Mr. Kristof is full of questions. In “Why Let the Rich Hoard All the Toys?” he asks should the top 1 percent of Americans really have more than the bottom 90 percent? That’s America: one nation, unequal for all. Ms. Collins, in “The Season of Debates,” says you deserve a hand, interested citizens. You’ve been through a lot this long campaign. Let’s try to figure out who won the battle of the zingers. Here’s Mr. Kristof:
Imagine a kindergarten with 100 students, lavishly supplied with books, crayons and toys.
Yet you gasp: one avaricious little boy is jealously guarding a mountain of toys for himself. A handful of other children are quietly playing with a few toys each, while 90 of the children are looking on forlornly — empty-handed.
The one greedy boy has hoarded more toys than all those 90 children put together!
“What’s going on?” you ask. “Let’s learn to share! One child shouldn’t hog everything for himself!”
The greedy little boy looks at you, indignant. “Do you believe in redistribution?” he asks suspiciously, his lips curling in contempt. “I don’t want to share. This is America!”
And then he summons his private security firm and has you dragged off the premises. Well, maybe not, but you get the point.
That kindergarten distribution is precisely what America looks like. Our wealth has become so skewed that the top 1 percent possesses a greater collective worth than the entire bottom 90 percent, according to the Economic Policy Institute in Washington.
This inequality is a central challenge for the United States today and should be getting far more attention in this presidential campaign. A few snapshots:
• The six heirs of Sam Walton, the founder of Walmart, own as much wealth as the bottom 100 million Americans.
• In 2010, 93 percent of the gain in national income went to the top 1 percent.
• America’s Gini coefficient, the classic measure of inequality, set a modern record last month — the highest since the Great Depression.
This dismal ground is explored in an important and smart new book, “The Price of Inequality,” by Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel laureate who was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Bill Clinton. It’s a searing read.
“We are paying a high price for our inequality — an economic system that is less stable and less efficient, with less growth,” Stiglitz warns.
The problem is not that the rich are venal or immoral, and I buy into the Chinese mantra of the reform era: “To get rich is glorious.” But today’s level of inequality is unusual by American historical and global standards alike, and, as Stiglitz notes, evidence is mounting that inequality at the levels we’ve reached stifles growth and employment.
As I see it, the best way to create a more equitable society wouldn’t be Robin Hood-style redistribution, but a focus on inner-city and rural education — including early childhood programs — and job training. That approach would expand opportunity, even up the starting line, and chip away at cycles of poverty. If the cost means forcing tycoons to pay modestly higher taxes, so be it. The economy wouldn’t suffer.
After all, the United States enjoyed strong growth in the 1950s when we were a more egalitarian country, even though the top income tax rate in that decade was always more than 90 percent.
Indeed, it was only in 1987 that the top income tax rate dropped below 50 percent in the United States. So the 15 percent rate that some tycoons pay because of the carried interest loophole is a recent, er, entitlement.
On this issue, Americans seem by intuition to be flaming lefties. A study published last year by scholars from Harvard Business School and Duke University asked Americans which country they would rather live in — one with America’s wealth distribution or one with Sweden’s. But they weren’t labeled Sweden and America. It turned out that more than 90 percent of Americans preferred to live in a country with the Swedish distribution.
Perhaps nothing gets done because, in polls, Americans hugely underestimate the level of inequality here. Not only do we aspire to live in Sweden, but we think we already do.
It’s also troubling that a considerable share of wealth today comes from the plutocratic version of welfare.
Mitt Romney, for example, became rich in private equity, as did many barons of finance. They’re smart, entrepreneurial and hard-working business executives. But private equity exists largely because of tax advantages for corporate debt that amount to a huge subsidy.
Likewise, the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington estimates that four major tax breaks that encourage excessive corporate pay cost taxpayers $14.4 billion last year. And 26 chief executives received more in pay last year than their companies paid in total federal corporate income taxes.
Often the best route to wealth isn’t competing in the marketplace but lobbying Congress for a tax break. That’s why there are six lobbyists for every member of Congress from the health care industry alone.
All this inequity would be unconscionable if it unfolded in a kindergarten. It should be more offensive when it defines our nation from womb to tomb.
And now here’s Ms. Collins:
So how are you enjoying Debate Season, people?
As compared to the prior Convention Season. Or that little patch in between that has now become known as Reducing Expectations Season. And before that, of course, there was Primary Season, and, before that, the French and Indian War.
On Wednesday night, as the debate era opened, Mitt Romney definitely seemed more energetic — was there ever before a presidential candidate who could sound that enthusiastic while vowing to defund Big Bird?
But Romney had that funny look on his face whenever President Obama was talking. Somewhere between a person who is trying to overlook an unpleasant smell and a guy who is trying to restrain himself from pointing out that his car is much nicer than your car.
Obama seemed tired or bored, and he fell way behind in the much-anticipated battle of the zingers. The president thinks these debates are ridiculous, and he may well be right. But, truly, it would have been a better idea to keep the thought to himself.
On the other hand, he was the only one who wants Donald Trump to pay more taxes.
If you watched the whole thing, you now know that the president has taken to calling his health care reform law “Obamacare,” which is really a tad strange.
Also that Mitt Romney will not admit that any of his proposals could involve unpleasant details. Taxes will go down, but not revenues. The health care reform plan will go away, except for all the popular parts, which will magically remain intact.
“At some point, I think the American people have to ask themselves: Is the reason that Governor Romney is keeping all these plans-to-replace secret because they’re too good? Is it because that somehow middle-class families are going to benefit too much from them?” Obama retorted. But this was about an hour into the debate.
Romney, on the other hand, was a veritable zinger arsenal from the get-go. (“Mr. President, you’re entitled, as the president, to your own airplane and to your own house, but not to your own facts.”)
And what are we to make of all this? There wasn’t any car crash, but we have been trained to regard every twitch, tic and failure to look engaged as a matter of possibly cosmic consequence. The next leader of the most powerful nation on earth needs to be the person with the best comebacks, but the fewest strange facial expressions.
It’s a little like one of those fairy tales where the citizens of the kingdom pick their next king on the basis of a race to find the feather of the golden swan.
Do debates really matter? The experts say that, barring total disaster, the answer is actually no.
The committed are already committed. (In some cases, really, really committed. Witness the large proportion of Ohio Republicans who told a pollster that they thought Mitt Romney was the person most responsible for killing Osama bin Laden.)
It’s all about the voters with failure to commit. CNN managed to corral some of them to register their responses to the debate’s every jab and parry. I kept peeping at the lines recording their emotions, and I swear there were long stretches where the Undecideds nodded off.
Still, you don’t want to mess these things up. No candidate wants to repeat the saga of Rick Lazio, who ran against Hillary Clinton for the United States Senate in New York in 2000. During a critical debate, Lazio tried to be clever by walking over and asking Clinton to sign a campaign fund-raising pledge. It made him look less like a senator than a stalker, and now, a dozen years later, Hillary Clinton is known as one of the most beloved figures on the planet, while Lazio is known as the guy who once violated Hillary Clinton’s space.
All I know is that you deserve a hand, interested citizen. You really have been through a lot. You were there for the Rick Perry meltdown and the Mitch Daniels blip, and the period when we had to get up to speed on Newt Gingrich’s marital history. And now we’ve still got two more presidential debates plus one vice-presidential debate. Then we will be moving into the final two weeks, sometimes known as the Actually Having an Election period.
Did you read John Noble Wilford’s article in The Times about the discovery of the remains of a dinosaur the size of a house cat? A paleontologist told Wilford that it might have looked like a “nimble two-legged porcupine.” I am telling you this because the race for the Republican nomination first began at about the time these creatures became extinct. Michele Bachmann shot the last one when it hopped across her front yard.
October 4, 2012 at 6:42 am |
What I heard: I saw a red faced man-boy try to convince the president of the US that he ought to come to terms with his flaws and give up. I heard the Republican use the Reagan fundamentals of low taxes, small government w/o once missing a beat on how it would be done. Oh he’d move Medicaid to the states and use federal taxes to pay for it. He’d remove most of Simpson-Bowles and take credit for it simultaneously. He basically said the Obama term was a success by trying to reinvent it as a conservative doctrine. Yes he made a bold point about food stamps but couldn’t answer why this had happened. He wants people to have a health insurance choice but they already do and would continue to have choices under the current act. So he manipulated the tastes of Americans by bringing out the fine wines and slipping them the bill with a smile. He had the gall to mention Reagan but forgot he raised taxes. He couldn’t square off with a revenue neutral point which Obama made. I think Obama knew it was senseless to argue with a guy who makes up facts. A Wall Street tycoon who doesn’t know how Haliburton moved to foreign soil to escape US taxes? And he’d tell the Chinese how to run their country. Oh and did u know there’s trouble in the Middle East. Like this all started last Wednesday. He couldn’t retort the firing of teachers. But he loves them. And he won’t lower upper class taxes. Sure but he knows he will have Republican congressmen who will advise him to do so. As for the five too big to fail no one has an answer to my knowledge though Obama has pressed for a bill of late he said. What I do know is bank reserves are up to cover their bets. Breaking up the banks is not on the menu because it’s not a primary objective. A safety net which includes the Federal Reserve and the Treasury is on the menu though.
I saw a man who tried to convince people his double speak and chatter was not charlatan gossip. I am glad Obama didn’t take the bait.Though I expected he would he obviously came out to throw punches at any plan the Republicans have and defend his own with his left held high. But his right he held back on. There’s no time to get down in the mud with Romney who makes his case with fast facts. There is no time for Republicanism of the brand Romney represents. I think the voters know that all too well.
October 4, 2012 at 9:01 am |
There have been any number of books and articles pointing to the current large and increasing disparity in wealth and incomes in this country. So the Kristof column is nothing new. Yet something remains unspoken which is undeniably true, give the facts….
Ask yourself: How will this work out in the future? What kind of country will this increasing inequalit lead to?
I don’t really know, but past history in other unequal countries suggests it will not be pleasant. Think France under the Louis; Russia under the Czars, or maybe Mexico under the hacienda system. If history teaches anything, it is that gross inequality in money leads to gross inequality in everything else, particularly education and political rights. Is that what we want for the USA?
October 4, 2012 at 1:33 pm |
Coal. I like coal and oil. Very fundamental. Very Bush One. Somehow refreshing to hear him twist the increase in horizontal drilling as something in spite of Washington.
So my taxes will be dropped in the marginal gap by 20% in exchange for my real estate taxes, mortgage interest, and contributions to my pension and IRA? I know in a flat plan with medical costs on the rise and insufficient funds to pay for them insurers will raise the price to me. Without Medicare I will have to use what little the federal government throws my way because Buffett and Met Life have to make more now than they have. All the billions thrown to the AIG’s of the world was not enough. It’s not just fairness and equity. It’s dollars and cents. If fewer people can contribute to the revenue stream as corporations make more and are taxed less my wages will fall. It stands to reason as medical insurance is obviated as bloat for the mainstream I won’t have enough to pay for college. Or I can’t pay for hospital insurance. I feel like I’m going to be starved out unless I work at Bain or KKR.
A neutral revenue stream with major cuts and the end of Medicare which is what vouchers will bring and smaller monies for pubic education as religious institutions gobble up the private donations and tuition becomes a tax incentive instead of mortgages I will be left out.
So why would anyone in their right mind trust someone from Wall Street. He has dreams and hopes. So did my stock broker. Calmly consider the crowd he goes bragging about. The money interests he has are not renewable. He isn’t for nuclear energy. He likes coal? Effluvium that stinks the streams. The end of the EPA. He is worse than Bush. He wants to turn the tables so far back we won’t be represented anymore. Romney wants to be king.
He’s angry. Has he lost hope or inspiration or money? No plans just the party to tell him what to do. He can always fall back on the idea I gave you principles and the party gave you action.
October 4, 2012 at 4:18 pm |
The guy who gave the speech at the Dem convention needs to be clear. He needs to be front and center. I can not tolerate eight years with an idiot at the helm.
October 5, 2012 at 5:15 am |
Vote often. I was looking at a photo of a walkway leading out onto a pond escaping from view in the dawn light and my eyes are drawn by the direction of the pier as it fades to the right and down towards the water. The gang plank is engulfed by water.
That is the Romney/Reagan ticket. It all sounds good. What’s a little creationism, coal and expensive health insurance payments? You’ll have a job. Stop whining. What’s the problem with a dynamic marketplace where everyone is on equal footing? No EPA. No SEC? Well the SEC is a joke but no regulations. Back to the good old subprime days. You’ll have a job. You’ll buy that 4000 sf home with the fancy schmancy counter tops. Your neighbor will envy you. Join me at the club.
I’ll lower your taxes to a manageable marginal rate while I take back your mortgage and real estate tax deductions. If you have more than three toddlers cute and round and pudgy that’s all u’ll get. You can find work in the coal mine. Those immigrants who worked for nothing? Well they’re illegal. So u’ll be working the vineyards. No not as the manager. You’ll be my numero uno picker.
It sounds so easy. It sounds too easy. It’s too good to be true. Obama offers a way to reasonable improvements given a laundry list of problems. Romney promises instant success for all. Just don’t look behind the curtain. Leave your children home if you want to hear how it’s being done to you. You must use your brain if you want to understand what this race is about. Many won’t. Be someone who will.
October 5, 2012 at 6:26 am |
Paul describes Romney’s exaggerations. But to be kind is to be weak. Pre-existing conditions which are already the law of the land are not at the same time new. The question of veracity is not the subject. Would u buy stock from Romney is the question?
What size is a small business in the top 3% of those affected by changes to the health insurance laws enacted by the HCA? I looked it up at https://epic.od.nih.gov/naics/Naicscodelist.asp Even a cursory glance shows that the small business definition includes up to 500 employees. In my county in MD, a largely bedroom community, that would include every single corporation or LLC as well as individual clones of WalMart if that moniker weren’t so big. And their gross I assume it’s gross but that makes no sense, it should read net operating profit after tax and minority interest can be at least single digit millions annually. Actually it depends on the type of business and goes much higher under computer related business. So to me a twenty five million dollar business isn’t small unless u compare it to Chrysler or GM which would love to make a profit every year for twenty so they can get even on their debt and pay a dividend to someone who isn’t on the board. I digress. Mitt mentioned these 3% deliver more new jobs than even corporations on the S&P 500. So they do. But if they were not enjoined to commit their revenue to group health insurance to be equitable they’d have to raise their wages. Not likely and certainly not dollar for dollar. Would these small businesses be willing to forgo the deductions from operations as expenses using a corporate return? I doubt it. But Romney wants us to believe his plan is better and Obama’s is in the shed knocking the gazeboe’s out of the economy.
Look if a business can’t make a profit it should close down. It shouldn’t be asking US for money. If it rides herd over my property I know I want someone in my corner to protect my rights. Someone I can trust not curse. That’s Obama.