Why Income Inequality Matters

[Malacite]

And why Bill O'Reily can go to Hell for going on and on about gutting PBS and getting Bill Moyers off the air (even though his show is actually privately funded)


Richard Wolff on Fighting for Economic Justice and Fair Wages | Moyers & Company | BillMoyers.com


See also:

[Taskmage]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

Interesting. Post the follow-up interview when it's available, please.

[Malacite]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

Will do.

The only point he made that I have to strongly contest is his absolving of the bankers and CEOs - that's horse shit. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should - especially if it's morally and ethically (if not legally) wrong. IMO, everyone is at fault on some level or another for the failings; The politicians for being cowards and refusing to stand up for the good of the nation, and the voters for not paying close enough attention to matters to let their representatives know. I'm much more lenient on the latter however, if only because peoples' lives have gotten so hectic that unless you're a politcal junkie like myself and only rely on trustworthy news sources (i.e. NOT the major news networks save for a handful of select journalists) chances are they are either uninformed or worse yet grossly misinformed (e.g. morons who take folks like Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh seriously).


EDIT: Would also like to clarify a couple of things, as the media and politicians are still in a major hype over the debt (which is a serious problem in the long run but should not be the focus of attention at all right now). Last year, the govt. Spent $3.539 Trillion, borrowing I believe 1.3? Something like that. Last I checked, the annual GDP was about 16 trillion, which coincidentally, is also about the total sum of the national debt. China holds the largest % of any single nation, but even then their share is only about $1 trillion.

My point? There is no shortage of money out there, only a shortage of political will to go after it. Now, I am not by any means suggesting that the govt. suddenly confiscate literally every penny of every citizen, I'm only pointing out that the debt can easily be paid off, in total fairness to everyone (the wealthy included) if sensible reforms were enacted and the rich actually paid what they ought to. I don't want to get into the whole mess of it (there's lots of things that honestly do warrant cutting, like defense spending and the RIDICULOUS $174k/year members of congress make on top of 5-figure pensions when most of them are already quite wealthy to begin with) I'm just making 1 little point that seems to get glossed over.

It's also partly why I deeply support Keynes' line of thinking, and the only economist out there who's pushing for the kind of thinking Keynes did is Paul Krugman. He's sadly been mostly alone in making the case for growing out of this mess rather than gutting programs that help the poor and lowering taxes for "job providers". I've only just started to understand why so many economists believe firmly in supply side economics (from reading the book I linked) and the justification for it borders on insanity really.

[Taskmage]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

That exchange reminded me of this comic:

smbc

It's a moot point, imo. People are a result of their culture, their upbringing, and their respective situations. You can say they could decide to act differently, but even if that was an easy thing, in most cases they'd just get ejected from their position and replaced by someone else who would behave badly in their place. So if individuals don't have the power to change the system, it's pointless to assign them responsibility for it.

The problem has tremendous inertia. I think the cultural change necessary to address it is taking shape, but the question remains as to how. I'm curious to see the solutions he proposes.

[Malacite]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

I'm still honestly surprised there hasn't been any kind of revolution/civil uprising over this shit, I honestly am. I think people have just become so cowed/complacent since the 70's that the will to resist just isn't there anymore.

Colbert put it best in an interview from last week when he said (referring to not jailing any bankers etc.) "Any other country, we would have lined them up and shot them all."

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

Any other country, we would have lined them up and shot them all.

The problem with this kind of thinking is that you believe its just the bankers that did this.

Kindly look up the Franklin/Dodd Act, which was signed into law under Clinton, revised and expanded under Clinton and revised and expanded once more under Bush. It kinda plays a huge role in the housing bubble.

When you are done, you should concede that if we're to shoot the bankers, we're going to have to line up most of Congress and the Senate as well.

Oh well, at least the baby boomer era of politics would be over then.

[Firewind]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

Oh well, at least the baby boomer era of politics would be over then.

Would that really be a bad thing?

[cidbahamut]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

I'm still honestly surprised there hasn't been any kind of revolution/civil uprising over this shit, I honestly am. I think people have just become so cowed/complacent since the 70's that the will to resist just isn't there anymore.

I'm not. It's the same reason the riots over gas prices my father has been predicting for decades haven't come to pass. It's all gradual and the implications aren't easily understood by the average joe. Plus most of this shit isn't exactly being clearly communicated to the public in general so they don't even know the stuff that's happening that should have them frothing with rage.

- - - Updated - - -

When you are done, you should concede that if we're to shoot the bankers, we're going to have to line up most of Congress and the Senate as well.

I'm not entirely convinced that would necessarily be a bad thing.

[Malacite]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

I'm not. It's the same reason the riots over gas prices my father has been predicting for decades haven't come to pass. It's all gradual and the implications aren't easily understood by the average joe. Plus most of this shit isn't exactly being clearly communicated to the public in general so they don't even know the stuff that's happening that should have them frothing with rage.

- - - Updated - - -



I'm not entirely convinced that would necessarily be a bad thing.

Nor I quite frankly. The vast majority of them are self-serving pricks only paying lipservice to the public. Fuck Boehner and his crockadile tears.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

I'd be okay with it. Just sayin' you gotta put the enablers down with the addicts. I mean, they just make things worse now with their fucking around on not making budget cuts.

This is the same government that tells us we're going to have to scale back, sacrifice and ride out the tough times while they won't for themselves, for their friends, won't take a day off or a pay cut for the jack shit they do. State and federal employees might be looking at a four day work week instead of five. OH NOES.

[Malacite]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

I'd be okay with it. Just sayin' you gotta put the enablers down with the addicts. I mean, they just make things worse now with their fucking around on not making budget cuts.

Absolutely 100% agree. The politicians are equally (if not more) as guilty as the banks and CEOs and other asshats that abused the system. And there do need to be some cuts made, but sensible ones and they need to be careful about it too - Austerity just doesn't work. Look at what happened in the U.K. It's why I want to desperately smack Obama upside the head, because he's so damn convinced that fixing the budget is the #1 issue right now when it really isn't - yes, the debt needs to be addressed for the long term because it can and will eventually outstrip the Country's propensity to make good on it. But you're still not in any real danger of that quite yet and honestly, while spending cuts are in order for things like the bloated defense budget, it's things like the Obesity epidemic and people being out of work that need to come first.


I single out these 2 things because they are by far and above 2 of the biggest growing concern. Medical bills will always be on the rise simply because people are living longer and we have an ever growing population - it's asinine to suggest that you can stop the growth of costs entirely. It can however be staggered severely with some public initiatives for the things you can't legislate (like what people can and can't eat) while shifting funding around in other areas, something the govt can do (e.g. instead of subsidizing the meat and dairy industries and especially corn ethanol, how about produce farmers so it doesn't more at the store for an apple than a bag of chips? Eating healthy has sadly gotten to be rather expensive and it's only fueling the problem.) Being overweight dramatically raises the risks for all kinds of horrible crap, and is the #1 cause of rising health care premiums. It HAS to be addressed as a matter of national security imo. (But again, you can't force people to eat right so I applaud the First Lady for showing initiative on the matter.)

I'm going to have to cut this short for now as dinner's ready lol... I'll finish up my little rant after.

- - - Updated - - -

OK so, yeah about the jobs thing...

I have never been more convinced, that the majority of these asshole economists who go on TV preaching about tax cuts and supply side economics need to be discredited and shut the fuck up already. The real experts all said way back when Obama proposed the 1st stimulus that it wasn't enough - that it had to be bigger, but of course it wasn't, and a good 1/3 or more of it was just more tax cuts. We needed more of what Ed Rendell spoke up, like massive infrastructure funding. Hell, Obama said it himself in his speech - there are 70,000 structurally deficient bridges. Nevermind the aging powergrid that's costing assloads to maintain and wastes a tonne of the power it's supposed to provide. Shit, even simple things like retrofitting old buildings to be more energy efficient. There is no shortage of work to be done that will greatly improve things for everyone in the country, but instead of spending money now to fix the Country and put people to work (if only temporarily) so they can pay taxes and buy goods (thereby offsetting the spending and then some) all you hear about is "the sky is falling" about the damned debt while the Right refuses to cede any ground, continuing to defend the fascist, oligarchy power structure put in place by the super wealthy. The country is slowly (but it's accelerating) going to hell around them but they continue to stick their fingers in their ears and defy any form of logic & reason, holding on to what's theirs at the expense of good of the nation.

EDIT: Point is, the U.S. is still (for now) the #1 economy in the world, and there's no shortage of money to pay down the debt with. There is however, and ever declining standard of living which will eventually come back to bite the super rich in the ass when no one can afford to support the companies that made them rich in the first place. And it's a hell of a lot easier to pay down the national debt and manage the country's expenses when at or near full-employment.

[cidbahamut]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

I think you've hit upon a key problem with the whole thing: No one gives a flying fuck about the good of the nation. Not the politicians, not the corporations and certainly not the citizens.

- - - Updated - - -

EDIT: Point is, the U.S. is still (for now) the #1 economy in the world, and there's no shortage of money to pay down the debt with. There is however, and ever declining standard of living which will eventually come back to bite the super rich in the ass when no one can afford to support the companies that made them rich in the first place.

This bit here is wrong. We'll just move back to something resembling feudalism where we have a mass of peasants working for the local lords(read: companies).

[Malacite]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

Well, it's ironic you should say that because from my point of view, we (I include Canada in this too because it ain't much better up here we just have more public benefits like health care) are essentially back to living in an aristocracy; corporations & politicians may as well be lords and barons :/

[cidbahamut]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

Yup.

And now we have the middle class dissolving so basically everyone else is back to being a peasant.

[Malacite]

Re: Why Income Inequality Matters

That's basically the plan. The sad thing is, as Wolff points out in the interview, there are too many people who are either uninformed or just complete denial - they do not want to face the horrible reality, and I honestly fault Obama for that. More than anyone else, as President, it's his duty to rally the public into action, to make their voices heard by their representatives (obviously this implies responsibility on our part, to actually use the influence given by our respective constitutions/laws) but the onus falls on him to spark the fire. I get the feeling though that too many groups with too much influence are playing hardball, holding him back from doing just that.

Either that, or he truly is blind to real crisis at hand.