Living in an upper class republican community, and as a person with friends on all sides of the political equation, I have heard a lot of divergent opinions regarding where the economic stimulus should be pointed. Jim and Steve cast their lots with those that say that any rebound will come from the investor class and that any economic aid should be pointed their way. Now it leads to the question - who really creates the wealth - the guy who owns the factory or the poor low wage shlub who's shoveling the coal?
Millard Fillmore told me that I was an out and out communist this morning - I am told that I put the pink in pinko. Sue sent me this poem by the minister William J. H. Boetcker, it is titled The Ten Cannots and has been mistakenly attributed to Lincoln:
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot help little men by tearing down big men.
You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot establish sound security on borrowed money.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn.
You cannot build character and courage by destroying men's initiative and independence.
And you cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they can and should do for themselves.
Rich and upper class people are worried about losing the position that most of them have worked long and hard for. The average American's net worth has dropped 20%. I am painfully aware that the economy is suffering. But take a look at the transfer of wealth to the upper percentile in this country since Reagan. The numbers are astounding. 109% income gain from 1983 to 2001 alone. The upper 1% has more wealth than the bottom 90% combined. Maybe they should pay more taxes? Bravo and a tip of the cap to the Halliburtons that are smart enough to take their businesses offshore and tax free while still getting plum no bid American contracts in Iraq.
I take issue with those that would bail out the top strata before other segments of our society. Investors' greed and penchant for throwing money at invisible windmills helped overheat the economy. The Investment banks peddled worthless derivative packages, whose collapse helped deep six the nation. The banks and their toxic debt have been subsidized by Joe taxpayer along with the huge bonuses, parachutes and compensation packages to the bastards who got us into the fix in the first place.
Citicorp's Vikram Pandit lied to Congress and recently when he said that he got one million bucks last year. Turns out it was ten times that much, well thirty times that with the initial value of his stock options - how about a jail cell for the guy? Cheney said recently that the finance industry had to be bailed out because they were a quasi "utility". I am sure that those Hampton and Connecticut summer houses are all still doing just fine. The bankers soak us for millions and we pick up the check.
The mantra of the previous administration was cut regulations. The S.E.C. was neutered and the Justice Department vested in rooting out nonbelievers. We are now reaping the desserts.
"The members of the tiny capitalist class at the top of the hierarchy have an influence on economy and society far beyond their numbers. They make investment decisions that open or close employment opportunities for millions of others. They contribute money to political parties, and they often own media enterprises that allow them influence over the thinking of other classes... The capitalist class strives to perpetuate itself: Assets, lifestyles, values and social networks... are all passed from one generation to the next." -Dennis Gilbert, The American Class Structure, 1998
Anyway, as I have pointed out previously we have a double standard about what constitutes socialism in this country. Bail out the rich and the banks, fine, but god forbid that we grant mortgage relief to the little people. Commie bastard. I would think and hope that most of the rich earned their fortunes the honest way, through hard work, but know from experience how many predators screwed over everything in their path to get to the top. I come from a real estate background and saw thirty years hard work come crashing to an end when we got into a deal with someone who was too rich to sue and subsequently stole twelve million dollars from my family. Won a unanimous jury verdict. Didn't matter. End of story.
It's a jewish passion to want to stick up for the little guy. Or sickness. Long periods under boot heel get into your genetic coding. But can we have a healthy society if we continue to shortchange the middle class? What would Jesus do, anyway? You think he'd be at the country clubs or the food banks?
The wolves will always feast on the sheep. Don't worry. I am not trying to foster class hatred. I just get tired of hearing rich people whining about taxes. You use the road system, expect people to inspect the peanut factories and meatpacking plants, want the vouchers so your kids don't have to go to school with the secular or the blacks or mexicans. We must pay the soldiers for your foreign incursions. Someone does have to pay for that.
I am reminded of David Stockman's assessment of Ronald Reagan's economic policy - Horse and Sparrow economics - the horse gets to eat and the bird can peck through his shit. And if you're not the lead dog the scenery never changes, to be sure. But no pyramid can stand without a broad foundation. We have to find a win win solution that shares the mercies of this stimulus with everybody. Or get out the guillotines.
"The members of the tiny capitalist class at the top of the hierarchy have an influence on economy and society far beyond their numbers. They make investment decisions that open or close employment opportunities for millions of others. They contribute money to political parties, and they often own media enterprises that allow them influence over the thinking of other classes... The capitalist class strives to perpetuate itself: Assets, lifestyles, values and social networks... are all passed from one generation to the next." -Dennis Gilbert, The American Class Structure, 1998
Anyway, as I have pointed out previously we have a double standard about what constitutes socialism in this country. Bail out the rich and the banks, fine, but god forbid that we grant mortgage relief to the little people. Commie bastard. I would think and hope that most of the rich earned their fortunes the honest way, through hard work, but know from experience how many predators screwed over everything in their path to get to the top. I come from a real estate background and saw thirty years hard work come crashing to an end when we got into a deal with someone who was too rich to sue and subsequently stole twelve million dollars from my family. Won a unanimous jury verdict. Didn't matter. End of story.
It's a jewish passion to want to stick up for the little guy. Or sickness. Long periods under boot heel get into your genetic coding. But can we have a healthy society if we continue to shortchange the middle class? What would Jesus do, anyway? You think he'd be at the country clubs or the food banks?
The wolves will always feast on the sheep. Don't worry. I am not trying to foster class hatred. I just get tired of hearing rich people whining about taxes. You use the road system, expect people to inspect the peanut factories and meatpacking plants, want the vouchers so your kids don't have to go to school with the secular or the blacks or mexicans. We must pay the soldiers for your foreign incursions. Someone does have to pay for that.
I am reminded of David Stockman's assessment of Ronald Reagan's economic policy - Horse and Sparrow economics - the horse gets to eat and the bird can peck through his shit. And if you're not the lead dog the scenery never changes, to be sure. But no pyramid can stand without a broad foundation. We have to find a win win solution that shares the mercies of this stimulus with everybody. Or get out the guillotines.
7 comments:
My father used to say if you can't eat it fuck it or wear it, you don't need it. I can go with just two of those: Eat the rich, fuck the poor, go naked. Gimme health insurance, a fishing pole, surf board and a happy family. Everything else is surplus,
D.F.
Economic stimulus should be pointed where it will be most effective. This includes cost effectiveness. If those factors are utilized, the private sector will be the recipient. If the objective is the redistribution of wealth or creating an economic shift, then you are not seeking an economic stimulus that is the most effective, rather the most transformational.
Why tax the rich at a higher rate than the middle class or the poor? Why shouldn't everyone pay at the same rate? Shouldn't all benefit or suffer equally under our government & laws? Don't we all have access to the streets and highways? Does the sheriff who arrests the meth head in the apartment next door serve the rich more than the poor?
Each of us will suffer in some way because of the poorly crafted bailout packages. However, some will suffer more than others. If the bailout brings you a job, keeps you in your home, or allows you to recieve a bonus paid by the taxpayers, you will suffer less than the vast majority, however you will suffer. The person who pays a higher tax rate will pay a larger share and thus suffer through a larger share.
Just as the cost burdens for the government inspector of the peanut plant are carried to a larger degree by those who shoulder the financial burden.
Ultimately this debt will become like shackles and halt our collective movement and progress. For many it will be worse than personal debt, because it will have been created by others.
Thank you for a well written reply. I have a couple arguments with it. A wealth redistribution has been taking place for the last thirty years. It's just all gone to the top. The rich like to demonize the poor, those shiftless crack smoking, baby making machines , who want to laze around on welfare while we work. The reality is that many good people who have been tiptoeing on the precipice now find themselves jobless and homeless. Good, hardworking americans.
The myth of capitalism is that there is a seat at the table for everyone willing to put the hard work in and to pull themselves up by the bootstraps. Once again, the reality is that there are only so many pieces of pie to be divided.
Your advocacy for a flat tax is understandable but contrary to most economic theorists for the last 100 years. Adam Smith wrote in the Wealth of Nations :
The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
I am not advocating throwing money at the poorest segment of society, whose gaping mouths will never be satiated, or the wealthiest, who tend to write the tax laws and have bevies of lawyers at their disposal to craft ways around them but at strengthening the middle class, where most of us reside.
This is not related to how the 'stimulus' should be handled, but a comment on the general econimic meltdown. No where do I read or hear about personal responsibility in regards to this economic mess we are in. True, the powers that be allowed it to happen. But my understanding is that the 'average middle class person' was making 50 some odd thousand a year and spending 80 some odd thousand a year. HELLOOOOOOO! Of course this could not be sustained. There are too many people out there who refinanced their homes (multiple times) to spend money on luxuries they could not afford. Now they are losing their homes, and all the blame goes to the financial institutions that allowed them to live their lifestyle. In the last 10 years they spent tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars more than they made. And now there is no stigma in walking away from their mortgages. Let the taxpayer pick up the tab. My heart goes out to those who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own. But when I hear of a friend or acquaintance losing their home, I have to think back on their past lifestyle. Everyone has different circumstances, but so many shouldn't be crying the blues. I think we've gotten a huge wake up call, and that it will be heeded. It will be a very long time before people forget and spend like they have in the past.
In the meantime, the middle class will be paying back (in taxes) the unearned money they spent.
Blue Heron, you state, "The myth of capitalism is that there is a seat at the table for everyone willing to put the hard work in and to pull themselves up by the bootstraps. Once again, the reality is that there are only so many pieces of pie to be divided."
In actuality, there is no myth of capitalism. It is an economic system which has allowed for and continues to provide untold opportunities.
Certainly, the limitations of individuals, the choices they make, imagination, and many other factors contribute to the ability to prosper under this system. However, the system does allow for all who are capable of doing so, to work hard and pull themselves up.
Perhaps your definition of what is meant by "work hard" or "pull themselves up" is out of line with a realistic expectation? Indeed, the "necessaries of life" are the basis of what we should expect a system to allow us to achieve.
Additionally, you state "there are only so many pieces of pie to be divided." This suggests a finite resource pool. In reality, man has not plumbed the depths of imagination, the ability to create, build, alter, re-use or invent. Until we reach that point, opportunity will be limitless.
Perhaps what you are really disappointed with is the effects caused by decisions and behavior of people operating within a capitalist system. Certainly, there is reason for disappointment! However, please do not confuse the shortcomings of people with the ability of a system to function.
Well put - I think it's a fantasy but well put - without cheap labor, the whole thing implodes. Got to have enough losers and saps or the wheels just don't turn right. I am not pushing any other ism, just trying to look honestly at the notion that we can have a billion millionaires on the planet as Buckminster Fuller used to preach. Rather than believing your notion of infinite opportunity, I see the hand of finite resources and entropy playing into the equation. The really smart guy or gal who comes up with a revolutionary cure or idea can still cash in but for most of us dummies our prospects are a little dim. Although you probably hang out with a smarter crowd than I do.
Post a Comment