Wealth disparity prompts civil unrest

A lot of Americans are angry with our federal government, and especially President Obama. They are working hard to make him a one-term president. But they should be angry at the people who have taken government away from them -- and that's the wealthy corporations and citizens with deep pockets for lobbyists and political campaigns, which control much legislation and propaganda.

We have to have government. Without government, we would be Somalia. So rather than say, "We should eliminate government," why not say, "We should take the government back from the fat cats who are shutting us out." Fight the real enemy. Money talks, and more and more the moneyed voices seem to drown out those of the middle class. The wealthy money buys plenty of tax cuts, subsidies and giveaways and service cuts for everyone else.

This is not what America is about. America is about middle-class opportunities and cohesion. Yet, much of the middle class continues to support tax cuts for the wealthy and the Republicans who fight to implement them. They vote against their own interests. They vote to increase the unequal distribution of wealth. They vote to put more money in the hands of those who will buy the government away from them.

This isn't wealth envy. This is about growing income and wealth disparity among Americans. It is an underrated problem that can undermine a civil society and create chaos.

Most Americans have a high tolerance for income inequality because it is a consensus that we all can become wealthy if we work hard and create something very marketable. Our differences of opinion about inequality degenerates into partisan debates over whether poor people deserve help and sympathy or should pull themselves by their bootstraps.

But there is evidence that living in a society with wide wealth disparities can lead to civil unrest and reverberate on multiple levels.

I believe in the free market and a person making an income from whatever is produced in the market. But I also believe that the person should be responsible to that society in which the wealth was produced.

More