Ho trovato un articolo del 25 gennaio 2011 su Market Watch, sito che fa parte del gruppo Murdoch, vicino al Wall Street Journal, scritto da Paul B. Farrell, in passato si occupava di investment banking per Morgan Stanley, vice presidente esecutivo del Financial News Network e di Mercury Entertainment Corp, oggi si occupa di economia comportamentale.
L'articolo lo trovate qui
www.marketwatch.com/story/the-super-rich-at-davos-40-years-of-disaster-20...
è in inglese, quindi se non riuscite a leggerlo lo dovrete tradurre con Google, io vi metto degli estratti, sempre in inglese.
SAN LUIS OBISPO, Calif. (MarketWatch) — Davos. Swiss Alps. Annual meeting of the notorious World Economic Forum. Invitation-only club for the Super Rich and friends since 1971. Feel-good mantra: “Committed to improving the state of the world.”
But they’re failing. In 40 years the Haves got richer. Have-nots got shafted. Something’s terribly wrong. When it comes to global economics, Davos is a disaster.
Why? Inside Davos is a secret society, a Conspiracy of the Super Rich, more than half the 2,500 attending the event. They’ve got trillions.
Reagan insider warns: Inequality gap as bad as before 1929 Crash
Why is the Davos Conspiracy of the Super Rich (with its high-toned mission to “collaborate in a proactive, integrated and systematic manner to address global challenges”) actually creating a global economy that’s deteriorating at high speed, where war, disease, population and poverty are accelerating at alarming rates, where the planet’s commodity-resources are rapidly disappearing?
Yes, Davos does have a thick-slick report about 28 global risks (warning: it only takes three happening simultaneously to trigger a global shutdown). But the real motives of the Super Rich are personal wealth, political power, glory. They care little for the masses.
The facts on economic progress since Davos launched in 1971 are undisputed: In the new American Interest Journal, Francis Fukuyama, author of “The End of History” and one of the leading minds behind President Reagan’s foreign policy wrote: “It is well established that income inequality has increased substantially in the United States over the past three decades, and that gains from the prolonged period of economic growth that ended in 2007–08 have gone disproportionately to the upper end of the richest layer of society.”
Yes, Super Rich billionaires grabbed the bulk of economic prosperity since Davos was launched. Fukuyama says “a study by Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez shows that between 1978 and 2007, the share of U.S. income accruing to the top one percent of American families jumped from 9% to 23.5 % of the total. These data point clearly to the stagnation of working-class incomes in the United States: Real incomes for male workers peaked sometime back in the 1970s and have not recovered since.”
The last time the inequality gap was this huge was just before the 1929 Crash and the Great Depression.
Trickle-up capitalism: Rich get richer, the masses get shafted
What about the Have-nots? The 99% in our working economy? Capitalism is shafting them: 40 years of economic gains trickling up. The top 1% got richer. Real incomes for the Have-nots, the bottom 99%, have declined.
Worse, Fukuyama warns of a toxic connection between the political and economic goals of the Super Rich: “The growing disparity in outcomes has coincided with a period of conservative hegemony in American politics. Conservative ideas clearly had to do with the rise in inequality. The economic model favored by Ronald Reagan was intended to open the doors to greater competition and entrepreneurship.”
But Reaganomics failed. While “pro-market advocates have repeatedly told us that growth nearly always trickles down over time to all or nearly all class cohorts … as the years went by, those outsized gains at the top of the income distribution pyramid failed to trickle down in any substantial way.”
Pimco’s CEO Mohamed El-Erian warns of revolutions dead ahead
The lead-in of Chrystia Freeland’s brilliant essay, “The Rise of the New Global Elite” grabs you, evokes more images of a vast conspiracy taking over the world: “F. Scott Fitzgerald was right when he declared the rich different from you and me. But today’s super-rich are also different from yesterday’s: more hard-working and meritocratic, but less connected to the nations that granted them opportunity — and the countrymen they are leaving ever further behind.”
There’s no secret organization commanded by a diabolical Blofeld clone plotting to disperse Angels of Death armed with biological WMDs to destroy the world.
Sure, the Super Rich are plotting. But they’re doing it right out in the open. To control everything. To concentrate more money, more power for the top 1%. They have all the money and lobbyists necessary to buy enough politicians to make all their corrupt, unethical behavior appear legal and constitutional.
The clincher comes near the end of Freeland’s essay when she focuses on Pimco CEO Mohamed El-Erian, author of a powerful best seller, “When Markets Collide,” a guy who manages over a trillion of investments worldwide.
Freeland summarizes: “The real threat facing the super-elite, at home and abroad, isn’t modestly higher taxes, but rather the possibility that inchoate public rage could cohere into a more concrete populist agenda — that, for instance, middle-class Americans could conclude that the world economy isn’t working for them and decide that protectionism or truly punitive taxation is preferable.”
Or a revolution.
Revolutions work because diplomacy, peaceful negotiations don’t
El-Erian is a “model member of the super-elite. But he is also a man whose father grew up in rural Egypt, and he has studied nations where the gaps between the rich and the poor have had violent resolutions.” Sudden, violent revolutions.
El-Erian is clear: “For successful people to say the challenges faced by the lower end of the income distribution aren’t relevant to them is shortsighted … this will lead to increasingly inward-looking social and political conditions … we risk ending up with very insular policies that will not do well in a global world.” We become even more vulnerable to external enemies.
Freeland’s summary: “The lesson of history is that, in the long run, super-elites have two ways to survive: by suppressing dissent or by sharing their wealth.”
Capitalism is in a death spiral, obvious from the recent resurgence of self-destructive Reaganomics in America. It will not survive. History tells us suppressing dissent will eventually fail. And sharing the wealth rarely comes through diplomacy and peaceful negotiations, only after violent costly revolutions that overthrow existing “systems,” like the Davos Conspiracy of the Super Rich.
Secondo me è molto interessante, descrive bene quello che succede a livello politico negli USA, e io non lo vedo così diverso da quello che succede qui in Italia.