Skip to main content

The answers are varied.

James G. Galbraith offers a provocative answer in his review of Thomas Piketty's book, Capital in the Twenty-First Century:

What is “capital”? To Karl Marx, it was a social, political, and legal category—the means of control of the means of production by the dominant class. Capital could be money, it could be machines; it could be fixed and it could be variable. But the essence of capital was neither physical nor financial. It was the power that capital gave to capitalists, namely the authority to make decisions and to extract surplus from the worker.
Extracting surplus from the worker.

Today's New York Times yields a number of different suggestions, from Robert J. Shiller who examines inequality through the prism of taxation:

Paying taxes is rarely pleasant, but as April 15 approaches it’s worth remembering that our tax system is a progressive one and serves a little-noticed but crucial purpose: It mitigates some of the worst consequences of income inequality.

.... But it’s also clear that while income inequality would be much worse without our current tax system, what we have isn’t nearly enough. It’s time — past time, actually — to tweak the system so that it can respond effectively if income inequality becomes more extreme.

Taxation mitigates the worst consequences of income inequality.

Peter Eavis, NYTimes business columnist, points to corporate CEO compensation:

Corporate America’s well-oiled compensation machine is running like a dream.

Browse the proxy statements of the nation’s largest corporations and you’ll find the instruction manuals for this apparatus explaining how to finely calibrate the pay of top executives with company performance.

.... But putting aside whether those particular metrics for aligning pay with performance make sense ... , the elegant machine itself would seem to have a dark side. Some say, in fact, that it is the main engine of inequality in America today.

CEO supercompensation drives the engine of inequality.

But then, there's the issue of gender. Phyllis Korkki, another NYTimes business columnist, takes a look at what she calls "brokering" and how it divides along gender lines:

A growing body of research has pointed to the importance of informal leaders known to researchers as “brokers,” who have the gift of connecting employees in productive new ways.

New research by Raina A. Brands of the London Business School and Martin Kilduff of University College London has uncovered a bias surrounding brokerage roles within organizations that gives advantages to male brokers and their teams.

.... “To the extent that women were perceived to be brokers, they incurred reputational penalties,” Professor Brands says. “They were seen as more competent, but less warm.” Other research, she says, has shown that men who take on brokerage roles tend to receive benefits in the form of compensation and promotions, whereas female brokers’ careers are negatively affected.

.... In a paper describing their research, she and Professor Kilduff noted that men are traditionally defined by words like aggressive, forceful, independent and decisive. Women, on the other hand, are stereotypically expected to be kind, helpful, sympathetic and concerned about others.

Aggressive, forceful, independent and decisive women are punished financially and politically.

On the other hand, kind, helpful, sympathetic and concerned about others women don't get no respect.

One of my fav NYTimes business columnists, Gretchen Morgenstern, has, possibly, an ironically titled column, Pay for Performance? It Depends on the Measuring Stick, which talks only of male CEOs and opines:

Year after year, as executive pay continues its inexorable climb, it’s amusing to watch corporate directors try to justify the piles of shareholder money they throw at the hired help. Check out any proxy filing for these arguments, which usually center on how closely and carefully the executives’ incentive compensation is tied to the performance of company operations.

But pay for performance is only as good as the metrics used to determine it. And as a recent study shows, some metrics — including the most popular — are downright ineffective at motivating executives to create shareholder value.

Frankly, the measuring stick appears to be a penis, for whatever that's worth.

And, to cap it, I've got to quote the plaintive note from Sofia Elena de la Garza for pointing out that the evil engineers of sexism and inequality start attacking their victims at an early age:

Dear Diary:

Tell me what you think it’s like to be a girl in New York City. To walk down the street and feel the construction workers sexing us up. Looking at our skirts and wondering what color panties we have on.

Sometimes they ask. Did you know that? Sometimes they get in our faces and ask about the thong they can see through our leggings.

Tell me why you would think we like it. When a man gropes us on the subway, do you expect us to thank him?

And don’t say that we should do something about, it because, yeah, we should. But we’re 17-year-old girls in New York City. So why not tell him to stop instead of telling us what we should have done?

Being a girl in New York City is like being the sick animal in a pack that gets picked on for parts. ...Because we are more than what our clothes may say we are. We are deserving of respect. And we will continue to flip off the truck drivers and construction workers and early-morning pervs until they realize that.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Thanks for this though provoking post. (0+ / 0-)

    "Seriously, Folks, WTH?" - ("What the Heck? "h/t Joan McCarter, Seriously, Florida. WTF?)

    by HoundDog on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 01:22:47 PM PDT

  •  I must be old now (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Metric Only

    I don't buy that the problem with the current American economy is the excessive pay and privilege of working-class men.  I realize that's how pay equity will be achieved though, by lowering their wages.  It's how current strides toward pay equity are happening, and the only means our system makes conceivable.  The 1% won't be giving up shit, and nobody with any pull would ever think they would or should, much less try to make it happen.  Better just to club and gas those objecting to the inequalities of class, or deny the existence of those inequalities entirely.

    Pay no attention to the upward redistribution of wealth!

    by ActivistGuy on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 01:37:22 PM PDT

  •  I liked both the diaries, but I kind of wish you'd (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Karen Hedwig Backman

    written them up separately. {half-snark} Either of the two concepts is well worth its own fuller exposition, even though they do, admittedly, need to be tied together for a full analysis. As it was, I wanted a whole lot more paragraphs before you brought it to a conclusion. Could you go back and make it longer? Maybe tomorrow? I'll T&R again, I promise.

    At least half the future I've been expecting hasn't gotten here yet. Sigh.... (Yes, there's gender bias in my name; no, I wasn't thinking about it when I signed up. My apologies.)

    by serendipityisabitch on Sat Apr 12, 2014 at 04:47:16 PM PDT

    •  There are three different issues here. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Karen Hedwig Backman

      1) The 1% is overpaid relative to the rest of the country.

      2) Men are overpaid relative to women.

      3) Some men take advantage of entrenched social norms and prejudices to whistle and make catcalls at pretty women.

      It is very, very tempting to say that three problems are related, but I don't think the relationship is that significant.

    •  I wanted to state the problem (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      serendipityisabitch

      As seen by a variety of people. Which resulted in a number of different reasons stated for the problem. Which makes me think that there is not a single solution to the problem of economic inequality and it must be attacked from a number of different directions.

      •  I kind of figured. But it came out a bit (0+ / 0-)

        disconnected, overall.

        And of course, there are other factors that key in as strongly as the types of privilege you've mentioned. I think, though, that your having picked privilege as the common factor might speak as much to our expectations of economic drivers as to any actual economic drivers.

        At least half the future I've been expecting hasn't gotten here yet. Sigh.... (Yes, there's gender bias in my name; no, I wasn't thinking about it when I signed up. My apologies.)

        by serendipityisabitch on Sun Apr 13, 2014 at 12:07:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site