More

State Of The Union Address 2012: Obama Calls Income Inequality 'The Defining Issue Of Our Time'

State Of The Union Address 2012

The Huffington Post   First Posted: 01/24/2012 8:41 pm Updated: 01/25/2012 12:05 am

The president has the wealth gap on his mind.

Obama identified the need for a level economic playing field as "the defining issue of our time" in his State of the Union address Tuesday night, according to early excerpts of his speech made available to the press.

"No challenge is more urgent. No debate is more important," the president said. "We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by. Or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules."

Obama delivered his address after decades of divergence between America's richest citizens and everybody else. A Congressional Budget Office report recently confirmed that the gap separating the wealthiest and poorest Americans is historically large, and that the nation's top earners have seen their incomes skyrocket in the past 30 years while paychecks for the vast majority of people have barely changed at all.

The address also took place amidst a grim season for the American economy, a time when millions of people are out of work, and millions more have jobs that don't pay enough to boost them out of poverty.

Presently, income inequality is more severe in the U.S. than almost anywhere else in the developed world -- a circumstance likely related to the country's pervasive levels of poverty and economic struggle.

In confronting the dearth of economic opportunities for ordinary workers, Obama seems to be echoing -- whether intentionally or unintentionally -- the concerns of the Occupy movement, which cast a spotlight this autumn on the national wealth gap and the harsh conditions faced by those looking for jobs. In evidence of how thoroughly the Occupy movement saturated the national conversation, the number of times the media mentioned the phrase "income inequality" increased nearly five-fold during the first two months of the Occupy protests, according to Politico.

The president is also likely playing into Americans' concerns about the issue. Nearly three-quarters of Americans said that they think income inequality is a problem for the United States, according to an October poll conducted by The Hill. More generally, countless polls in recent months have shown that the economy and the availability of jibs are the top concerns for Americans.

Evidence suggests that the income gap may be holding back a broader economic recovery, which has yet to manifest despite the Great Recession officially ending in 2009. Income equality positively correlates with economic growth, according to a September study from the International Monetary Fund.

In the hours leading up to Tuesday night's address, onlookers raised their eyebrows at the news that Debbie Bosanek, secretary of billionaire financier and occasional Obama adviser Warren Buffett, will receive a seat of honor next to Michelle Obama during the proceedings.

Buffett made headlines over the summer when he argued, in a widely read New York Times op-ed, that America's very wealthiest citizens should pay higher tax rates than many of them currently do. Buffett cited the example of his office co-workers, who he said paid a higher percentage of their income as taxes despite earning much less than him.

By seating Bosanek next to the First Lady, Obama appears to be aligning himself with Buffett and others who argue that the rich are given too much freedom to stockpile their wealth.

A report earlier this month from the Congressional Research Service pointed to regressive alterations in the tax code -- that is, high earners paying smaller and smaller shares -- as one of the major reasons for the differences in income growth during those years. The report found that between 1996 and 2006, the top 0.1 percent of tax filers experienced an almost two-fold increase in income, while the bottom 20 percent of filers saw their incomes fall by 6 percent.

Here are 15 charts to illustrate what Obama has termed "the defining issue of our time":

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
The president has the wealth gap on his mind. Obama identified the need for a level economic playing field as "the defining issue of our time" in his State of the Union address Tuesday night, accor...
The president has the wealth gap on his mind. Obama identified the need for a level economic playing field as "the defining issue of our time" in his State of the Union address Tuesday night, accor...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 599
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (10 total)
  1 of 1  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
gomezrules 11:32 PM on 01/25/2012
This didn't make much of a splash when it first came out, but it sure is gaining traction on the 'Net in recent days...  Read More...
turnkey44
Support your local Animal Shelter
09:49 AM on 01/31/2012
After three years of failure now this administration talks about fairness, they want to spread that warm and fuzzy feeling to gain your vote and sadly it'll work for a few unknowing sheep. It's time in November to be fair and clen house in Washington, "both sides". End
09:28 AM on 01/31/2012
How about fairness in political salaries all elected ploliticians would put their salaries into a pool which would be eveney divided between all politicians from the small town city council member to the president.

Or how about a fairness in baseball salaries. All professional baseball players from the d-ball to the majors woud be paid the same.

Or how about a fairness in actor salaries. All members of the Screen Actors Guild and AFTRA would be paid the same.

Why should Julia Roberts be paid so much more than someone who acts in local productions.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ondbuyu
Romney 2012.."Change to believe in"
08:02 AM on 01/31/2012
Income Inequality.......... MORE class war fare retoric from Obama under a different name.

The campaign should be based on POSITIVE news such as job creation and strengthening
our country with energy independence OPPORTUNITIES without his selected few hand
picked green energy companies which recieved multi millions months before bankrupt
proceedings.
Even the most liberal individual or media can deny this will be devisive and class warfare.
06:43 AM on 01/31/2012
Income equality?

If we could just get these "unequal people" to WORK!

Our government has done everything to remove the incentive to get ahead and now people just wait for INCOME EQUALITY!

We working people better wake up as over half the people in the US no longer even pay taxes and yet they are being taken care of to vote this poor excuse of a president in, AGAIN!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ondbuyu
Romney 2012.."Change to believe in"
08:03 AM on 01/31/2012
Fan # 15..........Good Post
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fairandbalanced100
08:45 PM on 01/30/2012
Obama is right . I have seen statistics that show the rich have got much richer the last 30 years
& the rest of us are struggling , which is unfair & bad for our economy. The economy would be
much better if the middle class & lower class were getting more money to spend.
09:55 PM on 01/30/2012
I think your idea of fair, as well as The One's, would scare the bejeezus out of me.
08:50 AM on 01/31/2012
Get off your A double S and go take the risk that are involved to run a corp. and you will see with all the rules and regs that if the govt doesnt put you out of business that you deserve the the money you earn and that you shoud be able to keep ore of it rather than the govt taking it to waste.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Siebenstein
99% -Don't do what they tell you !
07:39 PM on 01/30/2012
Mr. 1% speaks the truth for himself and his bank buddies !

They do not help Americans , much like the GOP.
We have to take things in our own hand, f Obama too.
03:38 PM on 01/30/2012
This is class warfare rhetoric. This is un-American speech. Read Alexis De Tocqueville. His observation of Americans. Equality was a condition of natural law and inalienable rights not some sort of radical egalitarianism where everyone is the same. Americans have never been tought to be envious of the rich because Americans are always striving to be rich themselves and cheer those who make it. The rich politicallty are no better than the person who happens to be struggling. But undaunted we persevere. We believe in ourselves. The President is teaching socialism and class warfare and envy in his desire for power and polituical ambition. He is trying to divide us like no other president in the past. Obama wants class envy in order to plunder the rich.
10:03 PM on 01/30/2012
Indeed. I keep reading my copy of the Constitution and I can't find *anything* in it that guarantees equality of outcome. And I really can't find anything that says life will be fair, particularly since that seems to be an awfully subjective thing.

Besides, when Dear Leader says "fair," I hear something entirely different in my head.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ondbuyu
Romney 2012.."Change to believe in"
08:05 AM on 01/31/2012
Very good post........ Fanned
08:53 AM on 01/31/2012
Fair is the code word to Libs (socialism).
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:45 AM on 01/30/2012
Michelle just went on a luxurious spending spree. Wheeeeeee!
10:55 AM on 01/30/2012
Communist rhetoric from Obama? (joke). Income disparity should decrease he says - paying by the same rules. I should have known that was what he was doing, when he initially extended the Bush tax cuts for the extremely wealthy.

Serious hypocrisy on display here.
yer
Stop the Alberta Taliban
07:09 AM on 01/29/2012
Wow only 38 times the salary in 1970s for CEOs. Explains why workers could afford buying a house. CEOs were not entitled to their entitlements back then I guess. Different standards of culture.

Maybe only allow 50:1 ratio of lowest employee to CEO in terms of salary today? Thus salaries can go up but everyone shares in the success of the company. Which was I thought was the point. That way CEOs aren't at the trough but have to actually work. Set some limit instead of being suckers
10:22 PM on 01/30/2012
What is it you imagine CEOs are doing now? Do you suppose one falls into that position because it was open on the day he showed up to fill out an application, as opposed to the junior accountant position that was available the next day?

Whether CEOs are worth what they're being paid is the business of the shareholders in any given company. While the rest of us are entitled to an opinion, we in no way are entitled to start dictating what someone else can earn, particularly at a business in which we do not have a stake.
yer
Stop the Alberta Taliban
02:30 AM on 01/31/2012
I am merely taking the 1970's statistic as a reference point of where it was okay to be a CEO and where it was okay to be a worker. Focus
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:26 PM on 03/29/2012
if it is so easy why haven't the workers formed their own companies with equal pay for all involved?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lendmeanear
09:54 PM on 01/28/2012
O is right.
04:49 PM on 01/30/2012
Incredibly deep thoughts like that have made you a SUPER USER...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lendmeanear
07:59 PM on 01/31/2012
You caught me on a lazy day. :)
02:42 PM on 01/28/2012
The rest of the story that is not added is, yes there is some income inequality, but still over our national history, the entire populations standard of living continues to increase (with a few recessions here and there). But, the number of American households with all the modern items, computers, cell phones, etc. continues to improve.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:28 PM on 03/29/2012
what is considered "poor" is considered the 1% by the rest of the world
09:43 PM on 01/27/2012
The President was saying these same things four years ago. My beef with him is not his ability to articulate the problem, it's that he is inept at fixing it. He procrastinates because he sooo enjoys being president and desperately "wants" a second term so he can continue to enjoy himself. One reason the gap between rich and poor has widened during Obama's administration is the lack of prosecutions of the financial criminals who blew up the housing market. Hey, crime pays very, very well if the crime is securities fraud. Why procrastinate for three years, then, with eight months to go before the election, let the country know you've finally gotten serious about prosecuting?

As an illustration, view Judge Rakoff's order at http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/SECCITI11282011.pdf

In 2007 Citigroup created a billion-dollar fund that allowed it to dump dubious assets on misinformed investors. Citigroup claimed the funds assets were attractive investments rigorously selected by an independent investment adviser, when in fact, it had included a substantial percentage of negative projected assets and had then taken a short position in those very assets it had helped to select. Investors lost more than $700 million on the fund. The SEC agreed to settle with Citigroup for....$285 million, an amount Judge Rakoff said was a "very modest penalty", "a very good deal for Citigroup", and "pocket change to any entity as large as Citigroup".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cheryljim430
01:58 PM on 01/27/2012
Obama wantsd to divide the country hoping all the poor will vote for him, I'm poor and he is not getting my vote
04:51 PM on 01/30/2012
I applaud you.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ondbuyu
Romney 2012.."Change to believe in"
08:06 AM on 01/31/2012
YOUR post is the most accurate one on here........Thanks
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cheryljim430
01:56 PM on 01/27/2012
Does Obama think they should give all their money to the poor, I've been poor all my life and I don't think the rich owes me anything,