Social tensions growing in U.S. between rich, poor

Local residents enjoy their meals during the annual Safeway Feast of Sharing November 23, 2011, at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center in Washington, DC. / Getty Images

WASHINGTON - Tensions between the rich and poor in the U.S. are increasing and at their most intense level in nearly a quarter-century, a new survey shows. Americans now see more social conflict over wealth inequality than over the hot-button topics of immigration, race relations and age.

The survey released Wednesday by the Pew Research Center highlights U.S. perceptions of the economic divide, an issue that has moved to the forefront in the 2012 presidential campaign amid stubbornly high unemployment, increasing poverty and protests by the Occupy movement.

The findings come as voters in New Hampshire's primary Tuesday night made clear that the economy was the issue that mattered most to them. In the end, they chose Mitt Romney by a large margin, even as Republican rivals already gearing up for more competitive contests in South Carolina and elsewhere had stepped up populist attacks on him as a heartless corporate raider who slashed jobs.

President Barack Obama has been promoting a campaign message of middle-class opportunity, calling for higher taxes on the very rich and successfully pushing a two-month extension of a payroll tax cut.

The Pew survey shows that younger adults, Democrats and African-Americans remained the most likely as in previous years to cite the existence of strong disagreements between rich and poor. But in the last two years, three important swing groups — whites, middle-income Americans and political independents — registered some of the biggest increases in those who now also hold this view.

As a result, majorities of each political party and ideology all agree that serious disputes exist between Americans at the top and bottom of the economic ladder.

Still, while overall U.S. awareness of class conflict has grown significantly in recent years, public attitudes toward wealthy Americans remain largely unchanged.

For instance, about 46 percent of Americans hold a disapproving view that rich people are wealthy because they were fortunate enough to be born into money or have the right connections. But almost as many people — 43 percent — say wealthy people are rich "mainly because of their own hard work, ambition or education."

That suggests some people who see more conflict between the classes may believe that anger toward the rich is misdirected.

Homeless children: The hard times generation
American angst and the plight of the 99%
Census data: Half of U.S. poor or low income

A recent Gallup survey also found that fewer than half of Americans said reducing the gap between rich and poor is "extremely" or "very important," compared with more than 8 in 10 who said policies to build economic growth should be a high priority for government.

"These changes in attitudes over a relatively short period of time may reflect the income and wealth inequality message conveyed by Occupy Wall Street protesters across the country in late 2011 that led to a spike in media attention," said Pew survey analyst Richard Morin. "But the changes also may reflect a growing public awareness of underlying shifts in the distribution of wealth in American society."

In recent weeks, a slew of recent census data have illustrated a widening divide, including the share of overall U.S. wealth held by the top 10 percent of the population that increased from 49 percent in 2005 to 56 percent in 2009. A separate census measure also found that a record number of Americans — nearly 1 in 2 — have fallen into poverty or make earnings that typically classify them as low income.

"As the presidential campaign begins in earnest, it is reasonable to expect that these issues will be a part of the political dialogue," Morin said.

About 3 in 10 Americans polled said there are "very strong" conflicts between the rich and poor, according to the independent research group. That is double the share who believed so in July 2009 and the largest proportion reporting that view in the 24 years the question has been asked in surveys.

In all, about 66 percent of those polled now say there are "very strong" or "strong" conflicts between the top and bottom income groups.

In contrast, a slightly smaller share of Americans — 62 percent — said there were "very strong" or "strong" conflicts between immigrants and native-born Americans. Even smaller shares of people saw such levels of conflict between blacks and whites (38 percent) and between young and old (34 percent).

That is a change from 2009, when immigration topped the survey list as causing the strongest levels of social conflict. At that time, about 55 percent reported "very strong" or "strong" conflict between immigrants and native-born Americans, compared to 47 percent who saw such conflict between the rich and poor.

[occupy_cbs]

skyk801: "You do NOT need a degree to understand the LIES we were ALL told about Supply Side Economics, the Rich and CEO's drafted them so working people would buy into them."



Yes, our income inequality has dramatically risen over the past 30 years, ever since the most pernicious fiscal doctrine in history -- supply-side economic insanity -- was foisted upon the American people.

Without a doubt, to a large extent our current budgetary problems stem from the widespread adoption of an idea by Republicans in the 1970s called "starve the beast." The republicans wrongly said, that the best, perhaps only way of reducing government spending is by reducing taxes, and since 1980, the top marginal rate has been cut in half, and spending has gone through the roof, causing extreme budget deficits, and the ever-widening income inequality.



Tax Cuts And 'Starving The Beast'
by Bruce Bartlett

The most pernicious fiscal doctrine in history

http://www.forbes.com/2010/05/06/tax-cuts-republicans-starve-the-beast-columnists-bruce-bartlett.html

[occupy_cbs]

pbarber12: "May I suggest you spend one day a week at your local food kitchen for the poor? It will definitely be an eye opener. While you are there, ask about ten people what happened. Then, come back and let us know what you found out. Mr. Franklin Roosevelt knew, because his wife did it many times. It was his wife that indirectly drove social change that we still have today: No more poor houses, job works, social security, etc. Believe me, it is something everyone should do at least once in their life time."




Thank you.......this is exactly what every one of the republican "holier than thou" posters should do......just walk a couple of miles in the shoes from those that have lost everything through no fault of their own.

[occupy_cbs]

hdc77494: "The tension is increasing because one political party"



Typical extremely biased fox/rush parrot, spewing the usual far-right propaganda and republican talking points, unable to see the growing income inequality more indicative of third world countries, is completely destroying the 'American Dream' and the middle class.

[hdc77494]

The "tension" is increasing because one political party, and a failed president, have chosen to agitate class warfare for their own ends. To help, they've redefined poverty so they can claim more poor.people, and their policies have killed millions of jobs in very short order. The government can only spend money they extract from someone else's pocket, and the only way they cancreste jobs is by reducing government regulation. Since when do the middle class or pooractually create jobs? No venture capital, no Apple, Microsoft, Cisco, etc. No investment banks, no expansion capital for mid-sized companies, and no one to buy and save bankruptcompanies. Lastly without sharks and dhortsellers, there's no one to keep prices in line and prevent small investors from overlaying for securities. Who's teaching our kids economics? Union activist teachers clueless about finance. Wake up people, thus piece was written to prop up the dems for the 2012 elections.

[jollyjohnson]

The top 5% of households now own more than 70 percent of the privately held financial wealth. The wealth gap is becoming larger and larger, year by year. This situation with so few people controlling so much of the wealth is not health for our country and it is helping to eliminate our middle class. An inherent characteristic of our economic system is that it hyper concentrates the wealth into a very small top segment of our society. In addition, the tax policy of the government over the last 30 or so years has played a large part in increasing this concentration of wealth by lowering the tax rates on the very most wealthy Americans. Supply-side economics which came into vogue in the eighties and was referred to as trickle-down economics and voodoo economics has cut the top federal income tax rates in half since 1980. It has been on of main reasons the U. S. now has some of the greatest income inequality and wealth inequality in the entire developed world. Supply-side/trickle down/voodoo economics does not work except for the wealthy. Romney's plan, if he gets to be President is to give us even more trickle-down, voodoo economics with more tax cuts for the wealth and the corporations even though the 1% and the corporation already hold trillions of dollars of the nation wealth.

[Zann-Zel]

If anyone needs to laugh - click here and go to the bottom of the page and watch the video! This guy is Hilarious! LOL! : )

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/12/stewart-romney-most-successful-candidate-who-no-one-likes/

[shortyfudpuc]

To "whom it may concern"
It was a choice to have children and I did. I had no insurance so I paid for them for 5 years in payments. I do not overeat. I worked an average of 13.5 hours a day for 35 years. I worked weekends and holidays and missed kids birthdays making a living and putting myself through college. There was no free handout because I not eligible for a Pell Grant, a punishment for havinga job.

It was a choice that I worked through the Reagan years for less money just to finish college, to support my family and PAY BILLS THAT JUST KEPT GOING UP. Jobs were scarce in my area and employers knew it. I worked in a seriously dangerous steel fabrication shop. Why? No other jobs to be had and I did not want to move my family and leave our extended family. I was frequently exposed to red lead paint mist, MEK paint thinner and welding smoke without proper protection. The company knew they could get by with those infractions because OSHA inspection were announces 2 weeks in advance. Inspections were a joke as they were shown around and made a choice on what they wanted to see. I always wanted to ask Reagan to come work with us for a while and then see what he thought about upping the retirement age. If he did we would all be retiring at 50.

I made a choice to contribute to a retirement plan while working in the fabrication shop. Eight years later two men without necks came into the shop general meeting and said"Da pension fund is broke. Youse need to make bigger contributions or youse will loose all yous money". I opted out and put my money in a 401k. It was a choice.

After 8 1/2 years of working days and going to college at night I finished. I went to work in the architectural field where I added more money to my 401k. I am now close to retirement and my health is bad. The early years are telling on me. And where is my 401k retirement? Why most of it went away in the last few years. Bad investments I was told. Real estate went south. Did I have choice in what the 401k invested in? To a limited extent and I managed what I could. The rest was handled by money managers. So where are the money managers ? Are they losing sleep over the amount of money they lost for the average American middle class Joe? I am not an overly religious man, but
I do seem to remember something about Jesus throwing the money changers out of the temples.Maybe I need to reread that again and make sure I understood the real meaning. Hmmm.

So do you/we think tensions are growing between the upper 1% and the other 99%? I feel they are because of the manipulation of the economy. Certain group grew even richer, lobbied to get laws passed that favored them, helped to elect officials and politicians (from both sides of the fence)that will protect their interests. The SEC let corporations make detrimental deals that would endanger our economy to the extent we almost collapsed. Did I choose to let this happen? I think not. I do not have enough money to manipulate the economy. So I guess the question is who does? Therein lays the answer to the question of Are social tensions growing in the U.S.? People are getting tired of being spoon fed rhetoric about how they never plan or use their money wisely. Some of us worked hard to get where we are, followed all the rules and Common Sense guidelines.

Then through legal wrangling and sleazy ethics certain business people (must be politically correct)were able to make huge profits off of mismanaged money. Our money, the working class people's money they thought was going to help them retire. Do I want to tax anyone who makes over $250,000 a year?
Not hardly. Do I want to tax someone who has a personal wealth of over $100,000,000? Corporations who have moved their business overseas to keep from paying American corporate taxes? Corporation who have relocated to eliminate the burden of complying with U.S. regulations for employee safety
and wellbeing? Yes. So in the end I guess I might be thinking I am one of the people who is feeling the growing tension.

[ThomasSense]

The book "All the Devils Are Here, the hidden history of the financial crisis" tells how lobbyists over many presidencies had laws changed that made investment banks tons of money but exposed the nation to an inherited mess.

[Lindag10]

My sister lost her shirt investing her retirement money in the stock market. She sold the house she inherited from our mother during the housing boom in Southern California and relocated. After purchasing a house for cash, she put the rest in the hands of a reputable investment manager (supposedly someone who would "grow" her wealth). When the market tanked, she lost more than half of her original investment and it has never recovered. She's a mail carrier and isn't covered by Social Security so this money was to help fund her retirement. Meanwhile the Republicans are doing everything in their power to get rid of Social Security and "privatize" people's retirement funds. The average person (like myself and my sister) isn't going to be able to create an adequate retirement fund on their own without professional help, so they NEED a reliable pension fund which was what Social Security was orginally designed to be to put money away for retirement.

[occupy_cbs]

snewsom2997: "Most people get rich by starting a small business, and working 80+ hours a week."



Sorry, but the vast majority of the wealthiest Americans inherited their wealth and gold spoons stuck up their butts!

Your republican talking points are getting very old, especially as economic mobility has declined drastically over the past 30 years!

[occupy_cbs]

We do not have an equal opportunity to succeed, and as economic mobility continues to decline in America, we see those opportunities being shaped by direct and indirect inheritance more than anything else!

[snewsom2997]

One only has to look on the SBA.gov website to see how the government defines small business. If you are smart enough and have decent parents motivating you to succeed you will, and it takes both of those, you can go as far in this country as your talents and abilities take you, some people just won't go very far, because their talents and abilities are uncompetitive, unneeded, or they just are not very good at what they have chosen to do compared to others.

[karek40]

Does anyone think our tax system is not broke. The only ones who pay a definitive amount receive their income as a salary and get a W-2 form. The very wealthy are able to avoid taxes under our current tax structure and if you raise their rates will continue to pay less because their (corporate) expenses are deductions. We need to completely do away with our current income tax. Perhaps Cain's 9-9-9 was a good starting point. No one else is proposing a solution the dems are just increasing social tensions which helps no one.

[occupy_cbs]

snewsom2997: "Of course taxes are at historical lows half of America doesn't pay any.."



NO, federal revenue is at historical lows of a mere 14% of GDP, because of 10-years of the bush tax cuts and the 'starve the beast' ideology -- the most pernicious fiscal doctrine in history.

Just because many Americans don't pay INCOME TAX, they certainly pay the greatest share of PAYROLL TAXES which are capped at $105,000 in income.

Besides, many of those that don't pay any income tax are retirees and the poor that cannot afford it, so I imagine your ideology is to tax the hell out of those Americans struggling to get by, since you already know how to get blood out of a turnip! Disgusting!

[snewsom2997]

The people get to choose how much the government gets, the people have chosen 14%, the government either works within that, or we go bankrupt. I have no problem unlocking the cap, i have no problem getting rid of subsidies and deductions, but get rid o them all, or don't get rid of any. No my idea is to tax every one the same, 5%-10%-15% pick one and every citizen pays it. No I would not tax capital gains, but I would tax income, everything beyond what you paid into SSI is income, so you wouldn't pay tax on all, and it isn't capital gains, because the money isn't invested, it is just spent.