nationofchange | There’s been a lot of discussion about the historically high levels of income and wealth inequality lately—mostly from people on the shorter end of that stick—with good reason: There’s no end in sight.
In his new book, “Capital in the Twenty-First Century,” economist Thomas Piketty argues that worsening inequality is inevitable in a mature capitalist system, based on his analysis of 200 years of data. But inequality isn’t just an evolving condition like a crippling allergy that comes and goes, or just grows, enumerated by horrifying statistics. Nor is it just the result of a capitalist-utopian idea of free markets in which everyone gets a fair shot armed with equal information (which simply don’t exist in the real world, where markets are routinely gamed by the biggest players).
Inequality is endemic to the core structure of an America that operates more as a plutocracy than a democracy. It is an inherent result of the consolidation of a substantial amount of both financial power and political influence in the hands of a few families.
In his new book, “Capital in the Twenty-First Century,” economist Thomas Piketty argues that worsening inequality is inevitable in a mature capitalist system, based on his analysis of 200 years of data. But inequality isn’t just an evolving condition like a crippling allergy that comes and goes, or just grows, enumerated by horrifying statistics. Nor is it just the result of a capitalist-utopian idea of free markets in which everyone gets a fair shot armed with equal information (which simply don’t exist in the real world, where markets are routinely gamed by the biggest players).
Inequality is endemic to the core structure of an America that operates more as a plutocracy than a democracy. It is an inherent result of the consolidation of a substantial amount of both financial power and political influence in the hands of a few families.
In my upcoming book,
“All the Presidents’ Bankers,” I trace the lineage of the banking and
political families and their associates who have had the most combined
influence on American policy. Inequality of income or wealth is a
byproduct of the predisposition and genealogy of this coterie of
America’s power elite. True, being born into wealth means having a
greater chance of accumulating more of it—but take it a step further.
Expanding on the adage of “it takes money to make money,” we get a much
better idea of why inequality is so rampant: Because aside from income
and wealth issues, it takes power to keep power.
By nature of the construct and self-reinforcing behavior of a small
circle of American families and their enterprises—particularly over the
past century since financial capitalism replaced productive capitalism
as the means to expand power, wealth and influence—a comparative handful
of families and their connections run Wall Street and Washington
collectively. They run America as two sides of one political-financial
coin, not as divided factions but as co-influencers of policy through
public and private office.
There have been times during the past century when the specific
individuals commanding this joint effort paid credence to the public
interest, or were imbued with more humility. During those times, levels
of inequality happened to decrease. At other times, the power elite
solely promoted private gain, as from WWI through the crash of 1929, and
since the 1970s, particularly since the 2008 crisis. At those times,
inequality happened to grow. This is not to imply that the moods of the
elite were the sole arbiters of the direction of inequality, but that
whatever the direction of these levels, general economic health is more
dependent on the actions of this long-term, tightknit and concentrated
few than on the ideal of a democracy. In this environment of such power
inequality, economic inequality is unavoidable—and unsolvable.
