General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe central reason for why many of the wealthiest Americans don't care about inequality
It is, quite simply, that they have isolated themselves from the rest of the country.
Are the residents of the wealthiest neighborhoods really affected by what goes on in the rest of the U.S.? Are their children, who go to the most elite public or private schools? Are the wealthy affected by economic downturns in the U.S., when they have assets around the globe, in other countries, offshore tax shelters, etc.? Do they suffer when the rest of us suffer? (That's rhetorical, obviously.)
Let's be real...if anything, they have enjoyed considerable gains at the expense of the vast majority of the country, whose standard of living has either stagnated or declined.
I see it here in the SF Bay Area, which is Ground Zero for extreme inequality that would make even the Robber Barons of old blush with embarrassment. They simply don't give a shit about the effect that they have on the region as a whole. "Fuck you, I've got mine" is their guiding philosophy. Pure, unadulterated greed.
This is simply not sustainable, by any measure.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Rebkeh
(2,450 posts)
I'm already there....
Arkansas Granny
(32,265 posts)They cannot conceive a reality where there isn't enough food to eat or utilities are being cut off. They don't know about having to buy a tire for the car means not having enough to pay the rent.
It's difficult to imagine if you haven't lived it. With gated communities and private schools, many don't even have to see it.
kristopher
(29,798 posts)In fact, I would say the blue collar bubble is far worse than the white collar bubble. I have certainly run into white collars who are completely clueless about blue collar life. But they are generally few and far between.
While in the blue collar world ignorance of (and disdain for) the white collar world is commonplace.
Sounds like you need to expand your horizons more.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511609494#post87
bunnies
(15,859 posts)
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)As someone who spends extensive time in both worlds, yes, there absolutely is a blue collar bubble.
In fact, I would say the blue collar bubble is far worse than the white collar bubble. I have certainly run into white collars who are completely clueless about blue collar life. But they are generally few and far between.
While in the blue collar world ignorance of (and disdain for) the white collar world is commonplace.
Do you deny the accuracy of that statement?
Also, how in the world is that post related to this thread?
bunnies
(15,859 posts)Its ridiculous to imply they dont.
Dont ask me how its related to this OP, I didnt bring it up. 
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)That subthread was originally about rural, working class people living in a bubble as much as or even more than urbane, upscale people. And it was far more about rural vs urban than about class. I foolishly used other poster's rewording which somewhat changes the meaning of that post.
And "rich people" was never mentioned anywhere.
The other OP defined people as living in a bubble based on their knowledge of a rural, working class lifestyle. My first post that started that subthread was that a person who lived their entire life on the farm was probably in a bigger bubble than the farm kid who graduated college, moved to the city and ultimately embraced an upscale lifestyle.
However, on the subject of rich people, I do disagree with your contention that blue collar people know damn well how rich people live. A former boss of mine replied to my not having a passport with, "but what if your girlfriend wanted you to take her to dinner in Paris this weekend?"
It would never have occurred to me to even think about something like that. I'm sure there is a lot about their culture that I do not know.
YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)Also just for the record, blue collar and rich are not mutually exclusive. But yes, most white collar people don't have a damn clue about how blue collar folks live.
Maybe some blue collar folks are not as "educated" or "sophisticated" and don't know a whole lot about the white collar world, but the majority - perhaps the vast majority - of white collar folks are hopelessly ignorant of what manual workers, workers without college degrees, and working class people in general do, to say nothing about how they live.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)But you're doing the reverse of the same thing by equating white collar with wealthy. Most office jobs are median range jobs money wise. Those people likely have more relatives with blue collar jobs than white collar ones.
For the record that other sub-thread was initially about rural, working class vs urban, upscale. The other poster brought in the collars, and I went along with it for shorthand. In that context "rural working class holding upscale city people in disdain" probably makes a whole lot more sense.
When I think White Collar/Blue Collar, I think of workers/management.
The super-wealthy, the 1% are not even part of that equation.
As to "ignorance of" the world of the super-rich. Yeah, we (though, I guess I'm not technically blue collar) are ignorant of it because most of us can not imagine not having to take care of our own daily needs ourselves. Maybe some of those One Percenters should change places with us peons for a few days and see which life they prefer.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)at people? The greater their (the poor's) suffering the greater the rich's "accomplishment".
closeupready
(29,503 posts)that there has never been a society in human history that has endured with the level of income and wealth inequality which is happening now in the US, and getting worse.
If it doesn't improve for the majority, it will eventually collapse either from within or without, to be replaced with a society perhaps without a currency of US dollars?
But how long have warnings been issued by their peers? Decades, and nothing has changed; they are hoping that they and their corrupt ways will somehow win out over human nature. They will not.
Who am I, nobody, but this is simply my opinion, worth what you paid for it.
RadiationTherapy
(5,818 posts)to combat it?
All in it together
(275 posts)It is for them. So the rest of us just are lazy or dumb or don't want money or need it.
There's not much empathy felt.
tblue37
(68,436 posts)and start a business?
trotsky
(49,533 posts)So simple!
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)This was also in the Bay Area.
The rich kids and their parents projected this sense of "we're rich because we're just better than other people."
MisterP
(23,730 posts)it's just something they HAVE, and they can get whatever they want--someone else even handles the dollar amount
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)
yurbud
(39,405 posts)on a level playing field.
If their daddy or grandpa or great great great great grandpa was the one who made the family fortune, they know they do not have the work ethic, stamina, tolerance to privation, frustration, humiliation, or pain it would take to make that fortune themselves (think Trump, W, Mittens, Steve Forbes, and on and on).
So even though no one is really talking about taking them all the way down to zero, they feel the only way to protect their standard of living is to accumulate ever more and make it impossible for the vast majority of us to compete with them.
robbob
(3,750 posts)Let's say, in spite of a huge surge and groundswell of support, Bernie falls short, takes his positions to the conventions, does his best to represent WE the people (ok; YOU the people; I still live in Canada), but comes up short and Hillary gets the nomination.
Lets say that doesn't mean the end of the world as we know it; Hill runs against Trump, common sense prevails and Hillary Clinton is the next POTUS. Ok; what changes are we going to see? Any great regulations on the banks/ Any relief for the middle and lower class? Any changes at all from the current status quo?
So, 4 years down the road either Hillary has done such a poor job (or has been indicted by the FBI) and the Republican find someone somewhere who can defeat her, or she continues steering the ship of state and wins another 4 years. Anything changing yet?
I'm afraid Bernie is a once-in-a-lifeline phenomena. I certainly have never seen anything like him in my lifetime, and I fear that if the American people don't take advantage of a real opportunity for true change, then they may not get another chance in their lifetimes.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)Does Justin have a twin? Because if Bernie doesn't make it, we need another Justin down here.
He's young and gorgeous, and that always helps.
I love Justin and I love Bernie, and the closest this has happened before in my lifetime was Bobby and we all know what happened there. And I agree. This will not happen again in my lifetime.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Take me through the changes that you think we would see, keeping in mind the role of the legislative branch in the United States.
It is important to remember that laws come from Congress, not the President.
The only way to see the real change in the status quo would be if the makeup of Congress changes dramatically.
As Bernie frequently says, he cannot do the things he wants to do on his own.
tblue37
(68,436 posts)our GOTV, to return to a 50-state strategy, and maybe take control of the House and Senate and start the process of getting control in some states so the 2020 redistricting won't be such a gerrymandered disaster for us.
Bernie could also appoint an AG who would aggressively pursue those who commit voting rights violations, as well as institute DOJ investigations of PDs that abuse PoC (or anyone else).
He could hold the feds back from interfering with weed sales in states where it is legal for medical or recreational use. He could commute unjust sentences, and even pardon Don Siegelman.
He could avoid pushing the TPP.
He could appoint decent SCOTUS judges, and use the bully pulpit to get the people to pressure recalcitrant senators to approve them.
He could refrain from appointing Rahm Emanuel to any poition of responsibility or power.
I do believe he would hear us if we presented our concerns.
And I do believe he would make powerful use of the bully pulpit to rally support from the public against an obstructionist congress.
Also, as much as I admire Obama, I was truly disheartened when he didn't make use of the fired up voters he had inspired but instead acted as though our job was finished until the next election. I believe Bernie would do his best to keep the movement going instead of letting it fade into disengagement and apathy.
maindawg
(1,151 posts)That's the siren song of all conservatives.
valerief
(53,235 posts)
WHEN CRABS ROAR
(3,813 posts)that it simply doesn't touch any part of their lives.
Pharaoh
(8,209 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)Once the rich have isolated themselves from the poor there is little incentive to care about what happens to the poor. Extreme inequality does serve the rich at the expense of the vast majority in the US and in the world.
Sometimes the isolation comes from walls - gated communities with security guards within the US; a Trump-style wall between countries.
steve2470
(37,481 posts)but it's going to have to get worse before it gets better. Why ? Because FDR was only elected because of the Great Depression. It took suffering on that immense of a scale for people to VOTE for something different. By the way, FDR did not campaign on a New Deal type platform. He adopted all that after he took office.
Do I want another depression to happen ? Of course not. What we just went through was really bad, yes, but it was not officially recognized as a depression. If we changed how we gather statistics and categorize them, we might start calling "Great Recessions" a depression.
astrophuss42
(290 posts)We are just about due.
steve2470
(37,481 posts)Dodd-Frank was a step in the right direction, but we need a lot more reforms. The minimum wage needs to be gradually restored to parity with 1980 levels. People in the bottom 80% need to be paid more, that's the real bottom line.
Atman
(31,464 posts)You can look up my ancient DU journals. I've said this for years...the Bush tax cuts were provided to give the 1% some more financial padding to build their walled compounds for when the final collapse came.
They could give a shit. They have quadrillions, fuck everyone else. When the Zombie Apocalypse comes, they'll send $3.35/hr workers out to clean the dead bodies off the sidewalk. They could give a fucking shit. When you have that much money, the only concern you have is that the hot-line to your accountant/lawyer are working.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)commoners in their minds is akin to kings and theirs coming out of castles to mix with the barbarians in their minds. This country is in deep shit. Just their yachts here are larger than most peoples houses. Then others have their private planes garaged in hangars by their houses.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)And some have, in fact, devoted a good portion of the wealth and resources to important causes. Many charitable organizations depend on such contributions to sustain themselves.
I do not think it is fair to make these blanket negative statements about wealthy people.
YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)But your concern is noted.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)However, some of the responses in this thread seem to be making broader generalizations.
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)easy for them to use, misuse and abuse us. They are narcissists, sociopaths and psychopaths with no higher emotions.
romanic
(2,841 posts)From gated compounds to ritzy businesses in pristine shopping districts; the wealthy ha always separated itself from the "masses". It's always been that way.