- RELATED ARTICLES
- > Live From Tampa: Teen Reports From GOP Convention Aug 31, 2012 9:57 AM
- > Biden Visits For Fundraiser, Says Election Is Choice Of 'Fundamentally Different Paths' Aug 28, 2012 3:27 PM
- > Romney Makes Second Visit To The Hamptons On Friday Aug 21, 2012 3:41 PM
- > Local Hairdresser Sings For Mitt Romney Jul 11, 2012 10:08 AM
- > Mitt Romney Will Fundraise In The Hamptons On Sunday Jul 3, 2012 5:12 PM
more
Jul 10, 2012 6:00 PMWalking to the sound of a beating drum, discordant notes from a saxophone and the clashing of voices, nearly 200 protesters made their way to the intersection of Meadow and Halsey Neck lanes in Southampton Village on Sunday, standing outside for hours in the heat chanting and yelling at supporters of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney who were making their way to a $50,000-per-guest fundraiser at the nearby home of David Koch.
The Koch fundraiser was one of three this past weekend on the East End for the Romney campaign, including an event at former U.S. Ambassador Clifford Sobel’s home, also on Meadow Lane, and at Ronald Perelman’s estate, The Creeks, in East Hampton—where David Fink and Simon Kinsella, both of Wainscott, were arrested for trying to get their sailboat past security on Georgica Pond.
While it would be unfair to say the protest at the Koch home was uneventful, police did not need to take action.
Meadow Lane, from Coopers Beach to Halsey Neck Lane, was shut down so protesters could have a place to exercise their right of free speech. Southampton Village, New York State and Suffolk County police officers and members of the Secret Service were stationed along the road, making sure no one got out of hand or crossed the barrier.
Southampton Village Mayor Mark Epley stood on the western side of Halsey Neck Lane to help police get residents through the traffic stop, as helicopters hovered above the gathering.
“My purpose here is to ensure that everyone gets through safely and residents have access to the beach,” he said on Sunday, adding that he knows who lives in the village and was able to help direct police. Those who had no business going down Meadow Lane were turned away.
While the protest was non-violent, tensions were high as some people verbally attacked those who did turn right on Meadow Lane toward the Koch house.
Shannone Rhea of Sag Harbor stood shouting, “Shame on you!” and “Koch whores!” to passersby, the latter a play on the host’s name, which is pronounced “coke.” Some attendees laughed in response to the admonitions, and some ignored the ruckus. Others took photos of the protest.
The marchers, many of whom identified with the Long Island Progressive Coalition, Occupy Wall Street, Moveon.org and other groups, took issue with the idea that one ticket would cost $50,000. “Our election system no longer represents us, and the people attending the fundraiser are buying our election, and I figured I should let them know that,” Ms. Rhea said. “We’re protesting Romney and Obama. They all do it.”
“There are still injustices being done to the 99 percent by the 1 percent,” said Aron Kay of Brooklyn. “The election is being prostituted.”
Mr. Kay said he has been involved in protests since he was 16 years old, first during the Vietnam War. While there were many veteran protesters, younger citizens from across the state turned out in a big way.
Walker Bragman of East Hampton stood at the very front of the police barricade and yelled, “The average age of a conservative is 65, I’m 24—stop screwing up my country!”
When asked why he decided to come out and protest, Mr. Bragman said he studied government in college and expressed his discontent with how elections are run.
“I’m sick of money in politics,” Mr. Bragman said. “This is not how our system is meant to be, and I feel like as a generation, we don’t really understand how it works—it takes time. We want everything now, now, now. I’m here because I understand how it works and I really think we need a change in this country, something we can all believe in.”
Mr. Bragman’s booming voice was joined by other angry voices, blowing whistles and the droning of a plane high above the protest, flying a Moveon.org banner reading, “Romney has a Koch Problem.”
David Koch, co-owner of Koch Industries, which owns subsidies in manufacturing, trading and investments, founded the Americans For Prosperity non-profit political advocacy group in 2004. Since then, the group has financially backed Republican presidential candidates and conservative movements, such as the Tea Party.
Not including the weekend’s fundraisers, conventions or SuperPAC contributions, Mr. Romney has so far raised approximately $119,550 from donors in the Hamptons, according to the Washington Examiner. President Obama has raised approximately $165,867.
During the 2008 presidential race, Republican senator and presidential candidate John McCain attended a similar dinner at The Creeks, Mr. Perelman’s estate, where attendees paid $28,500 per plate.
You've read 1 of 7 free articles this month.
Already a subscriber? Sign in
get your democracy here!!
50k a plate!!!!!
"The simple minded and the uninformed can be easily led astray."
~ John Mellencamp, "Walk Tall"
plutocracy and oligarchy, via polyarchy. brought to you by the same people who brought you the crash of 2008.
And then there’s his Individual Retirement Account. I.R.A.’s are supposed to be a tax-advantaged vehicle for middle-class savers, with annual contributions limited to a few thousand dollars a year. Yet somehow Mr. Romney ended up with an account worth between $20 million and $101 ...more million.
There are legitimate ways that could have happened, just as there are potentially legitimate reasons for parking large sums of money in overseas tax havens. But we don’t know which if any of those legitimate reasons apply in Mr. Romney’s case — because he has refused to release any details about his finances. This refusal to come clean suggests that he and his advisers believe that voters would be less likely to support him if they knew the truth about his investments.
And that is precisely why voters have a right to know that truth. Elections are, after all, in part about the perceived character of the candidates — and what a man does with his money is surely a major clue to his character."
~ Paul Krugman
if fraud and corruption area skill set, then you may have a point...
Americans still assume the London banking rates scandal doesn't affect them – but they're wrong
By Robert Reich
Britain is abuzz with the Libor scandal, but so far it's been a yawn in the United States. That's because Americans have assumed that the wrongdoing is confined to the other side of the pond. After all, "Libor" is short for "London interbank offered rate", and the main culprit to date has been London-based Barclays. It's further ...more assumed that the scandal hasn't really affected the pocketbooks of average Americans anyway.
Wrong, on both counts. It's becoming apparent that Barclays' reach extends far into the US financial sector, as evidenced by its $453m settlement with American as well as British bank regulators, and the US justice department's active engagement in the case. Even by American standards, the Barclays traders' emails are eyepopping, offering a particularly a chilling picture of how easily they got their colleagues to rig interest rates in order to make big bucks. (Bob Diamond, the former Barclays CEO, says the emails made him "physically ill" – perhaps because they so patently reveal the corruption.)
Most importantly, Wall Street will almost surely be implicated in the scandal. The biggest Wall Street banks – including the giants JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup and Bank of America – are likely to have been involved in similar manoeuvres. Barclay's couldn't have rigged the Libor without their witting involvement. The reason they'd participate in the scheme is the same reason Barclay's did – to make more money.In fact, Barclays' defence has been that every major bank was fixing Libor in the same way, and for the same reason. And Barclays is "co-operating" (giving damning evidence about other big banks) with the justice department and other regulators in order to avoid steeper penalties or criminal prosecutions, so fireworks in the US can be expected.
There are really two different Libor scandals, and both are about to hit America's shores. The first has to do with a period just before the financial crisis, around 2007, when Barclays and, presumably, other major banks submitted fake Libor rates lower than the banks' actual borrowing costs in order to disguise how much trouble they were in. This was bad enough. Had American regulators known then, they might have taken action earlier to diminish the impact of the near financial meltdown of 2008.
But the other scandal is worse, and is likely to get the blood moving even among Americans who assume they've already seen all the damage Wall Street can do. It involves a more general practice – starting around 2005 and continuing until … who knows, it might still be going on – to rig the Libor in whatever way necessary to assure the banks' bets on derivatives would be profitable. This is insider trading on a gigantic scale. It makes the bankers winners and the rest of us – whose money they've used to make their bets – losers and chumps.
Obviously, Libor is not limited to the UK. As the benchmark for trillions of dollars of loans worldwide – mortgage loans, small-business loans, personal loans – it affects the most basic service banks provide: borrowing money and lending it out. People put their savings in a bank to hold in trust, and the bank agrees to pay interest on those. And people borrow money from the bank and agree to pay the bank interest.
The typical saver or borrower on both sides of the Atlantic trusts that the banking system is setting today's rate based on its best guess about the future worth of the money. And we assume that the banks' guess is based, in turn, on the cumulative market predictions of countless lenders and borrowers all over the world about the future supply and demand for money.
But if that assumption is wrong – if the bankers are manipulating the interest rate so they can place bets with the money we lend or repay them, bets that will pay off big for them because they have inside information on what the market is really predicting which they're not sharing with the rest of us – it's a different story altogether.
It would amount to a rip-off of almost cosmic proportions – trillions of dollars that average people would otherwise have received or saved on their lending and borrowing that have been going to the bankers instead.
It would make the other abuses of trust Americans have witnessed in recent years – predatory lending, fraud, excessively risky derivative trading with commercial deposits, and cozy relationships with credit-rating agencies – look like child's play by comparison.
What can we expect when and if the full import of this scandal is understood in America? Most Americans suffer outrage fatigue when it comes to Wall Street. Its excesses have already wrought havoc to the lives of millions of Americans, causing taxpayers to shell out billions (of which only a portion has been repaid).
They are also cynical that anything will ever be done to stop these abuses because the Street is too powerful. To date, not a single top financial executive has been charged with a crime in connection with the excesses that led to the near-meltdown of 2008. Indeed, America's top financial executives are back to making more money than ever. And their political power (via campaign contributions) has already eviscerated much of the Dodd-Frank law that was supposed to rein them in – including the so-called Volker rule that was sold to Wall Street as a milder version of the old Glass-Steagall Act that used to separate investment banking from commercial banking.
But we may be reaching a tipping point where Americans move beyond outrage to political action. Recall that the bailout of Wall Street gave birth to both the Tea Partiers and Occupiers. Across America, one hears a growing demand that Glass-Steagall be reinstituted and that the biggest banks be broken up. Not long ago, the Dallas branch of the Federal Reserve, hardly known as a bastion of radicalism, proposed that the biggest banks had become too big to regulate and should be shrunk.
The pertinent question here is whether the unfolding Libor scandal, which will soon hit these shores, will provide enough ammunition and energy to finally get the job done.
The question is not why we did not protest in Hollywood, the question is why YOU did not protest in Hollywood. Get up off of your recliners and go out and do something positive instead of envying those that do.
Getting rid of the electoral college would be a good start on political reform.
The radical right also want to repeal the voting rights act (bill in the Texas legislature right now) and not allow insurance ...more companies to reimburse women for birth control. (Dozens of Republican bills in state legislatures across the south).
Reelect our Trusted Congressman Tim Bishop - Reelect President Obama
The clear message from the Left is that fundraising for their preferred candidates is fine, but donations to those with ...more differing points of view are somehow immoral. The Left’s outrage is selective and hollow and they even jumped at the chance to use the event for their own fund raising. Until the Left start showing up at record Obama fund raising events, some here and some in the city, it's a clear double standard regardless of the canned claims.
Ensuring the integrity of elections, promoting individual success for ...more all, and fiscal responsibility do not make for a non-compassionate nor immoral platform. How's that Libya and Afghansitan thing going speaking of committing to war? I see we have record military personnel being KIA. Must be more of that Obama peace keeping.
A. Donald Trump is an idiot and last I checked not a member of govt.
B. You need I.D. to buy cigarettes and alcohol, right? Proof of age. In a sense proof of your right to purchase what you desire. That same proof should be required for the right to vote. Of the 3 it is the most important.
C. The "you lie" statement was disrespectful. But was it not accurate?
The lawsuit seeks a courts guidance whether delegates are free to vote their conscience at the convention free from fear, coercion or threats of any kind.
The lawsuit also seeks to have the court order Federal Marshals to protect the delegates since RNC state apparatus ...more has recently been injuring delegate with hired security and off-duty police. Federal Marshals are superior to local and state police and are under the authority of the Department of Justice. The lawsuit seeks to have Federal Marshals in all areas of the Tampa Bay Forum Convention center including at all doorways, the parking lot, and in the aisles on the floor of the convention to specifically protect the delegates.
All National Delegates and Alternates are urged to call 1 850. 417. 8543
And visit electionfraudremedyDOTcom
Ron Paul can help save the American Dream #indivisible
Thanks for your thoughtful and well-stated response. I would like to respectively argue some of your points:
The Republicans, before their convention, are honoring Donald Trump as “Statesman of the Year.” He represents the right and he is fair game even though he is not in the government. His obsession with questioning President Obama’s citizenship - something he would never do to a white President - defines him as a racist. I do agree Donald ...more is also an “idiot.“ He bankrupted four companies, and his name is blight on the N.Y.C. skyline.
“The Voting Rights Act” of 1965 was designed to overcome the very discrimination conjured up by current Republican led bills in Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, Pennsylvania and five other states. Requiring photo ID is pure harassment. Driver's licenses can now run as much as $100 (typically they issue them for 10 years) so many people, especially minorities, can’t afford them or don’t drive, and they certainly don't have passports. In Texas they could only identify four cases of voter fraud. There have actually been more documented fraud cases with fake picture IDs. The right wing knows they won't get the Latino or Black vote so they are trying to make it difficult for Blacks and Latinos to vote. It might be a good political strategy, but it’s racist and illegal.
I disagree with you - Obama didn't lie. The Tea Party had done everything possible to stand in the way of his success. Obama has taken us out of the Bush depression, and protected the middle class especially with the health insurance bill. He has also knocked off a number of terrorists, and is slowly getting us out of both of Bush's costly wars. Considering what he is up against, I think he is a terrific president and an honest man. Once he is able to fairly tax the super rich, big oil and coal, and the banks and Investment houses, the deficit will come down. That said, Representative Joe Walsh (the “you lie” moron”) from South Carolina is not only “rude,” but he is a racist.
As you know, many Republican congressman and candidates, including our local job shipper, carpetbagger, Randy Altschuller are being funded by the Koch brothers. The apple never falls far from the tree and the Koch brothers' father, Fred Koch, served on the governing board of “The John Birch Society.” The brothers are either too scared to denounce their racist daddy or they agree with his politics. For all intents and purposes John Birch sympathizers are running a big chunk of the Republican Party. “Lie down with dogs, wake up with flees.”
You misunderstood my comments.
I labeled Donny Trump's obsession (he would have never gone after a white president) as racist and Walsh, the moron from South Carolina's comment, as a racist (he would have never shouted out to a white president).
I didn't say, nor do I believe, that every Republican is a racist. I have Republican friends who despise Trump, Walsh, and the Koch brothers, but disagree with Obama's policies. I am well aware that Bush had ...more Powell and Rice as their Secretary of States, and although I didn't agree with many of his policies, neither of the Bushes were racist.
But certainly if you knowingly align yourself with a candidate that is the puppet of a family whose father was on the governing board of "The John Birch Society," than you risk being identified with them.
Racism is the attempt to exclude or disparage a certain group of people based on their race. African Americans voting for a candidate they can identify with his hardly racism. (That point was silly. You did better in your earlier response.) Surely if an African American
refused to vote for a candidate just because he was white, than one could argue he or she was a "racist."
Most Americans are good people and will not want to be associated with the Koch name as they learn more about Daddy Fred. I think Governor Romney was ill advised to visit the Koch brothers and accept their money.
Monkey see, monkey do, or YOU LOSE.
Thanks to all the money corrupting our democratic process, this is what "We" get.
who was it that warned the colonists that the british were coming?
Paul Revere rode maybe 20, and the only persons he could have warned were some people in Cambridge.
Maybe if we taught real History, and not a pop culture version, things would be different...
This Bissel guy isn't very popular.
"That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons of history."
~ Aldous Huxley
"We have the power to make this the best generation of mankind in the history of the world or to make it the last."
~ John F. Kennedy
The fact that the "right", and fringers like the "Tea Party" only tell you 2/3 of the story. Yes, the Founders revolted against ridiculous taxes. Yes, they rebelled to have freedom from an oppressive and "BIG" government.
The last third they DON'T tell you is they also rebelled from the ARISTOCRACY which was choking the life out of their prospertiy in this new land. Socioeconomic disparity was a MAJOR factor in the American Revolution.
If ...more you don't see the same type of aristocracy/oligarchy choking this country today, you are either willfully blind, or just plain ignorant.
We returned ourselves to the policies of the early 20th century just after the Federal Reserve Act, and look what happened. Crash of '29 all over again, except our "adding machines" have Central Processing Units. I cannot trust a man who will not disclose his finances, when fiscal fraud is RAMPANT. If he ...more would like to continue those Plutocratic policies, creating an Oligarchy where the failures of the few, determine the fate of a massive population of people; NO, I cannot condone him as a leader.
The "middle class" have been fleeced, and Romney may well be one of the fleecers. We can't know for sure without transparency. Back in '29 the major players quit the market, went liquid, and the Federal Reserve crashed the economy by constricting the money supply. Then those who were "insiders" bought up everything they could on the cheap. This included some to the most wealthy families of the late 19th, and early 20th centuries. I see a repeat of such events, and the Federal Reserve, only this time they are doing the opposite. Flooding the world with money, instead of constricting it this time around. Instead of a strangle hold to beat down the world, they "pop bubbles".
It's either conspiracy, or stupidity and hubris. Either way, the aristocracy HAS GOT TO GO.
I think when it comes to work ethic, it's a matter of self respect, and honor. Providence knows that I'm no angel, but I won't sell someone else out for my own benefit. When people commit that kind of fraud, they sell everyone else down the river to advance themselves. There are various reasons like anger, enmity, or even a sense of "getting even" by staying ...more on the dole. Sometimes there are cases where it makes good fiscal sense to do so. Look at the wages people are paid in retail, for Petes' sake. Chains like Wal-Mart basically depend on Medicaid to provide decent benefits for their employees by the way they structure compensation.
There are a host of reasons for the "dependent class". But, we are all stuck on this planet. There is no ticket to another habitable sphere. I look at the mess which has been made, and I'd really hate to say to a son, or daughter someday that I was sorry I brought them into this world. There's a fresh book out called "Twilight of the Elite". Hayes had this to say about our society, and I think he is dead on:
"But why did the smart people **** up, again and again? Because, Hayes argues, America's mechanism for sorting the gifted and talented from the rest of us – what we proudly call our meritocracy – has broken down, to the point where it "isn't very meritocratic at all." And the consequence is that we're "led" by a grasping, status-obsessed elite class that's increasingly socially and economically distant and prone to rigging the game for its own benefit, the public good be damned."
Are the defecits alarming? Sure they are. What's more disturbing is the inverse relation to tax cuts, and soaring defecits. What's even more disturbing is they have made money an abstract, instead of a concrete measure of worth.
As far as the health care Act, I see things that are important like pre-existing conditions not being turned away, and extended coverage for students. It's an unfortuate truth that when confronted with acting ethically, and turning a profit ethics ...more usually go out the window. So, you have to legislate proper behavior. That's a price of civilization. Problem is, nothing is free, and your average hospital CEO takes home at least a million dollars a year. Some take home upwards of 3 million. Your average administrator comes away with around 150k. When compensation exceeds 60%, and even 70% of your yearly budget in come cases, that should throw up a HUGE hazard flag. And malpractice related costs? That's most of the need for high salaries when it comes to doctors.
If Massachussets is an example, it could create a HUGE fiscal disaster. Due to lack of oversight, people gamed the system by getting coverage "part time", and only "paid in" when they needed coverage. Costs were around 2 billion dollars in 2011. That was just for one state...
Massive money printing and FRAUD to build "wealth" is a crock of lazy a** ***t, and you know it.
By the way, I think that's the smartest thing you have ever posted.
When it comes to Romney, well, it reminds me of Lex Luthor running for POTUS in the Superman storyline...
Whoever paid for the busses got half page of Anti Romney coverage on the Southampton Press FREE. Not a bad deal.
July 12, 2012 – PENNSYLVANIA – Last Friday, the city of Scranton sent out paychecks to its employees, as it does every two weeks. But these checks were for amounts significantly smaller ...more than usual because Mayor Chris Doherty reduced all city employees’ pay—including his own—to the state minimum wage of $7.25 an hour. After sending out Friday’s checks, Scranton had only $5,000 left in the bank and still owed its 400 employees almost $1 million. Scranton’s police unions, firefighters’ union and public works unions have taken the city to court over the reduced pay, but Doherty says he has no other choice because the city is broke. His planned solution is to immediately raise taxes by 29 percent, and by 78 percent over the next three years. But the council wants the city to instead borrow money to solve Scranton’s fiscal woes. On Monday, Mish’s Global Economic Trend Analysis said, “It should be perfectly obvious to every soul on the planet that Scranton is bankrupt. Tax hikes are not the answer. The solution is filing bankruptcy with the hope of killing public union wages and benefits.” But like many other states, Pennsylvania has rules in place that prohibit cities from filing bankruptcy without approval from the state. Mish’s final assessment is that “Inept city management, with public union wages and benefits at the heart of it, killed Scranton.” Whether or not Pennsylvania is prepared to admit it, Scranton is bankrupt, and the tensions there are rising. And Scranton it is not the only U.S. city in such a condition. Last fall, Jefferson County, Alabama, filed the biggest Chapter 9 municipal bankruptcy in American history, leaving county commissioners planning to default on a general obligation bond payment. In late 2011, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, said it would default on a payment coming due to general obligation bondholders. Stockton, California, was in negotiations earlier this year in hopes of avoiding becoming the biggest American city yet to declare bankruptcy. Many municipalities across the nation have found themselves pushed over the brink by the recession and its lingering aftermath
They are in dire financial straits with little hope of recovery. “This is truly a new era for dealing with troubled municipalities,” said Michael Stanton, publisher of The Bond Buyer, a public finance newspaper. Cities are going belly up while states and the nation hang on, largely because cities cannot rely on the deus ex machina currency printing that the larger entities rely on. Mayor Doherty explained that he does not have the same options as the Fed or even a state government, saying, “I want the employees to get paid. Our people work hard—our police and fire—I just don’t have enough money, and I can’t print it in the basement.” These cities are the canaries in the toxic coalmine that is the U.S. economy. Smaller and more fragile than states, they are succumbing to their economic ailments in tragic ways. But the canary analogy breaks down at that point because, unlike the coal miner who leaves the mine after watching his canary keel over, state and federal policymakers are not heeding the warning. Washington’s failure to reverse its debt-driven economic course means it will soon be in a situation far more tense than that of beleaguered Scranton. –Trumpet
Yet, the banks pay a meager fine for "no admitted wrongdoing", but the municipality goes bankrupt.
Maybe ...more the unions were a bit greedy, but look at who's act they follow...
Yes, there were some bribes to local officials. No banker went to jail for that. Yes, there was chicanery. But easily 80% of it was on the part of the BANKS, not the municipalities. They, in many cases KNOWINGLY SOLD PILES OF **** AS GOLD. And, who pays for it all?
Deregulation led to the lax oversight, and environment whereby companies like Countrywide, and the quasi style entities like Fannie/Freddie could rubber stamp mortgages. Greenspan was printing cash like there was no tomorrow, and everyone thought it would "trickle down". Guess not, eh?
In seems that there is a grass roots effort for a new Republican Candidate? Who do you think they will chose. My guess is Jeb Bush.
+++
And that, my friends, is what Obama thinks of small business. If not for govt you couldn't have a successful business. Dead wrong (again). How would he know? What would he know about building a small business? Absolutely clueless. C'mon Ohio and Florida, we need a change.
“There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me — because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t… look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. ...more It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something: there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.
“If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
“The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.”
I didn't think so.
I love when people launch into tirades, on data taken out of context. It just makes my day...
That fact doesn't seem like much, but look at the economy, along with IRS SOI data and it actually makes sense. People are unemployed, underemployed, and there is more money than ever in circulation.
I would almost guarantee that if we confiscated every offshore account in every tax haven we could, the national debt would be paid off in less than five years.
You're just one of the mentally challenged who can't grasp how each generation stands on the shoulders of the one before it. One whose ego is grander than society's ability to support it.
Lately, is seems like the bruised backs of the majority of the living, though...
The people who can are friends of the wealthy, who liket them, enjoy their 15%, or less rate while people like us pony up 35%.
Mark my words, electing Romney is a mistake. The housing bubble was nothing, and something wicked this way comes...
Money is a tool, even though many treat it as an "earned luxury".
Roughly 12% of your population taking home half the taxable income of your nation in a fiscal year doesn't drive GDP.
It sure [expletive deleted] up Democracy, though.
I can't be nice about this anymore. You might see a bit of a harder edge to me from here on out, so fair warning...
A challenge to conservatives
By E.J. Dionne Jr., Published: July 15
It’s good that conservatives are finally taking seriously the problems of inequality and declining upward mobility. It’s unfortunate that they often evade the ways in which structural changes in the economy, combined with conservative policies, have made matters worse.
Occupy Wall Street, whatever its future, will always merit praise for placing inequality ...more at the center of our politics. The biggest sign of the Occupiers’ success: Conservatives once stubbornly insisted that inequality wasn’t a problem because the United States was the land of opportunity and upward mobility. Now they are facing the fact that we are by no means the most socially mobile country in the world.
Reports from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and others show that social mobility is greater elsewhere, notably in Denmark, Australia, Norway, Finland, Canada, Sweden and Germany.
What do these countries have in common? Not to put too fine a point on it, all have national policies that are, in right-wing parlance, more “socialist” or (to be precise) social democratic than ours. They guarantee their citizens health insurance. They have stronger union movements and more generous welfare states. They tend to keep higher education more affordable. In most cases, especially Germany’s, they have robust apprenticeship and job training programs. They levy higher taxes.
The lesson from this list is not that cutting back government, gutting unions and reducing taxes on the rich will re-create an America of opportunity. On the contrary, we need more active and thoughtful government policies to become again the nation we claim to be.
We also need to be more candid about the large forces that are buffeting the American middle class. Writing in The Nation about Timothy Noah’s excellent new book, “The Great Divergence,” William Julius Wilson, the distinguished Harvard sociologist, nicely summarized the factors Noah sees as explaining rising disparities of wealth and income.
They included “the increasing importance of a college degree due to the shortage of better-educated workers; trade between the United States and low-wage nations; changes in government policy in labor and finance; and the decline of the labor movement. He also considers the extreme changes in the wage structure of corporations and the financial industry, in which American CEOs typically receive three times the salaries earned by their European counterparts.”
Most conservatives accept the importance of education but then choose to ignore all the other forces Noah describes.
Recently, my friends David Brooks and Michael Gerson used their columns to address the decline in mobility. It’s to the credit of these two conservatives that they did so, yet both found ways of downplaying the challenge inequality poses to conservatism itself.
Brooks cited a fine study by Robert Putnam, also a Harvard scholar, noting that the different parenting styles of the upper middle class and the working class are aggravating inequalities. Brooks’s conclusion: “Liberals are going to have to be willing to champion norms that say marriage should come before child-rearing and be morally tough about it. Conservatives are going to have to be willing to accept tax increases or benefit cuts so that more can be spent on the earned-income tax credit and other programs that benefit the working class.”
Yes, parenting (including the time crunch that two- or three-income working-class families face) is part of the issue, which is why I also admire Putnam’s study. But the balance in Brooks’s call to arms is entirely false. It’s not 1969 anymore. Progressives — including Wilson, Barack Obama and, if I may say so, yours truly — have been talking about the importance of family breakdown for decades. Brooks rightly acknowledges the need for measures to help those skidding down the class structure. The barrier here is not liberal attitudes toward the family but conservative attitudes toward government.
Gerson also said sensible things about promoting a “broad diffusion of skills and social capital” but then closed by accusing liberals of wanting to “soak the rich” and insisting that “economic redistribution is not the answer.”
Actually, liberals are not for “soaking the rich,” unless you consider the Clinton-era tax rates some kind of socialist bath. And as the experience of the more social democratic countries shows, a modest amount of “economic redistribution” — to offset the radical redistribution toward the very rich of recent decades — can begin the process of restoring the kind of mobility we once bragged about.
My challenge to conservatives worried about inequality is to follow the logic of their concern to what may be some uncomfortable conclusions, especially in an election year
to blame bishop and obama for 30 years of damage is not only idiotic it's insanity. look at the m 2 factor of the economy in the last 20 years, and find evidence for me that the debauching was necessary.
golden parachutes for the top 10 percent, and freefall headlong into the ground for everyone else.
.....
That is disgusting. At a certain level do millions or even tens of millions even make a difference in your life? I mean I can survive on 115 million just as easily as I can 310 million.
Sigh...
You want real change?
Reign in the [expletive deleted] [expletive deleted] [expletive deleted] BANKERS.
Damned?
SERIOUSLY?!?!?!?!?
Well he finally came out and said it, This is great! It puts the whole thing in context.
Obama may be a stupid tool, but he is a tool of some very smart (and evil) people. It is easy for Barry to take this point of view since as everyone buy now can see he is not responsible for his own success? Some very powerful puppet masters (Ayers,Soros,Brzezinski) are behind this Manchurian candidate and his implementation of the ...more Sual Alinsky / Cloward & Piven strategy....
There were multiple generations before you who built what you have to work with today.
So, don't be a tool and forget that...
Freedom is one thing, and "humanity" is still too primitive, juvenile and greedy a species for true, pure anarchy. Freedom is legislated. Anarchy is a free society.
Just my opinion.
What kind of moron would remain in a country that they believe is like that? Why don't you get out before they throw you into a camp?
Oh, let's not forget "redistribution" of other peoples assets as a matter of fairness, affirmative aciton to ensure that certain groups get preferential treatment (regardless of qualification) in hiring.
But definately not communism...you wouldn't want that.
He don't know me very well, do he?
I cordially invite you to remove 6 to 10 tons of trash from residences in a summer workday. Keep up, if you can.
"Those who do not work, shall not eat."
~ John Smith, ref. Thessalonians (c. 1607)
My parents, great teachers throughout school, solid friends, the community as a whole I was surrounded by, et al... YEAH, there were a host of people who helped to make me who I am.
And, you know what? They raised me not to be so arrogant, egotisitcal, self serving, and downright selfish as the idiots who credit NO ONE but themselves, and have driven this country into the ground with their hubris.
BUT, I WILL NOT STAND BY while people take ANYONE out of context, and put words in their mouth.
ESPECIALLY a sitting President.
How many times di you do that for GWB? (cough, that would probobly be NEVER).
I love it when someone is slavishly in the tank for Obama, but tries to pass themselves off as an idependant.
He's got eight years of great comedy material, though...
So what you really meant was that you will defend Obama, not a "sitting president".
Even dan liked that one.
I think it may be our "first time".
And, get your minds out of the gutter...
You've got to come to the damned realization that there are 350 MILLION PEOPLE who share this society with you. They aren't all stupid, foolish, or gullible, possibly lazy, or even outright useless.
There are a whole lot of people who bust their ASS that don't get their due. Don't you see how Roman we have become? The hubris, the greeed, the avarice, the self importance, the EGO.
Christ (no, that's not blasphemy) ...more get a clue!!
You're being {expeltive deleted}ED.
The depths of poverty were far deeper, social mobility was no better, and the available government benefits were far less generous.
If there's a place with a better deal, go to it.
Study that album cover which is my avatar VERY closely. Justice is bound, both breasts bare, with money tipping her scales.
Get it?
You want real change?
Reign in the [expletive deleted] [expletive deleted] [expletive deleted] BANKERS.
At least we may agree on two things in a few years...
Don't you mean at least, "all 70%" of us?
Gross is one thing. NET is another. Who said "swish"?
Just shy of THREE QUARTERS OF THIS COUNTRY NETTED LESS THAN 60K fiscal year 2009.
Are you legally blind?
Here is what you will not see on CNN
the guy is a fraud show us the collage transcripts
My favorite (Army corpse-man)
"When I meet with world leaders, what's striking -- whether it's in Europe or here in Asia..." -mistakenly referring to Hawaii as Asia while holding a press conference outside Honolulu, Nov. 16, 2011
"We're the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad." —Cincinnati, ...more OH, Sept. 22, 2011
"We're not trying to push financial reform because we begrudge success that's fairly earned. I mean, I do think at a certain point you've made enough money. But, you know, part of the American way is, you know, you can just keep on making it if you're providing a good product or providing good service. We don’t want people to stop, ah, fulfilling the core responsibilities of the financial system to help grow our economy." —on Wall Street reform, Quincy, Ill., April 29, 2010
"One such translator was an American of Haitian descent, representative of the extraordinary work that our men and women in uniform do all around the world -- Navy Corpse-Man Christian Brossard." –mispronouncing "Corpsman" (the "ps" is silent) during a speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, Washington, D.C., Feb. 5, 2010 (The Corpsman's name is also Christopher, not Christian)
"The Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for centuries." --Tampa, Fla., Jan. 28, 2010
"UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? It's the Post Office that's always having problems." –attempting to make the case for government-run healthcare, while simultaneously undercutting his own argument, Portsmouth, N.H., Aug. 11, 2009
"The Cambridge police acted stupidly." —commenting on a white police officer's arrest of black scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. at his home in Cambridge, Mass., at a news conference, July 22, 2009
"The reforms we seek would bring greater competition, choice, savings and inefficiencies to our health care system." --in remarks after a health care roundtable with physicians, nurses and health care providers, Washington, D.C., July 20, 2009
"It was also interesting to see that political interaction in Europe is not that different from the United States Senate. There's a lot of -- I don't know what the term is in Austrian, wheeling and dealing." --confusing German for "Austrian," a language which does not exist, Strasbourg, France, April 6, 2009
"No, no. I have been practicing...I bowled a 129. It's like -- it was like Special Olympics, or something." --making an off-hand joke during an appearance on "The Tonight Show", March 19, 2009 (Obama later called the head of the Special Olympics to apologize)
"I didn't want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about doing any seances." --after saying he had spoken with all the living presidents as he prepared to take office, Washington, D.C., Nov. 7, 2008 (Obama later called Nancy Reagan to apologize)
"I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." -- defending his tax plan to Joe the Plumber, who argued that Obama's policy hurts small-business owners like himself, Toledo, Ohio, Oct. 12, 2008
"What I was suggesting -- you're absolutely right that John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith..." --in an interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos, who jumped in to correct Obama by saying "your Christian faith," which Obama quickly clarified (Watch video clip)
"I'm here with the Girardo family here in St. Louis." --speaking via satellite to the Democratic National Convention, while in Kansas City, Missouri, Aug. 25, 2008
"Let me introduce to you the next President -- the next Vice President of the United States of America, Joe Biden." --slipping up while introducing Joe Biden at their first joint campaign rally, Springfield, Illinois, Aug. 23, 2008
"Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee -- which is my committee -- a bill to call for divestment from Iran as way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don't obtain a nuclear weapon." --referring to a committee he is not on, Sderot, Israel, July 23, 2008
"Let me be absolutely clear. Israel is a strong friend of Israel's. It will be a strong friend of Israel's under a McCain...administration. It will be a strong friend of Israel's under an Obama administration. So that policy is not going to change." --Amman, Jordan, July 22, 2008
"How's it going, Sunshine?" --campaigning in Sunrise, Florida
"On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes -- and I see many of them in the audience here today -- our sense of patriotism is particularly strong."
"Hold on one second, sweetie, we're going to do -- we'll do a press avail." --to a female reporter for ABC's Detroit affiliate who asked about his plan to help American autoworkers (Watch video clip)
"I've now been in 57 states -- I think one left to go." --at a campaign event in Beaverton, Oregon (Watch video clip)
"Why can't I just eat my waffle?" --after being asked a foreign policy question by a reporter while visiting a diner in Pennsylvania
"It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." --explaining his troubles winning over some working-class voters
"The point I was making was not that Grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn't. But she is a typical white person, who, if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know, you know, there's a reaction that's been bred in our experiences that don't go away and that sometimes come out in the wrong way, and that's just the nature of race in our society."
"Come on! I just answered, like, eight questions." --exasperated by reporters after a news conference
"In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died -- an entire town destroyed." --on a Kansas tornado that killed 12 people
Nah, just kidding.
Express yourself kid. Just be intellectual about it, OK?
I guess if it's not a Republican making such a faux pas the mainstream media doesn't feel it's necessary to endlessly repeat it.
Let's see it the right's got, what the left gave on Meadow La. ...
More on LIBOR: Plus, Spitzer takes on Bartiromo in Japanese Monster-Movie Epic
Does Bartiromo remind you of anyone? AIG settlled for FRAUD. Acknowledged it. The OPINION was handed down. Greenberg stepped down. She just can't get it through her skull that Greenberg told Ferguson what to do, and it was fraud.
And, they have every right to be.
Obama eligibility reveals 'national security threat'
Media's Kenyan cover-up: Obama's past ignored
Flight records missing for week of Obama's birth
Forgerygate: Ignoring Arpaio's report is a scandal in itself
10. State senate papers. In the 2008 primary, Obama criticized ...more Hillary Clinton for not releasing papers from her eight years time as First Lady--but failed to produce any papers from his eight years in Springfield. “They could have been thrown out,” he said.
9. Academic transcripts. His supposed academic brilliance was a major selling point, but Obama (by his own admission) was a mediocre student. His GPA at Occidental was a B-plus at best, and his entering class at Columbia was weak. Can he prove his merit?
8. Book proposal. Obama’s literary agent claimed he was “born in Kenya”--for sixteen years. His original book proposal exists--biographer David Maraniss refers to it--and seems to have embellished other key details of his life. Yet it has never been released.
7. Medical records. In 2000, and again (briefly) in 2008, GOP presidential candidate Sen. John McCain released thousands of pages of his medical records. Obama, who had abused drugs and continued smoking, merely provided a one-page doctor’s note.
6. Small-dollar donors. In 2008, the McCain campaign released the names of donors who had contributed less than $200, though it was not required to do so. But the Obama campaign refused, amidst accusations it had accepted illegal foreign contributions.
5. The Khalidi tape. In 2003, Obama attended a party for his good friend, the radical Palestinian academic Rashid Khalidi. The event featured incendiary anti-Israel rhetoric. The LA Times broke the story, but has refused to release the tape--and so has Obama.
4. The real White House guest list. Touting its transparency, the Obama White House released its guest logs--but kept many visits secret, and moved meetings with lobbyists off-site. It also refused to confirm the identities of visitors like Bertha Lewis of ACORN.
3. Countless FOIA requests. The Obama administration has been described as “the worst” ever in complying with Freedom of Information Act requests for documents. It has also punished whistleblowers like David Walpin, who exposed cronyism in Americorps.
2. Health reform negotiations. Candidate Obama promised that health care reform negotiations would be televised on C-SPAN. Instead, there were back-room deals woth millions with lobbyists and legislators--the details of which are only beginning to emerge.
1. Fast and Furious documents. After months of stonewalling Congress, Attorney General Eric Holder asked President Obama to use executive privilege to conceal thousands of documents related to the deadly scandal--and Obama did just that.
In addition to the above, Obama and his campaign have lied about many facts about his past--his membership in the New Party; his extensive connections with ACORN; and his continued relationship with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright, among other examples. Obama’s own memoir is filled with fabrications. And now he is lying about his opponent’s honorable record in business. He--and the media--have no shame
bigfresh seems to think that corporate personhood, and the current "capitalist system" is how it was laid down.
The United States Charter System laid down by the founding fathers stipulated as such:
When American colonists declared independence from England in 1776, they also freed themselves from control by English corporations that extracted their wealth and dominated trade. After ...more fighting a revolution to end this exploitation, our country's founders retained a healthy fear of corporate power and wisely limited corporations exclusively to a business role. Corporations were forbidden from attempting to influence elections, public policy, and other realms of civic society.
Initially, the privilege of incorporation was granted selectively to enable activities that benefited the public, such as construction of roads or canals. Enabling shareholders to profit was seen as a means to that end.
The states also imposed conditions (some of which remain on the books, though unused) like these:
* Corporate charters (licenses to exist) were granted for a limited time and could be revoked promptly for violating laws.
* Corporations could engage only in activities necessary to fulfill their chartered purpose.
* Corporations could not own stock in other corporations nor own any property that was not essential to fulfilling their chartered purpose.
* Corporations were often terminated if they exceeded their authority or caused public harm.
* Owners and managers were responsible for criminal acts committed on the job.
* Corporations could not make any political or charitable contributions nor spend money to influence law-making.
For 100 years after the American Revolution, legislators maintained tight controll of the corporate chartering process. Because of widespread public opposition, early legislators granted very few corporate charters, and only after debate. Citizens governed corporations by detailing operating conditions not just in charters but also in state constitutions and state laws. Incorporated businesses were prohibited from taking any action that legislators did not specifically allow.
States also limited corporate charters to a set number of years. Unless a legislature renewed an expiring charter, the corporation was dissolved and its assets were divided among shareholders. Citizen authority clauses limited capitalization, debts, land holdings, and sometimes, even profits. They required a company's accounting books to be turned over to a legislature upon request. The power of large shareholders was limited by scaled voting, so that large and small investors had equal voting rights. Interlocking directorates were outlawed. Shareholders had the right to remove directors at will.
In Europe, charters protected directors and stockholders from liability for debts and harms caused by their corporations. American legislators explicitly rejected this corporate shield. The penalty for abuse or misuse of the charter was not a plea bargain and a fine, but dissolution of the corporation.
In 1819 the U.S. Supreme Court tried to strip states of this sovereign right by overruling a lower court's decision that allowed New Hampshire to revoke a charter granted to Dartmouth College by King George III. The Court claimed that since the charter contained no revocation clause, it could not be withdrawn. The Supreme Court's attack on state sovereignty outraged citizens. Laws were written or re-written and new state constitutional amendments passed to circumvent the Dartmouth ruling. Over several decades starting in 1844, nineteen states amended their constitutions to make corporate charters subject to alteration or revocation by their legislatures. As late as 1855 it seemed that the Supreme Court had gotten the people's message when in Dodge v. Woolsey it reaffirmed state's powers over "artificial bodies."
But the men running corporations pressed on. Contests over charter were battles to control labor, resources, community rights, and political sovereignty. More and more frequently, corporations were abusing their charters to become conglomerates and trusts. They converted the nation's resources and treasures into private fortunes, creating factory systems and company towns. Political power began flowing to absentee owners, rather than community-rooted enterprises.
The industrial age forced a nation of farmers to become wage earners, and they became fearful of unemployment--a new fear that corporations quickly learned to exploit. Company towns arose. and blacklists of labor organizers and workers who spoke up for their rights became common. When workers began to organize, industrialists and bankers hired private armies to keep them in line. They bought newspapers to paint businessmen as heroes and shape public opinion. Corporations bought state legislators, then announced legislators were corrupt and said that they used too much of the public's resources to scrutinize every charter application and corporate operation.
Government spending during the Civil War brought these corporations fantastic wealth. Corporate executives paid "borers" to infest Congress and state capitals, bribing elected and appointed officials alike. They pried loose an avalanche of government financial largesse. During this time, legislators were persuaded to give corporations limited liability, decreased citizen authority over them, and extended durations of charters. Attempts were made to keep strong charter laws in place, but with the courts applying legal doctrines that made protection of corporations and corporate property the center of constitutional law, citizen sovereignty was undermined. As corporations grew stronger, government and the courts became easier prey. They freely reinterpreted the U.S. Constitution and transformed common law doctrines.
One of the most severe blows to citizen authority arose out of the 1886 Supreme Court case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad. Though the court did not make a ruling on the question of "corporate personhood," thanks to misleading notes of a clerk, the decision subsequently was used as precedent to hold that a corporation was a "natural person."
From that point on, the 14th Amendment, enacted to protect rights of freed slaves, was used routinely to grant corporations constitutional "personhood." Justices have since struck down hundreds of local, state and federal laws enacted to protect people from corporate harm based on this illegitimate premise. Armed with these "rights," corporations increased control over resources, jobs, commerce, politicians, even judges and the law.
A United States Congressional committee concluded in 1941, "The principal instrument of the concentration of economic power and wealth has been the corporate charter with unlimited power...."
Many U.S.-based corporations are now transnational, but the corrupted charter remains the legal basis for their existence. At ReclaimDemocracy.org, we believe citizens can reassert the convictions of our nation's founders who struggled successfully to free us from corporate rule in the past. These changes must occur at the most fundamental level -- the U.S. Constitution.
Just be prepared for the consequences;you may end up as someone's girlfriend."
Either that, OR you could be made the secretary of treasury.
Nor was raping the system and the taxpayers that support you.
So much rage against the rich, fine. Where is the rage against those who are abusing Comp, Disability, Welfare, etc?
How many billions of dollars are being stolen from us because entitlement has gotten way out of hand?
I recall a euphemism about boots from my youth.
It's worse than not having boots, when someone STEALS your boots...
(CBS News) President Obama drops out of lead and Mitt Romney moves into Number one spot for the presidency, according to a new CBS News/New York Times survey.
Forty-seven percent of registered voters nationwide who lean towards a candidate back Romney, while 46 percent support the president. Four percent are undecided.
Romney leads by eight points among men; the president leads by five points among women.
(CBS News) President Obama drops out of lead and Mitt Romney moves into Number one spot
Raise my taxes + Obamacare
I have less to spend on goods and services.
I have less to offer in terms of payroll.
I will likely not be able to hire.
PT workers seem to be a logical answer.
And so on...
In the past you tried to make a funny and say "well ...more I guess you aren't a good businessman." Like you would know. But it is perfect in that you put blind faith in a guy that doesn't know or understand business, yet has no trouble insulting the risk takers and job creators while increasing burdens.
But you will see that the USA is not immune to the fiscal problems that we are seeing elsewhere. Will you be honest at that point and admit that you were wrong? I sincerely doubt it. Check out what's going on in CA.
BTW - your tax dollars hard at work. Driving to work the other morning I see a LIRR truck tucked under a tree and 2 guys sleeping in the truck. Call it a hunch, but I doubt it was break time. I wonder how much they make an hour? Keep spending my money Philly. It's going to good use.
I'll tell you what... if Obama is re-elected and his policies don't hurt the economy I will donate $100 to the charity of your choice. Let's give it 2 years. If I'm right and he does more harm than good then you donate $100 to my choice of charities. ...more What do you say? I'll be honest. Will you? Will you, really?
Seriously though, there is a chance Romney can win. I admire your confidence, but it could happen. What will you do? Remember when you said people are throwing themselves out of factory windows? Do you think that will increase?
10 SEXTILLION DOLLARS.
But, we have economic "issues"...
I kid, I kid.
Sadly, this forum isn't fun or interesting anymore. Same people (myself included) saying the same stuff. Doesn't do much good so I'm gone.
Phil - believe it or not I wish you well. I wish you peace, prosperity, health and happiness. There is no magic wand to cure the world's ills. There is no President that can either. Be well and relax a little bit, Philly.
Anyone with a reasonable amount of intellectual curiousity would have WATCHED the whole clip. Inflection, emotion, and all. Any person with a reasonable amount of intellect would not be so gullible as to post what you have.
All those official government stats on the maldistribution of wealth in the United States — and the world — vastly understate the actual extent of our contemporary inequality, says a landmark new study on global tax havens.
By Sam Pizzigati
Are America’s rich getting richer? They’re certainly making much more than ever before. ...more Every official income measure we have shows that America’s most affluent are upping their incomes at a much faster clip than everyone else.
What can explain the disconnect between the extraordinary income gains of the rich and the modest rise in their share of national wealth?
How fast? Between 1980 and 2010, notes an analysis of IRS tax data this past spring by economists Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty, incomes for America’s top 1 percent more than doubled, after inflation, to an average $1.02 million.
Average incomes for the nation’s top 0.1 percent, over that same span, more than tripled, and at the tippy top of America’s economic summit — the top 0.01 percent — average incomes more than quadrupled, to $23.8 million in 2010.
And what about the rest of us? After inflation, average incomes for America’s bottom 90 percent actually fell — by 4.8 percent — between 1980 and 2010. Americans in this 90 percent averaged $31,337 in 1980, only $29,840 in 2010.
We have to go back to the late 1920s, right before the Great Depression, to find an income divide this wide between America’s rich and everybody else.