I liked his idea that the common American is stuck at the loser-end of a system of "asymmetric risk." Americans are expected to take on more and more "personal responsibility" (i.e. risk) for healthcare, for securing income, etc. and that means they're subject to all the consequences of any failure.

On the other hand the powerful and wealthy monopolize the rewards of risk, and broadly refuse to share it. However, they have such large cushion (and connections) that they never really took any personal risks at all. If they fail, they'll probably be fine (except maybe with some hurt feelings).