Call it a case of old news reiterated: The rich are getting richer and the poor are not, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Economic Policy Institute. We've known this for awhile, and we've always ignored the data. Probably, we'll ignore it this time. It stands to reason, after all, that it takes money to make money, so you would expect the rich to get rich, and at a quick rate.

Economics abhors a vacuum, if it's in your wallet. Why are things so good for the rich families, who received an extra ten grand last year? The stock market boom. Why aren't the poor getting richer (incomes of the poorest families rose by only $100)? Because they can't afford to buy stocks. The conservative CATO institute claimed in two breaths that this study was just an attempt to put a negative spin on a spectacular economy and that we should cut the capital gains tax (a tax on rich people who sell expensive things) so that they'll invest more and create more jobs.

Trickle down is still with us.

Problem is, the water tends to evaporate before it hits the ground. Despite low unemployment numbers, we can say that rich people have been doing a lousy job at job creation. They're creating service industry jobs and service industry jobs don't pay anything because they're mind numbingly stupid and the workers who are unfortunate enough to find themselves trapped in that sector are easily replaceable. The cashier at Wendy's can't demand more money -- its easier for Wendy's to let the cashier quit and hire a new one. Seriously, what's a few hours of candidate interviewing and training to a giant corporation? It beats paying an extra dollar an hour forty hours a week for a year. So the rich are creating jobs, but bad jobs.

What else are they creating? Well, they're creating the world they inhabit. Those investing in the stock market, by their investments, are causing the boom. All that money flooding in for shares is allowing companies to expand (and create service industry jobs!) and... hire salaries for rich executives. Call it "trickle around" theory. It's a proper description of rich people who spend most of their time trading money with each other kids with Pokemon cards.

So why don't we do anything about this?

Because it doesn't matter. The poor people are too poor to do anything about. What are they going to do, bribe politicians? Hell, a lot of poor people are conservative, of the mindset that while they don't have much they don't want to pay taxes on it, and the hope that if they ever do have much they'll get to keep it all. The working poor are basically misinformed and unorganized in this country, so why should anyone care about income disparity except the poor people who we just said don't care?

There's no answer to that.

There really isn't. The study is rather meaningless because it will change nothing. Somehow, trickle down economics has become a national myth and people think we should cut the capital gains tax to spur on job creation. Somehow there's a national myth that the stock market boom of the 1990s, fueled by entrepreneurs and their initial public offerings on the Internet has taken everyone for the ride. Maybe its because we get our news from giant corporations who are spinning off their own dotcom companies and have a financial interest in making sure that everyone thinks the stock market will make them rich. Newsflash! The Internet is a genie who gives out money! Also, we're selling MSNBC! Now, who wants to buy?

Poor people can't get into the stock market, can't get into the beltway and they can't get into the media so, screw 'em. That's what the report really says. Maybe someday we'll pay for our "screw the poor" attitude, but I can't figure out how. I'll be surprised as the rest of the world, or maybe nothing will happen at all and I'll be surprised but the rest of the world won't.

Michael Maiello usually thinks this will be handled by some form of violent revolution, but it just doesn't seem like it's in the cards anymore.