Capitalism Guarantees Rising Inequality

[georgephillip]

[...]

Ohhhh, ill-gotten gains. Like the Dems who lied about earnings at Fannie and Freddie in order to get huge bonuses.

I agree, those Dems insiders should have given back the money and served time.

I wonder why Obama and Holder didn't prosecute?

I agree completely. But I don't wonder why Obama and Holder didn't prosecute. It is quite obvious those two are in service to the banks and to Wall Street. Obama was positioned for the presidency by money he received from the finance industry. As for Eric Holder, the following will shed some light on why he was appointed A/G:

(Excerpt)

But it also undoubtedly has something to do with the fact that the top leadership at DOJ is drawn almost exclusively from White Collar Criminal Defense Practices at large firms that represent the very firms that Justice is supposed to be investigating. Covington and Burling, the firm from which both Attorney General Eric Holder and Associate Attorney General and head of the criminal division Lanny Breuer hail, has as its current clients Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, JP Morgan, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank, ING, Morgan Stanley, UBS, and MF Global among others. Other top Justice officials have similar connections through their firms.

Obama's DOJ And Wall Street: Too Big For Jail? - Forbes

(Close)

"'The appearance of conflict is as dangerous to public confidence in the administration of justice as true conflict itself. Justice must not only be done; justice must also be seen to be done.' –Lloyd Cutler, 1981

"Over the past three years, the Department of Justice has filed criminal charges against hundreds of ordinary Americans for financial fraud.

"But no one from the largest banks and firms on Wall Street have been similarly charged for events leading up to the financial crisis.

"Could that be because those banks are clients of the firms from which top DOJ officials hail?"

Obama's DOJ And Wall Street: Too Big For Jail? - Forbes
Obviously, Goldman Sachs knew what it was getting when it donated over $900,000 to Hope and Change in 2008

 

[georgephillip]

Inequality exists because the greediest and the most selfish individuals and institutions use private wealth to control every government yet devised.

Inequality exists because people are not equal.

And capitalism enhances inequality:

"A child raised in the bottom fifth of the income scale through much of the southern United States has around a 5 percent chance of rising to the top fifth—4 percent in Atlanta and 4.3 percent in Charlotte—while a low-income child has a 9.6 percent chance of rising in Los Angeles and 11.2 percent in San Francisco.

"Do Republicans think poor kids in California are just twice as likely to be hardworking as poor kids in Georgia and North Carolina?

"Or might there be something else going on?

"Not to mention, even an 11.2 percent chance of going from low-income to high-income is pretty damn low if what we're looking at is an issue of merit.

"Those numbers are in line with Pew's earlier finding that 43 percent of Americans born in the bottom fifth of the income ladder never move up, and a full 70 percent never reach the middle.

"The 'this is about advantages and inequality, not individual merit' hypothesis gains strength when you learn that rich kids with below-average test scores are more likely to graduate from college than poor kids with above-average test scores."

Daily Kos: Republicans believe rich people just work harder. So how do they explain these statistics?

Better question, do Democrats think that California makes kids smarter?

Natural Selection makes California kids smarter.

 

[bripat9643]

It's even more irritating to listen to rich-bitch wannabees ignore economic realities in the 21st Century:

"A child raised in the bottom fifth of the income scale through much of the southern United States has around a 5 percent chance of rising to the top fifth—4 percent in Atlanta and 4.3 percent in Charlotte—while a low-income child has a 9.6 percent chance of rising in Los Angeles and 11.2 percent in San Francisco.

"Do Republicans think poor kids in California are just twice as likely to be hardworking as poor kids in Georgia and North Carolina?

"Or might there be something else going on?

"Not to mention, even an 11.2 percent chance of going from low-income to high-income is pretty damn low if what we're looking at is an issue of merit.

"Those numbers are in line with Pew's earlier finding that 43 percent of Americans born in the bottom fifth of the income ladder never move up, and a full 70 percent never reach the middle.

"The 'this is about advantages and inequality, not individual merit' hypothesis gains strength when you learn that rich kids with below-average test scores are more likely to graduate from college than poor kids with above-average test scores."

George "Dubya" Bush, for example

Daily Kos: Republicans believe rich people just work harder. So how do they explain these statistics?

DailyKOS is your source.

Enough said.

Here's some more, Hack:

"A new Pew Research Center/USA Today poll echoes Quinnipiac in finding that voters want to see the minimum wage increased and unemployment aid extended; once again, even Republicans support raising the minimum wage, 53 percent to 43 percent.

"Republicans are just about exactly flipped on unemployment aid: 43 percent want to see it extended while 54 percent don't.

"Democrats are overwhelmingly in favor of both policies, as are strong majorities of independents.

That may be a fairly accurate determination of the public's opinion, but where is the evidence that southern kids in the bottom quintile have a 5% chance of getting into the top quintile?

"But the survey also highlights a fundamental difference in how Republicans and Democrats see economic inequality and poverty: Republicans actually believe that rich people are rich because they worked harder and poor people are poor because they didn't work hard enough..."

Where have you proved that belief isn't justified?

Find any content you care to criticize, or are you still stuck on (stupid) context?

I have no idea what that statement is intended to signify.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

And capitalism enhances inequality:

"A child raised in the bottom fifth of the income scale through much of the southern United States has around a 5 percent chance of rising to the top fifth—4 percent in Atlanta and 4.3 percent in Charlotte—while a low-income child has a 9.6 percent chance of rising in Los Angeles and 11.2 percent in San Francisco.

"Do Republicans think poor kids in California are just twice as likely to be hardworking as poor kids in Georgia and North Carolina?

"Or might there be something else going on?

"Not to mention, even an 11.2 percent chance of going from low-income to high-income is pretty damn low if what we're looking at is an issue of merit.

"Those numbers are in line with Pew's earlier finding that 43 percent of Americans born in the bottom fifth of the income ladder never move up, and a full 70 percent never reach the middle.

"The 'this is about advantages and inequality, not individual merit' hypothesis gains strength when you learn that rich kids with below-average test scores are more likely to graduate from college than poor kids with above-average test scores."

Daily Kos: Republicans believe rich people just work harder. So how do they explain these statistics?

Better question, do Democrats think that California makes kids smarter?

Natural Selection makes California kids smarter.

That explains why they are all leaving the state.

 

[georgephillip]

Uh....stupid fuck.

Cuba, North Korea, the former USSR, etc had more poverty and inequality than the US. People are eating dead humans in North Korea to survive you stupid pile of shit.

Shut the fuck up.

Where is Democracy to be found in a world where the three richest individuals have assets that exceed the combined GDP of 47 countries?

A world where the richest 2% of global citizens "own" more than 51% of global assets?

Ready for the best part?

Capitalism ensures an already bad problem will only get worse.

"The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) states that income inequality 'first started to rise in the late ‘70s and early ‘80s in America and Britain (and also in Israel)'.

"The ratio between the average incomes of the top 5 per cent to the bottom 5 per cent in the world increased from 78:1 in 1988, to 114:1 in 1993..."

"Stiglitz relays that from 1988 to 2008 people in the world’s top 1 per cent saw their incomes increase by 60 per cent, while those in the bottom 5 per cent had no change in their income.

"In America, home to the 2008 recession, from 2009 to 2012, incomes of the top 1 per cent in America, many of which no doubt had a greedy hand in the causes of the meltdown, increased more than 31 per cent, while the incomes of the 99 per cent grew 0.4 per cent less than half a percentage point."

Spotlight on Worldwide Inequality

There are alternatives that don't require infinite "growth."

"The United States embargo against Cuba (known in Cuba as el bloqueo) is a commercial, economic, and financial embargo imposed on Cuba by the United States. It began on 19 October 1960 (almost two years after the Batista regime was deposed by the Cuban Revolution) when the US placed an embargo on exports to Cuba (except for food and medicine), and on 7 February 1962 was extended to include almost all imports..."

"The UN General Assembly has, since 1992, passed a resolution every year criticizing the ongoing impact of the embargo and claiming it to be in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and international law.[2] Human rights groups including Amnesty International,[2] Human Rights Watch,[18] and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights[19] have also been critical of the embargo."

United States embargo against Cuba - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Antares]

And capitalism enhances inequality:

"A child raised in the bottom fifth of the income scale through much of the southern United States has around a 5 percent chance of rising to the top fifth—4 percent in Atlanta and 4.3 percent in Charlotte—while a low-income child has a 9.6 percent chance of rising in Los Angeles and 11.2 percent in San Francisco.

"Do Republicans think poor kids in California are just twice as likely to be hardworking as poor kids in Georgia and North Carolina?

"Or might there be something else going on?

"Not to mention, even an 11.2 percent chance of going from low-income to high-income is pretty damn low if what we're looking at is an issue of merit.

"Those numbers are in line with Pew's earlier finding that 43 percent of Americans born in the bottom fifth of the income ladder never move up, and a full 70 percent never reach the middle.

"The 'this is about advantages and inequality, not individual merit' hypothesis gains strength when you learn that rich kids with below-average test scores are more likely to graduate from college than poor kids with above-average test scores."

Daily Kos: Republicans believe rich people just work harder. So how do they explain these statistics?

Better question, do Democrats think that California makes kids smarter?

Natural Selection makes California kids smarter.

You may have something there...I am a Nor Cal product.

 

[georgephillip]

DailyKOS is your source.

Enough said.

Here's some more, Hack:

"A new Pew Research Center/USA Today poll echoes Quinnipiac in finding that voters want to see the minimum wage increased and unemployment aid extended; once again, even Republicans support raising the minimum wage, 53 percent to 43 percent.

"Republicans are just about exactly flipped on unemployment aid: 43 percent want to see it extended while 54 percent don't.

"Democrats are overwhelmingly in favor of both policies, as are strong majorities of independents.

That may be a fairly accurate determination of the public's opinion, but where is the evidence that southern kids in the bottom quintile have a 5% chance of getting into the top quintile?

"But the survey also highlights a fundamental difference in how Republicans and Democrats see economic inequality and poverty: Republicans actually believe that rich people are rich because they worked harder and poor people are poor because they didn't work hard enough..."

Where have you proved that belief isn't justified?

Find any content you care to criticize, or are you still stuck on (stupid) context?

I have no idea what that statement is intended to signify.

It signifies you've offered no refutation of any claim I've made.
Like the one about southern kids and the "American Dream."

"A study finds the odds of rising to another income level are notably low in certain cities, like Atlanta and Charlotte, and much higher in New York and Boston."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/business/in-climbing-income-ladder-location-matters.html?hp&_r=0

When you criticize the source and not its specific content it makes you look like a right-wing loon

 

[P@triot]

Nice to see that Rottweiler continues to reside in his conservative bubble where the American dream isn't dead and everybody still had a chance to be the next Bill Gates.

That's because everybody does. Every single year in this country, someone who grew up in poverty graduates from an Ivy League school or the next best thing (Stanford, Cal, MIT, etc.). It's sad to see that you continue to live in your liberal bubble where "life is too hard" and everything must be handed to you.

By every measure, doors are closing to the lower and middle class to rise up. If you don't make enough to support yourself and your family, how can you possibly have money left over to invest?

Because your idea of "supporting" your family means Blackberry's, iPad's, and HD tv's. If liberals would grow the fuck up and do without these exceptionally frivolous luxuries, there is plenty of money left over for education, or investing, or insurance, etc. It's simply a matter of putting actual necessities over frivilous desires - something greedy liberals refuse to do.

The quality of public school education is in serious decline and American students are falling behind the rest of the world while surveys show that a large percentage of the population denies science, evolution and climate change.

Well that's what happens with the ignorant Cuban-communism policies you support. Detroit has filed for bankruptcy and is literally a 3rd-world shit-hole now after almost 60 straight years of Dumbocrat Mayors, Dumbocrat-controlled city council, and Dumbocrat spread-the-wealth unions. One would think the facts would wake you out of your liberal-stupor, but apparently not.

And as far as "climate change" - well, perhaps you want to step away from the liberal propaganda. We have this thing called science now.... (60% increase in the polar ice-caps....Oops!!!!)

Global Cooling: Arctic Ice Cap Grows 60 Percent In A Year [NASA PHOTO] - International Science Times

Arctic ice cap grows 60%...in a YEAR

Student grants are being cut while tuition rises so that when students graduate, their future has been fully mortgaged to pay their tuition.

And that's why you ungrateful, greedy liberals should be thankful for the minimum wage jobs that also provide tuition reimbursement (and in many cases now, universities put off payment until after the semester - so the corporation can pay them directly pending the outcome of a passing grade).

Unions gave rise to the middle class. It's no accident that in destroying the middle class Ronnie Rayguns went after the unions first.

Except the middle class (and the economy) skyrocketed under Ronald Reagan. While Barack Obama and his marxist policies have decimated the middle class.

So far, all you've done is post uninformed opinion. Meanwhile, I've provided specific facts (Detroit, tuition reimbursement, etc.) and links. What now Dragon? You're kind of backed into a corner here and losing credibility by the letter typed...

 

[Dragonlady]

If she actually has a degree in accounting she wouldn't be spouting about accountants getting a 60% pay raise in order to deal with more complex tax laws, and dismiss it as a COLA increase.

That isn't what I said at all. I said that if an accountant gets a 5% COLA, low skill workers should get one too.

Then I added that in the past 30 years management types, like accountants have seen a 60% rise in their pay while unskilled workers have lost ground.

I don't have a degree in accounting. I worked as a banker for 10 years after I finished school and then went to work in law for the next 30 years. That was in response to the a$$hat who suggested I was the product of a US public school education, knew nothing about economics and still lived with my parents.

I didn't make these comments to brag on my education and experience, but rather to counter the suggestion that I was young, stupid and had no idea how things work in the real world.

 

[P@triot]

No one expects low skill workers to be paid the same as the company's accountant. What we expect is wages for all workers to rise proportionately. If the accountant is given a 5% increase for cost of living, the low skill workers should receive a similar 5% increase.

Pure, unadulterated Dumbocrat socialist ignorance. So if the "low skill" worker always shows up late for work, has a bad attitude, and provides nothing of real value to the organization, he/she should receive the same 5% increase as the accountant who puts in 55 hours per week, has a professional approach to their job, and saves the organization money in taxes and corrections in the financial books????

People aren't really paid based on their value to the business. That's a right wing myth. They're paid based on supply and demand. There are lots of low skill workers and they're easy to replace. With so many unemployed looking for jobs, they line up for any opportunity offered. You don't have to pay more to replace them, and if you can find a legal way to pay them less, they'll still line up for the jobs and be grateful for the opportunity.

Once again, pure, unadulterated Dumbocrat socialist ignorance. Why do you think LeBron James gets paid $30 million per year? Because he can dunk a basketball? Really?

He gets paid $30 million per year because people want to see him play so badly, they will collectively pay $100 million per year in ticket sales to sit there and watch him in person. He will generate more revenue for the organization than he will cost them. In other words, he is paid because of his value to the organization. Just like everybody else in America.

 

[Dragonlady]

Who says low skill workers don't work hard, turn up on time and do their jobs? You assume that people who are paid more work harder and that not always the case. I've seen lots of wage slaves who turn up every day and give a good day's work for their wages.

Accountants earn more because they require more skills and education and are more difficult to replace but the cost of living raises should go to all workers because the COLA goes up for everyone, not just those in management. COLA is not a merit increase.

 

[P@triot]

Who says low skill workers don't work hard, turn up on time and do their jobs? You assume that people who are paid more work harder and that not always the case. I've seen lots of wage slaves who turn up every day and give a good day's work for their wages.

Accountants earn more because they require more skills and education and are more difficult to replace but the cost of living raises should go to all workers because the COLA goes up for everyone, not just those in management. COLA is not a merit increase.

I agree 100% with that... My point was your asinine claim that everyone should get the same increase across the board regardless of their performance is completely absurd (and I suspect you know that too - you're just playing that disingenuous Dumbocrat game).

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

People are payed by their value to a business. You expect a person who stocks shelves to receive the same salary the Company's Accountant gets.
Please explain what a living wage equals. Especially, if you are still living with mommy and daddy.

We are not doing as well as other countries? We still have the Largest Economy in the World. Our poor live better than in any other country in the world and we give aid to those countries.

You really know very little about economics and the world we live in. You are a perfect example of just how bad our Public Education System has become.

Well, I know you just can't fix stupid. So I won't try.

No one expects low skill workers to be paid the same as the company's accountant. What we expect is wages for all workers to rise proportionately. If the accountant is given a 5% increase for cost of living, the low skill workers should receive a similar 5% increase.

What has happened is that wages for accountants have risen by 60% while the low skill workers haven't seen a raise in years.

People aren't really paid based on their value to the business. That's a right wing myth. They're paid based on supply and demand. There are lots of low skill workers and they're easy to replace. With so many unemployed looking for jobs, they line up for any opportunity offered. You don't have to pay more to replace them, and if you can find a legal way to pay them less, they'll still line up for the jobs and be grateful for the opportunity.

Accountants are harder to find and not easily replaced so they're paid more to attract better employees.

You don't have the largest economy in the world. That would be China. Your economy was surpassed because your low income workers have lost buying power and China's markets are growing due to the rise in manufacturing.

I am not a product of your lousy public education system. I'm a product of the much superior Canadian education system. I'm now retired but I was one of the first female bank managers in Canada before moving into law in the early 80's. I specialized in corporate/commercial law and real estate. I think I have a pretty good grasp of economic matters and how successful businesses work.

What has happened is that wages for accountants have risen by 60% while the low skill workers haven't seen a raise in years.

Most people are bad at math and we've imported 20 million low skill illegals.
And you think the low skilled worker should get the same increase?
You want to help the low skilled worker, deport his low skilled illegal competition.

You don't have the largest economy in the world. That would be China.

See what I said about math? LOL!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Which only works if god and heaven exist.
Inequality exists because the greediest and the most selfish individuals and institutions use private wealth to control every government yet devised. Solutions include stronger regulation of markets to promote sustainable and equitable growth along with curbing the power of the rich to influence political processes and policies that best suit their interests. Build a wall of separation between private wealth and the state, or use the state to tax private wealth into extinction. There are alternatives.

Inequality exists because the greediest and the most selfish individuals and institutions use private wealth to control every government yet devised.

Inequality exists because people are not equal.

And capitalism enhances inequality:

"A child raised in the bottom fifth of the income scale through much of the southern United States has around a 5 percent chance of rising to the top fifth—4 percent in Atlanta and 4.3 percent in Charlotte—while a low-income child has a 9.6 percent chance of rising in Los Angeles and 11.2 percent in San Francisco.

"Do Republicans think poor kids in California are just twice as likely to be hardworking as poor kids in Georgia and North Carolina?

"Or might there be something else going on?

"Not to mention, even an 11.2 percent chance of going from low-income to high-income is pretty damn low if what we're looking at is an issue of merit.

"Those numbers are in line with Pew's earlier finding that 43 percent of Americans born in the bottom fifth of the income ladder never move up, and a full 70 percent never reach the middle.

"The 'this is about advantages and inequality, not individual merit' hypothesis gains strength when you learn that rich kids with below-average test scores are more likely to graduate from college than poor kids with above-average test scores."

Daily Kos: Republicans believe rich people just work harder. So how do they explain these statistics?

And capitalism enhances inequality:

It's true, when you live in a system where success is possible, the successful will make more.
If you live somewhere like Cuba, the smart, the stupid, the lazy and the hard worker are equally unsuccessful. This leads a moron like you to point to Cuba as a country to emulate.

 

[Contumacious]

I am not pro or anti government. I find such a political dynamic juvenile and based on ideology more so than economics and reality. I am for effective markets and I am for a pro growth approach based on demand and supply growing hand in hand. If government involvement is needed then so be it.

In what circumstances is government needed?

.

To protect citizens from control fraud:

"Control fraud occurs when a trusted person in a high position of responsibility in a company, corporation, or state subverts the organization and engages in extensive fraud for personal gain. The term Control fraud was coined by William K. Black to refer both to the acts of fraud and to the individuals who commit them."

Control fraud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shirley, you jest. The Federal Government is a continuing criminal enterprise...control fraud is their specialty.

.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If she actually has a degree in accounting she wouldn't be spouting about accountants getting a 60% pay raise in order to deal with more complex tax laws, and dismiss it as a COLA increase.

That isn't what I said at all. I said that if an accountant gets a 5% COLA, low skill workers should get one too.

Then I added that in the past 30 years management types, like accountants have seen a 60% rise in their pay while unskilled workers have lost ground.

I don't have a degree in accounting. I worked as a banker for 10 years after I finished school and then went to work in law for the next 30 years. That was in response to the a$$hat who suggested I was the product of a US public school education, knew nothing about economics and still lived with my parents.

I didn't make these comments to brag on my education and experience, but rather to counter the suggestion that I was young, stupid and had no idea how things work in the real world.

And,as I pointed out, accountants don't get COLA raises. The only people that still get COLA raises are public employees, and even they don't get them across the board.

 

[MikeK]

"'The appearance of conflict is as dangerous to public confidence in the administration of justice as true conflict itself. Justice must not only be done; justice must also be seen to be done.' –Lloyd Cutler, 1981

"Over the past three years, the Department of Justice has filed criminal charges against hundreds of ordinary Americans for financial fraud.

"But no one from the largest banks and firms on Wall Street have been similarly charged for events leading up to the financial crisis.

"Could that be because those banks are clients of the firms from which top DOJ officials hail?"

Obama's DOJ And Wall Street: Too Big For Jail? - Forbes
Obviously, Goldman Sachs knew what it was getting when it donated over $900,000 to Hope and Change in 2008

Eric Holder is not only totally ineffective at the real purpose of Attorney General he is brazenly and contemptuously so. He exists to serve the interests of his and the President's sponsors, who are major figures within the financial industry, which is where he and Obama will settle after 2016.

 

[Dragonlady]

I agree 100% with that... My point was your asinine claim that everyone should get the same increase across the board regardless of their performance is completely absurd (and I suspect you know that too - you're just playing that disingenuous Dumbocrat game).

COLA is not a merit increase. Everyone should get the same percentage COLA raise regardless of performance. Those whose performance merits an increase should also get an increase in addition to their COLA raise. That's how it works at every company/firm where I've worked.

COLA raises are increases in the base salary/hourly rate paid for any job, based on increases in the cost of living index over the previous fiscal year.

Most companies who are considered good employers have salary structures based on the established base rate of pay with annual COLA increases, merit increases tied to annual performance reviews and bonuses for exceptional performance - usually given at the end of the fiscal year and tied to profits.

Everyone gets the COLA increase but only those whose performance reaches or surpasses certain standards get the other raises and bonuses.

The widening gap between the lower skills jobs and the top end of the work force is the result of the top getting more and more money, while the middle and lower income jobs have not, in spite of rising productivity.

The loss of buying power for low income workers is dragging the economy down further. The greatest stimulus to the economy would be to get more money into the hands of low income workers. There are so many more of them.

 

[georgephillip]

Inequality exists because the greediest and the most selfish individuals and institutions use private wealth to control every government yet devised.

Inequality exists because people are not equal.

And capitalism enhances inequality:

"A child raised in the bottom fifth of the income scale through much of the southern United States has around a 5 percent chance of rising to the top fifth—4 percent in Atlanta and 4.3 percent in Charlotte—while a low-income child has a 9.6 percent chance of rising in Los Angeles and 11.2 percent in San Francisco.

"Do Republicans think poor kids in California are just twice as likely to be hardworking as poor kids in Georgia and North Carolina?

"Or might there be something else going on?

"Not to mention, even an 11.2 percent chance of going from low-income to high-income is pretty damn low if what we're looking at is an issue of merit.

"Those numbers are in line with Pew's earlier finding that 43 percent of Americans born in the bottom fifth of the income ladder never move up, and a full 70 percent never reach the middle.

"The 'this is about advantages and inequality, not individual merit' hypothesis gains strength when you learn that rich kids with below-average test scores are more likely to graduate from college than poor kids with above-average test scores."

Daily Kos: Republicans believe rich people just work harder. So how do they explain these statistics?

And capitalism enhances inequality:

It's true, when you live in a system where success is possible, the successful will make more.
If you live somewhere like Cuba, the smart, the stupid, the lazy and the hard worker are equally unsuccessful. This leads a moron like you to point to Cuba as a country to emulate.

Gee whiz, Milton Friedman, if we could only convince those hard-working Cubans to end their boycott of the greedy, fascist US?

Can you do this math, Milty?

"Is America the 'Land of Opportunity'? In two recent studies, we find that: (1) Upward income mobility varies substantially within the U.S. [summary][paper]

"Areas with greater mobility tend to have five characteristics: less segregation, less income inequality, better schools, greater social capital, and more stable families. (2)

"Contrary to popular perception, economic mobility has not changed significantly over time; however, it is consistently lower in the U.S. than in most developed countries. [summary][paper] "

Equality of Opportunity

 

[georgephillip]

"'The appearance of conflict is as dangerous to public confidence in the administration of justice as true conflict itself. Justice must not only be done; justice must also be seen to be done.' –Lloyd Cutler, 1981

"Over the past three years, the Department of Justice has filed criminal charges against hundreds of ordinary Americans for financial fraud.

"But no one from the largest banks and firms on Wall Street have been similarly charged for events leading up to the financial crisis.

"Could that be because those banks are clients of the firms from which top DOJ officials hail?"

Obama's DOJ And Wall Street: Too Big For Jail? - Forbes
Obviously, Goldman Sachs knew what it was getting when it donated over $900,000 to Hope and Change in 2008

Eric Holder is not only totally ineffective at the real purpose of Attorney General he is brazenly and contemptuously so. He exists to serve the interests of his and the President's sponsors, who are major figures within the financial industry, which is where he and Obama will settle after 2016.

Holder will undoubtedly return to whence he came, at a much higher rate of compensation probably.

IMHO, it's a real shame he and Obama don't draw their last breaths in federal prison

"White Collar Criminal Defense work has become one of the few revenue bright spots for large firms. According to a detailed analysis by the Professor Charles D. Weisselberg of UC-Berkeley in the Arizona Law Review, there is big money to be made because 'this area of practice is not susceptible to the same types of cost controls' that apply to other legal work.

"In short, white collar criminal defense work is 'enormously lucrative.'

"Eric Holder left Covington with a $2.5 million salary and a seven figure bonus. If he returns to Covington (as two of his colleagues at Justice already have) a similar payday certainly awaits him.

Obama's DOJ And Wall Street: Too Big For Jail? - Forbes