Leave it to NBC's Today show to find the downside of a booming stock market. Playing the class envy card Today co-host Matt Lauer teased a story on a widening gap between rich and poor as he incredulously asked the audience: "Do you feel like you're working harder and harder these days just to stay financially afloat while fat cats get richer and richer?" Lauer, not exactly a pauper himself, then threw it to CNBC's Scott Cohn who claimed: "Not only are the rich getting richer they're leaving everyone else behind. In fact the last time the rich were this much richer than everyone else was the Great Depression."
Cohn did mention the wealthy are giving more to charity but only highlighted liberal billionaire Bill Gates' good deeds.
The following is the full story as it occurred on the April 26th Today show:
Matt Lauer: "Do you feel like you're working harder and harder these days just to stay financially afloat while fat cats get richer and richer? It's not just a feeling and you're not alone. The story now from CNBC's Scott Cohn."
[On screen headline: "Share the Wealth? The Rich Get Richer."]
Scott Cohn: "Richard David Story is feeling it. The editor-in-chief of American Express's magazine for its most elite card members. He's on a constant quest for the glitziest, glamorous. For an audience that just keeps wanting more."
Richard David Story, Departures magazine: "They're looking for that one perfect bottle of wine. They're looking for that one perfect not hotel room, not suite, that one perfect villa and they're extremely demanding right now."
Cohn: "They can afford to be with a record stock market and hedge funds creating a new crop of billionaires. But then there's the rest of us."
Man: "The rich do keep getting rich and the poor keep getting poorer."
Woman: "I can make ends meet but I have to think about it more."
Cohn: "Not only are the rich getting richer they're leaving everyone else behind. In fact the last time the rich were this much richer than everyone else was the Great Depression. A University of California study shows the top one percent of Americans now make 22 percent of the nation's income - their biggest piece of the pie since 1929. While middle-class Americans, by in large, are stuck. Rising energy prices cancelling out any increase in wages."
Robert Greenstein, Center On Budget and Policy Priorities: "It makes it harder to achieve the basics of the American dream for the millions of families that get up, work hard, play by the rules everyday."
Cohn: "Like a house. For all the talk of a slowdown the National Association of Realtors says homes are still less affordable as a percentage of family income than they were three years ago. Not that there's anything wrong with being rich and Richard David Story says he's writing more and more about the newest trend among the wealthy, philanthropy. Following the lead of billionaires like Bill Gates the rich getting so rich they have money to give away. For Today, Scott Cohn, NBC News, New York."
Update (Ken Shepherd | 15:22): Related post by Mark Finkelstein here.
—Geoffrey Dickens is the senior news analyst at the Media Research Center.





Man: "The rich do keep getting rich and the poor keep getting poorer."










Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Matt just wants to be one of
April 26, 2007 - 14:53 ET by dahliatraversMatt just wants to be one of the peeps.
I'm sure Lauer meant to say &
April 26, 2007 - 16:11 ET by motherbeltI'm sure Lauer meant to say "except me." Whatever he earns, I'll bet he doesn't consider himself rich. More like "comfortable" maybe. To him, only those Halliburton and oil company executives are "rich". But to class-warfare Democrats, a two -earner household grossing $75,000 a year is rich.
Reduced-payment Contract for Matt?
April 27, 2007 - 10:29 ET by ecnirPOh, come on already, Mr. Lauer. Show me the terms of your contract where you specifically negotiate to make less money each subsequent year as your experience and value to your company grows and I'll believe you really mean this load of tripe.
lauer
April 26, 2007 - 14:54 ET by BRADENso the fat cats are getting fatter, where exactly does that leave Lauer and the other MSM pundits, just scraping by on their millions per year. I guess they try to come off like regular working people. What hypocrisy.
Matt "Liar"
April 26, 2007 - 15:08 ET by rtb67Matt Laur is so full of it...He's always catering to left wing politics that the Today Show isn't worth watching for news because the ultra left wing bias is the only thing he talks about..He and his cronies make me sick......it's almost so bad it is laughable that anybody would agree with him on anything.
Stolen from Charles Wheelan:F
April 26, 2007 - 15:38 ET by mulerider24Stolen from Charles Wheelan:
The skills necessary to ask, "Would you like fries with that?" are not scarce.
Exactly correct.Now, I am not
April 26, 2007 - 15:53 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveExactly correct.
Now, I am not hurting for money by any means...the only thing I owe money on is my house. Everything else is owned out-right...paid in full at the time of purchase. I have everything I need and most of the things I want (except for an underground lair on a volcanic island in the tropics), I regularly give to charity, and I am able to save around $500-$800 a month. I have all of this on my military income alone, my wife doesn't work. The military wasn't my only option for a career, I chose the military for many reasons, the foremost being my love for freedom and the U.S.A. I could be making 2-3 times as much money but, for now I chose to stay with the military.
My point is that most of these "impoverished" people more or less chose (albeit maybe indirectly) their path by living a certain lifestyle or not seeking opportunities or not taking risks or otherwise "accepting" their station in life. Bill Gates made things happen in his life to deserve being the wealthiest man in the history of the world. How many of the "impoverished" have even made a serious attempt to make things happen in their lives? Just because one is on a certain path by doesn't mean they are stuck on that path.
One person's success does not rob another's potential to succeed.
"Yeah, right! Who's the only one here that knows illegal ninja moves from the government?!" --Napoleon Dynamite
Couldn't agree more Mean Gene
April 26, 2007 - 16:28 ET by mulerider24Couldn't agree more Mean Gene. I have trouble narrowing all my gripes on this topic, but I can't get over the irony of what some of these MSM geniuses are advocating. Economic growth is GREAT for poor people. It is the prototypical "rising tide" that lifts all ships. Will it lift a fast-food worker into the range of neurosurgeon? No. But at least there is a job there. On the flip side, when the economy turns downward, who do you think will lose their jobs first - busboys and valet parking attendants or brain surgeons and molecular engineers?
Elites like Lauer need to start caring about how much pie the poor are getting, not how much pie they are getting relative to Bill Gates. Policies that guarantee some pie for everybody will actually slow the growth of the pie itself. Liberals often ignore the fact that a growing pie, even if unequally divided, will almost always make even the small pieces larger. (Who is hungry for dessert now?)
I wish they would realize that we've already answered the question of which system works best - capitalism, communism, or socialism. That's soooooo 20th century.
Question concerning freewill
April 26, 2007 - 19:32 ET by UnsaneYou mean that (gulp) FREEWILL plays a role in how well people do in life???
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
And here I thought you might
April 27, 2007 - 03:32 ET by Full MonteAnd here I thought you might actually be the real Mean Gene Simmons...reading your posts in the future just won't be the same! Keep it up anyway.
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking." --Gen George S. Patton
How can anyone...anyone that
April 26, 2007 - 15:02 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveHow can anyone...anyone that makes over $30,000USD/year have any credibility at all whining or reporting/"exposing" income disparity? Let alone these reporters like Lauer that make $13,000,000 per year. That's 260 times as much money as I make (including all my military benefits that don't come in the form of a paycheck). How can these reporters do these stories with a straight face?
Good for them for earning that kind of money. It just seems cheap and hypocritical to air stories like this with extremely well-paid anchors/reporters...at least give these stories to the unpaid interns or pick some homeless guest reporter...at least then the delivery of the stories would be believable.
"Yeah, right! Who's the only one here that knows illegal ninja moves from the government?!" --Napoleon Dynamite
Matt Laur
April 26, 2007 - 15:13 ET by rtb67I'm sure matt can relate to someone like myself who is disabled and barely makes 10,000.00 a year....he's so full of it....he couldn't give a crap about me and others like me. he is a big hyprocrite
Unless they're getting richer
April 26, 2007 - 15:17 ET by mattmUnless they're getting richer through fraud or some other dubious means, there's nothing wrong with it. Of course, to Libs, capitalism is wrong - except when they benefit from it.
The solution is to get rid of the Liberal Democrat, Big Government roadblocks to prosperity:
i guess (financially speaking
April 26, 2007 - 16:17 ET by pmohbucki guess (financially speaking) being a "chubby kitten" instead of a "fat cat" has lauer's panties in a wad
Well I see they worked in t
April 26, 2007 - 16:27 ET by MightyMouthWell I see they worked in the "Great Depression" comparison. But I think Lauer is slipping, not one "Nazi" reference in the entire piece.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Fat Cats Under Bill Clinton
April 26, 2007 - 17:51 ET by Gary HallFat Cats Under Bill Clinton.
The media has been playing this game with a heavy hand for a while now; that the CEO's of corporations are making it big - the word "again" is always missing, but of course.
In this little chart, from a recent LA Times article, the caption notes that over a 15 year period of time (1990-2005) this pay gap between workers and CEO's had risen 4 times. Not mentioned, naturally enough, is that according to their chart this pay gap soared by 5 times in only 6 years (1994-2000) during the Clinton era.
For goodness sakes, it's not yet back to where it was during that greedy Clinton era. Gee, I wonder if the media was so upset about this back in 2000, when it was certainly much more shocking.
Nicely done, Gary.As they say
April 26, 2007 - 18:00 ET by BlondeNicely done, Gary.
As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words.
Take that, Matt Lauer.
Blonde
April 26, 2007 - 18:15 ET by Gary HallThanks - it's the caption on the graphic, that indicates that LA Times (like Lauer) doesn't want the public to get the picture. You and I see it, because we are looking for the larger picture.
Gary, Maybe we see it because
April 26, 2007 - 18:24 ET by BlondeGary,
Maybe we see it because we're not economic illiterates who rely upon the MsM to tell us what we should think.
You always come up with such great stuff, I have to tell you, you always impress me.
(BTW....the sim has CAT4 inbound in the next 8 hours, oh yeah! I shut it down right on time. As if we don't have enough practice doing this for real).
Thar she blows
April 26, 2007 - 18:52 ET by Gary HallThar she blows... tape the windows ... duc and cover... oh, it was only agore.
Thanks for the nice (very nice) comment. (;~> gary
It's always nice to find out
April 26, 2007 - 18:06 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveIt's always nice to find out when the MSM isn't telling the whole story.
"Yeah, right! Who's the only one here that knows illegal ninja moves from the government?!" --Napoleon Dynamite
They were probably upset abou
April 26, 2007 - 18:11 ET by mattmThey were probably upset about it, but they saw no political advantage in broadcasting it.
Very good, Gary. And from the
April 26, 2007 - 18:12 ET by ThisnThatVery good, Gary. And from the LAT, yet. I always knew the LAT was on the side of truth, justice, and the American way.
I'll bet they are more careful with their graphs in the future -- no, maybe not. That would take brains and the ability to successfully interpret data and report the facts, rather than simply expose their bias.
Hey that, try this..
April 26, 2007 - 18:23 ET by Gary HallHey that, try this..
You know, by and large a lot of information ends up in the mainsteam media, especially in the print media. However, just printing a chart one time, or writing one story about an important news story, while it may provide coverage for the paper ("oh, we covered that") the information will not become common knowlegde on the street unless the media actually talks about it a bit more often. The LA Times could have titled the story - "The Greed is Back." That would have fit their view - but would not have served their agenda.
Try this chart on for size. Yes, it was pubished in the NY Times - but on the street, everyone knows that it was the US (notably Rummy) that supplied Saddam with arms and WMD's.
Gary, another good chart. It
April 26, 2007 - 20:05 ET by ThisnThatGary, another good chart. It always amazes me how/why these people suddenly ignore everything they said before, just to score points. It's as though they think "We are the truth, now, no matter what we might have said in the past". And people actually believe that!
A suggestion for Lauer
April 26, 2007 - 19:35 ET by UnsaneHey, Matt, here's a novel suggestion: if you are so pained with guilt over the money you make, why not give it to charity, instead of demanding government steal from everyone else?
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Huh?
April 26, 2007 - 20:06 ET by goldenthroatGee, Matt - you've got that right! It must be tough for you to live on 13 million dollars a year the Nobody But Clinton network is paying you while the rest of us have more income than we know what to do with!
Never dance on an empty stomach unless it's a liberal.