Former Romney Colleague Vehemently Defends "The One Percent"

Edward Conard, a former Bain employer who once worked for Mitt Romney, has written a book, “Unintended Consequences: Why Everything You’ve Been Told About the Economy Is Wrong,” in which he writes a treatise on the importance of the 1%. His conclusion comprises arguments in support of his belief that the vast income inequality in the United States reflects just how well our economy is working, and if the number expands, all economic classes would benefit.  Better for whom, Mr. Conard?


He erroneously asserts that the wealthiest 1% made their money by taking huge risks on innovative ideas that eventually reaped them mega bucks, while creating a plethora of jobs. I can buy that premise for people like Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, and Mark Zuckerberg, but many people who have made it to the top did so as CEO's of companies they didn't establish. Other gained monetarily be chopping and dicing American companies, with some forced into bankruptcy and others outsourcing jobs overseas. Thanks for that! I absolutely adore trying to explain a customer service issue to people in another country who must transfer me back to the US because they don't have the authority to handle my problem. This is, if I can negotiate through the automated voice response system that winds callers through myriad sidetracks before reaching a human. Count that so-called innovation as one of my biggest pet peeves.


The disparity between the average income of $51,000 for the 99% and $717,000 for the 1% provides reason enough to lament. It gets worse. The top 1% controls 43% of America's wealth. It doesn't take a math whiz to subtract 43% from 100%, leaving 57% of the nation's wealth in the hands of the remaining 99%. I don't care how you cut the pie, Mr. Conard, that leaves very little for the rest of us to live comfortably. Many Americans have devoutly clipped coupons, shopped sales and frequented discount stores to make up for rising a food prices, soaring health costs, and shrinking earnings.


Conard asserts that we simply need more innovators. I say we need more quality innovators and vastly more people who execute the innovations here in the US. Apple manufactures its iPads in China, rather than here. Thousands of examples of this type of outsourcing, which decimated many areas of "The Rust Belt", exist. I'm certain Conard would label that an innovation, but I disagree. It's an unwanted change that resulted in poor quality products, including contaminated drywall, baby clothes, children's toys, and clothing with mismatched seams and lacking in finishing work. I'm positive readers could share hundreds of additional examples relating to sub-par Chinese products.


Draw your own conclusions, Readers. I'm skipping "Unintended Consequences." I think Edward Conard has lost touch with his middle class roots, and he misses one salient fact. Many of the 1% gained their riches by losing their integrity and taking money that they didn't earn. Bernie Madoff was aptly named, because he made of with billions from his investors. The lack of a moral compass is the biggest unintended consequence of all.