Joseph Stiglitz believed that inequality in America was the result of a conspiracy between the rich and powerful. He also added that the U.S. government assisted them. He placed blame on their shoulders and he was angry because of his convictions. Stiglitz acknowledged that there are other forces at work but conceded that the major reason for the inequality is due to the actions of the wealthy, the corrupt and the opportunists. Stiglitz labeled the ability of the rich and powerful to steal from the weak as the art of rent seeking. Stiglitz observation must be considered in order to build an egalitarian society. Stiglitz traced the root-cause of inequality and said that it can be traced back to the acquisition of military power in ancient times. He said that the rich and powerful seized power in order to extract resources from the people that they have dominated. An overview of feudal systems and empires can easily confirm this assertion. Kings, landlords, warlords, emperors and pharaohs demonstrated the immutable fact that those who had the military and economic power to subdue people can force others to pay tribute. They also earned the capability to allocate resources in their favor. The author said that the ultimate goal of corrupt leaders and businessman is not to create wealth but to transfer wealth. He added that the rich and powerful had perfected various schemes that compeled others to pay tribute even if they did not work for it. The author said that this phenomenon is called rent seeking. Stiglitz cited examples such as: 1) hidden and open transfers and subsidies from government; 2) laws that make the marketplace less competitive; 3) lax enforcement of existing competition laws; and 4) statutes that allow corporations to take advantage of others or pass costs on to the rest of society (Stiglitz, p.39). Stiglitz condemned rent seeking and used strong terms to denounce the evil created by corrupt members of society and he wrote: To put it baldly, there are two ways to become wealthy: to create wealth or take wealth away from others. The former adds to society. The latter typically subtracts from it, for in the process of taking it away, wealth gets destroyed (Stiglitz, p.32). One can just imagine the wasted opportunities when wealth was destroyed through corruption. At the same time one can just imagine the ripple effect of a single act of benevolence. A businessman that created a high-quality product and sold it at the right price contributed in the creation of a better society. But a greedy businessman with inferior products and overpriced goods sold will create inefficiency in society. Stiglitz also condemned predatory lending practices and expressed his displeasure when he stated that the government’s inability to curb credit card woes was an outrageous form of social injustice. He added that the government must intervene and that policymakers should establish rules and regulations that will protect the poor from unscrupulous businessmen. Stiglitz argued that the solution to inequality is effective income distribution. He said that it is the byproduct of both political and economic processes. Therefore, the government must exert political will in order to shape and control the economic process so that it does not only favor the powerful and the rich. For example, a company’s failure can be traced to the hefty bonuses given to the CEO. The outrageous sums of money given