U.S. Income Inequality Higher Than Roman Empire's Levels: Study

Many tout the U.S. as the Roman empire of the modern world. But as it turns out, that comparison may not be all good.

Income inequality in America is at levels even higher than those in ancient Rome, according to a recent study from two historians, Walter Schiedel and Steven Friesen, cited by Per Square Mile. After analyzing papyri ledgers, biblical passages and other previous scholarly estimates, the researchers found that the top one percent of earners in Ancient Rome controlled 16 percent of the society's wealth. By comparison, the top one percent of American earners control 40 percent of the country's wealth, according to Vanity Fair. (h/t ThinkProgress)

The findings add to the growing chorus of studies and criticisms indicating that the wealth gap is hitting truly remarkable levels. The top one percent saw their incomes rise by 275 percent between 1979 and 2007, according to the Congressional Budget Office, while the bottom fifth of earners only saw their incomes grow by 20 percent during that same period.

In addition, the total net worth of the bottom 60 percent of Americans is less than that of the Forbes 400 richest Americans. Perhaps even more shocking, the six heirs to the retail giant Walmart had the same net worth in 2007 as the bottom 30 percent of Americans. And the phenomenon isn't just limited to the U.S. -- income inequality is on the rise in most of the world's major economies, according to the Organisation of Economic Development and Cooperation.

The high levels of income inequality may help explain why both Rome and America wield so much power. Large wealth gaps actually helped early societies spread, according to an October study. That's because unequal societies crowded out more egalitarian populations, the study found.

Still, the income gap may hurt the U.S. in other ways. A September report from the International Monetary Fund found that greater income equality positively correlates with stronger economic growth.

Not only that, but it's also unpopular; nearly three-quarters of the respondents to an October poll from The Hill said they think income inequality is a problem for the United States. In addition, it's been one of the main rallying cries of Occupy Wall Street.

Related on HuffPost:

 

 

Comments

[an seanchus mor]

11:26 AM on 01/18/2012

The reference to ancient Rome is interesting, it was income inequality coupled with a retrograde Christianisation policy which finally undid it. The parallel is fascinating.

[tosc]

12:28 PM on 12/23/2011

and as an american I do not need glasses to see the writing on the walls.....as rome diluted so will the U.S. and all due to greed, pompeity and religious rhetoric! Being american does not carry the honor it did in the past! Come to find out our government officials are just as corrupt as those in the countries we condemn. The U.S. is one big glass house! with government officials throwing the stones!

[DFL]

02:29 PM on 12/22/2011

No society can survive with all the money concentrated to the top.

[NiccoloM]

09:25 PM on 12/21/2011

Although I agree that economic equality is a serious issue in this country the Roman economy shifted just like ours does and it lasted over 700 years. Which part of Rome do they mean? During the Republic or the Empire? During Crassius who is considered by the standards of his dad 1 of the 10 wealthiest men in history (his wealth exceeding Bill Gates). Or how about during Augustus or Caligulia, the latter who was known to have helped wreck the economy? The equestrian order included both the middle class and wealthy in ancient Rome (but excluded the Patrician nobility). The plebians and slaves (you could be paid and still be a slave, on rare occassions even becoming wealthy), were the bottom economic portion of society. In terms of poverty they were worse off than most of our poor. But we certainly have an elite here that functions as a kind of aristocracy and which is ruining our democracy.

[Sam D man]

05:34 PM on 12/21/2011

The collapse of the Roman Empire consisted in.
1. Loss of National identity.
2. Loss of Diplomatic/Political influence.
3. Loss of Economic solvency.
4. Loss of Military strenght/might.
The people and nation that once upon a time was Looked upon as the synonym of geatness.Were now cosidered 3rd class nuisance.
The whent from being coliseums builders to shack/tent dwelling nomads

[AnthropologistAmongApes]

07:17 PM on 12/21/2011

You forgot the root causes of all those symptoms you list; extreme inequity and disparity that concentrated wealth according to greed while simultaneously marginalizing intelligence and developmental maturity.

[Sam D man]

09:39 AM on 12/22/2011

You can standarize earth's resources and it's byproducts but not human behavior.
Have you not learned that from human history to this day ?

[AnthropologistAmongApes]

01:21 PM on 12/22/2011

That presupposes human consciousness has no capacity to self examine and self improve beyond such animality. Complex human behavior is ultimately moderated according to meta-cognitive development that uses actual feedback and measures of efficacy. Arrest in this domain of cognition produces an unexamined life that does not know how it's behaviors export harm.

I come across many people who reduce the human condition to egocentric competitivism because it gives them permission to act selfishly, and ignore the results on others and the natural world.

[Andres64]

01:28 PM on 12/22/2011

--That presuppose­s human consciousn­ess has no capacity to self examine and self improve beyond such animality.

We may be capable of it, but doing it is another thing.

[Sam D man]

07:27 PM on 12/22/2011

My presuposition is not a blatant generalisations of the human potential to exceed beyond that of animality.
Human history is enought of a backdrop to give me a metacognitive wareness to the complexibity of individual and collective human behavior.

[madame48]

04:48 PM on 12/21/2011

how ironic as today we look at the payroll tax cut game by the gop. Many Republicans want a 0% cap gains rate, and as the investments are mostly where the rich get their income, that would leave them resembling the wealthy Romans...the ones who didn't pay taxes. Those wealthy senators owned the worst dangerous slums for thwe poor to live in...they bought and sold power just like today...and the gop today gives us Bread & Circus

[Stay Up Shabazz]

04:33 PM on 12/21/2011

so we're all going to fall apart like the Romans? Horriby?

Poverty has no color. Well, at least not in the last quarter of 2011.

[NiccoloM]

09:28 PM on 12/21/2011

Rome lasted 700 years with income inequality and it never really fell apart in the same sense that people think it did. Eitherway, we would be lucky to last so long. Few empires have.

[saldog]

12:23 AM on 12/23/2011

That is just the Western Roman Empire also. Constantine bailed to Constantinople and the Eastern Empire survived many more centuries. It is certainly possible that if things continue to go poorly for this country, there would be many places that would be OK. For example, the Midwest is a big exporter of farm goods and is doing quite well compared to the rest of the country. Areas that are producing their own energy are relatively better off as well. This will continue in tougher times because self sufficiency would be more important. The frothy jobs and markets will deflate and those that produce real goods will flourish by comparison.

[inorbit]

04:27 PM on 12/21/2011

The Roman Empire lasted for almost 700 years - so what part of the Empire are we talking about?

[AnthropologistAmongApes]

07:20 PM on 12/21/2011

The part where the same pathological trajectory that brought Rome down is simply "accelerated" by the nature of modernity; and that we are currently in the same phase of decline caused by wealth concentration and the undue influence it provides to unworthy people.

[PublicCitizen21044]

03:36 PM on 12/21/2011

Will America fall as hard as Rome and for the very same reasons? Lack of ethics, morality,justice and a weak national will is going to cause us to crash coupled with the high levels of greed and selfishness that has and is being exhibited in the American society these days is a recipe for disaster.

I wonder what the touted job creators of the Republicans and their ardent supporters or the wanna be rich crowd think about this article.

[NiccoloM]

09:33 PM on 12/21/2011

Rome didn't fall because of a lack of ethics, morality or justice. It actually (depending on the period), had a better justice system than most ancient cultures and much of what was immoral about it lasted for over 700 years. Rome was no more immoral than other cultures at the time, and sometimes not as bad. Although it never really fell in the sense that people think it did, if you were to name the biggest reasons why it didn't last -- it was German hoardes and overextended armies that possessed territories which costed more to keep than the resources they gave back.

[usa77]

03:24 PM on 12/21/2011

so the democrats got their wish, by making the USA not equal. and they complain about their own work,....... vote out demonic-rats. vote in someone new. at this point almost anyone new would be better then the reid pelosi communist punch.

[madame48]

04:57 PM on 12/21/2011

hahahah communist...hahahaha what a goober

[Julia Howe]

10:29 PM on 01/31/2012

omg are you seriously slinging words around like "communist"? That's about as relevant to the current situation of MASS ECONOMIC MELTDOWN as calling someone a "tory" or "whig".

[scythus]

01:40 PM on 12/21/2011

Actually many paralells can be drawn between the US and the Roman empire. For example look into "bread and circuses" in my opinion that's where we are now....you might not want to look into what happened after that stage in Rome it's not pretty.

[aforbes808]

03:18 PM on 12/21/2011

It's gonna get ugly.

[saldog]

12:33 AM on 12/23/2011

I still feel that reality television and its ilk are one of the major reasons for this economic crisis. How else can you explain people buying into the real estate bubble just several years after the dot com fraud. People just were not paying attention because they were so absorbed with things that had no impact on their actual lives. "Bread and circuses" as you say will always exist and there is a "sucker born every minute" and we all have been told this yet the majority of Americans refuse to learn from their mistakes. I strongly believe that a big part of the reason is that the people are then conditioned to believe that it was somebody else's mistake. No acceptance of responsibility for actions taken and, consequently, NO LESSON LEARNED.

[Lindytindy]

01:29 PM on 12/21/2011

Considering that the ruling classes of Britain and the USA grew up educated to admire Rome as the ideal society, it's not too surprising that we've ended up that way. Our government, military and judicial systems are modeled on the Roman Empire. As is our militaristic philosophy. The rest is Crazy Christian messianistic, you have to kill them to save them philosophy, we must transform the world in our image and all that. And then there are those few Enlightenment influenced adherents trying to forward rationality, humanism, and peaceful coexistence. So here we are.

[cdhj12000]

03:43 PM on 12/21/2011

I agree with about all you said except I would replace "Christian" with "religious." There are a lot of crazy religious people out there who think you have to "kill them to save them" doing human sacrifice, terrorism, or just plain open war (a.k.a. jihad, but those that are involved often call it something else for lack of a better term or p.c. reasons). Remember that the Romans were very religious. People believe that the US has a separation of church and state, but it really doesn't. Not sure what religion or whatever has an influence in the US government, but something is there and probably has since the country's birth.

[NiccoloM]

09:38 PM on 12/21/2011

Much of the parts we borrowed from Rome were good parts. Rome was a brilliant creation that far exceeded any other civilization besides Greece in the western world at the time. Their legal system was in "some ways" during "some periods" far better than others. You didn't get a trial or public representation else where in most of the ancient world. And the enlightenment was influenced a great deal by the thinkers and some of the government of both ancient Rome and Greece. Up to the enlightenment you had a monarch, not a republic, and even some Roman emperors were closer to the people than most of the kings prior to eighteenth century.

[Tom Hn]

01:26 PM on 12/21/2011

I need to get richer and richer. If someone else doesn't have the same ambition, its not my problem.

[egal]

01:53 PM on 12/21/2011

And you've perfectly codified the sociopathic credo of the people at the top leading us into this mess without regard for how bad income inequality is for the economy supporting those at the top.

[Tom Hn]

03:41 PM on 12/21/2011

Of course, its ALWAYS someone ELSE's fault.

[madame48]

04:59 PM on 12/21/2011

and Machiavelli would be proud

[NiccoloM]

09:39 PM on 12/21/2011

Machiavelli wasn't a bad guy. He pointed out that sometimes the ends do justify the means. He has been maligned undeservedly more than any other intellectual in history (except perhaps Nietzsche).

[Tom Hn]

01:25 PM on 12/21/2011

Of course, the richest of Rome can't be compared to the riches nowadays, even factoring in inflation.
The richest guy in Rome couldn't get an iPhone.

[StopMakingSense2]

12:14 PM on 12/21/2011

That explains why rubepublicans fiddle as America burns!