This study of polls of the wealthy's views on various political issues compared to the general populace is fascinating:
faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~jnd260/cab/CAB2012%20-%20Page1.pdf Tables 4 through 10 are particularly worth a gander. There are a few areas which both the rich and average Americans agree on--they want more government infrastructure spending and scientific research and less foreign aid--but on most other things they disagree. But how they disagree shows a real gap in perception. The funny thing is even though almost everyone agrees we need more infrastructure spending on roads and bridges, we still can't seem to get it done as a nation.
Comments
time.com/83073/barack-obama-transportation-republicans/
Nothing funny about it... more like pathetic.
"Budget Committee Chair Mike Enzi (R-WY) said he and other Republicans are all for more infrastructure spending. They take issue, however, with Sanders essentially dictating tax reform policy to the Finance Committee by setting a long-term funding target. “That’s not the way we do it around here,” Enzi said Tuesday."
Q: So what, exactly, IS "the way we do it around here", Mr. Enzi? And when was the last time that any of you either cared or bothered?
We are going to miss that window of opportunity due to political bickering.
The article researchers openly acknowledge the shortcomings of this early study. From a statistical perspective, it is short on number size and also on fair geographic distribution representation. These factors alone make the contemporary findings unreliable and highly suspect. It is no shocking discovery that “the rich are different”. By definition that must be true.
The sub-population of survey respondents totaled merely 73 folks with 73% of that small cohort above the 5 million dollar wealth threshold. That’s not an impressive army, especially since they are all located in the Chicago area.
I doubt if this small sample represents the views and proclivities of the wealthy from Boston, or New York, or Los Angeles, or Dallas, or Miami. This is patently flawed statistical data collection methods. Additionally, most of the interviews were conducted on the telephone which likely corrupts the findings still further. Data compromise follows compromise. At this juncture, these findings border on junk science.
The university authors are not neutral political observers. They have an agenda that likely can be nicely summarized by two of their book titles: “Class War?: What Americans Really Think about Economic Inequality” and “Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age”. This introductory survey appears to be an extension of their earlier work. There just might be some not so hidden bias here.
Even recognizing the pitfalls and traps inherent in its current design, the experimental results are not all that surprising. Although the authors highlight the two group disparities, most of the opinions expressed are similar, with less frequent divergences in expected areas. The rich prefer to more carefully husband their wealth, and are less egalitarian than the general population. The population wants free college for everyone without considering costs. What a surprise!
If I were offered the opportunity to choose having a financially-oriented lunch with an “average” citizen with an income of 60K dollars per year, or a self-made, multi-millionaire, I would not hesitate to select the latter. I would expect to learn more from his/her success story.
As Bismarck famously remarked: “Fools say they learn by experience. I prefer to profit by other people’s experience.”
As an aside, I answered many of the interview questions and bounced between those favored by the rich and by the general population. Does that mean I’m suffering from schizophrenia? Please don’t answer that.
Lewis, I noticed that the article was published in March, 2013, so it is somewhat dated. Have any updates been released? In its present form, there is hardly enough there to secure additional funding support.
Best Wishes.
quotecounterquote.com/2009/11/rich-are-different-famous-quote.html
Best wishes.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/03/opinion/sunday/nicholas-kristof-inequality-is-a-choice.html
"The Wall Street bonus pool in 2014 was roughly twice the total annual earnings of all Americans working full time at the federal minimum wage.
You read that right: Just the annual bonuses for just the sliver of Americans who work just in finance just in New York City dwarfed the combined year-round earnings of all Americans earning the federal minimum wage.
That is just plain sick. If that bonus pool were simply cut in half in half we could double the earnings of every American working full time at the federal minimum wage. And virtually every cent of that income would immediately be spent, with a huge boost to the national economy.
"We will bury you." - Ha!
No, it's getting close to dinner time.
What do you mean? Every fastfood worker I have ever met works as many hours as allowed, so yeah, up to 40 if not more. Barbara Ehrenreich's books (at least Nickel and Dimed, IIRC) get into that thoroughly. See also
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/nyregion/board-hears-support-for-raising-food-workers-minimum-wage.html
Not important though. I just thought someone might have already dug into this.
Just sayin'..
Yep. One employee works two jobs at less than full-time, at minimum wage, with no benefits because less than full-time. One day those folks are gonna wake up, and there will be hell to pay.
Regards,
Ted
@LewisBraham- Oh, come on now... that's a bit harsh. A reign of grouchiness, maybe. Those of us who've been here awhile don't pay all that much attention, you know. Don't jump at the bait.