As Occupy Wall Street movements have fallen from the news cycle, its message too has been lost in the minds of voters despite the spiraling growth of wealth inequality between Americans.

According to the IRS, the average U.S. income declined 1 percent between 1988 and 2008. But Americans making $380,000 or more saw their incomes grow 33 percent. Still, during the past decade the percentage of Americans who say this disparity is something lawmakers should focus on has dropped from 52 percent to 45 percent.

In a presidential race focused on economic growth, it is worrisome how few Americans seem concerned with the fact fewer opportunities to succeed are presented to people today.

‘In this country, broad-based prosperity has never trickled down from the success of a wealthy few,’ President Barack Obama said this week in response to Republican Paul Ryan’s budget proposal. ‘It has always come from the success of a strong and growing middle class.’

But as we began to pull out of a deep economic recession in 2010, household income only grew by 2.3 percent. Though the top 1 percent enjoyed growth of 11.6 percentage points, the bottom 99 percent saw only 0.2 percent growth to their incomes. This meant that the wealthiest Americans captured 93 percent of the income gains that year.

According to a recent study of world economies by Daron Acemoglu, an economics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of technology, ‘Countries with so-called ‘inclusive institutions’ that encourage hard work and innovation from top to bottom consistently out-perform countries where wealth is extracted from the middle class and concentrated at the top.’

Statistics and Republican sentiment convey a U.S. economy that is increasingly accepting of policies that only benefit the upper class. Indeed, Acemoglu’s studies conclude our economy ‘is in danger of exiting this select pool of thriving nations as more wealth and political power accumulates at the pinnacle, at the expense of the base.’

The result of this greediness by the richest Americans at the expense of those who are in need of opportunities for success is often justified by trickle-down economics. But those lowest on the totem pole have not yet seen these benefits.

For instance, as the Federal Reserve has held interest rates at near-zero levels and mortgages have fallen to 3.8 percent, the wealthiest have been given opportunities to borrow low and invest in distressed businesses and properties for huge gains. At the same time, student loans remain at a staggering 6.8 percent. The result has been a skyrocketing default rate and fewer people now even consider college because of expense alone.

Conservatives continue to attack public aid and programs aimed at allowing Americans from difficult backgrounds to succeed.

In a campaign stop in Ohio last month, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney indicated if he is elected in November, he will advocate to end government loans and grants for education. He said, ‘It would be popular for me to stand up and say, ‘I’m going to give you government money to pay for your college,’ but I’m not going to promise that.’

Understandably, many Americans have shifted their focus from the wealth gap to just getting the economy back on track, but this should not be the case. This attitude gives the elite the prerogative to take more for themselves while leaving less for the rest. It could help increase some business in the short term, but it is unsustainable for our future.

Without access to education, health care and other opportunities to succeed, most Americans simply will not succeed and will continue to be a drag on our economy. But an economy focused on development and growth provides the best opportunity for us to succeed not only on an individual level but as a united country.

Stephen Fox is a graduate student studying for his master’s degree in entrepreneurship and a graduate of the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications. His columns appear weekly. He can be reached at smfox03@syr.edu.   

Published on April 6, 2012 at 12:00 pm