Once again, Russian President Vladimir Putin has shown a stronger knowledge of American politics than most US politicians, pointing out that while globalization has benefited the elites, it has been a catastrophe for the average American.
In a latest interview, Putin told Lionel Barber, editor of the Financial Times, “The US middle class has not benefited from globalization; it was left out when this pie was split.”
Putin had some very interesting and precise remarks on the present U.S. political situation, especially as it refers to the middle class of America. Here are some of the main remarks: “Russia has been charged and, odd as it may seem, is still being charged with mythical interference in the U.S. election despite the Mueller report. What actually occurred?
Mr Trump looked at the attitude toward him of his opponents and saw changes in American society, and he took advantage of that.
You and I are speaking before the conference of the G20. It is an economic forum, and there will certainly be debates about globalization, global trade, and international finance.
The US middle class did not benefit from globalization… The Trump team felt this very strongly and clearly and used it in the election campaign. Has anyone ever considered who genuinely benefited and what advantages have been obtained from globalization, which we have observed and participated in over the previous 25 years since the 1990s?
In specific, China has used globalization to take millions of Chinese out of poverty.
What occurred in the United States, and how did that occur? In the US, these advantages were used by the leading US companies— the businesses, their executives, shareholders, and associates. Globalization has hardly benefited the middle class.
Globalization has not benefited the middle class in the US; it was left out when this pie was split.
The Trump team felt this very obviously and keenly, and in the election campaign they used this. This is where you should look for reasons behind the win of Trump, rather than any supposed foreign interference. This is what we should be talking about here, including when it comes to the global economy. “(my bolds) Viable Opposition reports: Mr. Putin obviously puts Hillary Clinton’s defeat at the feet of disillusioned middle-class voters in America in 2016. Let’s look at some of the factors for this disillusionment: 1.) Stagnant wages: here is a graph illustrating what occurred to average real wages for full-time employees aged 16 and over since 1979 (setting 1979 salaries at 100): real wages for full-time American employees have only risen by 6.6 percent over the four decades since the start of 1979. If that’s not salary stagnation, I don’t understand what it is. Here’s a graph illustrating what’s occurred to the average weekly nominal income for full-time American employees aged 16 and over since 1979: over the four-decade period, Corporate America’s earnings have risen by 696 percent or 2.4 times over the same period as its wage earners.
2.) CEO of Worker Wage Disparity: here is a table from the Institute for Policy Studies displaying the most egregious instances of CEO-to-worker pay gaps: here is a graph from the Economic Policy Institute illustrating how the CEO-to-worker compensation ratio has altered since 1965: CEO compensation has even increased when measured against the top 0.1 percent of earners as shown in this graph: 3.)
While it is hard to draw connections from economic class to voting patterns given that education has an impact on voting levels, it is quite evident that Vladimir Putin’s statements about American society and the increasing feeling that middle class America is left behind are precise. It becomes progressively apparent that globalization benefits the top few and leaves behind the vast majority of society who feel threatened by their location in society.