美国政策研究所最新发布的一份研究报告表明，全美最富有２０人坐拥的资产比美国一半人口的财富总和还要多，显示出美国社会财富分配差距悬殊。
英国《每日邮报》５日援引报告内容报道，这２０人中的“首富”是美国微软公司创始人比尔·盖茨。此外，“股神”沃伦·巴菲特、社交网站“脸书”创始人兼首席执行官马克·扎克伯格、电商巨头亚马逊公司首席执行官杰夫·贝索斯以及４名沃尔玛集团继承人均榜上有名。
报告说，这２０人的净资产总和高达７３２０亿美元，超过全美一半人口、即１.５２亿人的财富总和。除此之外，《福布斯》杂志评选出的美国最富有４００名富翁执掌的财富比３６００万户典型美国家庭的资产总和还要多。
按报告的说法，如今美国社会的财富分配模式不是“金字塔形”，而是类似于西雅图地标太空针塔的“头重脚轻”型，也就是说，美国社会大部分财富集中在仅占全美人口大约０.１％的富豪手里。
报告说，为缩小悬殊的“贫富差距”，有人建议一方面应堵死包括“离岸避税天堂”和私人信托基金在内的“富豪财富逃跑通道”，另一方面则应出台相关政策，对富豪“狠狠征税”。
此外，这份报告还显示出美国社会种族间财富分配的不均衡。譬如，美国最富有１００户家庭拥有的资产相当于全美非洲裔人口的财富总和。而在《福布斯》评出的最富有４００名美国富翁中，仅有两名非洲裔和５名拉美裔。
《金融时报》：美国中产阶级崩溃 五成美国人生活贫困或在贫困边缘
五个美国成年人中就有一个生活贫困或是处于贫困边缘的，全球金融危机以来，已经有570万人加入美国国家最低收入保障行列中。
许多新的贫困人口或接近贫困人口都期待美国联邦储备委员会在下周提高利率来实现经济复苏，这是近十年来的第一次。在后金融危机经济衰退结束后很长时间，有超过45%的人——近250万成年人——从2011年就加入到最低收入保障中。
这些发现是美国佩尤研究中心为其美国中产阶级新研究准备的并与英国《金融时报》共享的数据，共同研究经济危机后遗症这个严肃的事实，并揭示了经济恢复的坎坷。
他们阐明了即使在强劲的就业增长趋势下还是有很多美国人无法正常就业，如果美联储按预期实施措施，决策者们目前加息的决定将是争论的核心问题。
他们还解释了为何美国经济复苏还很遥远以及为何像唐纳德·特朗普这样的民粹主义政治家的言论，在选举前夕并不能得到很好的共鸣。
托里·伊斯勒是北卡罗来纳州伊甸镇的一位致力于帮助解决不断增长的贫困人口问题的牧师，他说：“现在有了新的美国梦，过去的美国梦是拥有一个自己的家和两辆汽车。新的美国梦是有一份工作。”
佩尤研究中心发现。近十年来，很大一部分美国中产阶级的萎缩导致中产阶级不再是美国成年人口的多数，令人惊讶的是这是因为美国日益富裕造成的。
但美国最低收入群体——佩尤定义的即三口人家庭年收入低于31402美元——在过去7年间，是中产阶级增加速度的5倍多。现在美国低收入成人达4890万，相比2008年的4320万人和1971年的2160万人增加了。
约翰霍普金斯大学社会学家凯瑟琳·艾丁，最近负责编写一本书，关于在美国每天生活费不足2美元的那群人。他认为在具有里程碑意义的20世纪90年代福利改革后，萎缩的社会安全网让美国成为一个对待贫穷更残酷的地方。
很多低技术要求工作的离岸外包和自动化也使脱离贫困比以前更难了。她说：“过去所谓不好的工作，也比现在不好的工作要好的多。”
中产阶级的教育构成也发生了重大变化。在1971年，中产阶级中76%的成年人有高中或高中以下学历。现在根据佩尤数据分析，现在这个数据仅仅是40%，同时低收入家庭中只有12%的成年人拥有大学学历。
前纽约市社会服务专员、现美国企业研究所保守派研究员长罗伯特·多尔说：“世界很残酷，要保住这些竞争激烈、基于知识、时好时坏、瞬息万变的企业的饭碗尤其如此。但这并不是底层人的问题所在。底层人的问题是不能站起来参与进这个游戏中。”
Opinion：
Shocking new report on wealth inequality actually understates the truth
December 2, 2015 2:00AM ET
by David Cay Johnston
A report out today provides a powerful image that will help people understand how extreme concentration of wealth has become in America — an issue at the core of our economic, political and social woes over the past 35 years.
“America’s 20 wealthiest people — a group that could fit comfortably in one single Gulfstream G650 luxury jet — now own more wealth than the bottom half” of Americans, according to the report, by Chuck Collins and Josh Hoxie, both veteran analysts of inequality in America.
But there’s a big problem with that memorable image: It seriously understates just how much wealth these 20 people have.
Probably just 12 or 15 of those at the top own as much as America’s worst-off 160 million people. That’s about $732 billion on each side of that equation. For the top 20, it averages $36 billion each; for the bottom half, $4,575 each.
Wealth and influence
The intense concentration of wealth matters because it makes the economy less efficient, discouraging investments that create jobs while giving a relative handful of superrich Americans vast sway over the agendas that politicians pursue.
Just 158 families, along with companies they own or control, provided nearly half the contributions to the presidential candidates in both parties, though giving was heavily skewed to Republicans.
The result is policies that take from the many and redistribute to the already rich few through stealth techniques that rarely make the news but can be found in the public record. Among these policies are a failure to enforce the laws of business competition, severe restrictions on unions and subsidies galore for big companies.
Five years ago, the 400 households reporting the largest incomes on their tax returns captured an astonishing 6 percent of all the increased income in America, as I revealed a year ago. Such massive inequality reflects not market economics but political influence that tilts the economic playing field.
And because of their political influence, those at the very top get tax favors, especially the deferral of taxes into the distant future, which transforms the burden of taxes into a bonanza of increased profits.
If you wonder why Washington doesn’t seem to fix problems that affect most Americans, this is the answer: Politicians take care of the hands that feed them, the donor class.
In an era when so many voters are easily swayed with angry rhetoric, made-up facts and slick marketing of policies that sound great but actually hurt the vast majority, most politicians pay no price for catering to the richest of the rich at the expense of the many.
Secret wealth
Wealth at the top is much more concentrated than Collins and Hoxie report, because we have only weak and incomplete measures of wealth. And we let people choose how to value their wealth.
Warren Buffett’s wealth is much more than the value of his Berkshire Hathaway stock. And government policy helps make it grow and grow.
Is an asset worth what was paid for it (known as basis) or its value after depreciation or its fair market value today? A smart owner picks basis when dealing with tax appraisers but market value when seeking loans. We let people simultaneously pose as poorer to the taxman and wealthier to their bankers.
The Collins and Hoxie analysis of top wealth was based on the latest Forbes 400, a promotional vehicle for America’s leading wealth-porn magazine. I devour every issue — and not just to feast my eyes on its charticles.
But the Forbes list is based mostly on disclosures about publicly traded stock, largely ignoring investments in other stocks and bonds as well as many other side businesses owned by those at the top.
Over the years, I have interviewed more than a dozen people whose wealth should put them on the Forbes 400 list, on the basis of public records on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission and at county courthouses, where land title, divorce and other records are often filed. None of these people have ever been mentioned in Forbes, however, in any article.
The list would be different if Forbes had a way to get at more privately held companies, analyzed more real estate records or could get a peek at the brokerage accounts of the superwealthy (or in some cases the banks they own).
Buffett’s billions
Counted or not by Forbes, the billionaires gather up mountains of dividends, royalties, interest and capital gains each year, making their wealth snowball apart from the companies they are best known for leading.
Forbes 400 leaders such as Bill Gates (No. 1) and Larry Ellison (No. 3) have sold huge amounts of stock over the years and used it to buy other assets not counted in the Forbes listings.
Gates’ second fortune is owned through his Cascade Investments LLC, which has large stakes in a more than a dozen big companies, including a major military boat builder, the Four Seasons luxury hotel chain and Republic Industries, a trash-hauling company. Forbes counts Gates’ second fortune, but those of many others are not so obvious.
Consider Warren Buffett, perennial No. 2 on the Forbes list of richest Americans. Forbes’ latest list shows his wealth as the value of his stake in Berkshire Hathaway, the Omaha, Nebraska, holding company that pays him a $100,000 annual salary.
But when Buffett disclosed data from his 2010 income tax return, it showed $62.8 million of income. More than $40 million of it was long-term capital gains and dividends, yet Buffett sold no Berkshire Hathaway shares, and the company pays no dividends. That tells us he has a second large fortune apart from Berkshire Hathaway.
He deducted about $16 million in investment interest, suggesting leveraged assets of perhaps $800 million, assuming he can borrow at 2 percent.
And he benefits from a host of laws that let him borrow from the government at zero interest, charge monopoly prices and even turn taxes embedded in the monthly bills of his electric company customers into cash that never gets to government, juicing his fortune at your expense.
The truth is that Buffett’s wealth is much more than the value of his Berkshire Hathaway stock. And government policy helps make it grow and grow.
So think about that image — a top-of-the-line Gulfstream G650 jet and 160 million Americans, each with the same net worth. Now imagine a much smaller jet, with 12 or so oligarchs, and ask yourself just why you are paying taxes to enhance their fortunes instead of your nest egg.
(David Cay Johnston, an investigative reporter who won a Pulitzer Prize while at The New York Times, teaches business, tax and property law of the ancient world at the Syracuse University College of Law. He is the best-selling author of “Perfectly Legal,” “Free Lunch” and “The Fine Print” and the editor of the new anthology “Divided: The Perils of Our Growing Inequality.”)
选择“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”
选择“don't run on pages on this domain”
