Skill?

Dan Froomkin wrote yesterday (my italics):

Greg Ip writes in the Wall Street Journal: "The richest Americans' share of national income has hit a postwar record, surpassing the highs reached in the 1990s bull market, and underlining the divergence of economic fortunes blamed for fueling anxiety among American workers.

"The wealthiest 1% of Americans earned 21.2% of all income in 2005, according to new data from the Internal Revenue Service. That is up sharply from 19% in 2004, and surpasses the previous high of 20.8% set in 2000, at the peak of the previous bull market in stocks.

"The bottom 50% earned 12.8% of all income, down from 13.4% in 2004 and a bit less than their 13% share in 2000. . . .

"The IRS data go back only to 1986, but academic research suggests the rich last had this high a share of total income in the 1920s. . . .

One study by University of Chicago academics Steven Kaplan and Joshua Rauh concludes that in 2004 there were more than twice as many such Wall Street professionals in the top 0.5% of all earners as there are executives from nonfinancial companies. . . .

"In an interview yesterday with The Wall Street Journal, President Bush said, 'First of all, our society has had income inequality for a long time. Secondly, skills gaps yield income gaps. And what needs to be done about the inequality of income is to make sure people have got good education, starting with young kids. That's why No Child Left Behind is such an important component of making sure that America is competitive in the 21st century.'"

Honestly, what "skills gap" is there putting the top 1% on top? The skill of managing money? No amount of education will allow the bottom 50% to catch up, especially when the real game plan is to keep cutting taxes on the 1%.

No, this is just one more example of the current president (and his party)'s total inability to see beyond big bank balances. I don't care how well educated all the children in America are, the jobs will not be there.