Showing posts with label Wealth. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wealth. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

A Rich Man's Freedom


Freedom in capitalist society always remains about the same as it was in ancient Greek republics: Freedom for slave owners. -Vladimir Lenin


     Freedom for a rich man means something different than it does for the rest of us. Because to the truly wealthy freedom means not having to rely on anyone else for their happiness. This is an enviable kind of freedom to have, one that I’m sure we’d all enjoy if it was available to us. The only problem with that kind of freedom is that it costs a whole lot of money. In fact, if you want to be sure you have enough wealth that you’ll never have to rely on anyone else for your happiness, were talking tens of millions of dollars.
     Nevertheless, it is a freedom that is available to anyone. Potentially, at least. I mean, there is no law stating that certain people are not allowed to acquire that kind of money. Black, brown, white, man or woman, nobody is banned from being in that club once they have acquired the money. And the U.S. does provide the opportunity for advancement for anyone willing to put in the effort, there is no doubt about it. But even the most hard-working and shrewdest of us have little more than a lottery winner’s chance of acquiring the kind of money that would give us that kind of freedom. Realistically, only an elite few of us will ever get to experience that kind of freedom, I’m guessing somewhere near the one percent mark, a cutoff point that has been getting a fair degree of attention lately. And overwhelmingly, the most likely way one will gain that much money is by inheriting it. In that respect we have not moved far from the royalty we rebelled against in 1776.
     What I’m talking about with that kind of freedom—or more importantly, what the one percent are talking about when they talk about freedom—is the opportunity to make enough that you will be able to do whatever you want with your life. You won’t have to worry if there will be Medicare, welfare, or unemployment insurance. You won’t have to rely on scholarships for your children to attend college (though you’ll probably still take advantage of any opportunity to save a few bucks, after all the rich don’t get rich by letting opportunities to reduce costs slip by). You won’t have to worry about any of the social programs that are available to the rest of us. Therefore, you’re not likely to care about maintaining such programs: after all, programs like those cost money and they cost the rich more than they cost the poor.
     Even for those of us who don’t have that kind of money, it is a beautiful thing to dream about as we work hard to get ahead. But the problem is that it IS only a dream for the vast majority of us. And a dream is not freedom, it is not even the potential for freedom, it is a substitute for it. We are all free in our dreams, but we all have to wake up and go to work in the morning.
     Freedom can and does mean a lot of things. You can be free to do something or free from having to do something. You can have your freedom and still you can starve from a lack of food. Nelson Mandela was freer than most of us even when imprisoned because he refused to bow down to the powers that be. Freedom is quite a nebulous concept. But I’m not concerned with defining what freedom actually is or means, I’m only speaking to the rich man’s freedom.
     And when a capitalist—which is what most rich men are—talks about freedom, he means the freedom to make money. That’s what capitalists like to do, make money. That’s what makes them capitalists. So freedom for them is the pursuit of happiness (i.e. money). To them the sound the Liberty Bell makes is cha-ching.
     They want no limitations on what money can do. Kill them all and let the market sort them out is the philosophy. To impose any regulations on the market would be an attack on everything our Founding Fathers fought for. You see, because their one interest in life is money, they suppose that freedom to make money is the only thing worth living for. And because the rich are still prone to seeing things from their own point of view—just like the rest of us, only more so because their wealth validates their opinions—they assume that is what everyone else wants as well. That’s why they are willing to give what they love so much (money) to politicians, in order to preserve the freedom of the rich.
     The politicians who cater to the rich are quite fond of talking about freedom. They are always there to trumpet the value of liberty. Perhaps they were not the ones fighting for it on the battlefield, but they are quite eager to battle for your freedom in Washington D.C., that evil place where the enemy (government) resides.
     When a politician talks about your freedom, what he is really saying is “I’m not responsible for you.” Reagan talked about freedom and then released the mentally ill from the institutions they were housed in, leaving them homeless. He did it in the name of freedom. He gave them the opportunity to become capitalists.
     Most of us living in a capitalist society are no more capitalists than the average citizen of a communist nation was a communist. Most of us have lives beyond the pursuit of money. We don’t have a clearly defined ideology, we’re mostly just looking to get out of work on Friday afternoon. Most of us work to provide for our family and to be able to afford a few of life’s pleasures. Our needs are simple and we consider our lives worthwhile if we have some time off of work to spend with friends and family, to play a round of golf or do some fishing, play cards or go to the bar for a few, do a little travelling or work in the garden. We want to worship in the church of our choice or not at all if that is what we choose. There are a thousand different interests we all want to pursue, a thousand decisions we wish to make for ourselves, and for most of us that is what freedom means. And to achieve that kind of freedom, the kind of freedom that is available to everyone and not just a tiny minority, we have to work together in order to ensure our ability to attain it. Such freedom will not be won for the majority by each of us acquiring our own hoard of treasure, most of us will never be able to amass that much. We instead will have to trust our neighbors and our fellow citizens in order to guarantee the kind of security only society can provide, knowing that the security and hope for a better life of others is in our hands as well as ours is in theirs. We won’t get rich but we won’t end up homeless.
     That is the only kind of freedom that will ever be available to the vast majority of people. And when we look at it, there is ample material wealth to provide such freedom. It will never provide us all with outlandishly oversized toys, but we are adults after all, not children.

     It is a choice we will have to make, freedom for the rich or freedom for the many. The freedom for the many does impinge somewhat on the freedom of the rich, but so too does the freedom of the rich take from the freedom of the many. It is a freedom based on dominance, based on the notion that the only way we can truly be free is to have enough money to distance ourselves from our fellow man through gated communities, security systems, and armed guards. It is the kind of system that requires locks and bars and security codes to protect the free from those who dream of freedom. And that doesn’t sound like the kind of freedom our Founding Fathers would have wanted. 

Sunday, January 3, 2016

The Doers And The Takers


…..There are doers in this world and there are takers. I don’t want to draw lines and divide us all, but somewhere is a line that divides those who take more than they give from those who give more then they take.
…..But let’s not obsess about it too much. The line that does divide the takers from the givers is not one that’s easy to see. It’s probably not one that we as human beings are capable of drawing, seeing as so many different factors go into what makes a person’s stay on this earth a net asset as opposed to a net liability. A housewife who has never worked a day in her life has done more than most if she has raised healthy, contributing children who are looking out for their fellow man, especially if she has found time to contribute to various volunteer activities most of us just don’t seem to find the time for. Again, that line is a difficult one to draw and I’m humble enough not to presume that I am capable of judging just where it should go. It’s the sort of thing wise people leave in God’s hands, whether they believe in Him or not.
…..What I can say, I think, is where it should not be drawn. Being human beings we like to come up with simplistic models in order to help us understand a complicated reality, and no more so with drawing the line between the doers and the takers. And the yardstick we use to measure between the two uses dollar bills instead of inches. You see, money is the final determiner of who contributes and who is a drain on society. At least to many people. At least to those who own the media and influence our legislators with healthy campaign donations. According to them, money is the measurement that never lies, it is the golden rod sent down from Heaven to measure the worth of a man. If you are paid a lot of money, you are worth more to society, such a thing is unquestionable according to the wisdom of today.
…..As I said, we humans like to find a quick and easy answer to everything, but life is never quick or easy unless you are both very fortunate and very dumb.
…..I appreciate those who hustle and make things happen. I freely admit that I am not always one of those people. There are those who are able to direct the energies of others in order to make possible what those people individually would never be able to accomplish. (If at any time during my argument you feel I am neglecting that fact, please reread this paragraph). Such people deserve adequate recognition and recompense.
…..But having said that, let us not confuse those who are capable of making a lot of money with those who have given more than they have taken. Assuredly there is a great deal of overlap between the two, but let us not mistake one group for the other. Let us not use the yardstick of money as the only measuring stick.
…..Because there are many people who earn their money in ways that do not benefit society. Oh, I know, the magic of the market states money equals value, but I learned the silliness of such a notion at about the same time as my dad gave me the lowdown on The Tooth Fairy, The Easter Bunny, and Santa. Sorry, Virginia, there is no such thing as magic.
…..You see, I’ve always liked good music and could never understand why the worst sort of musicians often made the most money. Just how much did Milli Vanilli make, anyhow? I appreciated really good writers and wondered why they were rarely the ones you could find on the bestsellers list. And don’t try and sell me the idea that in some way they’re making the world better by producing what they do, because I’m not buying it. Don’t tell me 50 Cent is worth the money he made, don’t tell me EL James has given more to society than Daniel Woodrell, because that insults my intelligence, insults the very concept of intelligence.
…..You don’t have to be jobless to be a taker. As a matter of fact, all you have to do is take more out than you put in. You say you work 60 hours a week? Good. But do you receive more for those sixty hours a week than the sweatshop worker who works the same amount of hours who made those clothes you’re wearing? Don’t tell me you work harder because I don’t buy it. You say you work smarter but is part of that intelligence in knowing how to extract more from those sweatshop workers?
…..The world is full of hardworking people who aren’t getting their share of the pie and yet the only complaints you seem to hear are from those with the biggest slices. Anyone whose belly is not bursting from their gluttony, anyone whose plate is not piled high with the fat of the labor of others, is called a taker. And worse, much worse. Spend five minutes on some media stations and you’ll hear those without adequate capital described as subhuman parasites that are dangers to society.
…..To those who equate wealth with worth, I say this: when you’re old and in a nursing home, perhaps then you will finally appreciate the worth of those who do the hard jobs for low wages. Maybe then you’ll see just how hard others work for their living, how much more they contribute to society than what they get in return. There are so many doing an honest day’s toil regardless of the inequality of the system. Maybe when your are old you will see how people are willing to clean up the accident you had in your pants and still manage to treat you with a measure of dignity.

…..Of course there are takers on the other end of the spectrum too, those who are doing as little as possible at dead end jobs to get whatever money they can. Poor takers are no better than rich takers, always looking out for themselves and trying to maximize profits. But to you who believe all people without blossoming stock portfolios are takers, who give nothing back to society, I can only hope that the ones who are changing your adult diaper are not the kind that will prove you wrong.