Saturday, November 11, 2017


Bill Clinton's looming reckoning as a sexual predator

So far, there has not been much holding of Bill Clinton to account by progressives, despite the change in zeitgeist for sexual predation by the powerful.  Never mind that it's fashionable on the left today to hold the founders of our country to present-day standards.
But the inevitable is happening.  At first, a few progressives start mentally applying the post-Weinstein ethic to Bill Clinton.  In the process, they eventually have to reflect on their own past and regret their support for him throughout Kenneth Starr's revelations, impeachment, and beyond.  That will take a long time.  
But if they don't publicly reflect, I am sure their friends on the feminist left and the entire right will be happy to dig up whatever the politicians and pundits said at the time about private matters being off limits.  It's only sex!
Worst of all: Just as with Harvey Weinstein, everybody knew.  That's why Hillary and Betsy Wright put together the "bimbo eruptions" team.  Bill's victims were double-victimized, dismissed, pictured as chasing a hundred-dollar-bill dragged through a trailer park by James Carville.
The dam may be leaking among the progressive pundits, in cable news, at least.  Justin Caruso of the Daily Caller is covering the awakening of MSNBC's Chris Hayes on Twitter.  This tweet is the general charge, but Hayes gets more specific:
As gross and cynical and hypocrtical [sic] as the right's "what about Bill Clinton" stuff is, it's also true that Democrats and the center left are overdue for a real reckoning with the allegations against him.
— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) November 10, 2017
There is a lot of material to choose from if you are going to start pillorying Bubba.  But Hayes focuses on Juanita Broaddrick and draws explicit comparison to the worst of the Hollywood predators.

The omertร  on Bill Clinton's predation of less powerful women lasted through last year, as Caruso points out:
Broaddrick and several other Clinton accusers appeared with then-candidate Donald Trump before the second debate with Hillary Clinton in 2016. She said at the time, "Actions speak louder than words. Mr. Trump may have said some bad words, but Bill Clinton raped me and Hillary Clinton threatened me. I don't think there's any comparison."
The MSM commentariat knew, and they kept their mouths shut.
They even knew that Hillary, the breaker of glass ceilings, was the enforcer.
As always when we are fighting the cultural hegemony of the progressives, we use Alinsky's Fourth and hold the enemy to its own rules.  It works most of the time.


Hillary, Billary, Cosby, Buttman Affleck, Oliver Stone, Harvey Weinstein and their boy Obomb….. new definitions of
degradation and sleaze.                          

Harvey Weinstein has been exposed in the media as the sexual predator he is, and Hillary Clinton has been exposed as the craven money-grubber she is; money over morality is the mantra she lives by. PATRICIA Mc CARTHY – AMERICAN THINKERcom
"But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now."  ----  Patricia McCarthy -
 rom top to bottom, the leadership of this country is POND SCUM


“If the Constitution did not forbid cruel and unusual punishment, the sentence I would like to see imposed would place both Bill and Hillary Clinton in the same 8-by-12 cell.”    ROBERT ARVAY – AMERICANTHINKERcom

…. The parasitism of  Hillary,  Billary, Obomb, Heffner, Cosby, Buttman Affleck, Oliver Stone, Weinstein and the rest.

Harvey Weinstein has been exposed in the media as the sexual predator he is, and Hillary Clinton has been exposed as the craven money-grubber she is; money over morality is the mantra she lives by. PATRICIA Mc CARTHY – AMERICAN THINKERcom

"But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now."  ----  Patricia McCarthy -

Hollywood and Pedophilia

In a scene from “I, Claudius,” a 70s television drama based on the life of the Roman emperor who ascended to power after Caligula’s death, Claudius relates the dismay of Julius Caesar when the emperor discovers the extent of his daughter’s promiscuity. The accused are lined up before Caesar and confess their sins.
Finally, after hearing out all the fornicators, a frustrated and overwhelmed Caesar exclaims, “Is there anyone in Rome who has not slept with my daughter?”
A similar question could be asked of the Hollywood and Washington swamp critters coming out of the woodwork either to confess their sins or to expose those who sinned against them: Is there anyone who has not been harassed by or forced to sleep with people like Harvey Weinstein?
As Weinstein’s accusers have stepped out into the media klieg lights, Babylon’s moral night creatures are either scurrying back into the shadows of hoped for anonymity or are preemptively coming out of the bushes to confess their sins. Alex Baldwin admits he has bullied women. Arnold Schwarzenegger says his cheating on his spouse was his biggest mistake. Ben Affleck confesses he has erred, and even George H.W. Bush admits -- at age 93 -- that he patted women’s rears.
However, even more ominously for Hollywood, the lowlifes who have a penchant for pedophilia are being exposed by Cory Feldman, while at the same time Kevin Spacey, who is accused of molesting underage boys, provides ratification of Feldman’s accusations. Both men present a worry for Hollywood’s LGBT communities, as they have always sought to separate themselves from accusations of pedophilia, insisting that gay sex is practiced among adults who are completely consensual partners who wish to be married for life.
Amidst all the accusations, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that professional saviors of actors’ and politicians’ reputations and careers, seeing the likes of Weinstein going to the block, have advised their clients to get ahead of the coming storms of judgment by preemptively confessing, savagely beating their breasts while at the same time they beat a judicious but hopefully temporary retreat from the public gaze.
In Kevin Spacey’s case, he is being erased from Hollywood’s collective memory.
His appearances in Netflix’s “House of Cards” are cancelled. His shoots in Ridley Scott’s upcoming film All the Money in the World are being expurgated, with actor Christopher Plummer taking his place. One is reminded of others who have been erased from history, like Nikolai Yezhov, Leon Trotsky and Bo Gu were eliminated from the collective memories of Communist regimes.
For the truth is that Spacey, who followed Hollywood’s political correct rules in “coming out” in order to ransom himself, must wonder what he has done wrong, much as the accused Soviet and Maoist show trials must have wondered why their heads were suddenly in the noose.
After all, the milieu in which Spacey lives and works has promoted films and lifestyles that have seen no particular wrong in promoting sexual activities of all types. Hollywood’s films are routinely vehicles for celebrating every permutation of the sexual revolution, as many producers have bought into cheap philosophical musings on post-modernist deconstruction of everything, including sexual morality.
The questions are, “Why Spacey? Why now?”
Not that most will feel sorry for him, but the actor must be confused, for it wasn’t so long ago that Roman Polanski was applauded in absentia at the Oscars, receiving a standing ovation from Meryl Streep, even though he had raped a drugged 13-year-old girl.
Why was Polanski applauded? For one thing, Polanski was and for some still is considered an artiste to whom no moral judgments apply. His creative genius apparently puts him beyond the condemnation doled out to less talented mortals. Polanski escapes condemnation much like the artist Paul Gauguin, who though he deserted his wife and children and took child mistresses to whom he gave the gift of syphilis, is forgiven. The greatness of his art has been deemed to transcend his pusillanimous sex life.
The fact is that Hollywood’s condemnation of Spacey, who apparently is truly guilty of child abuse, is completely arbitrary. Hollywood has no real moral basis for the finger pointing, for to judge justly requires a knowledge of right and wrong; and Hollywood in general does not believe in right and wrong, particularly when it comes to sexual behavior.
What’s left in the absence of a moral thermometer is total arbitrariness. Arbitrariness provokes fear, not true repentance. Arbitrary judgment and fear are always the results when the concepts of moral truth are infinitely flexible.
Since it is unlikely that genuine moral indignation is behind the current show trials now being played out in Hollywood (and in D.C.), we have to ask ourselves, to what end are all these displays of accusation and repentance being employed? What is truly feared? What sacrificial lambs are being given up in order to protect people behind the curtain? Who is being protected while a few are led to the gallows?
It is hard not to come to the conclusion that Spacey and others are being sacrificed in order that more powerful people who do not want their sexual proclivities revealed are not exposed. Certainly, Elijah Wood and Corey Feldman, along with other former child actors, have stated that pedophile rings including some of the world’s most powerful, famous and influential figures not only exist, but continue to operate freely because the deeds done in secret are covered up.
One need only think of the Rochdale sex abuse scandal in England. Police and other law officials looked the other way while young girls were drugged and passed around to “Asian” men who raped them. According to reports, some of the guilty men are still walking around freely. 
The list of powerful people who are child abusers is no doubt quite long. There are still unanswered questions about Jeffrey Epstein’s “Lolita Express.” Who among the famous are implicated in the child abuse happening on Epstein’s private island? Is it fair to ask just who was involved in the orgies aboard Epstein’s jet,” which according to the Daily Mail and other publications, Bill Clinton boarded 26 times in three years -- apparently accompanied at least once by Spacey?  
Isn’t it fair to demand reporters and law enforcement do some serious investigating of sex crimes committed against child actors in Hollywood? Isn’t it fair to demand Hollywood, which has produced exposรฉs like Spotlight, which documented the sex abuse scandals afflicting the Roman Catholic church, turn that same glaring spotlight on its own denizens of the child sex underworld? If the demand is that Catholic priests clean up what Hollywood deems as unspeakable acts, isn’t it fair to ask Hollywood to uncover its own scandals while demonstrating genuine change in the way it operates? Hypocritically targeting a few lowlifes while indulging in ritualistic breast-beating is not enough. There has to be real change, including stopping the glorification of sexual deviance in films -- starting with romanticizing pedophilia.
Time will tell. In the meantime, most will not be convinced Hollywood’s repentance is genuine by the social execution of a few stars like the odious Kevin Spacey.

Fay Voshell holds a M.Div. from Princeton Theological Seminary, which awarded her the prize for excellence in systematic theology. She is a frequent contributor to American Thinker. She may be reached at

STEVE BANNON DECLARES THAT 'You can't just vote for your country back! You have to take it back!'....... SO WHAT IS BANNON'S ENDLESS CRAP THAT SWAMP KEEPER TWITTER TRUMPER IS A "POPULIST"????

WATCH – Bannon on Brexit: ‘You Can’t Just Vote for Your Country Back, You Have to Take It Back’

Breitbart Chairman Stephen K. Bannon reflected on the Trump and Brexit victories and told a crowd at Citadel Republican Society in South Carolina that it was not enough just to “vote” to get your country back, “you have to take it back”.

After saying earlier this year that Brexit and 2016 are “inextricably linked“, Mr. Bannon outlined on Friday how, in 2013, “we could see there was something going on in Europe”. Drawing parallels between the American Tea Party and UKIP, Breitbart London was founded to give a voice to the working classes, and a platform for the Brexit movement.
“When Brexit happened, Nigel Farage went on the BBC the next morning and said: ‘Had Breitbart London not been created there’d be no Brexit. We had the media, we had the platform, to tell our story.'”
Remarking how the left had referred to Trump voters are “hobbits”, “deplorables”, and “rubes”, Mr. Bannon said, however, that “all these geniuses in the mainstream media on the night of Brexit on CNN couldn’t pronounce Brexit or Farage’s name”.
These were the same establishment media figures “who could not understand why ‘some guy from England’ was opening for Donald Trump in Jackson, Mississippi, and was getting a standing ovation”.

“Everyone knew who Nigel Farage was. And why was that? Because working class people are serious about where this country is going and they will read Breitbart London and they will read about and understand Brexit,” he said.
“They understand that people in Britain are trying to take their country back. The establishment are not going to give you your country back; you have got to take it back.”

Nigel Farage, ex-leader of the British UKIP party, speaks as Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, left, listens, at Trump’s campaign rally in Jackson, Miss., Wednesday, Aug. 24, 2016. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)

"These measures amount to a tax surcharge on workers, young people and the elderly to help pay for the tax boondoggle for the rich."

"The Democrats are putting on a show of opposition that is cynical to the core. They are denouncing the Republican bills for skewing the tax benefits to the wealthy, while fully supporting the centerpiece of the legislation, a huge tax cut for US corporations."

White House, congressional Republicans accelerate drive for corporate tax cut worth trillions

By Barry Grey
11 November 2017
The push is accelerating for an overhaul of the US tax system that will divert trillions of additional dollars to the corporate aristocracy, widen the gap between the rich and the working class and set the stage for the destruction of basic social programs.
On Thursday, the Republican-controlled House Ways and Means Committee passed a White House-backed tax bill on a party-line vote, after which House leaders said the measure would come to the House floor for a vote next week. On the same day, the Republican-controlled Senate released its version of the measure, with plans for a floor vote in the upper chamber before the Thanksgiving holiday later this month.
If passed, the two versions will be reconciled and a final bill will be moved through the two chambers and signed into law by President Trump.
The Trump administration and congressional Republicans are pushing for passage of the handout to the richest 5 percent by Christmas. The Democrats are putting on a show of opposition that is cynical to the core. They are denouncing the Republican bills for skewing the tax benefits to the wealthy, while fully supporting the centerpiece of the legislation, a huge tax cut for US corporations.
While there are differences between the House and Senate bills, both versions adhere to the same basic framework. The corporate tax rate is to be permanently reduced from the current level of 35 percent to 20 percent, saving US corporations $2 trillion in taxes and generating an additional $6.7 trillion in revenues over the next decade. The House bill enacts the corporate tax cut in 2018, while the Senate bill, in order to reduce the projected deficit from lost federal revenues, delays the corporate tax cut one year, until 2019.
The House bill keeps the top federal tax bracket at 39.6 percent (down from 70 percent in 1980), but applies it to households making more than $1 million a year, as compared to the current threshold of $500,000. The Senate version provides a bigger windfall for the very rich by reducing the top bracket to 38.5 percent.
Both bills eliminate the alternative minimum tax, which almost exclusively impacts the wealthy, and they both slash the tax rate on so-called “pass-through” income reported by business owners.
Each bill allows corporations that have 

stashed hundreds of billions of dollars 

overseas to avoid US taxes, such as Apple and

Amazon, to repatriate their profits at a 

sharply discounted tax rate even lower than 

the new 20 percent corporate rate.
The bills either sharply restrict or eliminate outright the estate tax, which is currently paid by the wealthiest 0.2 percent of households. The House bill doubles the exemption for an individual to $11 million and eliminates the estate tax entirely in 2025. The Senate version doubles the exemption but does not repeal the tax.
Either way, the change underwrites the right of the richest households to pass on their wealth to succeeding generations, institutionalizing the transformation of the United States into an oligarchy, presided over by a semi-hereditary dynastic caste.
Other boons to business are included in both bills, including an immediate 100 percent tax write-off for capital investments. Neither bill eliminates or reduces the so-called “carried interest” loophole that allows hedge fund, private equity and real estate speculators (such as Donald Trump) to pay only 20 percent on their income instead of the normal tax rate, currently almost twice as high.
This is in line with the legislation as whole. While shifting the tax code to further redistribute the social wealth from the bottom to the top, it particularly favors the most parasitic sections of the ruling class, those engaged in financial manipulation.
In order to promote the fiction that the overhaul is geared to the “middle class,” the bills include certain tax breaks, such as a doubling of the standard deduction for taxpayers who do not itemize and an increase in the child tax credit. However, they also rein in or eliminate existing tax deductions that benefit working class and middle class households.
This is driven above all by the need to keep the total ten-year deficit resulting from the legislation to $1.5 trillion. That limit must be met in order to move the tax overhaul on an expedited basis through the Senate, where the Republicans have only a 52 to 48 majority, ruling out a filibuster and enabling passage by a simple majority.
The House bill eliminates the federal tax credit for state and local income and sales taxes, but continues the write-off for state and local property taxes, capping it at $10,000. It reduces the existing tax reduction on mortgage interest payments as well as a tax break on medical expenses. It also eliminates tax credits for student loan payments and imposes a tax on graduate student stipends. These measures amount to a tax surcharge on workers, young people and the elderly to help pay for the tax boondoggle for the rich.
The Senate version calls for a somewhat different package of added tax burdens for the working class and middle class. It eliminates all state and local tax deductions but retains the tax credits for mortgage interest, student loan payments and medical expenses.
The Republicans are resorting to brazen lying to present the legislation as a boon to “hard-working middle class Americans.” Typical is an op-ed column published Friday in the Washington Post by Orrin Hatch of Utah, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. “For too long, middle-class Americans have struggled with stagnant wages, sluggish labor markets and economic growth well below the historic average,” he writes. “It is time to pay attention to those Americans who have felt left behind in economic stagnation, by providing tax relief and economic opportunity.”
The line is that corporate America will use the trillions in tax savings to buy new equipment, build new factories, hire more workers and raise wages. This ignores the fact that US corporations already have access to cheap credit, are making bumper profits, and are sitting on trillions of dollars in cash. It also ignores the past record of tax cuts for big business, whether under Reagan or George W. Bush, which pushed up stocks and the wealth of the ruling elite while accelerating the destruction of jobs and working class living standards. The same lying pretext was used to justify Obama’s bailout of the banks.
In fact, the extra trillions will be used to buy more and bigger yachts, private planes, mansions, penthouses, private islands and gated communities and bribe more politicians to do the bidding of the oligarchs.
One indication of the two-faced character of the Democrats’ opposition is the fact that interest groups backed by Republican billionaires such as the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson have thus far spent almost $25 million on TV ads to promote the Republican tax plan, while Democratic groups have spent less than $5 million to oppose the plan.
An updated analysis of the House bill published Wednesday by the non-partisan tax center spells out in detail how the tax overhaul is designed to sharply increase the wealth of the richest 5 percent, and especially the richest 1 percent and 0.1 percent, and vastly increase over the next decade the concentration of wealth at the very top.
Under the so-called “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,” in 2018, taxpayers in the top 1 percent (with income above $730,000) will receive nearly 21 percent of the total tax cut, an average of about $37,000, or 2.5 percent of after-tax income.
Those in the top 5 percent income bracket, 

and especially the top 1 percent and top 0.1 

percent, will get by far the biggest percentage 

gains in after-tax income. In other words, if 

you are among the very rich, the rate of 

increase you receive will be far higher than 

for the lower 95 percent. That means the 

plan idesigned to widen the gap between 

the very rich and everybody else.
In 2018, the top 20 percent of income earners will get 56.6 percent of the total federal tax cut. Within the top 10 percent, the 90-95 percent group will get 7.4 percent of the total, the 95-99 percent group will receive 14.8 percent, the top 1 percent will get 20.6 percent and the top 0.1 percent will receive 10 percent. In other words, within the richest 10 percent, the benefits are skewed dramatically to the richest of the rich.
One decade out, by 2027, the transfer of social wealth to the very rich will be even more pronounced. In 2027, taxpayers in the bottom two quintiles (those with income less than about $55,000) will see little change in their taxes, with a tax decrease of $10-$40. Taxpayers in the middle of the income distribution will see their after-tax incomes increase by only 0.4 percent. Taxpayers in the top 1 percent will receive nearly 50 percent of the total benefit.
Someone in the top 1 percent will get a break of $52,780. Someone in the top 0.1 percent will get a tax cut of $278,370.
In total, 12.8 million households will have a bigger tax bill in 2018 under the law, including more than three million earning between $48,600 and $86,100. By 2027, more than 11 million households in this income group will see their tax bills increase. Overall, by 2027, 47.5 million households, a quarter of the total, will have a tax increase.


Trump's Mar-a-Lago gets approval to hire 70 foreign workers because there aren't enough Americans willing to do the jobs

  • Managers claim there aren't enough Americans qualified and willing to do work
  • Trump's hiring of foreign workers was criticized during the 2016 election

  • Trump defended Mar-a-Lago's hiring practices, saying not enough Americans apply for its low-end service jobs

  • Mar-a-Lago has been approved to employ 35 foreign waiters, 20 cooks and 15 housekeepers to help serve its 500 members starting this month through May 31

  • The waiters will receive $11.88 an hour with no tips, the cooks $13.34 an hour and the housekeepers $10.33 an hour
  • The waiters' and cooks' wages are slightly above the national average

  • The housekeepers' are slightly below, per Labor Dept. statistics

President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago club has received permission to hire 70 foreign workers to fill out its staff during its upcoming busy season, after managers attested there aren't enough Americans qualified and willing to do the work.
The president's hiring of foreign workers at the Florida resort over several years was criticized by his opponents during the 2016 campaign after he slammed companies for moving jobs out of the U.S. and others for hiring immigrants in the country illegally. 
During the Republican primary debates, Trump defended Mar-a-Lago's hiring practices, saying not enough Americans apply for its low-end service jobs and if his managers didn't recruit outside the country 'we might as well just close the doors.'
Trump Organization spokeswoman Amanda Miller did not return calls and emails seeking comment. Janine Gill, Mar-a-Lago's personnel director, also did not return a call. 
Trump visited Mar-a-Lago seven times after his January 20 inauguration and is expected back this season, perhaps as early as Thanksgiving.

President Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort has received approval to hire 70 foreign workers for its upcoming busy season. The Florida club pictured above in April  
Under requests approved by the U.S. Labor Department, Mar-a-Lago can employ 35 foreign waiters, 20 cooks and 15 housekeepers to help serve its 500 members starting this month through May 31. 
The waiters will receive $11.88 an hour with no tips, the cooks $13.34 an hour and the housekeepers $10.33 an hour. The waiters' and cooks' wages are slightly above the national average for those fields and the housekeepers' slightly below, according to Labor Department statistics.
Trump (pictured above in Vietnam on Friday) came under fire in the 2016 presidential race for his hiring of foreign workers, especially since he blamed immigrants for stealing jobs from Americans 
Trump (pictured above in Vietnam on Friday) came under fire in the 2016 presidential race for his hiring of foreign workers, especially since he blamed immigrants for stealing jobs from Americans 
Mar-a-Lago has made similar requests in recent years, ranging from 88 employees in 2014 down to 64 last year.
Many other high-end resorts and clubs in Palm Beach County annually receive similar approvals from the government, including 141 foreign employees this year for The Breakers, a historic beachfront hotel near Mar-a-Lago, and 65 for The Polo Club of Boca Raton. 
All are offering wages roughly similar to Mar-a-Lago, according to their Labor Department filings. The area's peak tourist season is from about Thanksgiving to Easter.
The workers are hired under the H-2B visa program, which is for seasonal, non-agriculture employees and is capped at 66,000 nationally per year. 
The State Department says all visa applicants are screened against law enforcement and counter-terrorism databases, but would not say whether Mar-a-Lago applicants get extra scrutiny.
Peter Ricci, director of Florida Atlantic University's hospitality and tourism program, said most foreign workers hired by Palm Beach County resorts are students from Ireland, South Africa, Portugal and the Netherlands who are fulfilling a graduation requirement. 
Ricci, who has studied and worked with the local resort industry, said most American hospitality students don't want to work as servers but want to get into a management trainee program, while the foreign students see high-end waiter and service jobs as possible careers and are eager to take them.
'The more upscale the type of venue, the more difficult it is to hire the type of (American) server or employee that we need,' Ricci said. 'With their culture from their home countries, (the foreign recruits) come with a more dedicated attitude for service that the recruiters just can't find enough of locally.'
Palm Beach County's unemployment rate is 3.6 percent, below the national rate of 4.1 percent. The county's Great Recession rate peaked at 11.6 percent in August 2010 and has been in a steady decline since.
Mar-a-Lago's members pay $14,000 annual dues for access to the 17-acre (6.9-hectare) estate, with new members paying a $200,000 initiation fee that doubled earlier this year. 
Trump purchased Mar-a-Lago - 'The Greatest Mansion Ever Built,' according to its website - from the foundation of cereal heiress Marjorie Merriweather Post in 1985 for $10 million and has invested tens of millions of dollars improving the property. He opened it as a club in 1995.
The property now boasts 58 bedrooms, 33 bathrooms, a 20,000-square-foot ballroom, tennis and croquet courts and three bomb shelters. Members pay extra to dine and stay on the property.
Video playing bottom right...

Loaded: 0%
Progress: 0%
Current Time0:01
Duration Time0:36

Read more:




"Today, each of the top 5 billionaires owns as much as 750 

million people, more than the total population of Latin America

and double the population of the US."




Three billionaires are wealthier than half the US population

10 November 2017
According to a report published Wednesday by the Institute for Policy Studies, the three richest Americans—Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffett—now own more wealth than the poorest half of the US population, some 160 million people.
America’s “60 families,” whose massive wealth was documented in journalist Ferdinand Lundberg’s 1937 exposure, have been replaced by just three billionaires whose combined wealth is over $264 billion.
The Institute for Policy Studies report, 
“Billionaire Bonanza: The Forbes 400 and 
the rest of us,” reveals that the richest 25 
Americans are wealthier than the bottom 56 
percent of the US. The net worth of the 400 
richest is roughly equal to that of the bottom 
two thirds of the country, a total of 200 
million people. According to the report’s 
authors, the US has become “a hereditary 
aristocracy of wealth and power.”
The unprecedented concentration of wealth is an international phenomenon. Oxfam reported in June 2017 that the world’s 5 richest people own as much as the poorest half of the world’s population, down from 80 people in 2015. Today, each of the top 5 billionaires owns as much as 750 million people, more than the total population of Latin America and double the population of the US.
The IPS report explains that the US data “underestimate[s] our current levels of wealth concentration” because “the growing use of offshore tax havens and legal trusts has made the concealing of assets more widespread than ever before." A 2017 report published by Alstadsaeter, Johannesen, and Zucman titled “Who owns the wealth in tax havens?” estimates that the world’s superrich have between $5.7 and $32 trillion hidden from taxation or statistical analysis.
While the superrich dominate the commanding heights, the bottom 90 percent face hardship and crisis that vary only in terms of immediacy. The IPS report measures the net worth of working class families by subtracting the value of durable goods like automobiles, household appliances and furniture. According to its estimate, over 19 percent of US households—roughly 60 million people—have “zero or negative net worth” when durable goods are subtracted.
Beyond the poorest 20 percent, the report explains, “even those low- and middle-income families who do have some wealth often don’t have any liquid assets—cash or savings—at their disposal. Over 60 percent of Americans report not having enough savings to cover a $500 emergency.”
Even above the roughly 200 million people with nothing saved, conditions for the 60th to 90th percentile are similarly difficult. The bulk of this section of the working class’s net worth derives from housing equity, and when this is subtracted, most lack enough to survive through a few years of retirement. According to a recent study of Census data by the Economic Policy Institute, retirement account savings have plummeted in recent years among all age groups.
The IPS report is based on data from the US Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer Finances, which the World Socialist Web Site analyzed in detail last month. While the extremely wealthy have accumulated vast sums of wealth, a broader layer, comprising the top 10 percent, has also greatly enriched itself in recent years at the expense of the working masses. The richest 10 percent of the US—the social and political base for gender and identity politics—owns 77.1 percent of total wealth, while the bottom three quarters owns just 10 percent.
The explosion of social inequality is not an accidental process. It is the product of a decades-long campaign by both the Democratic and Republican parties to transfer trillions of dollars from the working class into the pockets of the rich. The “accomplishments” of both parties over the course of the last forty years are a litany of tax cuts for the wealthy, cuts to social programs, the deindustrialization of broad swaths of the Midwest, gutting corporate regulations and spending trillions on imperialist war, state surveillance and mass deportation and incarceration.
The Obama administration marked a milestone in this protracted social counterrevolution defined by the Wall Street bailout of 2008-2009, the restructuring of the auto industry in 2009 and the bankruptcy of Detroit in 2013-14. With the help of the Democratic administration, the ruling elite cashed in on the financial crisis.
As a result, the United States is now an oligarchy. Through its immense wealth and control of the major corporations, the superrich have established total domination over all of the official institutions of political, cultural and intellectual power.
The courts, the congress, and the president not only operate on behalf of competing interests within the aristocracy, they are increasingly personally staffed by millionaires and billionaires, as expressed most directly in the figure of Donald Trump. The military wages permanent war across the globe to protect corporate profits. The mainstream media is nothing more than the official propaganda wing of the American oligarchy. The trade unions, in their typically brutish and corrupt form, are paid off by the corporations to police the workers and suppress opposition.
The obsessions and preoccupations of this privileged layer of the population are entirely alien to the concerns of the bottom 90 percent. The cost of health care is skyrocketing; thousands of immigrant families are torn apart each week by deportation; nearly 100 people die each day from opioid abuse; student debt crushes a whole generation; millions remain devastated by floods, fires and hurricanes; entire states have been stripped of women’s health clinics; one veteran commits suicide every 80 minutes; and on and on.
Congress holds no hearings on these subjects. Its calendar is booked full with hearings on alleged Russian interference in US politics and the need to bring social media and tech companies to heel by censoring antiestablishment media. The Democrats and Republicans are working around the clock to reach a deal on a tax bill that will hand over trillions to the wealthy and corporations, with Senate Republicans announcing their version just yesterday.
The astronomical growth of inequality and the absence of any institutional mechanisms by which the population can address its social grievances presages an historic explosion of the class struggle. Strikes and protests involving tens of millions of workers and youth are inevitable, but they must be guided by a socialist program.
The billionaires’ wealth must be expropriated and redistributed to those in need. The corporations through which they derive their riches must be seized, placed under democratic control and reorganized by the workers themselves to serve public need and not private profit.
Companies like Bezos’ Amazon can be used to deliver medicine, food, water and construction equipment to disaster zones and impoverished areas. Gates’ Microsoft software and programming development can be harnessed to introduce an unprecedented degree of social planning into the world economy, allowing for production to be controlled so as to eliminate scarcity of basic resources and reverse environmental degradations. All industries can be made to serve the interests of the human race.
Under socialism, across all industries and in all countries, workers will come together in their workshops, plants and offices to plot a course for wielding the world’s productive forces in pursuit of equality and progress. But the ruling class will not give up its wealth voluntarily. 
Eric London