Meet the Wealth Gap

Users who are viewing this thread

Meirionnydd

Active Member
Messages
793
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
For a delivery worker, perched on a bicycle with plastic bags of food dangling from each handlebar, Manhattan's East Side offers many opportunities for a trip to the emergency room. I learn this one May afternoon as I trail 26-year-old Apolinar Perez, a chubby-faced Mexican immigrant who skillfully steers his black mountain bike through the chaos. A taxi switches lanes without warning, nearly clipping my front wheel. Suit-clad men and women stride purposefully into the street, too wrapped up in their phone conversations to notice they're crossing against the light. A black Suburban with tinted windows screeches to a halt in front of us, directly in the path of the bike lane.

Perez arrived in New York City five years ago, after crossing the Texas border in the back of a truck while hidden beneath a pile of children's toys. Since then, he's delivered food for the same Italian restaurant, working eleven hours a day, six days a week. Pay couldn't be simpler: before heading home each night, one of the managers hands him a $20 bill. That's an hourly wage of $1.82--well below the state's $4.85 minimum wage for delivery workers. The rest of his earnings come through tips, which average $60 a shift. There's no overtime or healthcare, no sick days or workers' comp. I inquire about any benefits I might be forgetting. "For Christmas they give me $50," he says. "Sometimes."

I first encounter Perez as he is locking up his bike in front of 500 Park Avenue, a large, glassy building that serves as the headquarters for the hedge fund Caxton Associates, which manages more than $11 billion. Caxton was founded in 1983 by Bruce Kovner, a broad-shouldered 63-year-old with bushy eyebrows and a ruddy face who was among the top-ten highest-paid hedge-fund managers in 2006, with an income of $715 million. Though he has never shied away from public involvement--Kovner is chair of the American Enterprise Institute (AEI)--he does shy away from the press (an assistant told me he never speaks to the media). Perez wraps a chain around his bike's frame and attaches it to a post, then grabs two orders of pasta and heads through the revolving doors. Every lunch hour in Manhattan, the very poor meet the very rich. Today, wealth will be distributed downward, slightly: Perez emerges with a $2 tip. "I usually don't get very good tips from the fancy buildings," he will later tell me.



Four blocks away from the offices of Caxton Associates is 590 Madison Avenue, a forty-three-story building made of steel and granite, boasting a backup generator that can service its corporate tenants for four days without refueling. Behind a desk on the first floor stands security guard Timothy Williams. Williams, who has been an employee of TNM Protection for a year, is a 24-year-old African-American who, like Perez, lives in the Bronx, the borough with the lowest rents in New York City. After graduating from high school in 2002 he joined the Army, partly in the hope that it would help pay for college. He served in Iraq from August 2004 to July 2005, fighting the war that Kovner's AEI so aggressively pushed. AEI "Freedom Scholar" Michael Ledeen hoped the United States would turn the Middle East "into a caldron," and AEI fellow Richard Perle promised that Iraq's oil would pay for the reconstruction. "Maybe it won't work perfectly," admitted AEI vice president Danielle Pletka on the eve of the invasion, "but does that mean we shouldn't try?"



Williams, though, is disillusioned. "I was for going into Afghanistan, but I'm against Iraq," he tells me at the beginning of a noon-to-midnight shift. Wearing a dark suit with an American flag pin affixed to his lapel, he says that his time in Iraq convinced him that the mission wasn't working, which is one of the reasons he cast his primary vote for Obama.



Now back home, he's earning $12.50 an hour, with no union and no healthcare. "This is just a job I'll have for a little bit," he explains. He's able to get by with the help of the $1,300 monthly checks he receives from the GI Bill, which also covers his tuition at Monroe College, a private school in the Bronx geared toward working students, where he's pursuing an associate's degree. He plans to join the NYPD and hopes one day to become a lawyer. In the meantime, he has joined the National Guard--"I see the military as a place where I can actually have a career"--and recently learned he'll be sent back to Iraq next year.

Journey twenty-nine floors up from where Williams stands guard and the growing disparities of wealth again come into stark contrast. Here you will find the headquarters of Paulson & Company, a $32 billion hedge fund, this one run by John Paulson, the highest-paid individual in 2007. By short-selling the subprime market, he earned $3.7 billion last year. (In January, after a year in which 2.2 million households filed for foreclosure, Paulson told the Wall Street Journal, "I've never been involved in a trade with such unlimited upside.")

For Williams, who would likely shepherd Paulson to safety in the event of a building emergency, that upside is hard to discern: he would have to work more than twenty years as a security guard to earn what Paulson made last year in one hour.

On the East Side of Manhattan two very distinct classes of New Yorkers cross paths every day: the working poor (undocumented immigrants and citizens alike), who cook, deliver, secure and protect--for little money and no benefits--and the titans of finance, hedge-fund executives and heads of private-equity firms, who stare at numbers on screens while moving other people's money in and out of stocks and commodities or buying and selling companies, and whose wealth is expanding so quickly they have difficulty figuring out what to do with it.



While workers in the first group struggle to survive on wages that don't get much higher than $10 an hour, the financial elite continue to break income records. The just-released 2007 earnings figures find the top five hedge-fund managers all clearing $1.5 billion. As Alpha magazine notes, "The top 25 on the list earned an average $892 million, up from $532 million in 2006"--in a year when the economy began to stall, the group needing no help ended up nearly doubling its income. The top ten earners alone made a combined $16.1 billion, more than the GDP of Nicaragua.

Some hedge funds took a hit with the downturn: Kovner of Caxton Associates saw his annual earnings drop to a measly $100 million. But even in a down year, an executive like Kovner has plenty of money to spend--and he isn't shy about protecting his interests. Along with being the chair of AEI, he's also a trustee of the conservative Manhattan Institute and a supporter of the conservative New York Sun. Called "George Soros's Right-Wing Twin" by New York magazine, Kovner has a commitment to neoconservatism that is unsurpassed. His fund is reported to manage much of AEI's investments, and he has been a major donor to the Republican National Committee; in recent years he has sent checks to candidates Rudy Giuliani, John McCain and Joe Lieberman. In 2004 he donated $110,000 to Softer Voices, a conservative group supporting Senator Rick Santorum in what would prove to be a failed 2006 re-election bid, and he sent a quarter of a million dollars last year to All Children Matter, a 527 group that advocates school choice. The group was recently fined a record $5.2 million by the Ohio Elections Committee for illegally transferring money to Republican candidates.

Although Kovner donates to candidates and causes, his real desire is to transform the world through sweeping ideas--the sort of ideas that set the stage for the invasion and occupation of Iraq and that now urge confrontation with Iran. Along with its nation-conquering agenda, AEI is also a voice for an unfettered free market that abhors any sacrifice from the wealthiest among us. Articles in AEI's American magazine have titles that seem to be taken from the pages of the Onion, such as The Upside of Income Inequality and Why Do We Underpay Our Best CEOs? One AEI scholar, on the op-ed pages of the Wall Street Journal, bemoans "the left's 'inequality' obsession."

The "upside" of income inequality is best considered from above: for example, with a view from the fifth floor of Kovner's mansion overlooking Central Park, which he purchased in 1999 from the International Center of Photography for $17.5 million. With the infusion of another $10 million in renovations, the structure--which had contained two floors of gallery space, the museum school and offices--was transformed into his private fortress. In the basement is a rare-book vault, where Kovner presumably keeps copies of an edition of the King James Bible that he financed, with a price tag in excess of $20,000 per volume. Other vantage points from which to assess the benefits of growing income inequality in a clear-eyed fashion might include Kovner's 200-acre estate in Millbrook, New York, or his twelve acres of linked oceanfront properties in Carpinteria, California, which he purchased last year for $70 million in what the Wall Street Journal called "among the largest U.S. residential real-estate deals."

For the fortunate like Kovner, being on the winning end of inequality isn't just about flipping through expensive Bibles in a personal book vault or owning a large chunk of the West Coast; it's about the vast political power conferred by wealth, which can be deployed to support institutions pushing policies that, in turn, magnify the wealth divide.

Whole article at: (There is quite a bit more)


http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080630/thompson
 
  • 35
    Replies
  • 1K
    Views
  • 0
    Participant count
    Participants list

hart

V.I.P User
Messages
6,086
Reaction score
8
Tokenz
0.01z
So what is your point? I mean, I understand the discrepancy, but it's always been there........but what do you hope to gain by posting this?
 

Accountable

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,962
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
Those damn American bastards! The gov't of Australia should pay Perez's airfare to Sidney to work so that he won't get raped by American Uber-rich. Or maybe they can just send him a stipend to his hometown in Mexico so he can live comfortably without having to try so hard.
 

Meirionnydd

Active Member
Messages
793
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Those damn American bastards! The gov't of Australia should pay Perez's airfare to Sidney to work so that he won't get raped by American Uber-rich. Or maybe they can just send him a stipend to his hometown in Mexico so he can live comfortably without having to try so hard.

It's pronounced Sydney*

I just thought it would be an interesting article to post here. You don't see anything ethically wrong with someone earning a measly $1.82 an hour?
 

Minor Axis

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,294
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.02z
I just thought it would be an interesting article to post here. You don't see anything ethically wrong with someone earning a measly $1.82 an hour?

Yes, I do.

I realize you have a lot of experience posting, but my recommendation for future posts is to quote just a small juicy tidbit, link the rest, and express an opinion about it. That usually gets the ball rolling. :)
 

Accountable

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,962
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
It's pronounced Sydney*

I just thought it would be an interesting article to post here. You don't see anything ethically wrong with someone earning a measly $1.82 an hour?
Nope, not at all. The dollar amount is irrelevant. The job of business is to stretch the operations dollar as thin as possible while maximizing profits. The job of the employee is to negotiate a fair wage for a fair day's work. Perez traveled many miles to earn that $1.82. Obviously he feels it's worth the effort he's put into it.

Where the wrong comes in is when the employer violates law to stretch his operations dollar. If he were brought to task for that, he'd hire a legal resident to do the job and Perez would be out in the cold earning nothing at all. Perez is actually benefiting from from the employer's unethical practices.
 

Hans

Active Member
Messages
1,734
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
The rich get richer, the poor get poorer. The way of things until revolution, war or revolt changes it.
 

Minor Axis

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,294
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.02z
Nope, not at all. The dollar amount is irrelevant. The job of business is to stretch the operations dollar as thin as possible while maximizing profits. The job of the employee is to negotiate a fair wage for a fair day's work. Perez traveled many miles to earn that $1.82. Obviously he feels it's worth the effort he's put into it.

Where the wrong comes in is when the employer violates law to stretch his operations dollar. If he were brought to task for that, he'd hire a legal resident to do the job and Perez would be out in the cold earning nothing at all. Perez is actually benefiting from from the employer's unethical practices.

It's all a matter of perspective. In other words, don't count on business to give the employee a fair shake out of the goodness of their hearts- most of them don't have any. ;) Perez benefits while others suffer because of a cheap-ass employer. The job of government is to set a framework of laws and regulations where most citizens benefit and are not taken advantage of, because otherwise, it's not going to happen.
 

Tangerine

Slightly Acidic
Messages
3,679
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
The job of government is to set a framework of laws and regulations where most citizens benefit and are not taken advantage of, because otherwise, it's not going to happen.

I'm with you in principal here, with the exception of this statement.

How exactly is it the government's job to ensure that most citizens "benefit'? Benefit from what? From whose labor? In what way?
 

Francis

Sarcasm is me :)
Messages
8,367
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
2.08z
There is so much missing in this story..

Hard to judge but what is being told is being bias towards business gets protection by buying Government protection while lowly payed people get none..
 

Minor Axis

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,294
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.02z
I'm with you in principal here, with the exception of this statement.

How exactly is it the government's job to ensure that most citizens "benefit'? Benefit from what? From whose labor? In what way?

Most citizens benefit when the the playing field of the work place is somewhat leveled so competing groups labor vs management don't have undue advantages over one another. Usually it's management with the advantage, but that advantage can be minimized to some degree through regulations and labor law.

I'll give you an example of the advantage. In At-Will states, the employee works at the will of the employer. Unless you are covered by a collective bargaining agreement, you can be fired at any time without reason as long as you are not discriminated against based on race, gender, or religion. So if you're a faithful, hardworking, effective employee, you could be fired so the boss can hire his nephew in your place. Unions and collective bargaining are one means of moving the playing field towards a more-level proximity. Some employers, most notoriously Walmart don't want their employees to have any say over their livelyhoods, so they close stores instead of allowing unions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tangerine

Slightly Acidic
Messages
3,679
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Most citizens benefit when the the playing field of the work place is somewhat leveled so competing groups labor vs management don't have undue advantages over one another. Usually it's management with the advantage, but that advantage can be minimized to some degree through regulations and labor law.

I'll give you an example of the advantage. In At-Will states, the employee works at the will of the employer. Unless you are covered by a collective bargaining agreement, you can be fired at any time without reason as long as you are not discriminated against based on race, gender, or religion. So if you're a faithful, hardworking, effective employee, you could be fired so the boss can hire his nephew in your place. Unions and collective bargaining are one means of moving the playing field towards a more-level proximity. Some employers, most notoriously Walmart don't want their employees to have any say over their livelyhoods, so they close stores instead of allowing unions.

As well he should be able to hire or fire anyone he wishes, IMO. It's his company. I'm not supportive in any way of telling employers who they must hire, or not hire, or fire or not fire - cases of blatant discrimination excepted. I personally do not believe modern-day unions do anything to "level the payling field," rather I believe they unfairly take money from the pockets of employees without truly offering any benefit. It's pretty commonly accepted that they have led to major financial implosions of some of our biggest manufacturers. I would offer that labor unions have done more to drive jobs out of this country than any piece of legislation ever could.

I do not believe that there is a "right" for me to have a job, nor is there any "obligation" for anyone to provide me with one.

I agree with you completely that the government has the role of preventing others from fucking me over, but unfortunately being "fucked over" is a highly subjective and very fluid thing.

One thing that I bemoan about life in the US in general is that we've become a society of fine print and "gotcha" business practices. This is a relatively new shift in the way businesses operation. When I started into adulthood business transactions were pretty straightforward: If you bought a subscription to something you paid one price for one term, and had the chance to renew if you wanted. Now, it's more common to have auto-renewing subscriptions with additional hidden fees and charges for "convenience." If you bought something on credit, you knew the rate, the term and the payment. It was that simple. Now you deal with sliding rates adjusted at will, fees on top of fees, and payment structures designed to keep in you debt indefinitely. I would love to see our government use it's power to curb those types of practices, but I fear the genie is forever out of the bottle.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dana

In Memoriam - RIP
Messages
42,904
Reaction score
10
Tokenz
0.17z
Sydney... Sidney.... same pronunciations if I'm not mistaken. I've never heard anyone pronounce the Y in Sydney. Or maybe you mean't that it was spelled Sydney.
 

Minor Axis

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,294
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.02z
As well he should be able to hire or fire anyone he wishes, IMO. It's his company. I'm not supportive in any way of telling employers who they must hire, or not hire, or fire or not fire - cases of blatant discrimination excepted. I personally do not believe modern-day unions do anything to "level the payling field," rather I believe they unfairly take money from the pockets of employees without truly offering any benefit. It's pretty commonly accepted that they have led to major financial implosions of some of our biggest manufacturers. I would offer that labor unions have done more to drive jobs out of this country than any piece of legislation ever could.

Without a doubt you belong in management.
 

Tangerine

Slightly Acidic
Messages
3,679
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Without a doubt you belong in management.

And I have been for about 20 years. What's your point? For some very highly rated companies by their own employees, by the way. It's quite easy to treat employees well and empower and support them without labor unions. My company was named one of the Top 5 best places to work in Atlanta a few years ago in an employee-voted poll conducted by Atlanta Business Journal. We're the only restaurant or service-industry company to ever make that list.
 

Minor Axis

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,294
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.02z
And I have been for about 20 years. What's your point? For some very highly rated companies by their own employees, by the way. It's quite easy to treat employees well and empower and support them without labor unions. My company was named one of the Top 5 best places to work in Atlanta a few years ago in an employee-voted poll conducted by Atlanta Business Journal. We're the only restaurant or service-industry company to ever make that list.

I know a manager when I hear one talk. :)

If you work for a company that treats your employees well, that is outstanding. Unfortunately for every one like that there are bunches that don't.

And push comes to shove, when the business environment turns South and the company starts making decisions that adversely effect their work force while shielding their managers and company leadership. Usually there is no such thing as equal sacrifice when management thinks they are superior and deserve to be shielded. Tough shit labor, that is just your lot in life. A very good example of this is People Express. It was oh so wonderful when it started, but became a employees nightmare. When the work environment turns to shit, unrepresented employees have no say and the only power they have is to quit. Fine by you, I'm sure. It is all a matter of perspective.
 

Accountable

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,962
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
I know a manager when I hear one talk. :)

If you work for a company that treats your employees well, that is outstanding. Unfortunately for every one like that there are bunches that don't.

And push comes to shove, when the business environment turns South and the company starts making decisions that adversely effect their work force while shielding their managers and company leadership. Usually there is no such thing as equal sacrifice when management thinks they are superior and deserve to be shielded. Tough shit labor, that is just your lot in life. A very good example of this is People Express. It was oh so wonderful when it started, but became a employees nightmare. When the work environment turns to shit, unrepresented employees have no say and the only power they have is to quit. Fine by you, I'm sure. It is all a matter of perspective.
So how do you feel about co-ops like the one Edgray brought up a few weeks ago? You think they should unionize as well?
 

Minor Axis

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,294
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.02z
So how do you feel about co-ops like the one Edgray brought up a few weeks ago? You think they should unionize as well?

I don't know anything about the example you are mentioning. Unions arise when there is need, not usually when employees are happy.
 

Accountable

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,962
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
I don't know anything about the example you are mentioning. Unions arise when there is need, not usually when employees are happy.
Crap I can't remember the name & can't find it in a search. I'm sure Ed'll read this soon & will chime in. When you said the employees had no choice but to quit, it seemed to imply they should've had a union even though things were going well. Actually I agree with you that unions arise as needed. Those employees had the choice of pulling together rather than allowing the company to lay people off. What it would take is someone whose job is secure risking his job to support those in a more precarious position.
 
78,875Threads
2,185,391Messages
4,959Members
Back
Top