|
Someone, preferably Republican or Tea Party true believer who spends time shouting “the free enterprise system!” day and night, should explain why income in America got to be so poorly distributed during the years when the Republicans held the White House for decades and controlled Congress for an extended period of time. Of course, they can’t or don’t want to, other than say, “Well, that’s the way it works. Free enterprise doesn’t mean everyone wins. It just means everyone has a chance”. To which I would say....well, I won’t say because the words would come out as too harsh.
The Republicans have turned themselves into the Church of Free Enterprise and they worship there regularly. There is no set rule, in life, justice or philosophy, that says results have to be fair or anything like equal. It is in the interest of everyone who would like a productive, stable and decent society, however, that people at all income levels have a better share of what is produced by the society.
It can be argued, further, that huge disparities in earnings make a society less competitive, less productive and, ultimately, lead to rot from within and eventual revolution. In short, having the top one per cent control almost one quarter of the nation’s wealth is not good for business, for enterprise, whether “free” or regulated. Further, democracy works best when people at all levels believe they have some participation in the economic scheme.
The slogan “free enterprise system” is nothing more than a cover for letting business do whatever it wants, whenever and wherever it pleases. This is just grand if you are in that top one percent, or even in the top 1/3 or imagine you will be, someday. For the rest of the country, income disparity is not so wonderful. Just as there have to be losers in the game of higher education for their to be true winners, there must be losers in the economy for there to be multimillionaires. Otherwise, there would be no one to buy the shoddy goods many at the the top sell to the rest of the country. This is not political posturing, it is economic fact. Without people in the lower economic levels, the companies controlled by the very wealthy would have no one to sell to, period.
Putting the “big squeeze” on one segment or several segments of society actually, over the long term, works to defeat prosperity. Once, the ideal in America was an honest day’s wages for an honest day’s work. Those who worked were expected to make enough to house, clothe, feed and care for themselves and their families and, if you were lucky, move up the ladder just a bit. Now, the idea is to make profits, any profits you can, by hammering everyone, especially the working poor and near poor. What a deal.
One can certainly disagree with Riech’s assertions as to how income and wealth inequality were reduced, but the fact remains that, as we all know, the rich have gotten filthy richer while the rest of the country has done somewhat better or worse, and that was before the recession took away jobs, full time work and pay increases. As is normal for them, the Republicans pose no solutions nor even suggestions about how to address this massive problem. Forget the Tea Party crowd, they just want to “take back” their country. I’ve got some news: lower taxes do not address every problem known to man or beast. If you are elderly, or approaching that age, then cutting or keeping taxes the same sounds just wonderful: let the next generation worry about solving problems while you draw your checks.
Here’s another bulletin: virtually all of the wealth of America, or any nation, is derived from the middle classes, those who get up every morning and go make something or help make something. A strong, healthy and rewarded middle class pushes money upward and downward. Why are they the lynch pin? Because, first, there are more of them than any other group and, second, because you can’t have grand wealth unless you have productivity. (It is true that countries like Mexico, with vast numbers of poor, have a few terribly wealthy people, but their money comes, in small bits, from the millions of the poor. The wealth of poor countries also comes from the fact that few other people can buy the goods or services the rich want, so there is less competition and thus lower prices.)
Income disparity is the lurking giant in America’s future. Right now, that problem is hidden by a false debate about taxes and the size of government, neither of which will matter if the country shatters. We are on the road to that point now.
ONE OTHER interesting point about the Riech quote is that he chose 1928 and 2007 to do his comparison of wealth concentration. Both of those years were just prior to the biggest economic disasters in American history. The TerryReport has made the point several times that one source of the housing collapse was too much money chasing too little opportunity.
Doug Terry, 10/12/10
|
