Another legacy of President George W. Bush: massive income inequality
George W. Bush left so many memorable things in his wake. Sure, there were those two wars. And then there's that legacy of white-hot hate wielded by wacky multimillionaire talking heads. However, for a legacy that keeps on giving, W's greatest leave-behind is a level of income inequality that outpaces even that of the Roaring '20s that led to the Great Depression.
In 2007, the top .001 percent of American earners took home 6 percent of total U.S. wages -- about twice the figure for 2000, notes Emmanuel Saez, an economics professor at University of California–Berkeley. Saez also found that the top 10 percent of American earners pulled in 49.7 percent of total wages: a level "higher than any other year since 1917 and even surpasses 1928."
What did W have to do with this? He cut $1.3 trillion worth of taxes, 32.6 percent of which went to the top 1 percent of earners. And thanks to $7.8 million in contributions from Ameriquest, a subprime-mortgage company, President Bush pushed his Ownership Society initiative to get poor people into mortgages they could not afford so that Wall Street could engorge itself on borrowing to buy toxic waste.
But truly, W's legacy of income inequality is best reflected in the earnings of his Yale classmate Steve Schwarzman, CEO of the Blackstone Group (BX). Schwarzman's $702.4 million payday last year makes him the highest paid executive in America.
You may recall him as the fellow whose 60th birthday party in February 2007 cost millions, but Schwarzman also hosted a $1.2 million fundraiser for Bush that helped pave the way for China to invest $4 billion in Blackstone prior to its IPO.
By the way, Blackstone's price is down 55 percent from its June 2007 IPO price of $31 a share -- not that that will stop the big bucks from rolling in to Schwarzman. Nor will the $23.7 trillion Wall Street bailout, paid for by the bottom 99 percent, do anything to keep Goldman Sachs Group (GS) from paying itself record bonuses this year. Goldman, incidentally, still gets $52 billion in low-interest loans from the government to finance its trading.
Unfortunately for the 6.2 million unemployed, this record level of inequality is not soon likely to subside. In the immortal words of Will Ferrell, "You're Welcome, America!"



























Reader Comments (Page 1 of 15)
8-17-2009 @ 9:10AM
Jeff Soshay said...
Peter your a dumbass. Barney Fricken Frank open the door on the subprime FHA loans. Do some research before you spill that crap out of your ink pen, just try youtube.com search barney frank mortgage speach
Reply
8-14-2009 @ 4:37PM
STATEMAN26 said...
George W is the poster boy of them all for demonstrating what happens when the private sector is given free reign to gormandize, feather its own nest, use the public treasury to enrich itself--the best example
of GOP Marxism one can find-- and then pass the dinner check on to the American people.
Today we have income inequality on such a level that if the Democrats play their cards right, regulate business at every level, tax the rich, and stop spending $12,000,000,000 a month on Iraq, and this president gets a hold of the deficit with a stimulus in the trillions, the GOP will wander in the desert for decades to come.
If this be SOCIALISM, let's have it in abundance!!
Reply
8-15-2009 @ 5:07PM
EARL said...
HAVE YOU LOST YOUR MIND? WITHOUT A PROFIT INCENTIVE , NOT EVEN FOLKS LIKE YOU { NO IDEA OF ECONOMICS 101} WOULD HAVE A JOB. PROFIT IS GREAT!!! WHOM IS THE LAST POOR PERSON THAT HIRED YOU !
8-15-2009 @ 5:38PM
acbntx2208 said...
HIP HIP! HOORAY! Well said ....well said! Good riddence Bush! BTW, thanks for screwing the republican party up for good, they will never be what they once were EVER!, thanks to good ole W!
8-16-2009 @ 11:46AM
Kevin said...
to blame this totally on Bush is weak and irresponsible. The congress's from the past and present not to mention Presidents from as far back as FDR are responsible for screwing this up. If we had one philosophy and stuck to it we would never have a problem. But everytime congress changes or the administration changes we get something new. This is where the problems start. Liberalism has provine to never work. Fiscal conservatism with strict adherance to the Constitution will always work. The government is to damn big. Unfortunatly the current group of Gov is making it even bigger and threaten to totally erase the Constitution. This will lead to another Revolution guaranteed.
8-16-2009 @ 12:48PM
Ed said...
It never ceases to amaze me how economically illiterate liberals are when they beat that "tax the rich" drum! Who do you think is the economic backbone of our economy idiots? The "rich" are employers, the middle class are employees!
8-14-2009 @ 4:57PM
Iridium said...
Bush and the rest of the Wall Street cronies are socialists. It is not a republican problem, it is a ENTITLEMENT PROBLEM. The top 1% believe the are entitled to the majority of wealth. They will do anything to increase their wealth.
The stock market is not a capitalist institution. It has more in common with the Kremlin than a free market. It is controlled by a small group of very wealthy players. Look what happened in the USSR. The leaders of the communist party lived a life of luxury while the people starved. Sound familiar.
People have to start understanding this. Any dollar you send to a brokerage becomes part of the collective wealth of a few select individuals. You lose control of your individuality and they control your economic destiny.
Take a quick look at the top wealth earners in America. Can any single one of them really be called a conservative? No they are all economic liberals, economic socialists. Look at Soros, Buffet, Schwarzman, Turner, Gates. Not really a group you associate with the GOP.
What does economic socialism have in common with national socialism? Easy, singular control of the markets and singular control of the people. Both of these fly in the face of true economic conservatism.
A true economic conservative would support regulation to allow an open market. To make sure the top and bottom level remain in balance. Economic liberals say they want to level the playing field but in practice they only mean to redistribute wealth. While they increase taxes they open loopholes to allow the well connected to escape that taxation.
Our entire economic system is nothing more than a giant ponzi scheme.
Reply
8-15-2009 @ 9:31PM
Sam said...
You are so correct. Peter Cohan is always blaming the Republicans for all of the problems. He is smart enough to know that there isn't one iota of difference between the two party's. They are both led by thieves and liars that are controlled by the financial elite in this country.
8-16-2009 @ 1:53PM
Mark said...
"Iridium" is indeed a rare specimen...Right on the money - as usual. I vote Iridium for President!!!!
8-16-2009 @ 3:04PM
FedUp2 said...
When we start attacking congress who actually pass the laws and approve funding for the (too big to fail) C.E.O.s' "continuing salary entitlement program"; we come to the heart of the matter. Presidents sign or veto what congress has passed. Presidents come and go while congress hangs on to their corrupt system of business as usual and, they protect each other (not their constituants): Therefore nothing of substance changes. Congress does not write (or read) the legislation they sponsor (their "special interest" campaign sponsors do this). There is no good or bad party; our 'representatives' are self-absorbed with their own enrichment. As long as they get their piece of the pie, do you think they care when nothing is left for the future well being of the "less fortunate"?
We need to assess how congress acts exlusively for our benefit and disregard the empty rhetoric (televised and sponsored by "special interest" corporate media). Do you really think this media "informs" you or, would risk offending sponsors and potential sponsors? How much money is spent on campaign coverage and who pays for it?
Can you get an appointment with your congressman or does he/she only grant personal audience to the wealthy and its corporate lobby? If congress does not read the legislation before voting, do you imagine that they read, know of, or even care about your input? Are congressional replies to your letters "canned" for the closest fit in category?
Yes, there were Bush's financial rewards to supporters (just like congress) and, we shouldn't forget one of his biggest supporters, Ken Lay at ENRON.
We should equally not forget the antics of a democratic congress and Clinton who (in 1999) signed the repeal of the Glass-Steagal Act of 1932. This Act prevented banks from investing depositor's money in the stock market, security trading, owning a brokerage and otherwise engaging in high risk activities that endangered the bank depositor's security interests.
In 8 short years (after the repeal) we again have massive bank failures and; for the same reasons that banks failed en mass after the crash of 1929.
Should any of us believe that congress did not have the foresight to prevent this culture of unregulated and unfettered greed that led us back to the same conditions preceeding the great depression? Or, did they not give a ....? Then ask youself what members of congress were there and remain in congress today. How did they vote? Did the "press" tell you the historical significance at the time? Do they mention it now or ask any long-standing member of congress why they voted in favor?
We need to wise-up, stay informed, stop listening to corporate propoganda and decide who is really acting in our best interests.
8-14-2009 @ 5:00PM
Tracy Coenen said...
Those who work harder deserve to make more. There is no "right" to "income equality." If one wants more income, one should work harder. And since the top income earners pay almost all of the income taxes, they are the only ones really able to receive tax cuts, aren't they? Those who don't pay taxes can't get a "cut." But shame on those naughty rich people!
Reply
8-14-2009 @ 5:29PM
STATEMAN26 said...
Those who work harder do indeed deserve to make more and they also deserve to pay higher taxes for their higher income. Unlike George Bush who made certain those who earned less paid more.
A good example of how we the suckers were left with the bill after the diners pigging out had left the restaurant.
8-14-2009 @ 5:43PM
Michelle said...
Tracy, you're an idiot.
In 2004, the top 10% of CEOs made 350 times the average worker. Do they work 350 times harder? No, I don't think so. Of COURSE CEOs deserve to make more money than the average worker, because they DO work harder, but 350 times harder. No.
Plus, we all got tax cuts under Bush's plans, because we ALL pay taxes. All of us (or at least those who follow the law). Yes, the rich got most of it because they make the most and thus pay the most taxes, but us peons pay taxes on our measly income as well.
However, I disagree with the article. We cannot place the blame on Bush for the income inequality that has been rising in this country since the 80s, that's a result of poor policies in this country. We need to regulate these corporations; if there's one truism about human nature, its that people in power will use that power to amass as much wealth as possible, even if it means leaving everyone else out on the streets.
8-15-2009 @ 3:25PM
repukeslie7 said...
The fact that minimum wage was not increased by the Republican Congress for 9 years certainly contributed to this problem. Health care costs tripled during that time which left poor, American workers without health care. It does not take a PhD in Economics to see that Bush completely screwed over the Middle and Lower working classes during his administration.
8-15-2009 @ 3:29PM
sally said...
Wow! Naive much?
8-15-2009 @ 3:42PM
riboy said...
This is the biggest lie I have been hearing that the top 1% pay the most taxes that is pure bull and they know it! Look at the tax code 62,000 pages of loopholes for who not me I'm just an average working man that can deduct interest on a mortgage big deal!!! The rich start with a high tax rate then that's when the big lie starts,when tax lawyers begin their magic of off shore accounts and other loopholes the rich have set up for themselves. A flat rate is only fair,you make this much here is your tax,but no they don't want to be fair. People this is called Greed pure and simple!!!!
8-15-2009 @ 6:43PM
frank said...
Working harder? What planet are you in? Let's see. many brokers lost millions for their clients and still got big fat checks at the end of the year. Working harder to lose millions? The days of good old capitalism are gone in our country. Capitalism has turned into an elete group, which Bush tried hard to increase, to the explotation of the rest. Many get rich not because they worked harder but becayse theie families wealth is passed on. Case in point? Why W himself. His entitlements included a free pass to Yale, having his father bailed him out of many business failures, and to his credit becoming the President of the USA on the simple minded or arrongance of the wealthy.
8-15-2009 @ 7:09PM
Anonymous said...
Tracy,
Um, actually I do pay taxes. I make around $40,000 per year, and almost 1/3 of it goes to taxes. I might get $90.00 back at the end of the year and most of the time I have to pay in. Also, because of the way income is taxed, I am actually working for "free/no pay", after about the $33,000 mark, because after that amount, I pay over $4,000 + 25% of everything I make over that. I don't feel that 1/3 of my income should be taken from me-can't afford it. I also don't like working for free-do you?
And, I work a whole lot harder than lots of people who make two or more times what I do. It is a myth that people who make tons of money work harder-yes some might. It is only something many of them claim to justify "taking" money from people like me.
Think before you speak or write. You sound very unintelligent...
8-15-2009 @ 7:18PM
fishingfly said...
Tracy
Before you make statements about taxes, you shoulkd check your facts. As a percent of income, the wealthiest people pay considerably less than the middle class. Even Warren Buffet has stated this more than once. You can Google the numbers yourself.
Tax Accountant
8-27-2009 @ 10:55PM
mary ann said...
you are an idiot