"They are essentially exploring the laws and mechanisms by which the wealthiest 1% have managed to game the system in their own favor."
I have a few concerns with the whole one percent narrative. It's a convenient narrative, of course, ever more so since Occupy Wall Street made it a rallying cry. And the numbers are easy: 1 and 99. Makes for good media. But I'm not sure it's an altogether true narrative.
-- The cutoff for being a one-percenter (income wise) is around $400,000, I believe. While earning $400,000 a year can make you pretty comfortable, I'm not sure too many people at the lower end of the one-percenters (and there are many) spend much time buying politicians and gaming any system (especially since many politicians are already above that threshold themselves). Perhaps the .1 percenters, but that doesn't look as good in the media narrative and it's harder to say while blathering on a talk show or on a sidewalk.
-- The narrative is pretty much how 'all of us 99 percenters' are against those filthy rich one percenters. But when you actually start talking numbers, do you really believe that those making $20,000 or $30,000 a year feel like they share a common struggle with those making $200,000 or $300,000 a year? I would think not, not even close.
-- You can be a one-percenter income wise one year, and not for the next 10 years, and it's not even all that hard for two working professionals who sell a house/inherit a bit from a deceased parent/etc.
I think we are in danger of becoming intellectually lazy when we begin to expound on things with catchy phrases - those phrases obscure far too much and can allow us to reduce complicated issues to internet memes and he said/she said arguments (not that we'd do that here on BPL.....).