Sounds like the bible story of the Widow’s Mite. 

 

REH

 

October 15, 2011


America’s ‘Primal Scream’


By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/nic
holasdkristof/index.html?inline=nyt-per> 


IT’S fascinating that many Americans intuitively understood the outrage and
frustration that drove Egyptians to protest at Tahrir Square, but don’t
comprehend similar resentments that drive disgruntled fellow citizens to
“occupy Wall Street <http://www.adbusters.org/campaigns/occupywallstreet> .”


There are differences, of course: the New York Police Department isn’t
dispatching camels to run down protesters. Americans may feel
disenfranchised, but we do live in a democracy, a flawed democracy — which
is the best hope for Egypt’s evolution in the coming years. 

Yet my interviews with protesters in Manhattan’s Zuccotti Park seemed to
rhyme with my interviews in Tahrir earlier this year. There’s a parallel
sense that the political/economic system is tilted against the 99 percent.
Al Gore, who supports the Wall Street protests, described them perfectly as
a “primal scream of democracy.” 

The frustration in America isn’t so much with inequality in the political
and legal worlds, as it was in Arab countries, although those are concerns
too. Here the critical issue is economic inequity. According to the C.I.A.’s
own ranking of countries by income inequality
<https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2172r
ank.html> , the United States is more unequal a society than either Tunisia
or Egypt. 

Three factoids underscore that inequality: 

¶The 400 wealthiest Americans have a greater combined net worth
<http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/mar/10/michael-moore/mi
chael-moore-says-400-americans-have-more-wealth-/>  than the bottom 150
million Americans. 

¶The top 1 percent of Americans possess more wealth
<http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/about-that-99-percent/>  than
the entire bottom 90 percent. 

¶In the Bush expansion from 2002 to 2007, 65 percent of economic gains
<http://elsa.berkeley.edu/%CB%9Csaez/atkinson-piketty-saezJEL10.pdf>  went
to the richest 1 percent. 

As my Times colleague Catherine Rampell noted a few days ago, in 1981, the
average salary in the securities industry in New York City was twice the
average in other private sector jobs. At last count, in 2010, it was 5.5
times as much
<http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/11/bankers-salaries-vs-everyone-e
lses/> . (In case you want to gnash your teeth, the average is now
$361,330.) 

More broadly, there’s a growing sense that lopsided outcomes are a result of
tycoons’ manipulating the system, lobbying for loopholes and getting away
with murder. Of the 100 highest-paid chief executives in the United States
in 2010, 25 took home more pay
<http://www.ips-dc.org/reports/executive_excess_2011_the_massive_ceo_rewards
_for_tax_dodging>  than their company paid in federal corporate income
taxes, according to the Institute for Policy Studies. 

Living under Communism in China made me a fervent enthusiast of capitalism.
I believe that over the last couple of centuries banks have enormously
raised living standards in the West by allocating capital to more efficient
uses. But anyone who believes in markets should be outraged that banks rig
the system so that they enjoy profits in good years and bailouts in bad
years. 

The banks have gotten away with privatizing profits and socializing risks,
and that’s just another form of bank robbery. 

“We have a catastrophically bad misregulation of the financial system,” said
Amar Bhidé <http://www.bhide.net/> , a finance expert at the Fletcher School
of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. “Its consequences led to a taint
of the entire system of modern enterprise.” 

Economists used to believe that we had to hold our noses and put up with
high inequality as the price of robust growth. But more recent research
suggests the opposite: inequality not only stinks, but also damages
economies. 

In his important new book, “The Darwin Economy,” Robert H. Frank of Cornell
University cites a study showing that among 65 industrial nations, the more
unequal ones experience slower growth on average. Likewise, individual
countries grow more rapidly in periods when incomes are more equal, and slow
down when incomes are skewed. 

That’s certainly true of the United States. We enjoyed considerable equality
from the 1940s through the 1970s, and growth was strong. Since then
inequality has surged, and growth has slowed. 

One reason may be that inequality is linked to financial distress and
financial crises. There is mounting evidence that inequality leads to
bankruptcies and to financial panics. 

“The recent global economic crisis, with its roots in U.S. financial
markets, may have resulted, in part at least, from the increase in
inequality,” Andrew G. Berg and Jonathan D. Ostry of the International
Monetary Fund wrote last month
<http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2011/09/berg.htm> . They argued
that “equality appears to be an important ingredient in promoting and
sustaining growth.” 

Inequality also leads to early deaths and more divorces
<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/07/opinion/07kristof.html>  — a reminder
that we’re talking not about data sets here, but about human beings. 

Some critics think that Occupy Wall Street is simply tapping into the
public’s resentment and covetousness, nurturing class warfare. Sure, there’s
a dollop of envy. But inequality is also a cancer on our national
well-being. 

I don’t know whether the Occupy Wall Street movement will survive once
Zuccotti Park fills with snow and the novelty wears off. But I do hope that
the protesters have lofted the issue of inequality onto our national agenda
to stay — and to grapple with in the 2012 election year. 

I invite you to comment on this column on my blog, On the Ground
<http://www.nytimes.com/ontheground> . Please also join me on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/kristof>  and Google+
<https://plus.google.com/102839963139173448834/posts?hl=en> , watch my
YouTube videos <http://www.youtube.com/nicholaskristof>  and follow me on
Twitter <http://twitter.com/nickkristof> . 

 

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to