Back to School, and to Widening Inequality

 Robert Reich

 American kids are getting ready to head back to school. But the schools they’re heading back to differ dramatically by family income. Which helps explain the growing achievement gap between lower and higher-income children. Thirty years ago, the average gap on SAT-type tests between children of families in the richest 10 percent and bottom 10 percent was about 90 points on an 800-point scale. Today it’s 125 points. The gap in the mathematical abilities of American kids, by income, is one of widest among the 65 countries participating in the Program for International Student Achievement.

On their reading skills, children from high-income families score 110 points higher, on average, than those from poor families. This is about the same disparity that exists between average test scores in the United States as a whole and Tunisia.

The achievement gap between poor kids and wealthy kids isn’t mainly about race. In fact, the racial achievement gap has been narrowing.

It’s a reflection of the nation’s widening gulf between poor and wealthy families. And also about how schools in poor and rich communities are financed, and the nation’s increasing residential segregation by income.

Explaining the Economic Crisis - Ed Asner

Tax the Rich. Ed Asner. 

Plutocracy, Paralysis, and the Great Depression

“Specifically, money buys power, and the increasing wealth of a tiny minority has effectively bought the allegiance of one of our two major political parties , in the process destroying any prospect for cooperation.

And the takeover of half our political spectrum by the 0.01 percent is, I’d argue, also responsible for the degradation of our economic discourse, which has made any sensible discussion of what we should be doing impossible.

All the evidence points, however, points to a simple lack of demand, which could be and should be cured very quickly through a combination of fiscal and monetary stimulus.

No, the real structural problem is in the political system, which has been warped and paralyzed by the power of a small, wealthy minority.  And the key to economic recovery lies in finding a way to get past that minority’s malign influence. “  Paul Krugman. May 4,2012.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/04/opinion/krugman-plutocracy-paralysis-perplexity.html?_r=1

10 years of Bush Tax Cuts- the Results

http://blog.aflcio.org/2011/06/07/not-a-happy-anniversary-10-years-of-bush-tax-cuts/

Why We Must Raise Taxes on the Rich - Reich

Why We Must Raise Taxes on the Rich, ASAP!

America's wealthiest are paying a pittance in taxes, while the country is chipping away at its central foundations to meet budget shortfalls.

 It’s tax time. It’s also a time when right-wing Republicans are setting the agenda for massive spending cuts that will hurt most Americans.

Here’s the truth: The only way America can reduce the long-term budget deficit, maintain vital services, protect Social Security and Medicare, invest more in education and infrastructure, and not raise taxes on the working middle class is by raising taxes on the super rich. Even if we got rid of corporate welfare subsidies for big oil, big agriculture, and big Pharma – even if we cut back on our bloated defense budget – it wouldn’t be nearly enough.

The vast majority of Americans can’t afford to pay more. Despite an economy that’s twice as large as it was thirty years ago, the bottom 90 percent are still stuck in the mud. If they’re employed they’re earning on average only about $280 more a year than thirty years ago, adjusted for inflation. That’s less than a 1 percent gain over more than a third of a century. (Families are doing somewhat better but that’s only because so many families now have to rely on two incomes.)

Yet even as their share of the nation’s total income has withered, the tax burden on the middle has grown. Today’s working and middle-class taxpayers are shelling out a bigger chunk of income in payroll taxes, sales taxes, and property taxes than thirty years ago.It’s just the opposite for super rich.

End Tax Cuts for the rich !

by Tula Connell
A majority of the American public thinks Bush’s tax cuts should continue for families that make less than $250,000 a year but should rise to the previous level for those making more than that amount, according to a new CNN poll. Some 51 percent say the tax cuts, which expire at the end of this year, should end for the rich.

Wise. Because as Dave Dayen points out, George W. Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans are thought to cost $830 billion over 10 years, adding massively to the nation’s budget deficit. Overall,

it’s generally considered that extending all the tax cuts would increase the deficit by $3.1 trillion dollars over the next 10 years.

Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich is among those calling for an end to Bush’s tax cut for the rich, noting it has been a “huge windfall for the wealthy. About 40 percent of its benefits went to the tiny sliver of Americans earning over $500,000.”

A final reason for allowing the Bush tax cut to expire for people at the top is the most basic of all. Although Wall Street’s excesses were the proximate cause of the Great Recession, its fundamental cause lay in the nation’s widening inequality. For many years, most of the gains of economic growth in America have been going to the top—leaving the nation’s vast middle class with a shrinking portion of total income. (In the 1970s, the top 1 percent received 8 to 9 percent of total income, but thereafter income concentrated so rapidly that by 2007 the top received 23.5 percent of the total.)

Safety Nets for the Rich

by Bob Herbert Op-Ed Columnist
New York Times - October 20, 2009

The headlines that ran side by side on the front page
of Saturday's New York Times summed up, inadvertently,
the terrible fix that we've allowed our country to fall
into.

The lead headline, in the upper right-hand corner,
said: "U.S. Deficit Rises to $1.4 Trillion; Biggest
Since '45."

The headline next to it said: "Bailout Helps Revive
Banks, And Bonuses."

We've spent the last few decades shoveling money at the
rich like there was no tomorrow. We abandoned the poor,
put an economic stranglehold on the middle class and
all but bankrupted the federal government - while
giving the banks and megacorporations and the rest of
the swells at the top of the economic pyramid just
about everything they've wanted.

Read the entire piece; http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/20/opinion/20herbert.html

Congress: Help the rich

Housing Policy: Free Market Vs. Help the Rich

By Dean Baker - April 3, 2008, 8:46PM
As we all know there is an ongoing debate in politics between those who favor market solutions and those who believe that the government must intervene to protect the rich.

Okay, the first group may not exactly be market fundamentalists, but the government intervention help-the-rich faction is definitely calling the shots these days, especially when it comes to housing policy.

The economy is in recession and job loss is soaring. The banking system is on life support, with the Fed handing tens of billions of dollars to the country’s biggest banks at below market interest rates. Millions of homeowners are facing foreclosure, and more than ten million are now underwater in their mortgages, owing more than the value of their house.

In such dire circumstances, Congress did the only thing it could; it gave more tax breaks to banks and homebuilders.
Yes, that is really what Congress, or least the Senate, proposes as the answer to the crisis facing the country’s homeowners. The Senate has approved a bill that would give a tax break worth more than $6 billion to homebuilders facing losses due to unsold homes and banks facing losses due to bad mortgages. That should make troubled homeowners sleep more securely.
Read more at Talking Points Memo