Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Incompetence, fear, or corruption? why not all three?

Meanwhile over at truth Social, the former president is busy confessing to crimes.

This fight is for everything.

Spilling the end game before they can coat it in frankl luntz-approved dogwhistles.

It looks like winning debates is a black job!

They’re not red states to be hated; they are voter suppression states to be fixed.

I was confident that someone would point it out and thought why not me.

An unpunished coup is a training exercise.

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

rich, arrogant assholes who equate luck with genius

But frankly mr. cole, I’ll be happier when you get back to telling us to go fuck ourselves.

A sufficient plurality of insane, greedy people can tank any democratic system ever devised, apparently.

Compromise? There is no middle ground between a firefighter and an arsonist.

Too often we confuse noise with substance. too often we confuse setbacks with defeat.

I’m pretty sure there’s only one Jack Smith.

Maybe you would prefer that we take Joelle’s side in ALL CAPS?

Let’s finish the job.

They think we are photo bombing their nice little lives.

“Cheese and Kraken paired together for the appetizer trial.”

Nothing worth doing is easy.

When you’re a Republican, they let you do it.

Usually wrong but never in doubt

Sitting here in limbo waiting for the dice to roll

Republicans firmly believe having an abortion is a very personal, very private decision between a woman and J.D. Vance.

You are here: Home / Politics / Domestic Politics / High Hats and Arrowed Collars

High Hats and Arrowed Collars

by | 93 Comments

This post is in: 

Working as intended:

Unemployment remains at near-record levels, and most Americans are struggling to rebuild their battered finances. But the country’s wealthy are once again doing just fine, thank you.

No group was immune to the downturn. In 2008, as the financial crisis raged, the stock market hit bottom and the Great Recession ate into the economy, the number of millionaires in the United States plunged.

But last year the number of millionaires bounced up sharply, new data show.

And after that decline and rebound, the millionaire class held a larger percentage of the country’s wealth than it did in 2007.

“It’s been a recession where everyone took a hit — with the bottom taking a bigger hit,” said Timothy Smeeding, a University of Wisconsin professor who studies economic inequality. But “the wealthy alone have bounced back.”

If people would sit still and wait for some to trickle down, everything will be ok.

(via)

Reader Interactions

93Comments

  3. 3.

    The Dangerman

    Would it be too much to ask to have an economic system where wealth trickles UP?

  5. 5.

    licensed to kill time

    I think most folks feel pretty pissed upon, so maybe somethin’s trickling down.

  7. 7.

    fucen tarmal

    and to think, my community college still doesn’t have a job retraining program in yacht building….

  10. 10.

    Allison W.

    And after being gone for 10 days, congress is gone for another 4 days without voting on unemployment extension. Also, the GOP and some blue dogs won’t budge until they get more tax cuts for the rich and prevent Dems from closing the tax loopholes that would help raise revenue.

  11. 11.

    Corner Stone

    You think that I’m some guinea, fresh off the boat, and you can kick me! But I’m too big for that now. I’m sick a’ takin the scrap from you, Leo. I’m a’ of marching into this goddamn office to kiss your Irish ass. And I’M SICK A’ THE HIGH HAT!

  12. 12.

    Waynski

    The rich, as in the time of Roosevelt, don’t seem to realize that Obama saved there @$$es. You want to see real socialism? Then unleash the kind of poverty that exists in Venezuala. Moderate income redistribution is good for the rich, because it quells populist movements that would be happy to take ALL of their money. I guess they’re too greedy to realize that.

    Also too, why do I get put in moderation using the word @SS. Is it because of Obama. FYWP.

  13. 13.

    PeakVT

    Between cutting defense and raising taxes on the rich, we could close the federal government’s current budget deficit without touching any other programs. But we won’t. We’ll just drifter closer to third world status to the sounds of American Idol.

  14. 14.

    Corner Stone

    @fucen tarmal:

    and to think, my community college still doesn’t have a job retraining program in yacht building

    Your area is probably lacking a significant enough population of 16 year old girls.

  16. 16.

    jl

    Spats and monocles. What about spats and monocles?
    And ascots.

    It would look quite dashing to see our better sort of people wearing those as they dismounted from their Duesenbergs. Or maybe Cords.

    I made a comment in a previous post with more detail on the composition of recent increase in consumer spending, and implications for economy. If you are not wealthy, do not have a college degree, or not older with retirement income, looks like no recovery for you:

    https://balloon-juice.com/2010/06/11/not-going-to-happen-2/#comment-1825194

    Edit: This post is sexist. What about the ladies? What should they wear to stimulate the economy and edify of the peasants? All I can think of is snoods right now, but they were not high class, were they?

  18. 18.

    Davis X. Machina

    Can’t read the title without hearing Hugh Laurie as Bertie Wooster singing it….

  20. 20.

    El Cid

    Wealth, Income, and Power in the US.

    Numerous studies show that the wealth distribution has been extremely concentrated throughout American history, with the top 1% already owning 40-50% in large port cities like Boston, New York, and Charleston in the 19th century…
    __
    It was very stable over the course of the 20th century, although there were small declines in the aftermath of the New Deal and World II, when most people were working and could save a little money. There were progressive income tax rates, too, which took some money from the rich to help with government services.
    __
    Then there was a further decline, or flattening, in the 1970s, but this time in good part due to a fall in stock prices, meaning that the rich lost some of the value in their stocks. By the late 1980s, however, the wealth distribution was almost as concentrated as it had been in 1929, when the top 1% had 44.2% of all wealth. It has continued to edge up since that time, with a slight decline from 1998 to 2001, before the economy crashed in the late 2000s and little people got pushed down again…
    __
    …[W]e can still safely say that the top 10% of the world’s adults control about 85% of global household wealth — defined very broadly as all assets (not just financial assets), minus debts. That compares with a figure of 69.8% for the top 10% for the United States. The only industrialized democracy with a higher concentration of wealth in the top 10% than the United States is Switzerland at 71.3%…
    __
    …Black and Latino households are faring significantly worse overall, whether we are talking about income or net worth. In 2007, the average white household had 15 times as much total wealth as the average African-American or Latino household. If we exclude home equity from the calculations and consider only financial wealth, the ratios are in the neighborhood of 100:1. Extrapolating from these figures, we see that 70% of white families’ wealth is in the form of their principal residence; for Blacks and Hispanics, the figures are 95% and 96%, respectively.
    __
    And for all Americans, things are getting worse: as the projections to July 2009 by Wolff (2010) make clear, the last few years have seen a huge loss in housing wealth for most families, making the gap between the rich and the rest of America even greater, and increasing the number of households with no marketable assets from 18.6% to 24.1%.

    And, my favorite, from the same:

    Here are some dramatic facts that sum up how the wealth distribution became even more concentrated between 1983 and 2004, in good part due to the tax cuts for the wealthy and the defeat of labor unions:
    —
    Of all the new financial wealth created by the American economy in that 21-year-period, fully 42% of it went to the top 1%.
    __
    A whopping 94% went to the top 20%, which of course means that the bottom 80% received only 6% of all the new financial wealth generated in the United States during the ’80s, ’90s, and early 2000s.

    Free market. Lower taxes. Stop all the spendin’. Soshullism. Welfare cheats. Get the gubmit outta regulatin’ business. Geese who lay the golden eggs. Etc.

  21. 21.

    Sue

    @jl: big, big hats and lots of fur. Also can we start having minor British and European royalty come over here on Rich-Daughter-Shopping exhibitions again? They can marry Paris Hilton as long as they promise to take her back with them.

  22. 22.

    Napoleon

    I don’t think I have seen anyone hear comment on this, but it fits right in with this thread. The Supreme Court this week granted an injunction forbidding the state of Az from giving candidates matching funds so they can advertise on the theory by giving poorer candidates a better ability to “speak” somehow violates the free speech rights of the rich candidates who now can take unlimited corporate funding. Seriously, they actually did that.

  24. 24.

    Lurking Canadian

    Free market. Lower taxes. Stop all the spendin’. Soshullism. Welfare cheats. Get the gubmit outta regulatin’ business. Geese who lay the golden eggs. Etc.

    You forgot, “No poor man ever gave me a job!”

  26. 26.

    Corner Stone

    @El Cid: And you can lay this data out in a very straightforward manner to any local wingnut you choose, because I have, and they will be completely unaffected by it.
    Doesn’t even phase ’em. This is how it’s supposed to be because those are the people who create jobs. What’s wrong with someone being rich? They worked hard for it, why shouldn’t the do what they want with it?

  27. 27.

    Corner Stone

    And meanwhile, they just cut Art class out the elementary schools in our ISD.

  28. 28.

    Bill E Pilgrim

    The genius of this brand of capitalism is in its ability to convince people that riches are just around the corner. It lets them actually achieve it precisely as often as a casino lets the marks win: just enough to keep the others coming back for more.

  29. 29.

    El Cid

    @Lurking Canadian: I was trying to remember that one. Also, ‘class warfare’, if you’re talking about returning upper income and dividend tax rates to sane levels.

  31. 31.

    Bill E Pilgrim

    The genius of this brand of capitalism is in its ability to convince people that riches are just around the corner. It lets them actually achieve it precisely as often as a ca si no lets the marks win: just enough to keep the others coming back for more.

    Edit: Okay, will try again. I was thinking it was the political word but then realized it was probably the other one that put me in purgatory.

  35. 35.

    kdaug

    @Corner Stone:
    No, no, no. That’s just the *public* schools.

    The private schools still have their art classes and galleries.

    (Full disclosure: private school student, circa 1980s)

  38. 38.

    licensed to kill time

    @eemom:

    Oooh, I vote for Sarahstopheles! The little horns are such a fetching addition to her look, and would really set off the black leather jacket with Satanzippers.

  40. 40.

    Daddy-O

    I’m PRETTY sure the lyrics are:

    High hats and Arrow collars
    White spats and lots of dollars
    Spending every dime
    For a wonderful time!

    As in an Arrow brand shirt. The finest.

    And who could forget the immortal Taco’s version of that song, released in the middle of the Big 80s pop music scene? Sold more records than the Stray Cats or Depeche Mode put together…

    ;-)

  43. 43.

    El Cid

    @kdaug: The librul science elites tried to hide this because it proves there’s no manmade global warming.

  46. 46.

    kdaug

    @El Cid:
    Welp, that’s what satellites fallin’ from the sky are for, son.

    Bonk a few of them god-folks on their heads with crap shootin’ out of low-Earth orbit. Tends to wake ’em up right quick.

  48. 48.

    QuaintIrene

    I finally got my rain gutters fixed, so I’ve had enough of trickling down, thank you very much.

  49. 49.

    jl

    Column on Brooks’ latest attempt at commentary on economics.

    Link to interesting study by a small business group that claims lack of demand among the mass of the common people is their biggest problem. I have never heard of this small business group before, but looks like it has interesting set of statistics.

    David Brooks doesn’t inspire confidence
    Jun 11th 2010, 15:45 by R.A. (Ryan Avent)
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/06/deficit_reduction

  50. 50.

    QuaintIrene

    But “the wealthy alone have bounced back.”

    Well, bless their little hearts.

  52. 52.

    Bill E Pilgrim

    @Citizen Alan:

    Why on earth does ca sin o trigger the mod filter?

    From what I understand of it the filter is all about catching marketing spam, not about some political squeamishness or censorship as people seem to assume.

    So for instance soçialism is only a problem because it contains çialis, not because it contains soçialism.

    So my first thought was “oops, “capitalism”, but then I realized, ah no, probably ads for online çasinos are more the issue.

  53. 53.

    NR

    Gee, if only the Democrats controlled Congress and the White House and could change tax policy. If only….

  55. 55.

    licensed to kill time

    Can we say shoes now, or does the spam filter still ban it? This is a test.

    edit: shoes is a go! W00T!

  56. 56.

    Bill E Pilgrim

    @jl: Thanks for that link. I read that Bobo column and just shook my head, hoping Krugman would debunk it also.

    This writer says

    But Mr Brooks ignores the paper’s nuances.

    Of course he does. David Brooks and George Will use that as their stock in trade, cherry picking or even just blatantly misquoting some study to “prove” some conservative nonsense, when even the study’s authors write in to complain that they came to the opposite conclusion.

  57. 57.

    bkny

    @jwb:

    did you see this:

    June 9, 2010, 12:00 am
    Legacy for One Billionaire: Death, but No Taxes

    A Texas pipeline tycoon who died two months ago may become the first American billionaire allowed to pass his fortune to his children and grandchildren tax-free, The New York Times’s David Kocieniewski reports. …

    Had his life ended three months earlier, Mr. Duncan’s riches — Forbes magazine estimated his worth at $9 billion, ranking him as the 74th wealthiest in the world — would have been subject to a federal tax of at least 45 percent. If he had lived past Jan. 1, 2011, the rate would be even higher — 55 percent.

    Instead, because Congress allowed the tax to lapse for one year and gave all estates a free pass in 2010, Mr. Duncan’s four children and four grandchildren stand to collect billions that in any other year would have gone to the Treasury.

    http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/09/legacy-for-one-billionaire-death-but-no-taxes/?pagemode=print

  58. 58.

    Mike Kay

    @NR:

    Gee, if only the Democrats controlled Congress and the White House and could change tax policy. If only….

    They are ass hole. The Bush tax cuts are expiring in 6 months and they’ve elminated the sweetheart tax loophole for hedge funds. You know – hedge funds – like the one were your phoney hero John Edwards worked at after he left office.

  59. 59.

    Mike Kay

    Why are all Naderites and Firebaggers so uninformed?

    /there’s no difference btwn Bush and Gore!

  62. 62.

    cat48

    Obama does care about Arkansas enough to alert FEMA to be on standby if Arkansas requests any help. Flash floods were a horrible story…..scary.

  65. 65.

    kdaug

    @martin:

    OK, that warrants the obligatory “heh”.

    It almost reads like some comic book from the 50s – “now that the great S-Jobs has decisively conquered the Sun Oracle, he’s now must do battle with his mightiest foe – the FLASH (3.0)!”

  66. 66.

    Mike Kay

    More people have died in the Arkansas flood then in the BP oil disaster, yet the blogosphere doesn’t care.

  68. 68.

    Boxer

    I went outside today and was waiting around for money to trickle down out of the sky and fill my pockets, but it turns out all the rich people aren’t flying around in corporate jets dropping money outside because they are too busy waiting in lines for awful socialized healthcare since they’ve all recently come down with a condition called “being taxed to death.” Karl Marx is holding the little guy down, I tell you!

  69. 69.

    Citizen Alan

    @Bill E Pilgrim:

    So for instance soçialism is only a problem because it contains çialis, not because it contains soçial ism.

    Aha. Also, “socialism contains cialis” should totally be our catchphrase. That would probably be enough to get the Teabaggers on our side.

  70. 70.

    NR

    @Mike Kay:

    The Bush tax cuts are expiring in 6 months

    And the Democrats could have repealed them sooner if they’d wanted to, you fucking idiot. To say nothing of actually increasing taxes on the wealthy to the point where we might actually start to address some of this huge income inequality. But no, as jwb pointed out, the Democrats don’t even think this is a problem, let alone a priority.

  72. 72.

    Mike kay

    @NR:
    Just fucking brilliant. Raise taxes when the economy was losing hundred of thousands of jobs per month. Fucking Hippie-Firebag-Naderites with their heads up their Red asses. You ever heard of Smoot–Hawley, asshole?

    No one — not a single economist would recommed raising any tax when an economy is emerging from a great depression.

    Just ask K-Thug:

    PAUL KRUGMAN, NEW YORK TIMES: What actually happened was, you know, there was an enormos, there was a collapse in the financial system, which was not restored for a long time. There was a persistent deep slump in consumer demand, and therefore no investment demand and so you’re stuck in this trap. FDR got the economy moving somewhat. By 1937 things were a lot better than they were in 1933 then he was persuaded to balance the budget, or try to, and he raised taxes and cut spending, and the economy went back down again.,

    You Hippie-Firebag-Nadrites make me sick. You dim-wits are no better than Michelle Backman and Palin.

  74. 74.

    El Cid

    @Mike kay:

    You ever heard of Smoot–Hawley, asshole?

    Smoot-Hawley had very little effect whatsoever on the Great Depression, first of all given the late time-frame of its application, secondly because the reason trade declined is that no one was buying anything, because of the Depression. In addition, at the time imports & exports were a small portion of the economy.

    Smoot Hawley was not a factor in causing or worsening the Great Depression. This is mostly a myth cited over and over by people pushing certain types of trade deregulation.

    The question of raising taxes in a recession / depression is a different one, and many agree that those are bad times for general tax increases, though it’s not agreed that higher taxes on the most wealthy have any detrimental effect on the larger economy, because their investments are typically not productive anyway when it can flow freely into financial instruments, and their impact on the consumer economy is fairly constant.

    The main tax raise which had an economic impact under FDR in the 1937-1938 period was the beginning of Social Security deductions on workers.

    But you couldn’t have Social Security as signed in 1935 and planned with its worker pay-in component without beginning deductions. In effect, that was a tax on ordinary workers, and was not compensated by additional immediate benefits or wage rises or other economic moves.

    Can you ever treat anything other than an epinephrine jolt to your heart to scream about ‘firebaggers’ and ‘hippies’? Are you OCD? Do you take medication for this?

  75. 75.

    Makewi

    This is probably all due to Obama’s tax cuts for the rich. Democrats hate the poor.

  76. 76.

    Mike kay

    @El Cid: Oh, I see. You’re gonna insult me for using insults. yes, take the high road. Heh! Welcome to the jungle. If you give them enough thread…. Amazing, the worst words have no effect on me (I didn’t plug my ears during “Goodfellas” or “The Godfather” or on the subway), yet some faint at hippie.

  77. 77.

    Sly

    @El Cid:

    The impact of Smoot-Hawley wasn’t in its actual effects on prices, really. It had more to do with how the debate surrounding it created a lot of uncertainty in an already volatile commodities market in 1929. You could, however, make a credible argument that the market in 1929 was so volatile that anything could have pushed it over the edge.

    The effect of the tariff on actual international trade is disputed, largely because there are a lot of variables to account for. But I don’t know of any reputable economic historian who attributes anywhere near the entire ~60% decline in imports/exports between 1929-1934 to Smooth-Hawley.

    On 1937, I don’t think the Social Security tax wasnt as significant as the cuts to public works (or perhaps even the small monetary contraction by the Fed). The initial tax on employees was 1%, and it was redistributed to other consumers who were just as (if not more) likely to spend the money.

  78. 78.

    Brandon

    Hayek had his economics assed backwards. The logical outcome of Austrian economics is serfdom and we are already halfway there. These greedy fackers have totally forgotten the ‘genius’ of Henry Ford, pay your workers more and then they’ll buy more of your crap. These ‘geniuses’ have decided instead to pay crap, keep all the money and turn you into a debt slave instead. It’s about time we just faced the reality that our society has 3 classes: the owners, the debt slaves and the un-credit worthy. Nothing will happen to correct this problem until bankruptcy law is made sane again. While it is not a solution, it is a beginning.

  79. 79.

    arguingwithsignposts

    @Brandon:

    These greedy fackers have totally forgotten the ‘genius’ of Henry Ford, pay your workers more and then they’ll buy more of your crap.

    OTOH, Ford did try to break the unions. His idea of giving workers weekends off so they could drive was genius, but he was something of an asshole.

    Interestingly, IIRC, he did not sell cars on credit, but layaway. GM was the one that came up with the credit method of selling cars (from an episode of American RadioWorks).

  80. 80.

    J

    @El Cid: & Handy:

    If the present condition gave us something like the spirit of the Warner Brothers’ musicals of the ’30s that would be something I suppose.

    With long term unemployment where it is, something like Remember my forgotten Man (sung by the terrific Joan Blondell) is very much to the point.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jIofWwupLA

  82. 82.

    NR

    @Mike kay: God damn, you are stupid. Every time you open your mouth, more idiocy drops out.

    Higher taxes on the rich do not cause economic recession. And lower taxes on the rich do not spur economic growth, as simple historical fact shows us:

    The highest period of growth in U.S. history (1933-1973) also saw its highest tax rates on the rich: 70 to 91 percent.

    I’d tell you to educate yourself about the effect that tax policy has on the economy, but someone as stupid as you is probably incapable of that. So just go back to eating paste in the corner and let the adults have a conversation, kay?

  83. 83.

    El Cid

    @Sly: I wasn’t suggesting that the new SS deduction was the major factor in the economy, but it was the most significant ‘tax’ like change in the time period I’ve heard of.

  84. 84.

    asiangrrlMN

    @Edwin: @Rosalita:

    I have many many rusty pitchforks, and for the remainder of the depression and the obscenity of the rich getting richer, they are free for the sole purpose of going after the oil (yes, oil) garchy.

  85. 85.

    El Cid

    @Mike kay: You’re apparently under the illusion that I was emphasizing your OCD focus on hippies & firebaggers because I’m sensitive about it. This is unsurprising, because it matches what you say approximately 1,000x each day no matter the subject of the post. If you would try just to be relevant every now and then, instead of simply being proud of your blog Tourettes, it would be different.

    Every time people point out you’re full of shit and irrelevant, you think it’s because you’ve bravely hit some nerve and you wish to call on the high school debate coach to award you one more point before the bathroom break.

  86. 86.

    Mike Kay

    @El Cid: So now you’re replying to comments you find irrelevant. What does that say about you. hahahhahahahhaah You’re too much. Don’t you get it, you can’t claim the high ground with insults. Quit digging, the hole is only getting deeper.

    This is what glen does. He’ll post something inflamatory. Someone will reply with an insult. Then he say how horrible it is resort to insults in a discourse. Then he proceeds to post a tirad with a bunch of insults. Someone calls him on trying to have it both ways (occupy the high ground with his feet in the gutter). To which he says no one has the right to criticize him for using insults after he’s been insulted, completely ignoring his self serving hypocritical moralizing.

    This is why I’m convinced Glen doesn’t own a mirror – that and his selection of shirts.

    Heh.

  87. 87.

    kdaug

    Mr. Kay, might I raise the example (yet again) of the 1950-60s? One parent (OK, the dad) could work, afford a house and a car, and raise a family. Our military expanded at a pace the world has never known. We fielded both a nuclear deterrent and sent a man to the moon. Early computers, interstate highways, the Pentagon, NASA. It was, by most reckonings, the most prosperous period in US history.

    Know what the Top Marginal Tax Rate was in that period?

    90%.

    And now we’re treated with boo-hoos of it going up to 41% (if you pay any at all).

    Sorry, shithead. Wanna play, gotta pay.

  89. 89.

    Sheila

    So much of the populace seems resigned, or even eager, to return to the Middle Ages, when most of the population of Europe was squashed between the castle ( today represented by the corporate-military complex) and the church (today represented by, well, the church), with no perception that they might be worse off for it.

  91. 91.

    TenguPhule

    and he raised taxes and cut spending, and the economy went back down again.,

    Cluemobile to Mike Dumbass Kay, The key point being that SPENDING WENT DOWN.

    Tax the rich and spend it on the rest. Not that hard.

  93. 93.

    El Cid

    @Mike Kay: You’re just weird. You keep having this illusion that you’re cleverly getting under someone’s skin. Trust me, a blog comment requires close to zero energy, involves almost zero emotional investment, and I respond to whomever it interests me at the moment.

    You really sometimes ought to read your own comments. Apparently you view yourself as some sort of bold, daring warrior, and it’s just odd.

    Every single thing in the universe for you apparently revolves around Jane Hamsher, firebaggers, hippies, John Edwards, and Glenn Greenwald. This is not a list I have to come up with some sort of close following. You repeat these dozens of times a day on nearly every thread.

    And if someone thinks it’s kind of silly — as if every single blog post I made some energetic, attempted insulting comment on Firestone tires (maybe I’ll start that) — then apparently you trumpet some sort of 7 year old’s notion of ‘victory’.

    You said something dumb and uninformed about Smoot-Hawley, and I pointed it out, and also that you had done so in the context of ‘firebaggers’ and ‘hippies’. Maybe you don’t see it, well, I know you don’t, but, again, that’s not bold and insightful, it’s just OCD.

Comments are closed.