-- Herman Melville
Showing posts with label plutocracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label plutocracy. Show all posts
Friday, September 21, 2012
Quote Of The Day
Sept 21st, 2012
"Of all the preposterous assumptions of humanity over humanity, nothing exceeds most of the criticisms made on the habits of the poor by the well-housed, well- warmed, and well-fed."
-- Herman Melville
-- Herman Melville
Monday, August 27, 2012
Quote Of The Day - GOP Flashback Edition
-George Romney, letter to Barry Goldwater, 1964
Saturday, May 26, 2012
Mitt Watch - A Staggeringly Ugly Reveal
May 26th, 2012
Websters defines the word game as an "activity engaged in for diversion or amusement."
Games are fun.
They are also frivolous.
This matters.
In an interview with one of his fawning water-carriers, the WSJ's Peggy Noonan, the GOP nominee for the most powerful position in the history of world said the following a few days ago:
The shocking elitism in his statement is only matched by its craven stupidity. It's bad enough to consider his even thinking this way. But, to have so little regard for the people that he would say it aloud is unlike anything I have witnessed in the last quarter century.
Politics, by his own proclamation, is simply his latest hobby. While wife Ann spends part of their fortune on her "dressage," Romney has set out to saddle the people with a more hopeless future for his own gratification and that of his monied friends.
After all, it's just a "game."
We are the pawns and pieces. We are the poker chips. He likes a good bluff so why not truck with "birthers" and "tenthers" and propagandists? Anything to win.
After all, it's just a "game."
This serves to explain Romney's staggering mendacity. Why bother to tell the truth?
It's just a "game."
Wild proclamations that Russia is our "number one enemy" don't really mean anything.
It's just a "game."
Promising the last administration's neo-cons that he will give them their third war in the Middle East is of no consequence.
It's just a "game."
A worldview in which leadership of the United States is just a shiny prize during times this turbulent and potentially transformative should preclude eligibility for any office, much less Commander in Chief.
To doubt that a Romney presidency would be a disaster of previously un-imagined proportions is increasingly naive.
 |
| Image via |
Games are fun.
They are also frivolous.
This matters.
In an interview with one of his fawning water-carriers, the WSJ's Peggy Noonan, the GOP nominee for the most powerful position in the history of world said the following a few days ago:
"I think the game is like a sport for old guys. I mean, you know, I can’t compete in competitive sports very well, but I can compete in politics."This should end Mitt Romney right here.
The shocking elitism in his statement is only matched by its craven stupidity. It's bad enough to consider his even thinking this way. But, to have so little regard for the people that he would say it aloud is unlike anything I have witnessed in the last quarter century.
Politics, by his own proclamation, is simply his latest hobby. While wife Ann spends part of their fortune on her "dressage," Romney has set out to saddle the people with a more hopeless future for his own gratification and that of his monied friends.
After all, it's just a "game."
We are the pawns and pieces. We are the poker chips. He likes a good bluff so why not truck with "birthers" and "tenthers" and propagandists? Anything to win.
After all, it's just a "game."
This serves to explain Romney's staggering mendacity. Why bother to tell the truth?
It's just a "game."
Wild proclamations that Russia is our "number one enemy" don't really mean anything.
It's just a "game."
Promising the last administration's neo-cons that he will give them their third war in the Middle East is of no consequence.
It's just a "game."
A worldview in which leadership of the United States is just a shiny prize during times this turbulent and potentially transformative should preclude eligibility for any office, much less Commander in Chief.
To doubt that a Romney presidency would be a disaster of previously un-imagined proportions is increasingly naive.
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Friday, May 18, 2012
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Quote Of The Day
May 17th, 2012
"Do you want to know the cause of war? It is capitalism, greed, the dirty hunger for dollars. Take away the capitalist and you will sweep war from the earth."
-- Henry Ford
-- Henry Ford
Friday, April 27, 2012
Quote Of The Day - Here And Now Edition
-- James Salt, executive director for Catholics United, responding to Rep. Ryan's continued defense of his budget as being in keeping with the tenets of his faith.
Saturday, April 21, 2012
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Thomas Sowell Jumps The Shark
April 10th, 2012
Sigh. This is what passes for great thinking in the post "Derb" NRO offices?
In his column today, Thomas Sowell first regurgitates long debunked smears about half of Americans not paying their "fair share" (that would be the poor half).
That this is mendacious propaganda is illustrated HERE, HERE and HERE.
Sigh. This is what passes for great thinking in the post "Derb" NRO offices?
In his column today, Thomas Sowell first regurgitates long debunked smears about half of Americans not paying their "fair share" (that would be the poor half).
That this is mendacious propaganda is illustrated HERE, HERE and HERE.
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Why No GOP Budget Proposal Can Be Taken Seriously
March 21st, 2012
Ezra Klein lays it out flat and explains why they are all so mercenary:
"The Republican Party has settled on four overlapping fiscal commitments that leave them with few other choices.
The Republican plans we've seen share a few basic premises. First, taxes are too high, and must be cut. Second, defense spending is too low, and should be raised. Third, major changes to entitlement programs should be passed now, but they shouldn't affect the current generation of retirees. That would all be fine, except for the fourth premise, which is that short-term deficits are a serious threat to the country and they need to be swiftly cut.
The first three budget premises means that taxes and defense will contribute more to the deficit, and Medicare and Social Security aren't available for quick savings. That leaves programs for the poor as the only major programs available to bear cuts. But now cuts to those programs have to pay for the deficit reduction, the increased defense spending, and the tax cuts. That means the cuts to those programs have to be really, really, really deep. The authors have no other choice."
That's it, in a nutshell.
"Taxes are too high" in spite of being at a 60 year low.
"Defense spending is too low" in spite of being at its highest level since World War II and consuming nearly 54 cents of every weapons dollar spent globally per year.
Gutting Medicare and Social Security won't provide rapid savings so the poorest Americans will just have to pay for pretty much everything.
Lastly, the deficit has to be slashed immediately by implementing all of the above... which will guarantee higher deficits.
That we are in a position where we have to address these proposals with any seriousness whatsoever boggles.
Ezra Klein lays it out flat and explains why they are all so mercenary:
"The Republican Party has settled on four overlapping fiscal commitments that leave them with few other choices.
The Republican plans we've seen share a few basic premises. First, taxes are too high, and must be cut. Second, defense spending is too low, and should be raised. Third, major changes to entitlement programs should be passed now, but they shouldn't affect the current generation of retirees. That would all be fine, except for the fourth premise, which is that short-term deficits are a serious threat to the country and they need to be swiftly cut.
The first three budget premises means that taxes and defense will contribute more to the deficit, and Medicare and Social Security aren't available for quick savings. That leaves programs for the poor as the only major programs available to bear cuts. But now cuts to those programs have to pay for the deficit reduction, the increased defense spending, and the tax cuts. That means the cuts to those programs have to be really, really, really deep. The authors have no other choice."
That's it, in a nutshell.
"Taxes are too high" in spite of being at a 60 year low.
"Defense spending is too low" in spite of being at its highest level since World War II and consuming nearly 54 cents of every weapons dollar spent globally per year.
Gutting Medicare and Social Security won't provide rapid savings so the poorest Americans will just have to pay for pretty much everything.
Lastly, the deficit has to be slashed immediately by implementing all of the above... which will guarantee higher deficits.
That we are in a position where we have to address these proposals with any seriousness whatsoever boggles.
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
The Koch Fortune Came From WHERE?
March 20th, 2012
Much the way the Bush family fortune was built, in part, by doing business with some of the worst human beings of the last century, the Koch brothers are also the beneficiaries of blood money.
John MacMurray explains:
"As the first General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union’s Central Committee from 1922 until his death in 1953, Stalin hired Fred Koch, father of David and Charles, to construct oil refineries, pipelines, and train workers. Fred Koch delivered good value for Stalin’s money, and worked for the USSR for many years.
In later years, Fred apparently had second thoughts about the relationship, and helped found the virulently anti-communist John Birch Society."
Much the way the Bush family fortune was built, in part, by doing business with some of the worst human beings of the last century, the Koch brothers are also the beneficiaries of blood money.
John MacMurray explains:
"As the first General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union’s Central Committee from 1922 until his death in 1953, Stalin hired Fred Koch, father of David and Charles, to construct oil refineries, pipelines, and train workers. Fred Koch delivered good value for Stalin’s money, and worked for the USSR for many years.
In later years, Fred apparently had second thoughts about the relationship, and helped found the virulently anti-communist John Birch Society."
Sleep tight.
Monday, February 27, 2012
About That Romney "Tax Plan", cont...
Feb 27th, 2012
We looked at the numbers yesterday HERE and HERE. It's not just a more radical approach to revenue than even the W tax cuts; One of the component's of his plan is a full scale gutting of the social "safety net" he said he would preserve just weeks ago.
Frum savages Romney's departure from the comparatively rational proposal he released only last September and sums up the weekend's developments as follows:
"Compassionate conservatism has been dead for a long time. Romney's Detroit speech cremated the remains. As a man, Romney remains far and away the most capable of the presidential candidates seeking the Republican nomination. But he has now finally eliminated the policy differences separating him from the radical congressional wing. If Romney should win the Republican nomination, moderate and independent voters nationwide will be forced to decide: If they vote for Romney, who is it they're truly voting for?"
We looked at the numbers yesterday HERE and HERE. It's not just a more radical approach to revenue than even the W tax cuts; One of the component's of his plan is a full scale gutting of the social "safety net" he said he would preserve just weeks ago.
Frum savages Romney's departure from the comparatively rational proposal he released only last September and sums up the weekend's developments as follows:
"Compassionate conservatism has been dead for a long time. Romney's Detroit speech cremated the remains. As a man, Romney remains far and away the most capable of the presidential candidates seeking the Republican nomination. But he has now finally eliminated the policy differences separating him from the radical congressional wing. If Romney should win the Republican nomination, moderate and independent voters nationwide will be forced to decide: If they vote for Romney, who is it they're truly voting for?"
Sunday, February 26, 2012
About That Romney "Tax Plan"
Feb 26th, 2012
James Kwak calls it a "mathematical disaster:"
"There are several things about this plan that are either loony or deeply misleading. One is the claim that it would "address the debt crisis" because it will be paid for by $500 billion in spending cuts by 2016.
But the only proposals mentioned would (a) repeal the Affordable Care Act (increasing deficits, since the ACA has been scored as deficit-reducing); (b) convert Medicaid to a block grant (no deficit impact); (c) increase government efficiency (yawn); and (d) cut Social Security and Medicare benefits for "younger generations" (no impact until well after 2016). In other words, it's a complete fantasy."
James Kwak calls it a "mathematical disaster:"
But the only proposals mentioned would (a) repeal the Affordable Care Act (increasing deficits, since the ACA has been scored as deficit-reducing); (b) convert Medicaid to a block grant (no deficit impact); (c) increase government efficiency (yawn); and (d) cut Social Security and Medicare benefits for "younger generations" (no impact until well after 2016). In other words, it's a complete fantasy."
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Institutional Inequity
Feb 21st, 2012
On the heels of the latest Council of Economic Advisers Report to the President, Bruce Bartlett sums up what we already know pretty well today:
"...a tax system that lightly taxes capital and heavily taxes labor is necessarily going to benefit the wealthy. As this chart illustrates, federal tax rates on the wealthy have been falling since 1978, when Congress cut the maximum capital gains rate to 28 percent from 35 percent."
It is notable that Bartlett refers to capital gains in this piece as "unearned" income as opposed to the "earned" income of labor.
The current field of Republican Presidential hopefuls would never use such language. In spite of the fact that the realities of the last ten years have disproved the supposed benefits of so lopsided an approach to federal revenue, their plans, if elected, are to make the disparity more extreme.
Every one of them has proposed lowering taxes on dividends and capital gains further while actually raising them on the lowest quintile's labor.
Bartlett's takeaway:
"...the tax system in the United States violates the fundamental principles of income taxation. Those are "vertical equity," which says that those with upper incomes should pay a higher effective tax rate than those with modest incomes — as far back as Adam Smith, ability to pay has always been a core principle of taxation — and "horizontal equity," which says that those with roughly the same income ought to pay roughly the same taxes." EMPHASIS OURS
Of course, what the heck does Bartlett know? He's merely one of the Reagan Revolution's architects as well as one of the preeminent economists of our age.
Friday, January 13, 2012
Mitt Romney's Version Of Capitalism, cont...
Jan 13th, 2012
Last week, Jonathan Weisman reported:
"More than three-quarters of Americans say the country’s economic structure is out of balance and "favors a very small proportion of the rich over the rest of the country," taking up the calls of Occupy Wall Street protesters to reduce the power of major banks and end tax breaks for the affluent and for corporations, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows."
People are waking up to the fact that we have an unsustainable system and the fix is in. Not so, says Mitt Romney. He says the problem with all of us little people is "envy."
Last week, Jonathan Weisman reported:
"More than three-quarters of Americans say the country’s economic structure is out of balance and "favors a very small proportion of the rich over the rest of the country," taking up the calls of Occupy Wall Street protesters to reduce the power of major banks and end tax breaks for the affluent and for corporations, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows."
People are waking up to the fact that we have an unsustainable system and the fix is in. Not so, says Mitt Romney. He says the problem with all of us little people is "envy."
Monday, January 9, 2012
I Told You So.. But...
Jan 9th, 2012
by F. Grey Parker
Generally, I am not happy when I can say, "I told you so."
After the failure of the Democratic base to turn out during the 2010 election, I opined that the Republicans had no plan for jobs and would, instead, spend the entirety of 2011 masquerading their attacks on the poor as "austerity."
I predicted that they would characterize any and all attempts to re-stabilize federal revenue as "class warfare."
I warned that there was likely to be a genuinely unprecedented assault on not just abortion, but, women's health programs and rights in general.
I also repeatedly stipulated that the House GOP leadership would call every anti-environmental bill they could throw at the Senate a "jobs bill."
Well... I told you so.
See what I mean? I take no pleasure from this. That's the point. Usually, when I have to say, "I told you so," it feels like I have arrived at the bottom of a great crevasse, battered and bloody, and am making the pronouncement from the passenger seat to a driver who I have warned repeatedly not to drive off of a cliff.
Well, not today. Today, I am enjoying a 'told ya' so moment.' Immensely.
Last Fall, a conservative colleague and I were sparring, in a friendly manner, with regard to the upcoming Presidential election. He was stunned at my position on Obama's chances against the presumptive GOP nominee, Mitt Romney.
The text of our online exchange 10/27/2011
SP: You're not worried at all?
Me: Nope
SP: Really? That's nuts. Our base hates BO. Econ can't bounce enough to save him. Indys not on his side. Libs totaly (sic) disaffected
Me: Obama's gonna win. No question.
Sp: What? How can MR possibly lose???
Me: Bain
Trip Gabriel and Nicholas Confessore wrote yesterday for NY Times:
"Thanks to a $5 million donation from a wealthy casino owner, a group supporting Newt Gingrich plans to place advertisements in South Carolina this week attacking Mitt Romney as a predatory capitalist who destroyed jobs and communities, a full-scale Republican assault on Mr. Romney’s business background.
The advertisements, a counterpunch to a campaign waged against Mr. Gingrich by a group backing Mr. Romney, will be built on excerpts from a scathing movie about Bain Capital, the private equity firm Mr. Romney once ran. The movie, financed by a Republican operative opposed to Mr. Romney, includes emotional interviews with people who lost jobs at companies that Bain bought and later sold."
by F. Grey Parker
Generally, I am not happy when I can say, "I told you so."
I predicted that they would characterize any and all attempts to re-stabilize federal revenue as "class warfare."
I warned that there was likely to be a genuinely unprecedented assault on not just abortion, but, women's health programs and rights in general.
I also repeatedly stipulated that the House GOP leadership would call every anti-environmental bill they could throw at the Senate a "jobs bill."
Well... I told you so.
See what I mean? I take no pleasure from this. That's the point. Usually, when I have to say, "I told you so," it feels like I have arrived at the bottom of a great crevasse, battered and bloody, and am making the pronouncement from the passenger seat to a driver who I have warned repeatedly not to drive off of a cliff.
Well, not today. Today, I am enjoying a 'told ya' so moment.' Immensely.
Last Fall, a conservative colleague and I were sparring, in a friendly manner, with regard to the upcoming Presidential election. He was stunned at my position on Obama's chances against the presumptive GOP nominee, Mitt Romney.
The text of our online exchange 10/27/2011
SP: You're not worried at all?
Me: Nope
SP: Really? That's nuts. Our base hates BO. Econ can't bounce enough to save him. Indys not on his side. Libs totaly (sic) disaffected
Me: Obama's gonna win. No question.
Sp: What? How can MR possibly lose???
Me: Bain
SP: Huh?
And here we are.
Reid J. Epstein and Jim Vandehei write today in Politico:
"Forget his specific rivals. The biggest threat to Mitt Romney is hitting now and set to fully detonate in South Carolina: it’s the Bain bomb.
While conservatives look unlikely to unite around one alternative to Romney, the campaigns themselves are uniting around this one theme, that the former head of Bain looted companies, tossed people out of jobs and is now exaggerating his success at the venture capital firm."
"Forget his specific rivals. The biggest threat to Mitt Romney is hitting now and set to fully detonate in South Carolina: it’s the Bain bomb.
While conservatives look unlikely to unite around one alternative to Romney, the campaigns themselves are uniting around this one theme, that the former head of Bain looted companies, tossed people out of jobs and is now exaggerating his success at the venture capital firm."
I told you so.
As I said, my expectation was that this would be the heaviest artillery in the Obama re-election arsenal. What I never foresaw was the possibility that it would be Romney's own party that would make so effective a use of it first. This serves to illustrate just how unusual a period this is; The Democrats are having their work done for them by their opposition.
Literally.
One DNC strategist I have spoken to is openly giddy. Quite some time was being expended on framing this with great caution. Hundreds of hours have been devoted to making the Bain attack later this year without rendering the Obama campaign more vulnerable to smears that they are "anti-business." This contact quipped this morning, "Maybe I should donate to Newt. He's doing us a real service."
This is the truth. It is Newt Gingrich who has framed the discussion.
I had wondered whether, in the post-Tea Party political process, we might not see a practical abandonment of Reagan's "11th Commandment." But, I never saw Newt coming.
Until a few weeks ago, Newt Gingrich seemed to be even more absurdly ridiculous than he had been as a water-boy for D'Souza. Romney might be called a flip-flopper. But, Newt is the petty, little pip-squeak who sat next the GOP's favorite she-devil, Nancy Pelosi, and endorsed not only the concept of man-made climate change, but, argued for federally mandated solutions to the problem. He's the only GOP contender who took over a million dollars from Fannie and Freddie for lobbying being "an historian." And, as his litany of vulgar peccadilloes testifies, he is NOT the "values candidate" for any party in this country unless its mission is to establish Hugh Hefner's 1963 world-view as the norm.
And yet, here we are. Somehow, Newt Gingrich has managed to capture enough wealthy hearts and minds to wage an all-out war on Romney.
"Thanks to a $5 million donation from a wealthy casino owner, a group supporting Newt Gingrich plans to place advertisements in South Carolina this week attacking Mitt Romney as a predatory capitalist who destroyed jobs and communities, a full-scale Republican assault on Mr. Romney’s business background.
The advertisements, a counterpunch to a campaign waged against Mr. Gingrich by a group backing Mr. Romney, will be built on excerpts from a scathing movie about Bain Capital, the private equity firm Mr. Romney once ran. The movie, financed by a Republican operative opposed to Mr. Romney, includes emotional interviews with people who lost jobs at companies that Bain bought and later sold."
Romney's tenure and practices at Bain Capital make the fictional economic predations of Oliver Stone's 'Gordon Gekko' look not merely tame; they make them look elegant.
Romney wasn't just a job-killer, he was a community-killer. Whole towns perished so that he might live larger. Families suffered. Mothers wept over the choice between food and rent. Grown men watched as their hungry families were unable to heat their homes, afford their food, pay their rent or have new shoes.
All this so that Mitt Romney could go to multiply-Michelen-starred restaurants where his backwards-ass can't even pronounce the name of an appetizer.
From here on in, every mention of Bain will injure the GOP. However, for the next several months, at least, most mentions of Bain will come from the GOP.
So. I told ya so... but I never saw this coming.
Monday, January 2, 2012
Quote Of The Day
Jan 2nd, 2012
"For all men being originally equals, no one by birth could have a right to set up his own family in perpetual preference to all others forever."
-- Thomas Paine
 |
| Image via |
-- Thomas Paine
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
It's The Inequality, Stupid, cont...
Dec 27th, 2011
Eric Byler offers a theory after reading Peter Whoriskey's article on the growing wealth gap between our country's elected and its governed:
"Establishing the causal connection between income inequality and political polarization will require further study, the article says. And, I want you to read the entire piece, which includes evocative profiles that humanize eye-popping statistics — i.e., the average wealth of Members of Congress has increased 250% since 1984 while that of the average American family has gone down slightly. But allow me to offer a brief hypothesis:
The disastrous fiscal policies of the past 30 years — which have lavished America’s ruling class with unprecedented riches while hammering our middle class to a degree not seen since the days leading up to the Great Depression — simply would not have been possible without massive doses of political entertainment that have distracted and divided us into either failing to notice or failing to respond.
I've chosen the term "1% Media" for this indescribably vast body of news/entertainment content because it tends to reflect the perspective and, arguably, the agenda of the fortunate few who possess the immense wealth required to produce and disseminate it. During the past three decades, as constant streams of increasingly incendiary soap opera disguised as political commentary, or, worse, "news," have flooded the minds of 1% Media consumers, we have seen our culture, and perhaps the American electorate, transform. Consumers of 1% Media have become reliable voters, and, the most vocal and most malleable advocates for the policies and candidates presented to them on TV and radio. And, we have seen seen Members of Congress openly pander to this audience, not only in their rhetoric but also in their policy positions. They do this, despite their abysmal poll numbers, either because they actually believe in the political soap operas in which they star, or because they fear the entrenched apparatus that writes the script."
I am inclined to agree.
Eric Byler offers a theory after reading Peter Whoriskey's article on the growing wealth gap between our country's elected and its governed:
"Establishing the causal connection between income inequality and political polarization will require further study, the article says. And, I want you to read the entire piece, which includes evocative profiles that humanize eye-popping statistics — i.e., the average wealth of Members of Congress has increased 250% since 1984 while that of the average American family has gone down slightly. But allow me to offer a brief hypothesis:
The disastrous fiscal policies of the past 30 years — which have lavished America’s ruling class with unprecedented riches while hammering our middle class to a degree not seen since the days leading up to the Great Depression — simply would not have been possible without massive doses of political entertainment that have distracted and divided us into either failing to notice or failing to respond.
I've chosen the term "1% Media" for this indescribably vast body of news/entertainment content because it tends to reflect the perspective and, arguably, the agenda of the fortunate few who possess the immense wealth required to produce and disseminate it. During the past three decades, as constant streams of increasingly incendiary soap opera disguised as political commentary, or, worse, "news," have flooded the minds of 1% Media consumers, we have seen our culture, and perhaps the American electorate, transform. Consumers of 1% Media have become reliable voters, and, the most vocal and most malleable advocates for the policies and candidates presented to them on TV and radio. And, we have seen seen Members of Congress openly pander to this audience, not only in their rhetoric but also in their policy positions. They do this, despite their abysmal poll numbers, either because they actually believe in the political soap operas in which they star, or because they fear the entrenched apparatus that writes the script."
I am inclined to agree.
It's The Inequality, Stupid
Dec 27th, 2011
Everyone is talking about Peter Whoriskey's WaPo piece examining the growing divide between the increasingly wealth of elected officials in D.C. and the relative declines experienced by most of this country's citizens:
"Between 1984 and 2009, the median net worth of a member of the House rose by more than 2 1 / 2 times, according to the analysis of financial disclosures, from $280,000 to $725,000 in inflation-adjusted 2009 dollars, excluding home equity.
Over the same period, the wealth of an American family has declined slightly, with the comparable median figure sliding from $20,600 to $20,500, according to the Panel Study of Income Dynamics from the University of Michigan."
Here's what it looks like in chart form. Click the image for a better view.
Everyone is talking about Peter Whoriskey's WaPo piece examining the growing divide between the increasingly wealth of elected officials in D.C. and the relative declines experienced by most of this country's citizens:
"Between 1984 and 2009, the median net worth of a member of the House rose by more than 2 1 / 2 times, according to the analysis of financial disclosures, from $280,000 to $725,000 in inflation-adjusted 2009 dollars, excluding home equity.
Over the same period, the wealth of an American family has declined slightly, with the comparable median figure sliding from $20,600 to $20,500, according to the Panel Study of Income Dynamics from the University of Michigan."
Here's what it looks like in chart form. Click the image for a better view.
 |
| Image via WaPo |
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
