Overview:
Politics facilitated the creation of the super-rich, the plutocrats. As the super-rich become wealthier, they obtain political power. Plutocrats were called robber barons during the industrial revolution. Plutocrats are the cronies of capitalism. Unlike the historical robber baron counterpart, plutocrats are the working rich. Their wealth was generated through effort, rather than inherited wealth. They are economic meritocrats, who not only consume wealth but create it. Plutocrats utilized technology and globalization to reach more people than ever. Plutocrats compete with each for more money, and have redefined what it means to be rich.

The rich and poor work very long hours, but better to be the plutocrat. Plutocrats have better benefits with better severance packages. Wealth impacts life satisfaction for everyone, not just the plutocrats. Although people are making more money, they are generally more frustrated with their income source. Economic growth at the expense of life satisfaction. Even behavior changes as people become wealthier. The affluent tend to behave more unethically. Tending to prioritize themselves over others.

The wealthy can self-tax through charities. Some claim that they prefer charities of their own selection, rather than government using their money through taxation. Some plutocrats tend to see themselves as victims, and claim that they should be respected because they provide the jobs and have created a lot of value.

An interesting relationship between government and the private sector exists, because of a revolving door. There are many who work as regulators and then as the regulated, or vice versa. A relationship that creates a conflict of interest when engaging with each other.

Labor market has become polarized. With better and highly paid jobs at the top, without much change for the bottom. The middle-income jobs have been hollowed out. Knowledge workers have become higher paid because technology used has become personal to each individual. The worker is able to take their tools with them and apply their knowledge elsewhere. Silicon Valley figured out how to make their system be more egalitarian, by contracting out the lowest paid jobs. Thereby they do not count as employees.

There are workers who are famous. Being a celebrity means being famous, for the fact that the person is famous. Firms need to pay more for those celebrities. Not because of talent, but because they are famous. A celebrity surcharge.

Caveats?
The quality of claims and counterclaims varies. While there are claims that are given a complex understanding, with the implications and consequences of the claims. There are claims which are standalone, without much analysis.

There is a survivorship bias. Few plutocrats are analyzed, and they appear to be representatives of the group. The plutocrats referenced have been wealthy for some time. But the group of plutocrats have changed, which means that not all plutocrats had effective political power.

The book prioritizes showing the way the system operates, and lacks potential resolutions to the inequality problem. The problem is expressed as more complex than the historic inequality era’s. ( )

Some interesting ideas, somewhat dated. A curious mixture of pro- and anti- capitalism. ( )

This one started off as a history book became a political book and wound up as a lousy business book 3 stars ( )

This book, written in 2012, talks about the growing wealth and power of the top 1% of global wealth-holders. It's well written and easy to read, although if you are not at all familiar with financial markets, you may find yourself "googling" a few things. While a lot has been said and written about the super-rich since 2012, I still gained some insights from Ms. Freeland's book.

One such insight was the concept of the "working rich". In previous generations, wealth was largely inherited. More of today's millionaires have worked for their money. Not all of them have produced useful goods or provided needed services; most of them work in finance or banking and manage hedge funds -- but they do work under stressful conditions.

Second, I learned what a small, insulated group the top 1% are. They go to the same events and holiday spots, and speak largely to each other. The same can be said for many groups, but this is a group which includes many politicians and has influence over the lives many of us live. My biggest worry about income inequality has become that of governing both governments and industries from a narrow perspective -- something that can only exacerbate the problems.

At first, I was left wanting more analysis in the book, but upon reflection, I am happy that Ms. Freeland described the issues as well as she did, enabling readers to draw their own conclusions. ( )

Pretty good book but I honestly can't remember much about it so I guess that doesn't say much about it. It's just that it wasn't all that inciteful. It was dismal and depressing and basically true. Oh well. ( )