Yes, and the solution is simple: limit those who skim off the excess value of labor with steeply progressive income tax rates. Oddly, seems that’s not a solution that either the list maker or Mike favor.

It matters *where* your income is from. Middle-men are just short of thieves whether it’s skimming off musicians or manufacturers: they don’t *produce* goods, only pass them on to those who *purchase* them, and for the amazing feat of this transport, collect *most* of the profit. Those who regard only economics as relevant of course fail to grasp the essential immorality of these middle-men, and indeed, may extoll them as performing a vital role in the economy. — No, middle-men are at best overhead in the distribution chain.

Retail and studios are an outdated model based on scarcity of goods and more importantly, a delivery system. Sears-Roebuck simply wasn’t possible before the Postal Service had adequate facilities, therefore its success was *subsidized* by gov’t funded basic structure. The degree to which gov’t subsidizes transport services seems lost on those who so take it for granted as to expect unlimited subsidized services for a fixed price.

The proposed steeply progressive tax rate would affect only those who end up skimming a great deal from society: the upper 1% as the income tax was originally implemented. You can find how much those fiends get and have of the wealth created by others elsewhere. I’d prefer this to be a simple and utterly fair test of 100% tax rate above $10 million a year income from *any* source, ZERO below that, and so I doubt it will affect *you*. — Though regressive sales taxes will. Those should be lifted, but taxing The Rich is a necessary first step.

The Rich have proven themselves efficient *only* at effectively skimming from workers through various machinations, and we merely need to utilize their abilities for public good, not private evils. High taxes on The Rich will automatically limit their efforts, and we’ll get a more than doubled benefit. That’s how the system worked in the 60’s, when both tax rates and industrial production were *high*, and it’ll work so again despite the looting of our industrial base. All history shows that if the rest of us don’t keep *some* limits on The Rich, they *always* ruin societies through greed and evil.

Practical problem is that all Americans think that they’re rich, or soon will be, and so oppose implementing high rates in order to keep a limit on The Rich. That’s just a matter of education. When people have the facts in view, opinions change.

George Washington said (perhaps not exact): “The Rich have as clear and sacred a right to their large property as others have to theirs which is smaller.” — That’s true — assuming lawfully gained — but note that’s *property*, not *money*. The latter is a *social* product, a means of exchanging *labor*. But The Rich have twisted this concept into money being an *entitlement* for them, and an *obligation* on the working class. The Rich expect you to labor for them in exchange for mere pieces of paper (or numbers in a computer account), with which you can then demand the products and services of your fellow workers! In this system, The Rich *never* put anything in, but only take from workers who support themselves and The Rich. It’s no wonder that those already “vested” (another feudal term) in this system that they call “capitalism” think it’s great! But they’re getting out of control and moving to limit *your* opportunities, besides income.

So, that’s a start on your “something” to be done, Mike. Take up the banner of worker’s rights, instead of finding ways for petty grifters to skim from the current system. It’s in your interest and of all who labor or create to do so, because otherwise, The Rich are going to gain total over control over even powerful web-site operators.