Power depends on inequality

Supply-side economics proposes that tax decreases lead

to economic growth. Historical data, however, shows

no correlation between lower top marginal tax

rates and GDP growth rate.

There have been attempts at equal opportunity and mutual benefit, and at caring for those less fortunate.  Today in America, the wealthy have a great chance at a great education, a great career, and a great income, but the bottom 80% or so do not.  For fifty years, they've lost ground, and the gap has widened. Why might that be?  Was it deliberate?

"Occupy Wall Street, the Arab Spring, the African uprisings, even the anti-austerity stance of new political parties in Spain and Greece, all have one thing in common: a recognition that the only way for a tiny group of people to become obscenely rich is for huge masses of others to be kept chronically poor." ~JASON HICKEL, JOE BREWER, AND MARTIN KIRK 03.12.15

Supply-side policies favoring the wealthy make them

wealthier at the expense of everyone else.  No
surprise. That's what we've done for
 four decades.

Is this perhaps a good time to reopen the discussion? It's called 'economic inequality' or the GAP, and it has spread through our financial system and trade agreements to the world. When 'too big' is part of the conversation, there are needed adjustments that are perhaps unlikely to be easy.

'Supply-side economics' or 'trickle down' are a known disaster for everyone except the wealthy.

Tax decreases on high income earners (top 10%) are not correlated with employment growth, however, tax decreases on lower income earners (bottom 90%) are correlated with employment growth.  No surprise.

So the continuing favoritism shown by each administration to large corporations and the financial industry is despite the evidence that such policies serve only the wealthy and do so at the expense of the common citizen.  Yes, that's what we see.  Government regulation appears to be available for purchase if you're wealthy enough.