Paul Krugman: We live in the most unequal society ever, and it’s only getting worse

The New York Times columnist and Princeton University professor said Thursday there is zero evidence to suggest extreme inequality is good for economic growth but plenty to suggest it’s not.

“Nobody wants us to become Cuba (but) the question is, do we have to have levels of inequality that are getting close to being the highest levels anywhere, ever,” Krugman told Bloomberg News. “We’re really starting to set new records here. Is that a good thing for anybody?”


The Nobel Prize winner said this troubling trend began around 1980, when President Ronald Reagan was elected and began implementing supply-side economic policies that promised more wealth for everyone if tax burdens were lifted for the rich.

“The fact of the matter is, since inequality began soaring, around 1980, the bottom half of America has pretty much been left behind,” Krugman said. “There has not been a rising tide that raised all boats.”

But he said American political leadership had throughout history set corrective paths whenever wealth became too unbalanced.

“If we could have modern politicians speaking forthrightly about the danger of high concentration of wealth, as Teddy Roosevelt did in 1910, we would be a long toward a good solution for this,” Krugman said, “and I guess I believe that America has a tremendous redemptive capacity and ability to take a look and say, ‘OK, in the end, what are our ideals? What do we want our society to look like?’”

He said current conditions were much worse than the notorious “Gilded Age” of the late 19th Century that ushered in an era of progressive reforms to start the 20th Century.

“It’s an era of not just inequality, but increasingly what looks like inherited inequality, and I think people understand that,” Krugman said. “They’ll say, ‘No, we don’t want that to happen,’ and we can do things that are not draconian, not socialist, but in the American tradition to limit that rising inequality.”

 

and its caused by the cronies and the tax code.

elminate the IRS and you will have more fairness.
the cronies make sure that everyone but the top .1% has everything taxed away in 2 generations.

 

Both parties have their hands out (both hands).

They go to DC to sell what they don't own to the highest bidder to line their own pockets.

Anybody who thinks one group is better than the other is FULL OF SHIT.

When candidates run on a platform of dismantling their own Elitist Perks , you can speak in favor of them Otherwise, you are just part of the same old shit.

http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2011/12/13/the-political-one-percent-of-the-one-percent/
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/26/1pct_of_the_1pct_polarization/
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/...e-1-percent-of-the-1-percent-want-hint-a-lot/

 

The reason income is getting more unequal is because assholes like krugman get paid 225k per year by tax payers to give a couple seminars, even though he has never proven himself to have any useful skills whatsoever. If krugman ever tried setting foot in the private sector, he would be washing dishes by now with all the horrendous predictions he has made.

 

There's a reason he's a Prof and not actually employed in the private sector. But I think he's be above a dishwasher .... he might be able to man the cash register given his great economics background.

 

The free market only works when it is allowed to weed out overpaid losers like krugman, or the useless losers who end up running companies into the ground. The whole reason the free market system is failing is because connected people are able to keep their jobs simply because of their connections, and they make ridiculous salaries regardless of the fact they have no discernible talents.

 

The problem is that money equals political power. We are becoming a plutocracy. The Citizen's United decision is just adding to the problem. The ultra-rich are writing the policy and controlling the politics. Just look at how the Koch bros are using their money via these "social welfare organizations" to get the people they want elected. This other recent decision eliminating restrictions on individuals to give is just adding insult to injury. It's terrible. The common man has no voice anymore. And it's not good when the top 1% control 40% of the wealth as it is now.

 

fc, I can't say that I agree with you very often (or Krugman for that matter), but here you appear to be dead on. This via slashdot ... http://politics.slashdot.org/story/14/04/16/0221210/study-finds-us-is-an-oligarchy-not-a-democracy

 

An inconvenient truth for fraudcunts.

 

If you want to see why things are the way they are -

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/the-astounding-power-of--economic-elites-190548250.html

So the asshole politicians are beholden to them. Both sides - Democrap and Repugnican.

IMO......

You are fooling yourself thinking there is a difference.

Citizens United was just another example. "Conservatives" on the court say they don't "interpret" the Constitution - yet there is not one reference to a corporation having rights as an individual in the Constitution, despite the fact that CORPORATIONS EXISTED IN EUROPE BEFORE THE U.S. WAS FOUNDED. (remember the East India Company for the historically challenged - the largest corporation of its time).

So - did the "conservative" judges figure the Founders meant to include corps as having the same (or better) rights than individuals? That in making the largest font on the document "WE THE PEOPLE" for emphasis, they inadvertently left out "AND CORPORATIONS", so the "conservative" judges kindly decided to "interpret" and add it in for them to correct their oversight??

Or are they just interpreting for their own agenda?

You can argue they both are eroding the Rights of Citizens.

The difference with the Libs on the court is at least they openly say they interpret as part of their philosophy of the "living" Constitution.

The "Conservative" are just hypocrites on the matter.