Sometimes I just feel like remembering why I blog at DWT. And in the end, it always comes down to economic inequality and how it’s one of the most pressing and divisive issues facing our country. Imagine a nation, our nation, where the top 1% possess more wealth than the bottom 90% combined— a nation, our nation, where the gap between the haves and the have-nots widens with each passing year. You know that this isn’t just a statistic; it's a harsh truth that underscores the deep-rooted disparities plaguing our society. Anyone who looks at the complex landscape of economic inequality in the U.S., notices something immediately and again and again: this is not merely an issue of dollars and cents; it's a matter of social justice, human dignity, and the entire fabric of our nation's identity.
Jamie McLeod Skinner, the progressive grassroots candidate running for a GOP-held seat in a swing district noted that “Undervaluing workers undermines our families, communities, and economy. It’s incomprehensible that CEOs are now paid an average of 320 times as much as the average worker. We need policies that address income inequality— helping balance wages with the cost of living— to build healthier families, thriving communities, and a stronger economy for all of us.”
Despite being one of the wealthiest nations, the gap between the rich and the poor continues to widen, much more do than in many other countries. In fact, income inequality in the U.S. is the highest of any of the G-7 countries. Our Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality where 0 represents perfect equality and 1 represents perfect inequality, is much worse than our peer countries. Remember, the lower the number, the less inequality:
US- 39.8
Italy- 34.8
UK- 32.4
Japan- 32.9
Canada- 31.7
Germany- 31.7
France- 31.5
For the sake of the curiosity I know you want sated, here’s the coefficient for a few other countries:
South Africa- 63.0
Mexico- 43.5
Philippines- 40.7
Israel- 37.9
Russia- 36.0
Spain- 33.9
India- 32.8
South Korea- 31.4
Ireland- 30.1
Norway- 27.7
Netherlands- 25.7
Overall, 61% of Americans say there is too much economic inequality in the country today, but views differ by political party and household income level. Among Republicans and those who lean toward the GOP, 41% say there is too much inequality in the U.S., compared with 78% of Democrats and Democratic leaners.
Lower-income Republicans are more likely than upper-income ones to say there’s too much inequality in the country today (48% vs. 34%). Among Democrats, the reverse is true: 93% at upper-income levels say there is too much inequality, compared with 65% of lower-income Democrats.
Recent data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the Federal Reserve highlights the stark disparities in income and wealth. The top 1% of Americans now hold more wealth than the bottom 90% combined.
As the U.S. slid into neo-liberal economic policies— including austerity— after the tremendous success of the New Deal, especially under Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush II, Obama and Trump, the wealth gap exploded. Tax cuts favoring the wealthy, stagnant minimum wage laws, and cuts to social welfare programs have all contributed to the growing divide. A detailed analysis of these policies reveals their role in exacerbating economic inequality.
Diane Young, whose career is in financial planning and who’s running for a Michigan seat held by a devoted neo-liberal Republican, John James, told me yesterday that “The top 1% of earners control more wealth than the entire middle class. That is unsustainable if we want to have peace and tranquility in our country. Ensuring that billionaires and big corporations pay their fair share is essential. They built their wealth on the backs of labor, on the roads built by our tax dollars, and transport their goods around the world under the protection of our military. We need to reform the tax code now!”
The kind of economic inequality we have in the U.S. impacts all facets of society, including education, healthcare, and housing. Studies show a direct correlation between high levels of inequality and social unrest, lower economic mobility, and poorer public health outcomes.
Conor O’Callaghan is running for a Republican-held seat in Maricopa County. He studied at Wharton and worked on Wall Street and is very aware of galloping economic inequality and how it tears society apart. “Too many families are being priced out of the American Dream,” he wrote. “Even in one of Arizona’s most affluent districts, economic improvements have not fully translated to relief in people’s pocket books. That’s why I will lead the charge to revamp our tax code and provide real economic solutions based on two decades of experience in the financial sector.”
In Wisconsin, our candidate for a swing district/GOP-held seat is Eric Wilson, who has a very forceful perspective: “Greedy corporations and the ultra wealthy few have rigged the rules in their favor so they can raise prices on the things we need to survive like groceries and gas. They pocket the profits, and then blame rising costs and hard times on poor families, Black people, and immigrants. Since 1989, the top 1% seized more than $22.7 trillion. The wealthiest few take more and more while we scrape by with less and less. Millions of people are still struggling and our essential workers like nurses, teachers and care workers continue to be underpaid and overworked. It's sick and we need to fight back. The only way to make sure everyone is paying their fair share is by electing candidates who aren't bought by the ultra wealthy and are fighting to close tax loopholes for corporations and the ultra rich. I am that person. I am committed to fighting for everyone so we aren't just trying to survive, but that we have the resources to thrive.”
Please consider contributing to the campaigns of any of these candidates who may have struck a chord with you. They are all on our Flip Congress ActBlue page here. Alan Grayson isn’t. Because he’s running for the Senate seat that Rick Scott disgraces every single day he’s in it. (You can contribute to his campaign here.) Grayson, who studied economics at Harvard and then worked as an economist before running for Congress, started with a funny story about economists: “Harry Truman famously asked to be sent a one-armed economist, having tired of exponents of the dismal science proclaiming ‘On the one hand, this’ and ‘On the other hand, that.’ So I’m going to give you only one hand on this. Here are my top 10 specific policy measures:
- Eliminating the bottom half of the income totem-pole from taxation, entirely.
- Eliminating the capital gains tax break.
- Taxing corporations at the same rate as people, or higher.
- Some form of “marking to market” the value of large holdings of investment assets for taxation purposes each year (which is already done with commodity investments).
- Eliminating the double taxation of Social Security tax payments and benefits.
- Massive increases in federal education aid, to reduce the gap between poor school districts and rich ones.
- Express legal permission for colleges, plus incentives, for colleges to continue to favor genuinely “underprivileged” children in competitive college admissions.
- Regulation of the pricing of private college education, and free public college education. (Interesting fact: Harvard could pick up the tab for tuition and room and board for all its students for the next 100 years without depleting its endowment.)
- A huge increase in the (refundable) child tax credit (because it actually does “take a village.”)
- At least doubling the national minimum wage, and indexing it to inflation.
“Note that this is not just talk; I actually have introduced bills for many of these policies. If you want to know why these policies are a moral imperative, I suggest Harvard professor John Rawls’s book, A Theory of Justice. It’s all in there. We do need to do these things because any one of us could be on the short end of the stick. ‘There but for the grace of God go I.’”
