The wealthy drown out their competition

For 40 years we have run our economy based on a flawed assumption: that the wealthy earned all their money from working harder than the rest of us, and that letting the wealthy keep all of their money will promote investment and job growth. However, prioritizing the interests of the 1% reduces competition and investment, increases economic insecurity and undermines democratic participation.

For example, we’ve rolled back regulations to let corporations get bigger and more powerful. Today the largest companies, from McDonald’s and Walmart to Amazon, are earning record profits — not because they are creating great new products, but because they are able to use their size to keep prices high, or wages low, or squeeze their competitors.

We’ve let the wealthiest among us, including presidential hopefuls Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg, take home more wealth and then hoard it.

Tax cuts for corporations, billionaires and financiers were sold to us with the promise of more investment that never materialized.

This is not to say either Mr. Steyer or Mr. Bloomberg are necessarily bad presidential candidates, but their wealth has allowed them to drown out competition in a very nondemocratic way. Their devotion to heroic causes like climate change, gun control and voter registration, while laudable, has not targeted the problems of corruption and wealth concentration at the root of our high-profit, low-wage economy.

At least Mr. Steyer recognized the important democratic principle of soliciting support from many individuals expressed through small donations. Mr. Bloomberg disqualified himself from the campaign debates by refusing all donations, denying voters an opportunity to see him questioned on stage on how he intends to rectify our economy and democracy.

The next president must prioritize unrigging the very economic system from which billionaires have so richly benefited.