wall_rus....maybe I'll respond with a couple of shorter posts....
first....you wrote:
True enough, but without defending the former, what would you call the movement of wealth to the rich?
I believe there is no "movement of wealth to the rich"....because "wealth" is the realization of a potential....wealth is generated....or, existing money (which is the manifestation of wealth) is stolen or legally usurped....
money, in and of itself, is not wealth because the intrinsic market determines the value of the dollar....if there was no intrinsic economy, how would you determine the value of a piece of paper with a picture of George Washington on it?
it is very common in conversation to equate money to absolute "wealth".....and, in conversation, that's ok....
but, "movement of wealth to the rich" carries an implication of a transferrence of money from people in the lower income groups to peoplein the higher income brackets....
i don't think that's the case....i think you're misreading events (and the misread was intentionally caused by political forces) insofar as the focus has been on Wall Street....
and, the "street", thru the use of derivatives and via the computerized international network has generated an inordinate amount of dollars....which those in the Obama camp like to vilify as "the wealth"....
tell us about that "wealth" when hyper-inflation sets in.....
again....it's not "wealth"....it's the disruptive generation of US dollars