A Do-It-Yourself Kit for Probing Plutocracy

[marmar]

from Too Much: A Commentary on Excess and Inequality:




A Do-It-Yourself Kit for Probing Plutocracy
November 20, 2010

The rich, many Americans have come to believe, rule. But how? The current hubbub over the federal budget deficit opens a welcome window to understanding just how our rich keep riding so high.

By Sam Pizzigati


How can you tell whether you live in a plutocracy? Easy. Just conduct this simple test. First, identify a “pressing problem” that pundits are splashing over your nation’s op-ed pages. Then take a glance at the “solutions” to this national woe that pop up, on these same op-ed pages, as “politically possible.”

If you live in a plutocracy, not one of these “politically possible” proposals will ever do more than, at worst, inconvenience your nation’s super rich.



Ready to put this plutocracy test to a real-life trial? Let’s consider the problem that America’s pundits have this fall tabbed as our nation’s most pressing: the federal budget deficit.

Earlier this month, the New York Times offered readers an interactive online opportunity to solve this deficit situation. Our national newspaper of record published a long list of deficit-cutting options, all culled from Washington insiders, and invited readers to choose enough of these options to end the deficit.

But readers who accepted this invitation to “fix the budget” quickly found themselves in a bit of an quandary. If these readers went through the Times list of insider suggestions and avoided all the options that would inflict pain on middle class families, they couldn’t get the deficit down to zero. ............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://toomuchonline.org/a-do-it-yourself-kit-for-probing-plutocracy/

[Tippy]

1. K&R

[Laelth]

2. Excellent article. k&r n/t

-Laelth

[Uncle Joe]

3. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, marmar.

[LongTomH]

4. Follow the link to Rep. Jan Schakowsky's alternative deficit plan

Schakowsky Offers Alternative to Simpson-Bowles Deficit Plan.

She understands the issues surrounding Social Security:

“There is a better way than the Simpson-Bowles proposal – which relies heavily on benefit cuts instead of revenue increases.

“Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Addressing the Social Security issue as part of the deficit question is like attacking Iraq to retaliate for the 9/11 attacks – there is simply no relationship between the two and attempting to conflate them does a grave disservice to America’s seniors.

“Taking money from Social Security retirees whose average total income is $18,000 per year and average benefit is $14,000 ($12,000 for women) is simply wrong. It places them at fiscal risk and hurts the economy because they will be unable to purchase the goods they need. Americans in poll after poll have indicated their opposition to benefit cuts – particularly at a time when Wall Street bankers are making record bonuses.

Rep. Schakowsky's plan makes sense, but it doesn't put the onus on the Middle Class, that's why it's getting so little attention from the media!