Reform or Revolution?

[JOEBIALEK]

I had the opportunity the other day to watch a most enlightening program broadcast by UCTV. The one-hour program was called "How Unequal Can America Get Before We Snap?" presented by President Clinton's former labor secretary Robert Reich.

"Inequality of income, wealth, and opportunity in America is wider now than it's been since the 1920s, and by some measures since the late 19th century. Yet the nation seems unable or unwilling to do much of anything to reverse these trends. What happens if we allow the trends to continue? Will they "naturally" reverse themselves? Or will we get to a point where disparities are so wide that we finally find the political will to take action? Alternatively, will the disparities themselves grow so wide as to discourage action, by fostering resignation among the losers and indifference among the winners? And if the latter, where will it all lead?" SOURCE: Goldman School of Public Policy UC, Berkley

The presentation made excellent use of economic graphs to demonstrate how large of a gap has developed between the upper class and the middle class (not to mention the lower class) with regards to income, wealth, and opportunity in the United States between the years 1962 to the present. The trends are alarming to say the least. The speaker correctly points to birthright as the beginning of the disparity that allows for advantages in everything from diet and healthcare to education and connections. Being born into a middle-class family myself, I have truly benefited from my birthright in terms of these advantages right from the starting gate. Some people would argue that many a poor person has risen up by their "own boot straps" but I would argue that in today's society, most (not all) poor people can only rise up with a good pair of athletic shoes or a willingness to sell drugs. Otherwise they have to remain content with working in the service industry for comparatively lower wages than their upper-class counterparts. Mr. Reich further points out that one of the elements keeping our society glued together is the belief or perception by the lower class that opportunity in this country still exists and that if one is willing to work hard, they can be successful.

The speaker talks of two potential outcomes for this growing disparity. He uses the metaphor of the rubber band to illustrate his point. Our society will either "snap back" with a series of reforms supported by all three classes and the government to regain a sense of fairness when it comes to income, wealth, and opportunity in the United States. This has occurred at least once before in the history of our country during a time referred to as the progressive movement. The other potential outcome is for our society to "snap break" whereby this country exists with two entirely different societies. The problem with the latter outcome is that it often leads to the arrival of a demagogue who plays upon the emotions of the middle and lower classes all for the hidden intention of personal gain. We have seen this all too often in history with the likes of Napoleon, Mussolini, Hitler, Lenin etcetera. Mr. Reich suggests somehow that the upper class are not a group with malicious intent but rather are nothing more than a naive self-indulgent class of people who don't know any better. Here I beg to differ. I believe the upper class is guilty of a careless disregard for their fellow countrymen. They have the arrogance to believe they are superior and deserving of extravagance regardless of how they attained it and regardless of how it affects the rest of society. Once again, history shows us what happened to those monarchs who behaved the same way. Do I think there will be a violent revolution in this country? I hope not. Do I prefer a new progressive movement over even a peaceful revolution? Absolutely. My fear however, is that we are already rapidly approaching the point of "critical mass" beyond which there is no turning back. The question today before the American people is what are YOU prepared to do?

[CybrSage]

I would say we have a VERY long way to go yet. Remember, it was not too long ago that several hundred people had all the money, while several million could barely eat from day to day. Some of the world is still like that.

Until the majority of people have to truely worry what they are going to eat tomorrow, things will stay the same.

[saturnotaku]

I had the opportunity the other day to watch a most enlightening program broadcast by UCTV. The one-hour program was called "How Unequal Can America Get Before We Snap?" presented by President Clinton's former labor secretary Robert Reich.

Why am I not surprised you would be "enlightened" by one of slick Willie's former cabinet buddies?

The question today before the American people is what are YOU prepared to do?

I am prepared to fight for every last cent of my paycheck that the left wants to take away and give to people who don't deserve it.

[ew2x4]

The US has a long way to go. Places like Mexico and some of Africa, however are very different.

It's going to take something big to shake up the US. The earliest event I see is peak oil. I dunno. In this nation, people are too lazy to fight for anything. That, or too blind.

[CybrSage]

Did you know that Canada has several hundred billion barrels of oil under it? It is heavy crude oil, though, not the nice light sweet crude.

However, once the price of oil rises high enough, it becomes economically feasable to tap the heavy crude oils. OPEC knows this, so they will be dropping the price of oil soon enough. They have to, since once it becomes worth it to tap Canada's oil, Canada becomes a major oil supplier and will trounce OPEC.

BTW, did you know that Venezuala has over 3 TRILLION barrels of heavy crude oil?

[Ninjaman09]

This reminds me of Podgorny the Communist Hamster for some reason.
It's going to take something big to shake up the US. The earliest event I see is peak oil. I dunno. In this nation, people are too lazy to fight for anything. That, or too blind.
Want to elaborate on that? That might be one of the most poorly formed thoughts I've seen on this board, and that's saying a lot. :rolleyes:

<hippie voice>

Yeah, man, the people are, like, all blinded by greed, or whatever. It's all like, bad, or something. We should totally, like, start a revolution, and stuff! Oh, and, uh, Bush is an evil nazi oil tycoon, you know? And it's uh...like...uh...evil! And stuff!

</hippie voice>

Oh, and just so you know everyone, "JOEBIALEK" is just a troll. Take a look at his posting record.

[saturnotaku]

Did you know that Canada has several hundred billion barrels of oil under it? It is heavy crude oil, though, not the nice light sweet crude.

However, once the price of oil rises high enough, it becomes economically feasable to tap the heavy crude oils. OPEC knows this, so they will be dropping the price of oil soon enough. They have to, since once it becomes worth it to tap Canada's oil, Canada becomes a major oil supplier and will trounce OPEC.

BTW, did you know that Venezuala has over 3 TRILLION barrels of heavy crude oil?

There's a lot of heavy crude in the world, enough to last a couple hundred years. It will allow plenty of time for advanced research into alternatives like hydrogen and E85.

Want to elaborate on that? That might be one of the most poorly formed thoughts I've seen on this board, and that's saying a lot.

Based on his other posts, it's likely not going to happen. Just chalk it up to hippy asshat-ism and leave it at that.

[killahsin]

I actually find this article to be an endorsement of what makes america a more progress based individualism country. The problem is its framed politically rather then socially. It's blaming the other side rather then actually putting the blame where it belongs, which is on the programs which have utterly failed. At some point were going to have to push for a more universal training methodology and higher education at a younger level. In my eyes the fault of people being poor ends at the doorsteps of our educational system. I would rather see all the money spent on rediculous programs like paychecks for alcholics and heroine/coke heads, being spent on educational programs for our kids. I think the number one problem isn't that we have to little programs or to little taxes but the programs are in the wrong places for the wrong people. The billions upon billions our country spends on keeping people poor rather then educating them to be productive people is dumfounding. Our welfare systems for instance are designed in a way as to promote not working. Our disability systems are setup in a way that there is a catch 22 for those people critically disabled. These gaps in our systems lead to people not wanting to do better for themselves because they can exist just fine at a lower denominator. It's a real paradox that democrats are facing. It's hard to admit that systems and programs are failures even though they are helping people survive, without giving a foothold to the right saying mroe reason to end the programs all together without putting in better ones. To me if we spent the money on tax benefits to those highering people in lower brackets, and changing the medicare/medicaid system to covering people with preexisting health conditions that ARE working, our economy and proportions of wealth would grow at a much more rapid base across the board. But as long as we have these social programs that tend to make people feel comfortable or trapped within the system, it won't happen.

[DaveW]

I do believe that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Actually the poor tend to get richer too, just not as fast as the rich do, so the gap between rich and poor continues to increase.

Most social programs don't help the problem however. There will always be rich and poor, because there will always be motivated people and lazy people. I think everyone should have a fair chance though.

I think what you make should be equal to how hard you work. Thats fair. I don't think its fair when the CEO of Oracle makes 130 million a year. If he was walking to work and dropped a $1000 dollar bill, its not even worth his time to bend over and pick it up. 130 million... thats 6500 times the national average. Now i'm sure hes a hard working guy, he deserves to earn more than the average, but does he work 6500 times harder than the average guy? does he work 6500 times more hours than the average guy? I doubt it.

I think CEOs wages should be capped at 10X their average employee wage. That way if they want more money they can increase their employees wages and everyone benefits. This also removes any incentive to outsource jobs.

[sytaylor]

Defintely agree with your last sentence DaveW, but the problem is, with capitalism, legally enforcing a cap in the USA, will make all the talent gravitate towards the money. Same with any country that did that, or with sports.

[vampireuk]

"Inequality of income, wealth, and opportunity in America is wider now than it's been since the 1920s,

I had to stop reading there since the Red Army came marching up the road

[Darth Rancid]

I had to stop reading there since the Red Army came marching up the road

I hate it when that happens...

[CybrSage]

I do believe that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Actually the poor tend to get richer too, just not as fast as the rich do, so the gap between rich and poor continues to increase.


A very wise statement.

[JOEBIALEK]

good points...

[Rakeesh]

Whats worse is how some people keep saying that we need to fix our problems by becoming more socialist, yet many european countries like france and germany who have miserable unemployment problems are finding that they need to move back in our direction, away from the socialism.

[evilchris]

I think CEOs wages should be capped at 10X their average employee wage. That way if they want more money they can increase their employees wages and everyone benefits. This also removes any incentive to outsource jobs.

This is already the norm. Bill Gates, for example, has a salary of $600k/year. Salary isn't where CEO's/Execs make their money.

[evilchris]

Socialism is BS. The reason the US is so successful is due to the drive to succeed and make something of yourself. Holding your hand out and getting what you believe is "owed" to you is BS. Only the lazy, untalented leeches of society benefit from socialism and they deserve nothing. I like knowing that the harder I work, the more I can earn. I don't like knowing that taxes I pay give free healthcare, school, and food to some illegal alien with 15 kids.

[Banko]

"Inequality of income, wealth, and opportunity", if you change that to Equality well you get communism.

[netviper13]

BTW, did you know that Venezuala has over 3 TRILLION barrels of heavy crude oil?

Yeah we get around 25% of our oil from Venezuela, which is why it is a very wise idea to keep their super-paranoid leader appeased for the time being.

I think CEOs wages should be capped at 10X their average employee wage. That way if they want more money they can increase their employees wages and everyone benefits. This also removes any incentive to outsource jobs.

I really like that idea. I think that a cap like that should also be applied to the salaries of people in Congress. People on both sides of the political spectrum seem to have no problem with giving themselves an automatic "cost of living" raise every year, courtesy of the US taxpayer of course, but all of a sudden have a heart attack when *gasp* the subject about cost of living for the average American comes up.

[retsam]

I had the opportunity the other day to watch a most enlightening program broadcast by UCTV. The one-hour program was called "How Unequal Can America Get Before We Snap?" presented by President Clinton's former labor secretary Robert Reich.

"Inequality of income, wealth, and opportunity in America is wider now than it's been since the 1920s, and by some measures since the late 19th century. Yet the nation seems unable or unwilling to do much of anything to reverse these trends. What happens if we allow the trends to continue? Will they "naturally" reverse themselves? Or will we get to a point where disparities are so wide that we finally find the political will to take action? Alternatively, will the disparities themselves grow so wide as to discourage action, by fostering resignation among the losers and indifference among the winners? And if the latter, where will it all lead?" SOURCE: Goldman School of Public Policy UC, Berkley

The presentation made excellent use of economic graphs to demonstrate how large of a gap has developed between the upper class and the middle class (not to mention the lower class) with regards to income, wealth, and opportunity in the United States between the years 1962 to the present. The trends are alarming to say the least. The speaker correctly points to birthright as the beginning of the disparity that allows for advantages in everything from diet and healthcare to education and connections. Being born into a middle-class family myself, I have truly benefited from my birthright in terms of these advantages right from the starting gate. Some people would argue that many a poor person has risen up by their "own boot straps" but I would argue that in today's society, most (not all) poor people can only rise up with a good pair of athletic shoes or a willingness to sell drugs. Otherwise they have to remain content with working in the service industry for comparatively lower wages than their upper-class counterparts. Mr. Reich further points out that one of the elements keeping our society glued together is the belief or perception by the lower class that opportunity in this country still exists and that if one is willing to work hard, they can be successful.

The speaker talks of two potential outcomes for this growing disparity. He uses the metaphor of the rubber band to illustrate his point. Our society will either "snap back" with a series of reforms supported by all three classes and the government to regain a sense of fairness when it comes to income, wealth, and opportunity in the United States. This has occurred at least once before in the history of our country during a time referred to as the progressive movement. The other potential outcome is for our society to "snap break" whereby this country exists with two entirely different societies. The problem with the latter outcome is that it often leads to the arrival of a demagogue who plays upon the emotions of the middle and lower classes all for the hidden intention of personal gain. We have seen this all too often in history with the likes of Napoleon, Mussolini, Hitler, Lenin etcetera. Mr. Reich suggests somehow that the upper class are not a group with malicious intent but rather are nothing more than a naive self-indulgent class of people who don't know any better. Here I beg to differ. I believe the upper class is guilty of a careless disregard for their fellow countrymen. They have the arrogance to believe they are superior and deserving of extravagance regardless of how they attained it and regardless of how it affects the rest of society. Once again, history shows us what happened to those monarchs who behaved the same way. Do I think there will be a violent revolution in this country? I hope not. Do I prefer a new progressive movement over even a peaceful revolution? Absolutely. My fear however, is that we are already rapidly approaching the point of "critical mass" beyond which there is no turning back. The question today before the American people is what are YOU prepared to do? is it me or has the summer semester at college bagain again ...

i give him a B-

[UDawg]

I cannot stand Rober Reich. Total liberal tit.

[retsam]

I think CEOs wages should be capped at 10X their average employee wage. That way if they want more money they can increase their employees wages and everyone benefits. This also removes any incentive to outsource jobs. i hate that idea..... lets do this ....if a company is profittable, let the shareholders vote on a reasonable salary guidline.see the problem isnt the ceo..the problems are with the board of directors..they are the ones giving out the money not the ceo's ...the ceo's just go "what you want me to take this 50 million in bonuses" how many here would turn that down ...none...let the share holders vote...

[evilchris]

I really like that idea.


WHY do you like that idea? This is America! this is a FREE country. People have the right to succeed and make millions if they can figure out how to do it. People aren't "entitled" to ANYTHING. It's YOUR JOB to better yourself if you want more money, not your entitlement.

It's none of the freaking government's business what a company pays its top dogs. Damn this is what I hate about liberals, BIG GOVERNMENT BIG GOVERNMENT, CONTROL EVERYONE AND EVERYTHING.

[Rakeesh]

Socialism is BS. The reason the US is so successful is due to the drive to succeed and make something of yourself. Holding your hand out and getting what you believe is "owed" to you is BS. Only the lazy, untalented leeches of society benefit from socialism and they deserve nothing. I like knowing that the harder I work, the more I can earn. I don't like knowing that taxes I pay give free healthcare, school, and food to some illegal alien with 15 kids.

Thems fightin words to a liberal.

[retsam]

WHY do you like that idea? This is America! this is a FREE country. People have the right to succeed and make millions if they can figure out how to do it. People aren't "entitled" to ANYTHING. It's YOUR JOB to better yourself if you want more money, not your entitlement. ahmen to that ....preach it brother....
It's none of the freaking government's business what a company pays its top dogs. Damn this is what I hate about liberals, BIG GOVERNMENT BIG GOVERNMENT, CONTROL EVERYONE AND EVERYTHING.

thats why i said what i said, give the option of a vote to the people with a vested interest in said company.... keep the government out of our buisness....period...