The disparity caused by income is very evident if one does have a modest amount of income to invest. ...
While investing over the long term is a risk that I feel is fair to compensate extra for, I find it seems biased in the extreme to offer hugely better rates to those who already have lots of money at the expense of those who have little to invest.
The bigger money mushrooms, while the small investor is lucky to stay ahead of inflation. ... The veneer of civilization is thin, IMO. It's a jungle out there, and likely to remain so.
You re absolutely correct, but this "It takes money to make money" upward concentration of wealth built into the economy is much worse than your present. It is part of why with GWB reduction of taxes on the very rich, the middle class in US society is being destroyed.
Another very important factor is well illustrated by Warren Buffett's buy of 5 million dollars worth of PREFERRED shares of BAC with a guarantee of 6% return and no cost options also granted. The common share holder only gets a 0.5% return and even that may soon be zero. Unlike Buffett, he is losing a great deal as the share price drops. More details in my recent posts.
Note also that the tax code is complex (700,000 printed pages, written by lobbyist for the rich and corporations) so that for example Warren only pays 17% of his income in taxes, but his secretary pays 34% of her income to the IRS!
But even that is not the main cause of the dying middle class. - The main cause is the concentration of wealth in the US society which is set up for the benefit of the already rich. (Government "of the rich, by the rich & for the rich")
I have several times posted MATHEMATICAL PROOF that the system is rigged to take wealth from the middle class and transfer to to the most wealthy, even if they did not get higher rates of return on their investment and pay lower tax rates!
The essence of the simple math model is to note that every one has certain necessary expenses (food, housing, clothing, etc.). In the model I have assumed that they are E dollars for the middle class and 10E for the very wealthy ("E" for Essential costs.) and just for numerical illustration, that the after tax income for the middle class is "I" and 25I for the better off. (The most wealthy have at least 200I as their after tax income.)
With taxes on each assumed to be fI, where f << 1. Note that in fact the "f" for the middle class is greater than for the wealthy (whose tax lawyers know how to exploit the tax code better) but for simplicity, I ignore that in the math model.
That means the middle class has (I - E - fI) to spend. I.e. All I except E & fI of taxes could be spent on investments if he chooses and the wealthy has (25I -10E - fI) he can invest. In addition to all the other conservative assumptions made to avoid arguments, I also falsely assuming that the both get the same rate of return, R, on their investment.
I.e. the net worth of the middle class annually increases by a capital gain of: c = R(I - E - fI) and that of the wealthy by C = R(25I -10E - fI). (Note C >> c.) Thus next year, assuming no real increase in I, E, R or f, the capital increase for the middle class will be R{c + (I - E -fI)} and that of the rich will be R{C+ (25I -10E - fI)} Note that both terms inside the {...} are larger for the wealthy than for the middle class, so not only are the wealthy growing richer faster each year, but they are doing so at an ever increasing rate as the years go by! Basically this faster rate of increase in wealth for the already wealthy is due to the fact that their essential expenses are a much smaller fraction of their income. For the poor E is essentially 100% of I so even if paying zero taxes, then can never prosper. They live "hand to mouth" and often are hungry before the end of the month, their children brain damaged by malnutrition, etc. - This in the world's richest country - SHAME!
This simple math model proves that "flat tax" ideas are doomed to destroy the middle class. A progressive tax rate* is essential to prevent all the wealth of the society from becoming concentrated in the hands of a few. (Eventual if a flat tax system remained unchanged for centuries one person or more likely one corporation, would own everything).
This concentration of wealth is INHERENT, a mathematical fact, if no offsetting redistribution of wealth away from the rich and back to the less well off is not also part of the economic system. The US had nearly an adequate re-distribution progressive tax code, but it has been destroyed by GWB's tax breaks for the very wealthy plus the modifications of the tax code for the benefit of the already wealthy (corporations included).
Thus the current destruction of the middle class and their reduced ability to support the "consumer economy" is to be expected - no surprise - and a major reason why the US is doomed. I.e. Tea Party types and most Republicans who oppose downward redistribution of wealth are guaranteeing the economic collapse of the US, but too dumb to understand math showing the current system's inherent concentration concentration of wealth. I.e. the fact that "it takes money to make money" MUST be off set for stable society.
-----------
* Or some other mechanism of wealthy redistribution - such as social collapse French Revolution etc. style with transfer back of the society's wealth from the super rich back to the population.