Rich and Poor

Workers' Daily Internet Edition: Article Index :

Rich and Poor

Thousands Demonstrate against Poverty in Madrid

Thousands of Lecturers Waiting for Pay Rises

The following excerpts from a recent article in the Wall Street Journal show the relentless increase in the gap between rich and poor in the United States, which is intensifying social conditions for an alternative. The most compelling statistic reveals that 50 per cent of those who filed an income tax return in 2005 earned only 12.8 per cent of the total declared US income for that year. This remarkable statistic combines with the knowledge that claims by governments on national revenue are more and more used for war and repression and to pay the rich in various ways while social programmes are starved of investment funds. This economic exposure compels people to meet the call of history and organise for the alternative, which puts them at the centre stage of social development.

            To stem this socially debilitating trend of a growing gap between rich and poor, the working class must organise and fight to restrict monopoly right and win the political battle to set the direction of the economy.

Income-Inequality Gap Widens; Boom in Financial Markets Parallels Rise in Share for Wealthiest Americans
Greg Ip, Wall Street Journal, October 12, 2007

            The richest Americans' share of national income has hit a post-war record, surpassing the highs reached in the 1990s bull market, and underlining the divergence of economic fortunes blamed for fuelling anxiety among American workers.

            The wealthiest 1% of Americans earned 21.2% of all income in 2005, according to new data from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). That is up sharply from 19% in 2004, and surpasses the previous high of 20.8% set in 2000, at the peak of the previous bull market in stocks.

            The IRS data, based on a large sample of tax returns, are for "adjusted gross income," which is income after some deductions, such as for alimony and contributions to individual retirement accounts.

            The IRS data don't identify the source of increased income for the affluent, but the boom on Wall Street has likely played a part, just as the last stock boom fuelled the late-1990s surge. Until this summer, soaring stock prices and buoyant credit markets had produced spectacular payouts for private-equity and hedge fund managers, and investment bankers.

            One study by University of Chicago academics Steven Kaplan and Joshua Rauh concludes that in 2004 there were more than twice as many such Wall Street professionals in the top 0.5% of all earners as there are executives from non-financial companies.

            Mr. Rauh said "it's hard to escape the notion" that the rising share of income going to the very richest is, in part, "a Wall Street, financial industry-based story." The study shows that the highest-earning hedge-fund manager earned double in 2005 what the top earner made in 2003, and top 25 hedge-fund managers earned more in 2004 than did the chief executives of all the companies in the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index, combined. It also shows profits per equity partner at the top 100 law firms doubling between 1994 and 2004, to over $1 million in 2004 dollars.

            The data highlight the political challenge facing Mr. Bush and the Republican contenders for president. They have sought to play up the strength of the economy since 2003 and low unemployment, and the role of Mr. Bush's tax cuts in both. But many Americans think the economy is in or near a recession. The IRS data show that the median tax filer's income – half earn less than the median, half earn more – fell 2% between 2000 and 2005 when adjusted for inflation, to $30,881.

 

Thousands of Spaniards took to the streets of the capital Madrid on Sunday, October 21, to join a march called by the Spanish Anti-Poverty Alliance to mark the United Nations International Day for the Eradication of Poverty.

            The demonstration, with the theme of "Rebel against poverty: more action, less words", was to "remind people that there are still millions of people living in extreme poverty", and calls for politicians "to move from promises and timid steps forward to more radical action," said Pilar Orenes, vice-president of the Alliance, which brings together 1,000 non-governmental organisations.

            Orenes urged the cancellation of foreign debt and the improvement of official assistance to development in both quality and quantity so as to ensure trade relations between rich and poor nations are not unfairly skewed towards the rich.

            "We are calling for coherent and committed measures by our government: raising aid investment to 0.7 percent of the Gross Domestic Product as soon as possible, and dedicating it exclusively to projects that fight poverty and inequality," the Alliance's manifesto read.

(Source: Xinhua):p>

Thousands of university staff are missing out on salary rises and changed career structures at some universities. The employers admit that at least 14% have not implemented the 2004 agreement of the national pay framework in the post-1992 university sector, created by the 1992 Further and Higher Education Act. This is 15 months after the supposed deadline.

            Figures from the Universities and Colleges Employers Association show that across Britain a further 10 per cent have not provided information to show the framework has been put in place. But the University and College Union said it could verify that only around half of the new universities in England and Wales have implemented the reforms. Assistant UCU general secretaries Rachel Curley and Michael MacNeil said in a circular: "The ongoing difficulties in post-92 institutions should not be underestimated."

            A UCEA spokesman said: "In comparison to similar pay modernisation agreements in local government and the NHS, this is a good rate of implementation." The UCEA is turning the situation on its head when criticising the UCU’s national offices for taking a long time to ratify agreements reached by institutions with local unions. The facts are that quite often agreements are reached, and then the employers say, fine, but we do not have the funds to implement the agreements. For example, at four Welsh universities, the employers complained of a shortfall in funding from the Welsh Assembly compared with funding for English universities. Malcolm keight , UCU national head of higher education, criticised the Welsh universities for choosing not to use supplementary income from the Welsh funding council to pay for fully backdating the agreement.

            The UCU circular said negotiations had broken down over issues such as employers' attempts to link grade progression or performance-related "contribution" pay to specific objectives and to move programme management duties from principal lecturers to lecturers. Most recently, universities have argued that new anti-age discrimination regulations forbid the adoption of provisions governing the length of pay scales and staff progression up the scales.

            The union circular underlined the importance of speedy ratification, saying: "The further travelled from August 1, 2006 (the agreed implementation date), the harder it is likely to become to secure a satisfactory and negotiated approach to implementation."

            Malcolm Keight said: "It is now 15 months after the implementation date for English institutions, and why employers haven't been able to get their act together is a mystery to us. There's a large backlog due to their inefficiency."

            This situation underlines the necessity for the government to fund higher education, as well as all educational and health programmes, to the level of the requirements that society and the professionals who work in these institutions demand. Increasing investment and unlinking it from “reforms” which favour private capital directly or indirectly is the demand of the times.

(factual source: THES)