Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

Americans have been watching protests against oppressive regimes that concentrate massive wealth in the hands of an elite few. Yet in our own democracy, 1 percent of the people take nearly a quarter of the nation’s income—an inequality even the wealthy will come to regret.

An excellent article from Vanity Fair that sums up, what's going on in this country and why it matters, and the driving force behind recent regulations, budget battles, etc. It also gives a hint of what may be in store if the trend continues. People will only except being used and lied to for so long before they look for a way to fight back, and for many that point is close.


Mod Edit: External Source Tags Instructions – Please Review This Link.

An excellent article, really hitting the details of some of the imbalances in our country.

I'm one of those people that truly believes a picture is worth 1000 words. Mother Jones had a piece that broke down these imbalances, graphically.

motherjones.com...

reply to post by villagesmithie


What a depressing article. I'm sure you'll get a lot of people saying this article supports socialism. But it really just wants us to go back to the way it used to be. When corporations and the rich paid their fare share. The middle class was booming, innovation was raging, and most Americans led a comfortable life.

reply to post by Scalded Frog


That was an excellent link. Thanks for sharing that. I am going to print that out and tape it over my
Bathroom mirror.
The Bailout moment was the time to wise up to the total rip off that has become the American Dream. $4.35 a gallon here folks....and rising. Oh yeah,,the food in the grocery stores is in smaller packages
now...but costs more. A sneaky little trick that they hope you wouldn't notice. Just wait till you can't afford, to
drive to work, or Jury Duty for that matter. When the stomachs start to growl the S will hit the Fan for real.

reply to post by Scalded Frog

Yep another great link. This info needs to be presented often and in many different ways until people get it.

reply to post by nunya13


Now see here, it is NOT Socialism. That is just "Auto Response" propaganda by the "Greedheads" that labels it that way.

America was MUCH better in every single way, shape, and form before this "Plutacracy/Oligarchy" type of concentration
of wealth occurred.

This is about freedom of innovation and fairness. Above all, it is about The American Way.

Which was originally designed to prevent Plutocracy, Monarchy, Oligarchy, Dictatorships, and Religious Rule
(or other) Tyranny. This is about FAIRNESS. By the way, a little bit of "socialism" and caring about your fellow
Citizens and Country is what Modern Society is all about. We as humans are Social beings living in a "Society"
So please think and research your material before you toss the concept of "Socialism" into the dust heap of
your mind. Most importantly, there are many forms of socialism. "Love thy Neighbor as you would love Thyself",
and "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" are only two. Learn it and Earn it.

Not Feudalism and Serfdom.

Originally posted by villagesmithie

Americans have been watching protests against oppressive regimes that concentrate massive wealth in the hands of an elite few. Yet in our own democracy, 1 percent of the people take nearly a quarter of the nation’s income—an inequality even the wealthy will come to regret.

I have issues with anyone that writes "1 percent of the people take nearly a quarter of the nation's income".

This is the line of thought that any wealth created and/or earned is the Government's first, and after they have had their turn at the trough, then you are allowed to keep a certain amount because it is not your money, it is the 'nation's'.

That being, I have problems also with the amount of meddling that government plays in a supposed free market system. In my opinion, they should only be their to ensure a level playing field, but both parties have shown they will manipulate law and legislation to benefit who they deem winners and will create obstacles for players wanting to enter any given market that may challenge their winners.

Still though, this article was meant to incite and stoke emotional response rather than true discussion and debate. Just my opinion of course.

reply to post by ownbestenemy


When we see two people brawling in the streets we rarely stop to wonder who threw the first punch and who was simply defending themselves.

You do understand that the best estimates suggest that perhaps 30% of the colonists wanted to declare independence?

The Elite/Rich were the primary source of the push toward independence and they also were the ones with the most to gain as their money already bought them 1st class citizenship or even one could say a form of royalty so they were for the most part very comfortable with their lot yet they apparently wanted more.

You probably base alot of what you have been programmed to believe on constitutional grounds yet I am tired and will save that thrashing for another day

Liberty Calls!
Long Live the ANTI FEDERALISTS! Long live the Confederation!!!

reply to post by Wildmanimal

The framers of the constitution also were very conscious of concentrations of wealth. As industrial society developed, the opportunity for increased wealth came along with it.

This wealth began to accumulate in the hands of the owner class. Remember that at the founding of the union only white male land owners had the right to vote for like the first , was it 80 years? By that time these rich guys
had managed to parlay their wealth into monopoly control of the resources and manufacturing facilities which fueled the industrial might of the nation. These in turn became the "Robber Barons" of the mid to late 19th century.

Through our government, yes, our government ,we managed to control the effects of their psycho-greed by placing regulations on their ability to use their great wealth to keep the strangle hold on the necks of smaller more innovative businesses. They have never forgotten.

By their accounting they should have owned everything, lock, stock, and barrel fifty years ago, but the will of the American people through their government and the strength of it's workers through their unions have kept them at bay.

From the 30's through the 70's the children and those envious of them bided their time. By
1980 they had found a man, a voice, a well known salesman to put their agenda back into popular American culture. They fed us an amiable caricature of a friendly father figure which we bought from them hook, line and sinker. We elected Reagan.

He reopened the gates we had managed to keep closed for for over half a century and loosed the hounds of unfettered megalomaniacal greed upon us all.

reply to post by ownbestenemy

I have issues with anyone that writes "1 percent of the people take nearly a quarter of the nation's income". This is the line of thought that any wealth created and/or earned is the Government's first, and after they have had their turn at the trough, then you are allowed to keep a certain amount because it is not your money, it is the 'nation's'.

Yes it is your opinion but I think your bias is showing. To take "nations income" in this content to mean "the government" is a distortion. I can't speak for the author but I believe what he is referring to is the wealth or income that we all produce. The idea that it's the governments first appears nowhere in the article. In fact the author makes the point that the 1%er's wealth comes from manipulating government to redistribute wealth from the lower and middle class to themselves.

That being, I have problems also with the amount of meddling that government plays in a supposed free market system. In my opinion, they should only be their to ensure a level playing field, but both parties have shown they will manipulate law and legislation to benefit who they deem winners and will create obstacles for players wanting to enter any given market that may challenge their winners.

I think that's what the article was saying.