To which economic class do you belong?  Read this and go figure.

Sep 17 1999 4:09PM Houston Chronicle

                                    Make campaign about who's getting rich vs.
                                    who's not

                                    By MARK WEISBROT

                                    There's a sleeper issue for the 2000 elections that a presidential candidate
                                    could just possibly ride to victory if there were anyone with the guts to grab it.

                                    It's something that most of the electorate cares deeply about, but none of the
                                    candidates seems willing to address.

                                    The issue?

                                    Income distribution.

                                    It's not just the poor, whom politicians are counting on to stay away from the
                                    polls in large numbers, who have been getting the short end of the stick for the
                                    last two decades. It's the overwhelming majority of the electorate.

                                    Consider this: Since 1977, the real after-tax income of the majority of
                                    Americans has gone nowhere in an economy that has grown by 50 percent
                                    per person.

                                    At the same time the income of the richest 1 percent has more than doubled --
                                    a 115 percent increase, according to the most recent study from the Center on
                                    Budget and Policy Priorities. They are now hauling down more than $515,000
                                    a year on average, up from $240,000, 22 years ago. (All these numbers are
                                    adjusted for inflation.)

                                    Meanwhile, the average compensation package of chief executive officers at
                                    America's major firms reached $10.6 million last year, soaring more than 400
                                    percent in just the 1990s.

                                    The results of this growing concentration of income are startling: the richest 1
                                    percent of Americans -- 2.7 million people -- now have more take-home pay
                                    than 100 million of their fellow citizens combined.

                                    Remember, this is income, not wealth, which is much more highly
                                    concentrated. The richest 1 percent now hold 39 percent of the nation's
                                    wealth, more than twice as much as belongs to the bottom 80 percent of the
                                    population.

                                    These statistics confirm what most voters already know from their life
                                    experience. Most are old enough to remember when it was possible for a
                                    typical working family, even with only one income, to buy a house, raise kids
                                    and send them to college -- without piling up a debt burden the size of
                                    sub-Saharan Africa's.

                                    And those who aren't old enough to have such memories -- Generation X and
                                    below -- are facing entry-level wages and salaries that have declined sharply
                                    since the 1970s.

                                    It doesn't take a million-dollar political consultant to turn these trends into a
                                    winning campaign strategy. Most people still have a sentimental attachment to
                                    the idea that a rising tide should lift all boats and not just the luxury liners of the
                                    rich. All a candidate would need to do is stand up and shout about it. Let his
                                    opponents try to say that this is fair or that it's what Americans really want.

                                    The problem is that in our "free market election" system, we vote with our
                                    dollars. And most of those dollars -- the ones that finance political campaigns
                                    -- come from a rather narrow segment of the population. That segment -- no
                                    surprise here -- has a rather high overlap with those who have been gorging
                                    themselves on increasingly large slices of the economic pie.

                                    For a candidate to make an issue of the Brazilianization of our income
                                    distribution would mean that they might not be able to fund their election
                                    campaign in the manner to which they have become accustomed.

                                    The polarization of income and wealth eats away at our social fabric,
                                    corrupting the most basic human values that are necessary for people to live
                                    humanely and decently together.

                                    It exacerbates the status hierarchy and conspicuous consumption that are
                                    already way too important in forging people's personal identities -- breeding
                                    insecurity, envy, resentment and cynicism.

                                    Greed and selfishness become ever more the norm. Politics are further
                                    corrupted by the increasingly disproportionate influence of the rich, and the
                                    marginalization of the poor and even the middle classes.

                                    This is a social ill as well as an economic problem. It is somewhat masked
                                    right now because we are eight years into a business cycle expansion and
                                    unemployment is at record lows.

                                    But sooner or later, people will get tired of putting in the longest -- and most
                                    productive -- working hours of any industrialized nation just so we can have
                                    the world's highest paid corporate executives. When that happens, even the
                                    politicians won't be able to ignore the issue any more.
 
 

                                    Weisbrot is research director at the Preamble Center, a nonpartisan, nonprofit
                                    think-tank in Washington.

RETURN TO PRO-SOCS HOME PAGE