NYT - "Pew Finds Rising Strain between Rich and the Poor"
This was one article in the NYT today that focused on Pew surveys of the conflict between rich and poor in the United States. That was in the National section. In the business section there was "Economic Troubles Cited as the Top Risks in 2012". This one focused on research done in preparation for the annual World Economic Forum in Davos later this month. Their research uncovered "growing signs of discontent" with income gaps.
Both articles mentioned the Occupy Wall Street movement as an example of a catalyst that has caught people's attention in the U.S. and around the world, leading to a more widespread shift in opinion relative to last year. None of this is really news, although the Pew work did have value as it to some extent quantified that shift in this country.
What is a head scratcher here is that the articles, especially the writer of the Pew one on the U.S. only, did not mention the Tea Party movement which preceeded OWS by two years. Does anyone really think that economic conditions were not partially responsible for the formation of this rag-tag party of conservative "thinkers". While there is no real core to the tea party, or to OWS for that matter, this intangible party did heavily influence the Congressional elections of 2010. If one thinks that part of their formation is not economic, consider this. Over 75% of tea party members think that they deserve(are entitled to) all social security benefits, medicare and medicaid benefits, disability payments, and any housing subsidies that they now receive or expect to receive.
If that's not big government what is. Yet they rail against big government and taxation and the elites in government that want to tell them what to do on so many issues. The dichotomy between their entitlements and their resentments underscores the economic underpinnings, whether explicity stated or not, of the tea party movement as one part of the growing conflict between rich and poor, or should it be more bluntly stated as between the rich and everybody else.
Both articles mentioned the Occupy Wall Street movement as an example of a catalyst that has caught people's attention in the U.S. and around the world, leading to a more widespread shift in opinion relative to last year. None of this is really news, although the Pew work did have value as it to some extent quantified that shift in this country.
What is a head scratcher here is that the articles, especially the writer of the Pew one on the U.S. only, did not mention the Tea Party movement which preceeded OWS by two years. Does anyone really think that economic conditions were not partially responsible for the formation of this rag-tag party of conservative "thinkers". While there is no real core to the tea party, or to OWS for that matter, this intangible party did heavily influence the Congressional elections of 2010. If one thinks that part of their formation is not economic, consider this. Over 75% of tea party members think that they deserve(are entitled to) all social security benefits, medicare and medicaid benefits, disability payments, and any housing subsidies that they now receive or expect to receive.
If that's not big government what is. Yet they rail against big government and taxation and the elites in government that want to tell them what to do on so many issues. The dichotomy between their entitlements and their resentments underscores the economic underpinnings, whether explicity stated or not, of the tea party movement as one part of the growing conflict between rich and poor, or should it be more bluntly stated as between the rich and everybody else.
posted by John Borden at 8:19 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home