| So to sum up, low growth, inequality, and austerity measures all lead to societal unrest (tax increases on the rich, however, do not). Assuming the Economist got its facts right, our country has been primed for a movement like 'Occupy Wall Street' for quite some time. Obviously, economic growth these past 4 years has been dismal (we're just now getting back to the level of GDP we had in 2007):
What's more, we've seen a rather stunning increase in inequality over the past 30 years:
To top matters off, the fading out of the stimulus, mandatory spending caps imposed by the August debt ceiling bill, and decreases in aid to state and local government have led to rapid fiscal consolidation:
It should come as no surprise, then, that the folks who are hurt the most by inequality and austerity measures (the poor and middle class) have taken to the streets in an effort to change the way we do business in this country. The fact of the matter is that our system has failed the vast majority of Americans. Frankly, the only thing about 'Occupy Wall Street' that actually is puzzling is why it didn't come about sooner. For a long time, America has had higher levels of inequality, less progressivity in its tax code, and less social spending compared to the rest of the developed Western world:
People are angry, and they have a right to be. OWS isn't about communism; it isn't about dividing the nation. It's about restoring some semblance of justice and fairness to a broken game.
March on. |
