Thomas Piketty's method for preventing an ever greater concentration of wealth and income is to impose sharply progressive income taxes and stiff inheritance taxes. We actually have a much larger menu of options.
The author of "Capital in the 21st Century" says the capturing of our political institutions by the ultra-wealthy is the single most serious concern stemming from today's worsening wealth inequality.
We measure a lot of stuff in our society. But it’s rare that we try to measure our progress in achieving the American ideal of opportunity, especially when it comes to our nation’s young people.
How did we get to a point in our history where our nation has record levels of wealth, but millions of people are still struggling with hunger, poverty and homelessness? It’s all thanks to Reaganomics.
Baseball’s top hitter and Wall Street power suits both ply their trades in a high-speed world. That hitter will make over a quarter-billion in the next decade. The top suits stand to ‘earn’ astonishingly more.
Even in a conservative fantasy world, where you can cut, cut, cut to your heart's content, the budget still doesn't balance unless you cheat. You can look at that mathematical reality the Palin way, or the sane way.
Two reports highlight the damage done by hewing to a central conservative tenet, that “cutting corporate taxes will stimulate job creation and grow the economy.”
Recent speeches by former President Bill Clinton and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer showed that Wall Street continues to hold considerable sway in their party, despite the fact that its austerity agenda has failed.
Earlier this month, a Senate committee released a discussion draft of legislation to overhaul the nation’s housing finance system. It’s a good time to take a closer look at America’s longer-term progress on home opportunity.
The recently departed heiress Bunny Mellon – “the last standing true American aristocrat” – didn't promise us a rose garden. She gave us one. We would have been much better off with more equality instead.
These are particularly rewarding times to be wealthy, what with runaway wealth accumulation at the top and actual tax rates for the rich and corporations near record lows. And yet the complaints keep coming.
What if you could receive a guaranteed basic yearly income with no strings attached? Sounds like a far-fetched idea, right? Wrong. All over the world, people are talking guaranteeing basic incomes for citizens as a viable policy.
First the oligarchs came for our economy, and we said nothing. Now, they’ve come for science. Thanks to Republican-backed austerity measures, our nation’s scientific infrastructure has been hit with devastating budget cuts.
President Obama sent Congress a $3.9 trillion dollar budget. Although his 2015 plan has been deemed more politics than policy, it's a blueprint of how to start repairing our economy.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has kicked off a new campaign called “Higher Ed, Not Debt” to tackle the nation’s staggering burden of student loan debt. It's part of a larger battle over education in America from pre-kindergarten up.
Tax-dodging companies are holding $2 trillion-plus of taxable profits outside of the U.S., on which they would owe as much as $700 billion in taxes. Congress should just make them pay what they owe.
The CPC budget offers Americans a common-sense set of choices on vital priorities. To do so, it has to take on big money and entrenched special interests. Common sense, it turns out, requires courage.
Let's learn from our not-so-distant past and share the gold. New technologies don't have to bring us new inequities. The prime example from our past: The advent of television in the decade right after World War II.
Again and again President Obama has proposed programs to help the economy and create jobs. Again and again these proposals have been obstructed by Republicans in Congress.
We need an economy that works for everyone, not just the top 1 percent. Income inequality is finally getting some long-overdue attention from our lawmakers, but we need less talk and more action to make our economy work for the 99 percent.
It's election time, when the Republicans decide it's time to troll for votes among their lovely base by kicking the poor. Thus, Rep. Paul Ryan's back with a budget that re-brands the GOP's "War On the Poor" as "Poverty Reform."
Why should moving data around be any different from moving people? No private party, the latest Comcast merger ought to remind us, should be allowed to get rich off a basic public trust.
President Obama's 2015 federal budget comes weeks he after declared inequality “the defining moral challenge of our time.” Early reports about the budget show no signs of such broad moral sweep or scope.
Social welfare organizations are allowed to influence elections to a degree, but can’t make electoral politics their “primary focus.” The problem is that standard hasn’t been well defined.
In 26 out of the 50 states, the top 1 percent have seized all of the income growth since the end of the Great Recession. Income inequality is not just a feature of certain regions or economic sectors.
Another rural Georgia hospital is closing its doors as that state continues to block the Medicaid expansion. It's time for Republicans to expand Medicaid in every state, and stop playing politics with people's lives.
On Valentine's Day and every other, those arrows aren't hitting their lovelorn targets the way they once did. The reason? New research is pointing to our unconscionable – and still growing – economic divide.
Democrats and a few moderately-sane Republicans will formalize what everyone has known all along: It is illegitimate to put conditions on the vote to increase the debt ceiling.
Organized labor stands for everything the GOP hates: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance and the 40-hour work week. So the GOP denounces workers exercising concerted action, at the workplace and in Washington, D.C
Democrats are remarkably unified behind the jobs and inequality agenda the president ticked off in his State of the Union address. But beneath this surface calm, there is a growing divide within the Democratic Party.
We're in the middle of a David vs. Goliath battle. Corporate lobbyists are waging a campaign to get the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal rushed through Congress with little debate. But a broad coalition has come together to take on Goliath.
In the fierce debate over our top-heavy distribution of income and wealth, egalitarians have vanquished both inequality's deniers and defenders. Now the debate is shifting to the most pivotal question of all.
Free trade is not always a win-win proposition. It can be win-win under some circumstances, but it can also be a losing proposition under other circumstances. For the United States, the latter has too often been the case.
Rand Paul's time warp to Bill Clinton's sex scandal won't erase the reality of the Republican party's "war on women," or its consequences for women, families, and communities across the country.
The latest polling shows President Obama wins, and Democrats in Congress will win, with a progressive populist economic agenda. And they need not shy away from highlighting Republican obstruction and wrong-headed priorities.
The president's State of the Union address drew clear lines against Republican obstruction. But the president also suggested that the economic crisis was behind us. He'll have a hard time selling that.
America’s 1 percent is short-circuiting democracy with Rolex watches and unlimited campaign cash, ensuring the rich get richer and everyone else gets poorer – in other words, engineering income inequality.
Elites believe that all that matters is that the possibility exists for someone to get rich. After all, that's their highest value, so it must be that for everyone. But acquiring great wealth isn't the holy grail for most people.
How to build the progressive future we all want