8 ms·

This is just another in a series intellectually feeble articles on the wealth divide. Compare this recent study from Canada: http://www.policyalternatives.ca/p

by akamaka 16y ago

This is just another in a series intellectually feeble articles on the wealth divide. Compare this recent study from Canada: http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/rise-canadas-richest-1 http://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/rise-c... Both of these pieces offer no in-depth analysis of the data and almost no international perspective. Without offering any justification, they quickly point the blame at the typical scapegoats of "the bankers who caused the crash", high CEO pay, and tax rates. They rely on broad and readily available statistics, and haven't done any genuinely new groundwork. I'd like to see a better study which considers these factors: * Choosing a meaningful dividing line (Why choose to compare the top 1%, and not some other fraction?) * Breaking down sources of income (Investment income, regular pay, stock option grants) * Breaking down income by industry (Medical, law, engineering professionals; public servants; finance professionals; entrepreneurs; corporate managers; entertainment figures) * Detailed comparison of wealth divides in other countries If anyone can point us to this sort of study, please speak up!

BarkMore 16y ago
Yes, it's feeble. The article does not connect some of the trends it discusses to the problem of income inequity. For example, there's no discussion of how increased taxes will fix income inequity nor is it obvious why it will. Gates, Buffet and other superrich got to where they are through long term capital appreciation. Increasing taxes will have an impact on them, but they will still be superrich.
elai 16y ago
How many high paid ($1million+) CEOs are there?
mattmcknight 16y ago
What's also interesting is the national wealth divide is more or less a fake issue, because the economy is global. The really important divide is between wages for unskilled workers in the US and western Europe versus wages for unskilled workers in developing economies. You can't ignore the "Designed in California, Made in China" differential.

by akamaka 16y ago

BarkMore 16y ago

Yes, it's feeble. The article does not connect some of the trends it discusses to the problem of income inequity. For example, there's no discussion of how increased taxes will fix income inequity nor is it obvious why it will. Gates, Buffet and other superrich got to where they are through long term capital appreciation. Increasing taxes will have an impact on them, but they will still be superrich.

elai 16y ago

How many high paid ($1million+) CEOs are there?

mattmcknight 16y ago

What's also interesting is the national wealth divide is more or less a fake issue, because the economy is global. The really important divide is between wages for unskilled workers in the US and western Europe versus wages for unskilled workers in developing economies. You can't ignore the "Designed in California, Made in China" differential.