Talk:Winner-Take-All Politics

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

United States

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

long article

Why such a long article? I guess because the Occupy Wall Street movement has made the issues raised in this book so topical, and because the book is unavailable in Google Books. The article still needs a lot fo work and I will endeavour to fix it up.--BoogaLouie (talk) 21:01, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com/Winner-Take-All-Politics-Washington-Richer---Turned/dp/1416588701/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1326673868&sr=1-1

99.181.130.94 (talk) 00:32, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Why the Rich Are Getting Richer; American Politics and the Second Gilded Age by Robert C. Lieberman (Professor of Political Science and Public Affairs at Columbia University) in Foreign Affairs January/February 2011; excerpt ...

Income inequality in the United States is higher than in any other advanced industrial democracy and by conventional measures comparable to that in countries such as Ghana, Nicaragua, and Turkmenistan. It breeds political polarization, mistrust, and resentment between the haves and the have-nots and tends to distort the workings of a democratic political system in which money increasingly confers political voice and power.

See Plutocracy, Financial Accounting Standards Board, Conservatism in the United States, Elmer Eric Schattschneider, Occupy movement in the United States and Tea Party movement, Reagan Administration and Bush tax cuts, ... 99.181.130.94 (talk) 00:27, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unacceptably vague; frequently worthless

There is frequent confusion or lack of clarity in this article. There are frequent references to "the top 1%", etc. without ever telling the reader "the top 1%...OF WHAT". The top 1% of wealth-holders (i.e., the wealthiest 1%)? Or the top 1% of income earners (including or excluding capital gains)? There is substantial movement among income brackets (moving to higher income brackets as people get older), so more money going to the top 1% of income-earners ould simply mean that salaries are becoming more age-stratified. Bueller 007 (talk) 21:48, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]