yes, but that's not the only factor.

I agree with your sentiment, but income inequality has risen because of our socialist policies disguised as capitalist.

Your previous list was spot on, but missed an important one....term limits.

Our problems can all be identified by following the money. In theory, I agree no single person should be a billionaire but we have to look at why and how that is the case. The money is already there to level the playing field...it's all wasted by and amongst the 1%

This doesn't get solved until that influence leaves our elected offices. No issue with a wealthy person spending 8-10 years in public service. My issue is a wealthy person spending a lifetime in "public service" leaving even wealthier.

The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.

Unionization and union-busting are both results of capitalism.

So, by the transitive property (though not the Favre Fan Terrible Football Thought Transitive Property)....

Unions can be adapted into the system of capitalism and has proven to be the case. The first thing other systems do is ban unions.

The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.

Unions thrived in America during the New Deal Era through the onset of Neoliberalism because the country had a highly socialized economy.

Neoliberalism de-collectivized the economy, destroyed the public sphere, and presided over a period in which the interests of government became increasingly inseparable from the interests of business (fascism),

Unions cannot survive in this type of economy.

Thanks for making my case though I'd say private sector unions were at their strongest post WW2.

The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.

If your point is that unions can exist in an economy that balances capitalism and socialism, then I agree.

Unchecked capitalism leads to the destruction of unions and fascism.

What's more capitalistic than collective bargaining? It can exist without socialism. Not a problem. Socialism is a pisspoor substitution for CBA's. Socialism has no skin in the game and the gov't gets to set prices/wages/pensions/handouts AND take their cut. There's no adaptability to socialism. It just ends up unwieldy and broke. We see it over and over and over again.

The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.

The only thing that allows for unions under capitalism is state intervention, which is decidedly anti-capitalist.

For example?

Weird, I see Dolphin looking in my asshole

The menstrual cycle changes among Hassidic Jewish women was something as well.