Edward Conard

  • June 12, 2012

    by Jeremy Leaming

    The nation’s middle class should demand far more of the tiny group of American’s that controls the vast majority of the nation’s wealth. If not, the growing wealth gap, according to numerous leading economists, is destined to seriously undermine democracy.

    For example, Columbia University’s Joseph Stiglitz has warned on numerous occasions about the dangers economic inequalities pose to a healthy democracy. And the number of Americans living in poverty is at its highest since the Great Depression. The Census Bureau reported last year on the nation’s shrinking middle class and growing number of Americans that have been thrown into poverty. 

    One of the nation’s greatest advocates for solving poverty, Peter Edelman, a law professor at Georgetown University and ACS Board Chair, is urging the middle class to become more vocal in calling for an end to right-wing economic policies that advance the out-of-touch interests of the super wealthy and exacerbate poverty.

    The Huffington Post’s Dan Froomkin reports on Edelman’s comments at a recent event hosted by ACS and the Center for American Progress. Edelman (pictured) said a broader group of people should stand against Republican economic policies, calling the policies destructive. He also said the right-wing’s rhetoric advancing those policies is “just weird.” See video of the event here.

    Froomkin noted that the former Bain Capital director Edward Conard has lauded the nation’s economic inequality, saying that more people should strive for the obnoxious sums of money he has earned. Conard in an interview with The New York Times offered little in the way of defense of economic policies that make his group even wealthier. Essentially risk-takers, like Conard should be celebrated, even though their work does little to nothing for the common good.

    But Edelman, Froomkin says, provides “the exact opposite approach” in his new book, So Rich, So Poor. Edelman said the goal “should be to raise taxes on the rich and strengthen” the social safety net, Froomkin reports. That safety net, as Edelman intimately knows, has been tattered by years of economic policies advanced by the Right and accommodating Democrats.

  • May 2, 2012

    by Jeremy Leaming

    If one really needs another example of how out of touch or clueless some of the nation’s super wealthy are, Adam Davidson’s piece on a retired multimillionaire for The New York Times Magazine provides it.

    As Davidson notes the retired former partner of Bain Capital, the outfit that excelled in tearing down other businesses for a profit, is plumping a forthcoming book that extols alleged virtues of the filthy rich. Davidson writes that the “spectacularly wealthy guy” believes the “wealth concentrated at the top should be twice as large,” to spur slackers or “art-history majors” into pursuing outlandish wealth.

    Economist Paul Krugman, in his Times’ blog, says the former Bain Capital partner’s argument “might have some plausibility if the era when America didn’t have such overweening plutocracy – the 50s and 60s, when the top 0.01% received only about a fifth the share of income that it commands today – were a time of economic stagnation and low innovation. In fact, the postwar generation experienced the best economic growth – and the fastest productivity growth – of any era in the past century.”  

    Since discussion of the nation’s growing economic inequality, right-wing pundits have attacked or belittled studies showing that the middle class is dwindling, while a tiny few continue to become wealthier. In a widely cited article for Vanity Fair, Columbia University Business School Professor Joseph E. Stiglitz noted that the “upper 1 percent of Americans are now taking in nearly a quarter of the nation’s income every year. In terms of wealth rather than income, the top 1 percent control 40 percent.”

    While the former Bain Capital multimillionaire, Edward Conard, is no innovator, he’s not invented anything that has enriched the lives of Americans; he has invested in a company that uses less aluminum for soda cans. “It saves a fraction of a penny on every can,” he told The Times. “There are a lot of soda cans in the world. That means the economy can produce more cans with the same amount of resources. It makes every American who buys a soda can a little richer because their paycheck buys more.”

    This is the gibberish that passes for an argument that investors should be celebrated and indeed helped by economic policies?

    Dean Baker, of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, is unlikely to be persuaded. Last fall Baker scored economic policies that have catered to the super wealthy for far too long, and noted that those policies do redistribute the wealth – to the super wealthy.