The term 'wealth inequality' is thrown around in a lot of abstract ways. Here's to making it concrete:Imagine the makers of one of humanity's highest-grossing entertainment films shooting footage for the sequel at one of the world's most brutal sites of human and environmental abuse.
On November 4th, vote for an independent. Vote for someone who has some semblance of understanding of the everyday struggles you face. Vote for someone who doesn't fly back and forth from Washington to your home district on his or her own private jet.
Not surprisingly, economic inequality is growing in the United States. From 1978 to 2013, CEO compensation, inflation-adjusted, grew by 937 percent, while the typical worker's compensation over that same period grew by only 10 percent.
Entrepreneurs not only provide us with critical innovation and keep us at the forefront of global markets, they also create ways to gain financial independence. So why has the percentage of start-ups in the U.S. dropped significantly in the last 35 years?
Because we have already called for an end to mass incarceration, but, though there has been progress, our elected local, state and especially federal officials haven't gone far enough.
The wealthy continue to see significant income and wealth gains while the majority of people are experiencing stagnant living standards. Income inequality is one of the most significant financial stories right now, and there's no end in sight.
Using public funds to build professional sports facilities is an ineffective, inefficient strategy for promoting economic development -- and, one might infer, an especially unseemly use of scare resources in a city like Milwaukee where 29 percent of its nearly 600,000 residents live in poverty. But in our new Gilded Age, big money has no shame.
The tea party and other elected extremists cannot bring themselves to believe that voters just aren't buying the poisonous policies they're trying to sell. So they operate under the belief that if you won't vote for them, you shouldn't vote at all.
Income inequality is killing the economy. Retailers, bankers and Democrats agree on that. Really. It's only Republicans who continue to insist that income inequality is great.
The Internet is replete with apologias for the rich. They are thinly sourced and even less well-thought. The goal is simple: to justify the unjustifiable chasm between the rich and poor, globally and within our nation. But the irony is that, rather than being better than the rest of us, in many ways the rich are worse.
Democracy is worth fighting for. Regardless of the president's popularity, progressives need to get involved in this election and fight for candidates that hold our values.
Like many who are attuned to politics in America today, we're well aware of the enormous sums of money you spend to influence both politics and policy. You obviously have some very strong beliefs, but we, and countless other Americans just don't understand where you're coming from.
That so many of our friends and neighbors face such profound financial insecurity after five years of supposed economic recovery tells me we have a lot of work to do if we're serious about America being the "land of opportunity."
Up in the sky, look: It's a bird. It's a plane. It's SuperCEO! Faster than a speeding retweet, more powerful than his female colleagues, able to leap monumental fuck ups in a single bound. Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft, has a superhuman task ahead if he's going to out-fly the PR disaster he created.
Author Bob Herbert found an America in which jobs have disappeared, infrastructure is falling apart and the "virtuous cycle" of well-paid workers spending their wages to power the economy has been broken by greed and the gap between the very rich and everyone else.
Not only is the deficit down sharply from its levels of 2009 and 2010, when it was near 10 percent of GDP, it is below the levels that even the deficit hawks had targeted back in those years. In other words, even if we had followed the lead of deficit crusaders like Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, the deficit would be no lower today.