>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 19:39:21 -0400 (EDT) >From: Robert Weissman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Subject: [corp-focus] The Billionaire Mindset and Wealth Inequality >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >X-Mailman-Version: 1.1 >Precedence: bulk >List-Id: Sharp-edged commentary on corporate power ><corp-focus.lists.essential.org> >X-BeenThere: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Status: > >The Billionaire Mindset and Wealth Inequality >By Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman > >Surely one of the most amusing developments of the 2000 presidential >election campaign is the emergence of Billionaires for Bush (or Gore). > >With chants and slogans like "Vote for Bush (or Gore) Because Inequality >is Not Growing Fast Enough" and "Who needs day care, hire an au pair!" the >Billionaires have highlighted not only the big money corruption of >politics, but problems of growing income and wealth inequality in the >United States. > >(For more on the Billionaires for Bush (or Gore), a project of the >Boston-based activist group United for a Fair Economy, see >www.billionairesforbushorgore.com) > >Far less entertaining, but somewhat more surprising is a recent report >from the Conference Board that also highlights how the current economic >boom times have left low-wage workers behind. > >The Conference Board's answers the question in its report title, "Does a >Rising Tide Lift All Boats?" with a telling subtitle: "America's Full-Time >Working Poor Reap Limited Gains in the New Economy." > >The report is important for two reasons. > >First, it shows that distribution of the gains from the information >economy have been extremely skewed, with benefits heavily concentrated >among the wealthy and not shared among the bottom of the income and >distribution curve. > >"Poverty has risen in both the number and share of those employed >full-time and year-round since 1973," the report finds. While the number >of full-time workers making poverty wages declined dramatically in the >1960s and early 1970s (from just under 5 percent in 1966 to 2 percent in >1973), there have been no gains since then. In fact, the proportion of >full-time workers making poverty wages rose to 2.9 percent in 1998, the >most recent year for which such data is available. > >The number of full-time workers earning poverty wages does not indicate >the number of people in poverty, because it does not register the poverty >rate among those without full-time work, nor does it take into account the >effects of taxes, tax credits (including the important Earned Income Tax >Credit) or government assistance for poor people. > >But by focusing on wages rather than ancillary government support and >taxation programs, the Conference Board offers a unique insight into the >failure of the current wage distribution to enable families to escape from >poverty. (The numbers would appear far worse had the analysis focused on a >living wage level, which is significantly above the artificially low >poverty level.) > >The second reason the Conference Board report is important is because of >what the Conference Board is. > >The New York-based organization is a business-backed research enterprise >best known for its monthly Leading Economic Indicators and Consumer >Confidence Index. It is viewed as a dispassionate research agency, not a >front group for the corporations that fund it. > >Its trustees and officers represent a segment of the enlightened corporate >class, those who are aiming to protect corporations' long-term interests. >Among those corporations represented: Bestfoods, Phillips Petroleum, J.C. >Penney, Excel, Texaco, Martha Stewart Living, Fidelity Management and >Research, Goldman Sachs, British Airways, Unisys -- and yes, we know many >of these may not seem "enlightened." But the point is that in their >concern to head off social unrest before it develops, they may be willing >to make significant concessions in an attempt to quiet social movements. > >In a description of its historical origins, the Conference Board says it >"was born out of a crisis of industry in 1916" when "declining public >confidence in business and rising labor unrest had become severe threats >to economic growth and stability." > >The decision to focus a report on the failure of the new economy to >provide above-poverty wages to millions of full-time workers suggests that >there may be, perhaps, an emerging concern with income and wealth >inequality among foresighted business leaders. > >"For too long, we've only counted our money, but today we stand up and >count ourselves. Billionaires, stand up and be counted!" proclaimed Phil >T. Rich at the Million Billionaires March outside the Republican >convention in Philadelphia on July 30. > >The Conference Board may not be ready to join such mocking efforts, but >these and other stirrings of discontent do seem to be worrying the >Conference Board's corporate members. > >Are the Conference Board members ready to support unionization and living >wage regulations, among the obvious solutions to the problems highlighted >in the organization's recent report? > >Without a bit more of the "unrest" which led to the Conference Board's >founding, probably not. But the publication of the report, the emergence >of the Billionaires for Bush (or Gore) and aggressive union organizing of >low-wage workers by some U.S. unions may in different ways signal that >such unrest is now, slowly but finally, growing. > > >Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime >Reporter. Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based >Multinational Monitor. They are co-authors of Corporate Predators: The >Hunt for MegaProfits and the Attack on Democracy (Monroe, Maine: Common >Courage Press, 1999). > >(c) Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Focus on the Corporation is a weekly column written by Russell Mokhiber >and Robert Weissman. Please feel free to forward the column to friends or >repost the column on other lists. If you would like to post the column on >a web site or publish it in print format, we ask that you first contact us >([EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]). > >Focus on the Corporation is distributed to individuals on the listserve >[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to corp-focus, send an e-mail >message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text: subscribe > >Focus on the Corporation columns are posted at ><http://www.corporatepredators.org>. > >Postings on corp-focus are limited to the columns. If you would like to >comment on the columns, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
