the GDPs of China, Japan, Brazil, Russia and the EU combined.

The rich have now created their own economy for their needs, at a time when the average worker's wage rises will merely match inflation and where 36 million people live below the poverty line. In Richistan sums of money are rendered almost meaningless because of their size. It also has other names. There is the "Platinum Triangle" used to describe the slice of Beverly Hills where many houses go for above $10m. Then there is the Jewel Coast, used to describe the strip of Madison Avenue in Manhattan where boutique jewelry stories have sprung up to cater for the new riches' needs. Or it exists in the MetCircle society, a Manhattan club open only to those whose net worth is at least $100m.

The reason behind the sudden wealth boom is, according to some experts, the convergence of a new technology -- the internet and other computing advances -- with fluid and speculative markets. It was the same in the late 19th century when the original Gilded Age of conspicuous wealth and deep poverty was spawned by railways and the industrial age. At the same time government has helped by doling out corporate tax breaks. In the 1950s the proportion of federal income from company taxes was 33 per cent, by 2003 it was just 7.4 percent. Some 82 of America's largest companies paid no tax at all in at least one of the first three years of the administration of President George W. Bush.

But who are the new rich? Some of the names are familiar, Microsoft tycoon Bill Gates and savvy stock investor Warren Buffett. But most are unknown, often springing from the secretive world of financial hedge funds. Men like James Simons, who took home compensation of $1.7bn last year. Last year the 25 top earning hedge fund bankers in the US earned an average of $570m each. The average US household income is $50,000.

It is such men -- and they are usually men -- who feed the outlandish luxury goods economy of Richistan. It is they who are responsible for the rebirth of the butler industry, which was all but dead in the Seventies and is now facing a shortage of trained staff. So keen is the demand that many can expect to earn a six-figure salary when they graduate from booming butler schools.

Then there is the runaway feeder-industry of luxury consumer items. The new ultra rich turn up their noses at Rolexes; the sought-after brand is Franck Muller, which sells a high-end timepiece for $736,000. Or try a Mont Blanc pen, encrusted in jewels, for $700,000. Louis Vuitton's most exclusive handbag sells for $42,000. Only 24 were ever made and none ever touched a shelf as all were pre-sold to Richistani clients.

In places such as Manhattan and Los Angeles, restaurants and bars outdo themselves in excess. New York's Algonquin Hotel has a $10,000 "martini on a rock" (it comes with a diamond at the bottom of the glass). City eateries sell burgers for more than $50. One offers a $1,000 omelette. In Los Angeles there is a craze for Bling mineral water -- at $90 a bottle.

Then there are the boats. The private yacht industry in America has been caught in an arms race of size and luxuriousness. So far, there has been a clear winner: Oracle-founder Larry Ellison's 450 foot water palace, the Rising Sun. More than 80 rooms on five stories and a landing craft that carries a Jeep, a basketball court doubling as a helipad and a fully-equipped cinema.

Now an Oregon-based company is taking things further: private submarines. An estimated 100 or so private subs are now drifting around the world's oceans. Then there are the rockets -- several notable billionaires are now leading the way in private exploration of space. One of them is Robert Bigelow who has ploughed $500m into trying to build an inflatable space hotel. A miniature prototype model was successfully launched and tested last month. In a scene that perhaps James Bond would find familiar, armed guards now patrol the fences of Bigelow Aerospace's headquarters wearing badges decorated with an alien as their corporate logo.

But this is not just a world of riches gone mad that the rest of America can ignore. The growth of such a large super-rich class, coupled with a deepening poverty in many communities, is starting to tear at the fabric of society. Even some of the most wealthy -- like Gates and Buffett -- have spoken openly of the needs to address the massive "inequality gap" that they have come to exemplify. In effect, some of the very richest Americans are calling for themselves to be taxed. In a speech last month Buffett -- the third richest man in the world -- pointed out that his tax rate was 17.7 per cent of his income while his secretary was taxed at 30 per cent. "Many of the new super-rich are looking long term at the world and they see a collapsing US education system and health-care system and the disappearance of the middle class and they realize: this is bad for everybody," said Frank.

Defenders of low tax for the very rich point to the theory of trickledown economics -- the spending power of the rich benefiting the poor. But while the super-rich have boomed, the earning power of the average and poor citizen has not nearly matched the performance of the elite. In 2005 the top one per cent of earners in the US gained 14 per cent in income in real terms, while the rest of the country gained less than one per cent. The situation is especially bad for the severely poor -- those living at half the poverty level -- whose numbers are at a 32-year high. The rich are getting richer but are not bringing everyone else with them. "If you look at the impact of the last 20 years it seems pretty clear that trickledown just does not work," said Paul Buchheit, economics professor at Chicago's Harold Washington College.

There are some signs of a change in attitude. Recent huge Wall Street flotations such as the listing of private equity giants like Blackstone have created a push in Congress for taxes on the instant billionaires they have created. Scandals of excess such as Enron and WorldCom and the trial of Conrad Black have been high-profile. But few politicians, needing campaign cash from new millionaires, will get far preaching higher tax. Calls for more equality tend to have come from men like Buffett and Gates whose fortunes are so enormous that a little extra tax would make no difference. Bush has pushed to phase out taxes like the estate tax, which benefit only the rich. "I don't see it changing. No matter what administration is in power," said Buchheit.

But many think it must change. To a large degree, the debate over the booming lives of the super-rich is an argument about the American soul. America is a country that has always worshiped wealth, where the creation of a fortune was seen as virtuous and a source of pride.

But now that huge wealth has started to squeeze the "middle class" out of existence, leaving the haves and have-nots in very separate worlds. It is possible that political will may develop to address the problem or that the problem will correct itself. The notorious end of the Gilded Age came in the panic of 1893 that sank America into depression.

Frank believes the signs of a coming storm are there. "The trick is to spot when prosperity turns to excess," he said. "When a large amount of people make a lot money very quickly it's a sign you are near the top of the market."

In a world of mega-yachts, private submarines and space hotels, that peak might be close at hand. And it's a long way down.

Billionaire's row

-- There are 7.5 million households in America worth up to $10m. A further two million are worth $10m-$100m and thousands are worth more than $100m.

-- There is now a two-year waiting list for 200ft yachts. If put end to end, the boats on that list, which cost $50m each, would be 15 miles long.

-- Sebonack Golf Club in the Hamptons, Long Island, charges $650,000 for membership. That doesn't include the $12,000 annual dues, or tips for caddies.

-- Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page have a private Boeing 767.

-- John D. Rockefeller was America's first billionaire. Adjusted for inflation, he had $14 billion -- less than the net worth of each of Sam Walton's five children today. There were 13 US billionaires in 1985. Now there are more than 1,000. There are as many millionaires in North Carolina as in India.

-- "Affluent" is Richistani for "not really rich." According to Frank, you need about $10m to be considered entry-level rich.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: wealth, inequality, usa

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The dumb rich could spend in proportions similar to the average person.
Posted by: zyxwvut on Jul 30, 2007 12:37 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The new ultra rich turn up their noses at Rolexes; the sought-after brand is Franck Muller, which sells a high-end timepiece for $736,000. Or try a Mont Blanc pen, encrusted in jewels, for $700,000. Louis Vuitton's most exclusive handbag sells for $42,000.

So if a person who has fifty-million dollars spends about three quarters of a million on a watch, that is equivalent to a person with thirty-thousand dollars spending about $450 on a watch (the ratio is 1:66.66666 or 3:200 or 1.5%).

Granted, the situation between the relative purchasing power of a person with millions of bucks and someone living on an average income isn't nearly this simple. But it is comforting to know that whenever there are super-rich people, there will always be super-opportunistic people who come along and sell them trendy, luxury versions of what are essentially the same goods and services as the rest of us buy and use.

We spend a few thousand dollars on a vacation, they spend a million. We spend $10-15 on a haircut, they spend $1,000-1,500.

There is a twisted equality in this, but it only goes so far. In the end, a rich person does not have to worry about becoming homeless or being denied medical care if there is a little turbulence in his or her financial situation. So there are many absolute differences.

I need to figure out a way to sell rich people coffee for $100 per cup.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Coffee fo $100 per cup. Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» Gold flake coffee beans. LOL Posted by: zyxwvut
You can bet...
Posted by: ZPaul on Jul 30, 2007 2:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You can bet that whoever sells luxury items to the rich are almost invariably very rich themselves. How much of a "comfort" is that to people with a normal income? The rich, if they "help" anybody, help the rich, almost never the poor. That´s the way it is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

History is warning you, USA
Posted by: Nigelthebriton on Jul 30, 2007 2:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
An emigré French nobleman reminisced, looking back at France during the years leading up to the fall of the Bastille in 1789: "...We believe it (our lifestyle) to be indestructible...Never was there a more terrible awakening preceded by a sweeter slumber and more seductive dreams"

So, slumber on, Murdoch et al - while you can!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

4.7
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Jul 30, 2007 3:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know the rich are getting too rich when they complain that their taxes are too low.

Good article. Lots of interesting stuff about the excesses and dumb spending habits of the so-called "smart money". You could build a good documentary with this...maybe the next Michael Moore movie.

The trouble is that the myth of the American Dream is so hardcoded in our culture that the message of this article could be lost. Just like the pre-Depression years, a lot of average working Joes take it as inspiration to get rich themselves--regardless of the odds against them--and miss the point.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The rich are not rich "because of technoloy" but because of its class mechanism
Posted by: Perfectclue on Jul 30, 2007 3:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The rich are not rich because of new technology, but because democracy was corrupted with a class mechanism, between the corrupted middle layers and the emerging capitalist oligarchy, through class elites, class hierarchies, and clas ideology. Once you institute new forms of class rule, class laws and class nationalism, it is the end and betrayal of democrati principles, and the false claims that a principle of social wealth and democracy have been created.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Everywhere I look... Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
Dr. Winston O'Boogie put it well
Posted by: Tom Degan on Jul 30, 2007 4:27 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You say you want a revolution?
Well, you know
We all want to change the world....

We may not chance the world but we will change this country. Count on it.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
"The Rant" by Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The myth of trickle down economics
Posted by: Bic Pentameter on Jul 30, 2007 4:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The wealthy tend to invest and/or save much of their surplus income while the poor spend virtually all of their income and borrow on top of that, living from paycheck to paycheck and using credit cards to cover the difference.

The actual flow is trickle-up. One of these days it may just trickle up in their faces.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Necessarily Trickle-Up Posted by: pdxstudent
» Fair enough. Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Fair enough. Posted by: bornxeyed
Yeah it always makes me shudder to read...
Posted by: Cruella on Jul 30, 2007 4:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
..."homeless children". In the UK we have the same problem of a growing rich-poor divide but we are well away from where the US is so far. We have free healthcare for all and we have pretty careful policies to ensure kids don't end up on the street (right wing people of course are forever whinging that poor people have children deliberately just to get housing, but even if they did i wouldn't want those kids left on the streets!).

Our real rich-poor divide is elderly women. The pensions gap is a disgrace and the cost of heating fuel is rising much faster than the level of income these people get.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One Other Thought
Posted by: Tom Degan on Jul 30, 2007 4:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Greta piece! But when the writer makes the point that the "average" income in the USA is $50,000 - that is a tad misleading. Molly Ivins (Lord, rest her merrie soul) once made the observation that if Bill Gates walks into a homeless shelter that is being run by two elderly nuns who are caring gor 36 homeless people, at the time Gates is inside that shelter, the average net worth of everyone inside that shelter is 1.5 billion. The real question is this:

What is the medium income of everyone in America? The answer is much lower.

Cheers!

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
"The Rant" by Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: One Other Thought Posted by: kathat
» U.S. Median Income Posted by: stormchilde1975
» RE: U.S. Median Income Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: U.S. Median Income Posted by: mike1997
» Funny thing about Gates... Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: One Other Thought Posted by: Trazom
» RE: One Other Thought Posted by: jbur816
» RE: One Other Thought Posted by: Conservasaurus
And speaking of Bill Gates
Posted by: bob t on Jul 30, 2007 5:27 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been in the computer field, on the internet shortly after it became the internet. That was back when Gates was a teenager.
Being around for that long I know for a fact that Gates STOLE his way to the top.
I remember when he sold DOS to IBM and DOS didn't even exist. It existed only in the minds of the guys whose office was in the building next door to the building where he had an office.
I remember every program created by others and which he stole from them.
I remember when he stole windows from XEROX's Palo Alto Research Center(PARC).
And that is what the Republicans call free enterprise.
Thats what Bill Gates and free enterprise is all about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Buy 'em out, boys... Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: And speaking of stealing Windows Posted by: edgar_michel
» RE: And speaking of stealing Windows Posted by: edgar_michel
» RE: And speaking of stealing Windows Posted by: edgar_michel
30 trillion?!
Posted by: zutronius on Jul 30, 2007 5:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was shocked to read that combined, these people had somewhere in the estimate of $30 TRILLION dollars. I think $30 trillion could be put a long way towards say...weaning our fossil fuel dependency, poverty, world famine/hunger, and put towards practical and well thought out environmental policy to ensure our survival as a species. But instead, we have the elite rich living out their American Dream.

Sigh :(

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 30 trillion?! So So Right Posted by: edgar_michel
» Might as well just burn it! Posted by: bornxeyed
» I should have said... Posted by: bornxeyed
Rich man, Poor man
Posted by: fdgsr on Jul 30, 2007 5:52 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Trickle down benefits are more like 'flow down' benefits. If the rich spend lavishly, those from whom they buy receive the flow. Ultimately the producer, not the entrepreneur, but the workers who produce what the rich want benefit. They have a job producing something that sells. The middle man mark up artists also receive some of the flow, but they also spend it on something made by workers. Workers are paid for what they make, even if it only a fraction of what the item sells for.

In the case of people like Warren Buffet; they do not consume much more than anyone else. They eat the same number of calories of food, but part with more of their easy money for it. Only a small fraction of a $1000 cup of coffee is coffee; the rest is an appearance of control over the money. It is not. The rich could not be richer if they spent $1.00 for the coffee. They could be more in control of the wealth, but the cost of the coffee content would be the same. To choose to spend $1000 for coffee gives the feeling of wealth.

The rich sequester the evidence of wealth of the nations and the world, which is perceived value. Perceived value is represented in terms of money, not calories. They keep the money working to produce a cash flow by providing for the flow down to the workers who are influenced to produce by a promise to pay a wage or a price that they accept. Those who refuse the price are the real poor. So long as more can be produced with the available effort than anyone could possibly buy, there will be wealth. So long as some refuse the price at the bottom, there will be poverty. So long as the rich get satisfaction by throwing crumbs to scrambling people at the bottom of the feeding chain there will be charity.

The only problem of morality is the care of the unfortunate. It is unfortunate that there are sick people near the bottom, lame people near the bottom, and lazy people at the bottom. The sick, lame and lazy at the top will take care of the sick, lame and lazy at the bottom. It is called charity. Charity is paying for those who cannot or will not produce the value of their consumption.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» "Even if..."!?! Posted by: pdxstudent
» Labor as commodity Posted by: pzzp
» Labour is Commodity Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: Labour is Commodity Posted by: Blade
» RE: Labour is Commodity Posted by: pzzp
» RE: The Only Job in Town Posted by: edgar_michel
» RE: The Only Job in Town Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: The Only Job in Town Posted by: edgar_michel
» RE: ich man, Poor man Posted by: Blade
The myth created by the Republicans (who on the whole are the super rich)
Posted by: Ellie1 on Jul 30, 2007 6:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is that YOU TOO can be in their ranks if you believe in the American Dream and work hard. So vote for George Bush and our party, because someday you will be ONE of us. Yeah right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Um, the disturbing 'point' of this article
Posted by: Gegner on Jul 30, 2007 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is it takes a lot of poor people to make on rich one.

The 'wealth' that is 'accumulated' (read stolen) by the super rich in fact represents raises the workers did not receive and lower prices the customer never sees.

Workers/consumers are mercilessly exploited so capitalists can 'capture' excess(ive) value...and line their own pockets with it.

There is another way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "free market" as a religion, NO. Posted by: Brooklynbrenda
» RE: "free market" as a religion, NO. Posted by: edgar_michel
Neo-Fascism Neo-Feudalism
Posted by: jim_altman on Jul 30, 2007 6:51 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wealth is the new Aryanism. The neofascist, neoconservative agenda for the last 30 years has been the rebirth of feudalism. Just as the Nazis fancied themselves as nobel knights on a quest to restablish some millennial Aryan utopia, today's robber barons envision themselves as the only true guardians and gatekeepers of value and quality in the world today. In their minds, only the super-rich are qualified to define what is good, noble, or pure, and we neo-serfs should be enthralled by their choices. These people are true believers in their predestined nobility and right to power. Conventional liberal moral arguments will consistently fail to dent or deter their agendas for absolute hegemony. At best, the benevolent barons like Gates and Buffett will do their best to keep their serfs happy, unrebellious, and productive, while the less benevolent dukes will continue to advocate for the building of more and bigger dungeons.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Neo-Fascism Neo-Feudalism Posted by: edgar_michel
Human Compassion Level Easy To See
Posted by: Windwhistler on Jul 30, 2007 6:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article is quite revealing. From it, it is exceedingly clear how much compassion our million/billion/trillion dollar business practioners (aka robbers) among others have for their fellow man. Then there are the criticisms that appear to be little more than sour grape comparisons by $30,000 a year tread-mill "slaves". What about the large mass of the world that survives (for a time) on $400 a year (or less)? I wonder what their opinion might me on this topic? Hey people we blew i!. I'm damn glad I brought no progeny into this world. All of you with any hope for the human race hold up your hands.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We shouold concentrate on fixing Pooristan.
Posted by: KeepsonTickn on Jul 30, 2007 6:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I believe that Richistan is not the problem. The problem is, as the saying goes, "It sucks to be poor." America is becoming a poverty based economy, and the trend is unstoppable. It makes sense to fight the trend rather than to exacerbate as the Bush-Republicans have done, but government policy at best will delay the inevitable.

The world will soon be energy-poor, and the countries that succeed will be those who adapt. America is structured around cheap energy, but the usefulness of that paradigm has run its course. There is a lot to do and not much time to do it in. What really frightens me is that our leaders, in politics and business, seem more interested in tapping our unrealistic expectations for profits than in adapting to the new reality.

It has been noted in studies that once we reach a point in income where we have a degree of security, then additional income does not improve our happiness. Take that, Uber-Rich. But here in America, we have made poverty and even middle-class life terribly stressful and unfulfilling.

Much of what we accept as lifestyle "improvement" has a neutral or even negative effect on our overall sense of well-being. Since there is no way that the American lifestyle is in any way sustainable, it is high time we change. We need to recalibrate our societal expectations to match the requirement for an energy-frugal lifestyle, and remake the infrastructure of this country to make that type of lifestyle more palatable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Rich People Taste Good!
Posted by: rgoalierob on Jul 30, 2007 6:58 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yummy yummy!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Rich People Taste Good! Posted by: edgar_michel
» Hahahahahaha!!!!!! Posted by: Prophit0
Socialism for Survival
Posted by: jcrw on Jul 30, 2007 7:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
SOCIALISM FOR SURVIVAL!

Human life and progress is possible only in a world that is ecologically sustainable and in which the global economy is democratically based to provide for universal human needs.

For centuries capitalist greed has been the motivating force behind slavery, racism, colonialism, and world wars. Today, with global warming, the U.S. corporate ruling elite threatens to destroy the entire planet to maximize greed and profit for itself. The natural and economic resources essential to the vast majority of peoples for survival are being exploited and privatized for the greed and profit of a few.

The 500 year reign of barbaric capitalism must end now if humanity is to survive this century.
jeremy@infowells.com
www.infowells.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Socialism for Survival Posted by: richholland
» RE: Socialism for Survival Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: Socialism for Survival Posted by: Brooklynbrenda
» Exactly! Posted by: eddie torres
» Sorry Posted by: bornxeyed
» Karl Marx was RIGHT! Posted by: zooeyhall
How long till someone...
Posted by: smendler on Jul 30, 2007 7:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... actually picks one of these spots for an attack? And what will happen when they do?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

there is such a thing as ENOUGH...!
Posted by: smendler on Jul 30, 2007 7:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If I had to pick one word to use as a slogan, it would be simply "ENOUGH."

One (admittedly over-simplified) way to characterize the present struggle would be as a fight between "ENOUGH" and "MORE." There are some people who realize that there is such a thing as ENOUGH, and everyone ought to be able to have it. Others, on the other hand, think that there must always be MORE (power, wealth, yachts, whatever) and they're willing to do whatever it takes (kill, enslave, pillage, cheat, destroy the environment - either directly or secondhand if they're squeamish) to get it.

That's one meaning of "ENOUGH" - the other, of course, is that there are certain things of which we have had quite ENOUGH already! And at some point, a critical number of folks might come to realize that ENOUGH REALLY IS ENOUGH...!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

An interesting question to pose to free-marketeers
Posted by: smendler on Jul 30, 2007 7:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is abject poverty a necessary precondition for the existence of multibillionaires?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Wealth is finite? Posted by: pzzp
» Yes, it is. Posted by: Illiteratilumen
Why aren’t you people at work?
Posted by: shangrilalad on Jul 30, 2007 7:54 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.
All right, what’s going on here?

Why aren’t you people at work?

Are you blogging from home or maybe sneaking a peek at the office? Shame on you.

I’m semi-retired and that’s my excuse.

.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Why aren’t you people at work? Posted by: edgar_michel
» This IS our work- Posted by: WitchyNy
we are just parasite
Posted by: lesterliu on Jul 30, 2007 8:00 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
if we cant control our consumption, we are no different from those parasites who will eventually burn out their hosts and dies. its so predictable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» not exactly Posted by: bornxeyed
the new nobility
Posted by: vwaites on Jul 30, 2007 8:00 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
comes not from royalty, but from corporations.

We are once again in a form of the system we liberated ourselves from in 1776. Thomas Paine said then, that if we rid ourselves of the burden of the Bourgeoisie, we could afford public education and other social programs. Now, here we are, listening to canidates talking of getting rid of these same social programs in order to control an out of control deficit.

Look at the French revolution to see where this is all headed. Just subsititute oil for bread.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: the new nobility Posted by: bornxeyed
Sowing chaos, reaping profit
Posted by: eddie torres on Jul 30, 2007 8:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When Bill Gates walks into a homeless shelter, everyone gets a virus and the nuns start a for-profit vaccination clinic. Like all successful oligarchs, he's an expert at sowing a manageable landscape of chaos (MS Windows) where independent operators with the "entrepreneurial" spirit can carve out a profitable niche, as long as enough income gets kicked upstairs at harvest time.

Compare that with how Rupert Murdoch and Conrad Black operate in the media biz, James Simons or Michael Berger in the hedge fund biz, and Philip Anschutz or Joe Nacchio run telecoms.

For every oligarch who publically mirrors some stylized ideal of the American Dream, there's an alter-ego billionaire on the run from the law or under investigation or hiding out in a non-extradition tax haven.

It's not because "there's always a few bad apples". It's because there are never enough investigators.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Sowing chaos, reaping profit Posted by: ray burchard
Karl Marx has been proven RIGHT!
Posted by: zooeyhall on Jul 30, 2007 8:48 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Karl Marx is vindicated. EVERYTHING he predicted is coming true.

As for those who say "well, socialism didn't work in Russia, China, etc." my answer is that the "socialism" in those countries was NEVER the socialism of Marx. It was a "statist" socialism---not a true workers social democracy.

We need a true socialist workers democracy in this country and the world. Until then all the hand wringing, the quick fixes, the "reforms", the this-or-that latest report on income inequality---all these are just band-aids on the cracks in the dike.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

otto
Posted by: otto on Jul 30, 2007 9:04 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In Mel Brooks' "Blazing Saddles" there's a scene I love that begins with the line: "Get ready For the Great Pie Fight!" I feel like shouting, "Get ready for the great revolution Fight!" - but it's not comedy or something nice. Dramatic income changes such as these described here are bound to lead to a violent revolution. We already have the making of private armies like Blackwater for the wealthy to defend their riches, but little by little the disenfranchised poor will start turning to sabatage and guerilla tactics like the ones used in Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam in the past. Crime rates have already risen tremendously, but the answer has been to get tough on crime and give longer sentences. Roosevelt was smart enough to foresee this in the 30's and make dramatic changes in the social system. Let's hope we elect leaders who can learn the same lesson.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The Walton family bunker Posted by: zooeyhall
» Ted Turner Posted by: jbur816
1410
Posted by: carolecraig on Jul 30, 2007 9:08 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I used to be an Alternet supporter. I withdrew my funding (limited I will admit) at the time Israel was sowing southern Lebanon with cluster bombs and Alternet carried advertisements to visit Israel. I am now going to remove myself from your mailing list (again). Don't you see that the term Richistan is loaded with racism? I am not at all sure what reality your editors live in. But it certainly is not one that I want to inhabit no matter how much I support resistence to the American regime.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 1410 Posted by: hayesad
» RE: 1410 Posted by: bornxeyed
» chill out dude... Posted by: may261989
» RE: 1410 Posted by: ALANHESTER
Ah, the gender card
Posted by: H_H on Jul 30, 2007 9:26 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"It is such men -- and they are usually men -- who feed the outlandish luxury goods economy of Richistan"

Ah, so the wives of these fat cats wish for no fur coats or diamond pendants or trips to private Caribbean islands. These long-suffering female victims are forced to consume such finery, I suppose. They eat caviar only because guns are being held against their temples.

If it wasn't for that, billionaire's wives would surely live like ascetics, subsisting only on bread and water.

Buffy: "What? You got me sapphire earrings?! I will wear NO sure finery, you capitalist swine. Any jewel is too big and fancy for my Spartan tastes and don't even try to make me live in your fabulous hill-top mansion. All I want is to meditate in this barren mud-brick thatched-roof hovel."

Dick: "You refuse these jewels? (SLAP!) I'LL MAKE YOU WEAR THEM! (SLAP!) MUWAHAHAH!"

Buffy: "NOOOOO! I'm being forced to consume luxury goods! My life of self-denial and simpleness has been ruined! (SOB!)"

Yeah, that's surely how it goes...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Trump that... Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: Ah, the gender card Posted by: WitchyNy
Paul Cardwell
Posted by: Paul Cardwell on Jul 30, 2007 9:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The parallel universe does not stop with the items stated. Here in north Texas, they are taking over already paid-for highways, turning them into toll roads, and forcing ordinary citizens onto the frontage roads.

Before that, they declared the inside lane of limited access highways to be "for passing only". This gave them the term "Nazi lanes" after the first Autobahn which reserved that lane for high (Gauleiter or higher) Nazi officials - later expanded to include Waffen SS units during the war. This still exists in that they have no speed limits and so were first used exclusively by war profiteers and now by industrialists born after that era. Those are the only ones who can afford the fast cars.

Those who refuse to study history...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You've got to be kidding me. Posted by: ABetterFuture
» RE: Paul Cardwell Posted by: zorro
$30 trillion?
Posted by: willymack on Jul 30, 2007 10:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All that minimally taxed money floating around, and opponents of universal health care say it's too expensive. I've got some suggestions for a cure to the Richie Blues. 1. Get rid of the bushies, NOW. 2. Impound all their ill-gotten gain, and return it to the treasury, where it belongs. 3. Get us the hell out of Iraq,Now. 4. Reinstate a fair tax for the super-rich, and: 5. Take legal action against the criminals responsible for the mess we're in. The last is a MORAL OBLIGATION we have to set things right and prevent the recurrence of the last 6+ years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: $30 trillion? Posted by: ALANHESTER
Suck up not trickle down
Posted by: sculptor on Jul 30, 2007 10:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It would be all well and good if it weren't for several things. First not only does trickle down not work, the rich accumulate wealth by "sucking up" the money from the bottom. Second this money equates to power. The media is controlled or outright owned by the oligarchs of Richistan. They use the media to slant public opinion and render harmless what little democracy remains. Speaking of democracy, they also use their power to see that candidates that support their interests are elected.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tell me something new
Posted by: Jbuuty on Jul 30, 2007 10:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've been living in Africa since 1989, and I've seen this coming since shortly after the Bush election. This isn't the result of new technology - though that has helped some achieve immense wealth - but it is a deliberate policy of Bush, Rove, Cheney, etc. It is part of the New American Century. Where can we get the soldiery to wage continuous war and expand the empire, but from the rising poverty class? For now the military is having recruiting problems, but if the economic/class policies of this administration continue, the military will become the only option for millions of Americans.
Look at the decrease in quality of education, and the difficulty that working-class kids have in going to college. (I benefited from government help to go to college, just before Reagan the class wars.)
Look at the wide separation in health care between classes.
Look at the inability of the lower class to participate in the political process.
As the article mentions, the lack of contact between rich and the rest.
Also look at the rising crime, and violent crime. It reminds me of Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa. The rich live protected, the poor suffer violence.
Look at the level of government corruption in this administration. It is reaching 3rd world levels. Political prosecutions and legal threats against those opposing the ruling party. Stolen elections.
This is the Bush model!! It needs to be stopped.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Tell me something new Posted by: edgar_michel
» RE: Tell me something new Posted by: WitchyNy
Please: Educate Yourself About the Federal Reserve System
Posted by: freethink7 on Jul 30, 2007 11:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Federal Reserve System is privately owned by a cartel/group of international bankers. That’s right, the Federal Reserve System is privately owned by a group of bankers outside of the U.S. and not subject to U.S. federal regulations. The Federal Reserve is privately owned by people outside the U.S. and has never been audited, refuses to be audited, and furthermore has never paid any taxes (just us little people/middle class are actually required to pay taxes).

Look around at what you are witnessing economically, socially and politically in this country…..it's all perpetuated by the Federal Reserve System. The Federal Reserve is illegal….it must be thoroughly researched by Americans, please research and abolish this illegal banking system. We must take our country back from this cartel of private international bankers. Federal Reserve owns our banking system = they own our country.

Since it is privately owned by a group of private international/global bankers (it is not a federal agency nor is there a “reserve”), the Federal Reserve does not support the majority of the American people’s interests (masses/middle class/and lower classes). In fact, it does the quite the opposite. Federal Reserve is synonymous with a central bank and is beholden to the interests of the extremely wealthy. Wealth consolidation is their game.

Simply put: The Federal Reserve creates economic cycles of boom and bust (our current recession, 1929 crash) thus enabling this group of private bankers to make enormous amounts money during these cycles (buy low – sell high). Our graduated income tax pays the exorbitant interest of Federal Reserve loans to banks here and abroad.

Incidentally, a central bank and graduated income tax are two separate planks in the Communist Manifesto. (This is explained explicitly in the book references below).

The Federal Reserve also encourages the following:

Fed encourages perpetual war(s) and funds both sides of conflicts
Fed is a tool/mechanism for usury/outrageous interest
Fed is a supreme instrument of totalitarianism in U.S. and globally
Fed promotes new world order/one world government (end of U.S. sovereignty)
Fed encourages a Plutocracy/Feudal system
Fed abhors middle class and encourages a feudal system
Fed promotes communism and/or fascism

The Federal Reserve is in fact supported by mostly unthinking albeit well-intentioned American people who have not thoroughly researched the issue of the Federal Reserve and all it’s negative economic, political, and social ramifications. Years of social conditioning tantamount to brainwashing through our news media (that these private bankers incidentally control) has led Americans to believe that the Federal Reserve is owned and operated by Americans……but this is not true. If we wish to be a real republic and democracy, invigorate the middle class…..we must abolish to Federal Reserve and take back our country.


Sources (Books):
The Creature From Jekyll Island
Case Against the Fed
None Dare Call It Conspiracy
Treason: The New World Order


(please: no baseless comments that I am a right-winger – pushing a right wing agenda……nothing could be further from the truth, I am an independent liberal deeply concerned about the massive wealth consolidation and loss of middle class that has occurred over the past 7-8 years)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yes, but lets keep refusing to tax the rich...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Jul 30, 2007 11:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After all... they don't have the money to spare... and if we tax them personally.. they'll just invest less in their businesses, right? Yeah right! Who told you that? Oh, yeah... a rich asshole who represents even richer assholes. Yes.. they will refuse to invest in their businesses.. the thing that made their money... because they pay a bit more in taxes. Yes, thats right.. they will actually make LESS money if you raise their taxes. They won't just net less.. they will actually refuse to invest money in their business to make more!

Tax the rich. Feed, house, and clothe the poor.
Want to bitch that they didn't "earn" it? Neither did the super wealthy. They don't make their money by working. The rich might sometimes earn their wealth.. the super-rich never do. They just take wealth they did earn and use it to employ other people to do the work for them while they reap the profits... while usually paying others as little as possible. Which is why we need to tax them to feed, house, and clothe the working poor in the first place!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good post
Posted by: Ambrose Pare on Jul 30, 2007 11:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Its a bubble.

The US is over $9 Trillion dollars in debt.
Technically, the US could borrow $500 Trillion dollars and give it away to various citizens, making instant millionaires of many people overnight.

Its just going to raise inflation and soon your kids monopoly money will be worth more than a US dollar bill.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I agree!
Posted by: locutusofborg on Jul 30, 2007 11:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The gap between the rich and everyone else in America is growing rapidly. By 2000 it had swollen to 1920s levels: the top 0.1% of Americans - with incomes over $1.6 million a year - now bring home 10% of all money earned. Meanwhile wages for the rest of us have stagnated.

It's time we started taxing the rich first. The government should take 99% of income over $1.6 million, indexed for inflation. The only deduction should be for investments in productive enterprises.

If more taxes than this are needed, then the government should take 90% of the income over $383,000 a year - where the top 1% starts. After that, it can start taxing the rest of us at the lowest possible rate - and leave out the bottom 20%, who make under $13,478, entirely.

This will benefit working families directly through lower taxes - and indirectly, by encouraging investment and discouraging exorbitant executive salaries. It's a question of simple fairness. None should enjoy outrageous luxury while most of the rest of us suffer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I agree! Posted by: Trazom
USA became the richest nation in the world on the backs of...
Posted by: eosrk on Jul 30, 2007 12:46 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
....African Slaves working the Cotton trade!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Heading toward"?
Posted by: nopuppy on Jul 30, 2007 12:47 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As someone who earns less in a year than Dick Cheney drops between the cushions of his couch in a week, I hereby testify that we are already there!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Have you seen these life changing films?
Posted by: jbur816 on Jul 30, 2007 12:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Richistan=racist
Posted by: jbur816 on Jul 30, 2007 12:56 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I couldn't agree more but although I hate the use of the term, I like that we can have a free and open debate about it and about this very important topic of the elites running and ruining our great nation. To me, this discussion is of such importance that I won't leave because I don't know where else I can find this kind of honesty in a forum that is widely read like this one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ichistan=racist Posted by: WitchyNy
How people look at money
Posted by: Trazom on Jul 30, 2007 1:03 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's very simple to explain the differences between the rich and the non-rich. The non rich use money to live their lives, pay their bills, afford clothing and shelter, etc. The rich use money to 1) make more money, and 2) buy luxury items to make them feel even wealthier.

In this wealth-oriented society, money works against the working man always, while working for the rich man. Think of interest.

The game was rigged from the get-go.

The only way to succeed as a non-rich person is to refuse to play the game.

Wealthy people who horde their wealth are diminishing society. Theirs is money that has been taken out of the game, thus leaving less to share with everyone else. A person with $100 million in the bank just collecting interest is not benefitting anyone. Yet 1 million middle class folks who buy $100 worth of groceries are supporting tens of thousands of workers in the agriculture and food prep business.

The question is, how much longer can the guy with $100 million increase his balance while fewer and fewer families can afford $100 for their weekly groceries?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: How people look at money Posted by: Logic's Edge
» RE: How people look at money Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: How people look at money Posted by: WitchyNy
A spiritual perspective (not religious) on why more isn't better
Posted by: jgdewey on Jul 30, 2007 1:27 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So often people at the top or the super rich say that it wasn't quite what they expected. Sure it's nice to have a lot of money but then when one house doesn't bring that joy and happiness, well maybe 2 or why not 3, or not one car but 5 or 25 antique ones, or when a simple rolex doesn't bring that magic high, then get one that's even better. I call it supersizing stupidity. It's like running full blast at an immovable wall and wondering why you can't get past it and just doing it now with a helmet and then with backhoe, but dang you are just unable to bust it. That 's the belief that material things will fullfill a non material being. Apart from basic necessities, material abundance can't possible fullfill your need to give, to love, to be loved, for joy, for compassion, for empathy, for peace, for freedom from fear, sickness, illness, rejection. The list is endless. A watch is a watch, a car is a car. All it does when you supersize it for happiness is alienate you from your soul, the source of all joy.Making you think happiness is in the wearing of that watch. The ego grows, covering the soul, because really there isn't any great thrill in 5 houses over one except that you can brag about it and lord it over others. The ego wraps around the soul choking it off. Some figure it out. Bill Gates did. Hey, I have a neat techno house in Hawaii, do I need to be an obnoxious richistan, or could I give it away helping others. Ah, peace reigns in his soul and it shows. Many get it many don't. Some sacrifice their entire life (think enron, think Nazis) just to get rich and end up amassing horrible karma hurting thousands of people, losing sight of decent behavoir, or just plain old fashioned morality. All to have more to fit into that big old hole in our hearts that material things never fill. Ever look at Gandhi's smile. It could have lit up an entire city, so could Mother Teresa's. To be poor and underprovided is bad, to have enough , a little extra for hard times and the future secure is balanced, to amass and amass and spend and spend is a soul out of balance and yet our society seems to have the highest respect for those people with the most money. No matter how they obtained it, how obnoxious they are in spending it, or how in love they are with themselves. Think Jimmy Carter's noble prize getting one inch of news, vs. Donald Trump with pages of news. For what . Making buildings for the rich. Who cares? Now if he started affordable housing for the poor, I'd listen. Too bad we have lost our soul as a nation. It will get balanced , harmony will be returned, but it will be a painful lesson. It happened in the depression, it'll happen similarly again. It will proabably be worse this time, but it will adjust.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Corporatism is fascism
Posted by: jbur816 on Jul 30, 2007 2:10 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
a quote attributed to Mussollini. Very applicable to our current situation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Money can't buy class, happiness, intelligence, integrity, or salvation
Posted by: xbj on Jul 30, 2007 2:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wealth can only buy meaningless useless (and ultimately, completely worthless) crap, power devoid of all possible pleasure, and endless problems in managing wealth and controlling the rest of humanity.

Wealth and power is a curse. One look at every last single one of the endless number of assholes who have it proves this beyond all shadow of all possible doubt. Even the decent are insufferable assholes, only decent in comparison to the most reprehensible of their kind.

Never envy the rich; they live in hell. Which is why they are eating the middle class, where the majority of happiness truly is. The rich want everyone in the world to be at either one of the two extremes where hell truly exists; wealth and extreme poverty.

But of the two, there is even far more happiness among the extremely poor than there is among the wealthy.

Wealth was invented by Lucifer to give humanity just enough rope to hang itself with, one by one by one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ABOUT TIME ALTERNET! EAT THE RICH!
Posted by: WitchyNy on Jul 30, 2007 3:53 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Remember the Watts riots?
Now it is the white peoples turn!

REVOLUTION NOW!

Forget about voting-the machines are rigged. I KNOW-I was a Democrat poll watcher for the bush/kerry elections. I WATCHED the votes change!

We need to take to the streets-

"When in the course of human events, it becomes NECESSARY----"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Power Players....Who's YOUR DADDY??
Posted by: picket on Jul 30, 2007 4:30 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sen Chuck Schumer[D-NY] is breaking with his party to oppose higher taxes on hedge fund and private equity managers.

Raising TAXES ON THIS RICH ENTITY would double the enormous profits reaped by its executives but Schumer who often portrays himself as a supporter of the the struggles of the middle class had to pass on this one. WHY???

Campaign Finance Reform is VERY VERY important ...to replace these millionaire Congressmen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As Capitalism ↑ Democracy ↓
Posted by: George DeCarlo on Jul 30, 2007 4:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As Capitalism ↑ Democracy ↓

Michael Parenti had also answered this question in a speech he gave viewable on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0a9VnxZEHGg (Part 1)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_97_EHQBVgg (Part 2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdiPnvYLvWM (Part 3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-D24ZEae5o (Part 4)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ir3WKY4pJE4 (Part 5)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEEdcDWFr_0 (Part 6)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjI3qWyeTeA (Part 7)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Congress is part of the ELITE
Posted by: Bicyclebarron on Jul 30, 2007 6:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's not forget that our elected representatives are all part of the wealthy elite. Every senator is a millionaire and most of the house of reps as well. Even the Democrats ultimately serve the rich. Outside of the token bump in minimum wage don't expect much from anyone in government until working people actually are represented in the government.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sour Grapes
Posted by: EncinoM on Jul 30, 2007 8:15 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most of the comments, here can be explained as, he has better and nicer toys then me, if I can't have them then neither should he.

Grow up, life was never promised to be fair.

Life is a competion, some people go handicapped, some got the short end of the stick.

Try working for a living instead of bitching that others have more.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Sour Grapes Posted by: WitchyNy
» RE: Sour Grapes Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: Sour Grapes Posted by: ray burchard
» RE: Sour Grapes Posted by: Trazom
» The first income tax Posted by: zooeyhall
» RE: Sour Grapes Posted by: ALANHESTER
» RE: Sour Grapes Posted by: ALANHESTER
» RE: Sour Grapes Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: Sour Grapes Posted by: ALANHESTER
» RE: Sour Grapes Posted by: EncinoM
Has the US ever not been an unequal ssociety?
Posted by: dayahka on Jul 30, 2007 8:19 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your title is clearly wrong. First, because it could be argued that there have always been two classes in America--the rich and the poor. Second, because the suggestion that the US is becoming a class-divided country is clearly wrong, for it already IS a class-ridden society, with a few rich and the majority poor. For a while, there was a so-called middle class (less poor poor), but now it's rich and poor, masters and servants, owners and slaves, same old, same old.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

priorities
Posted by: Dianka on Jul 30, 2007 8:47 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And these are the folks who pushed our welfare repeal policies, claiming that welfare recipients, on subpoverty-level incomes, lived in lazy luxury. America bought it. Today, instead of providing aid to the poor, we use our tax dollars to finance the years-long chain of "tax breaks" (i.e., the public pays the tax bills) for the rich. Funny thing is, we are more outraged at the idea of someone using food stamps to purchase a birthday cake for her child than we are of working hard to pay the bills of the wealthy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: priorities Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: priorities Posted by: bornxeyed
» RE: priorities Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: priorities Posted by: ALANHESTER
Blow-back
Posted by: talkville on Jul 31, 2007 1:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Reagan, Thatcher and Friedman return to "the Homeland" to roost. That old "invisible hand" of Smith now presses down on the Casino Game Machine. Who'll be our first Monarch who purchases the position? Even Law, Order and Stability are now commodities, available in the "Free Market" as assets for trade and exchange- backed up, of course, by an equally commodified Military and Police Force. The US thought, way back in those days of the Reagan/Tatcher assault, that we could live "in the style we have become accustomed to". There's still more to develop; we're only discerning the proverbial tip of the iceberg. And the Social ("Public") Debt keeps climbing - held by a Corporate State, Private in all but name. Mussolini would be in ecstasy today! The realities may seem gentler and more generous than in Chile or Argentina of other years; who knows about the consequences, however? The fallacy that temporary circumstances will be eternal haunts us still yet. No one is immune to "rude awakenings".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

None of the above.
Posted by: shangrilalad on Jul 31, 2007 7:59 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.
None of the above.

How long would it take to organize an Emergency Election?

We ought to have the right to choose “None of the above.”

If fifty per cent of voters choose “none of the above,” then we ought to declare a new election and wipe the “slate” of candidates by a process of elimination, disqualifying Corporate Candidates according to how much they received from Big Spender Billionaires and corporations.

People who don’t vote, don’t understand that someone they didn’t vote for is going to be daily making life and death decisions that can effect them like a bullet through the head. Forget the idiots who don’t vote voluntarily, they shouldn’t be voting anyway. But don’t forget, there are millions of dark-skinned voters, who don’t vote, involuntarily. That’s the way our political system operates.

Criminals, fascists and those who profit from a corrupt system of government have seized control of our country. Plutocrats, Republicans and DINO’s have usurped the democratic process, replaced it with a criminal enterprise, and they will stop at nothing to maintain their wealth and dominance.

No matter who wins the next, or the next, or the next election, nothing will change for a majority of Americans. Those who betrayed “the people” still control the political process and will never reform a system that treats them like royalty. They not only make the law, they are above the law, and that’s the way they mean to keep it.

When elections can be rigged with impunity, democracy is over.

It’s going to be interesting to see how “the land of the brave and the free” rationalize this reality.

.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: None of the above. Posted by: ALANHESTER
The Answer to the Question posed by the Author is Yes. And it is very unjust and unhealthy , indeed.
Posted by: yellow on Jul 31, 2007 9:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Luxembourg Income Study shows that current US income inequality is highly unusual by western standards and not part of a general global era trend. It is an anamoly and is policy driven and needs to be reversed by policy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Eat your purse
Posted by: DogSalad on Jul 31, 2007 10:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When the doo doo hits the fan, water,food and ammo will become the only things worth having, good luck with your watches and purses. My only other comment to a great article is that the hollywood stars are just as filthy as the corporate elite, they just pretend to be like us.
Start growing your own food and get ready for the big one

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: at your purse Posted by: WitchyNy
Tom Over
Posted by: Tomover on Jul 31, 2007 12:33 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Granted , the people who can be referred to as the "super rich" are not an oppressed group of people; however, this article involves demonizing and blaming super rich people for society's problems.
It's a common phenomenon: when faced with difficulties or other causes of frustration, human beings may be inclined to blame this or that person or this or that category of people.
Blaming "the poor" is the wrong approach, but so is blaming "the rich". I suggest we focus on what we have in common as human beings, while we go about making changes to our systems for allocating resources.
I support changes to the tax structure, changes to how our government spends that money, and changes to how we as a society define the "American dream" and what it means to be "successful."
But I don't agree with blaming America's super rich, anymore than I would agree with someone in a "poor" nation who may hate people like you and me, who have the luxury of instaneous water only footsteps away, refrigerated food, or electricity and other technology that we use to do such things as read and write via our computers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Tom Over Posted by: ALANHESTER
» The rich ARE the problem- Posted by: WitchyNy
» RE: The rich ARE the problem- Posted by: ALANHESTER
» RE: Tom Over Posted by: talkville
A Law of Nature
Posted by: fhughes on Jul 31, 2007 1:14 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pareto's Law of Incomes show that there will always be a few extremely rich, and an ocean of poor. This is a law of nature. If all start equal, some, from talent, good fortune, or criminal activity, will accumulate wealth. Then an Invisible Hand takes from the poor and gives it to the rich. Then it takes from the extremely poor and gives it to the extremely rich. It is a sisyphean task to overcome this.

F.P. Hughes ej245@freenet.carleton.ca

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A Law of Nature Posted by: talkville
fox1
Posted by: fox1 on Jul 31, 2007 2:14 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh God, I knew I would like this website. The jealeousy here is perfect. "KILL THE RICH! KILL THE RICH!" You people are just jealous. If you had the money, ya'll would be doing the same thing, buying all these overpriced luxury items and services. There is still a middle class in America, and so far we are managing to hold on. I happen to work for rich people, and they take very good care of theire employees. I would rather work for robber barons than a complete Commie and socialist takeover of this country, at least the robber barons will eventually leave you alone, whereas BIG BROTHER do gooders will NEVER leave you in peace to prosper and take care of your own problems. I'll take my overpriced private health care any day of the week over government provided. What do the other taxpayers in this country have to do with paying more for MY health problems? All you Americans need to reread the Constitution. The Democrats and Republicans are not differant parties anymore. Al Gore, Hillary, Rudy, what the hell is the differance? One group will raise taxes more than the other, thats all. Please, help save our country from the socialist, commies, nazis, and all the other kooks who will destroy our constitution. DO NOT HELP THE U.S. DOWN THE ROAD OF THE E.U.!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: fox1 Posted by: ALANHESTER
» RE: fox1 Posted by: fox1
but who did they exploit to get that rich
Posted by: unity1 on Aug 1, 2007 7:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in our world, getting rich is always at anothers expense, the entire western world lives its over abundant and trashy lifestyles at the expense of the lives of third world peoples, after all the west is dependent and reliant on thier nations resources -

bill gates for instance continues to get rich via MS by ripping off everyone with his outrageous prices for software that always needs patches and updates in order to work - I don't know the other billionares - but if one is willing to pay that much for a bloody omelete I don't want to know them, the old saying that only a fool doesn't know the value of a dollar springs to mind - these obsenely rich bastards have no respect for money nor for the rest of us - and they will soon be the only ones rich enough to trash the planet with their toys

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Spiritual health care for the Rich
Posted by: metamind on Aug 3, 2007 11:11 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's right, we need to show some compassion for the rich. They are only doing what we all tell them is "the right thing to do." We need to start telling them something different. They are sick and they need health care .... spiritual health care.

Teach virtue. Generosity is a virtue. Repsonsibility is a virtue. If you want to be wealthy then you need to accept responsibility for your wealth. That means you need to share it generously with those in need.

Selfishness is not a virtue.
Decadence is not a virtue.
Greed is not a virtue.

Teach virtue to the rich. Tell them the "right way to be" over and over and over again.

And say to them:

"I want you to be virtuous with your wealth.Power and responsibility go together. If you have power, you are responsible."


Share the wealth ... intelligently with kind consideration of all.

Steve Moyer
http://stevemoyer.us
http://teachvirtue.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Makes me laugh
Posted by: donl51 on Aug 5, 2007 6:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No big deal let the rich get richer,let them have every thing made overseas ,let that money fund those evrywhere else,in 10 years i'd like to know who's going to buy what they produce,we'll all be the poor aliens climbing over fences some where to have a better life,look at Mexico ,thats not a poor country they've plenty of wealth,but its an unfair balance theres no trickle-down so others can make a living to so they look for a better life, and right now but not for long this country is offering it!..when used properly capitalism can be a good thing!...makes me laugh!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Been true for years, but no one listens
Posted by: twa on Aug 13, 2007 1:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nice article. I recently gave up after ten years of trying to warn Americans that the United States is becoming a third world nation. Last year I attempted to travel the entire USA for a year to investigate the matter for my Third World American Podcast, and to produce a documentary film. But nobody cared. Nobody wanted to hear it. It sounded too fantastic to be true. Without any support whatsoever, I have to give up on the project because, like most Americans, I didn't have enough money to pull it off. Which more or less proves my point.

So keep talking about it, by all means. However, with a decade of experience under my belt, I'm confident that Americans won't figure it out until they qualify for Third World Aid from the United Nations. With peak oil on the horizon, this should be within our lifetimes.

No one can say we didn't try to warn them.

All the best,
Paul

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement