What kind of sick animal would say rising inequality is good for the workers?
Tim Cavanaugh would, in this Bloomberg/Businessweek pro/con with John Schmitt of the Center for Economic & Policy Research.
Resolved: "Occupy Wall Street protesters are wise to focus on unequal income distribution — such as the outsize gains reaped by financial-industry companies. Pro or con?"
Bloomberg includes a default video interview with the topic: somebody goes to her first Occupation.
Phrases from the comments:
"If the 1% wants to hold onto their large share of all the commodities, land, and entertainment resources,"
"I can hear the construction of the gallows in every conversation at work. Left or right. Be aware,"
"to dismantle an entire supportive class (middle class) by downsizing, offshoring, financial manipulation, and obscene lobbying to pull out the safety checks"
"is not in the cards for centuries."
Nut of Cavanaugh's argument for the Con side:
Creating general equality of opportunity is among the greatest U.S. achievements. But creating equality of outcomes has caused misery everywhere it has been tried.
Read the whole thing, and decide which part of the One Hundred Percenters you're on.