Decrease of Wealth Distribution
No society is really a democracy unless the average citizen has
economic freedoms is significant proportion to the wealthiest in a
country. Otherwise, it is a class-based society of elites who inherit
power by chance of birth and control, as they would say, "the masses"
by propaganda, bought government policies, and corporate control.
Substantive democracy cannot last long under such autocratic rulership
when it permeates a majority of a societies activities.
One easy way to measure the "Democraticness potential" of the US is
through wealth distribution. In the case of the statistics I cite here, it is
the divergence over time between the wealth held by the 1% of the most
wealthy and the 80% everyone else in the U.S.
No society is really a democracy unless the average citizen has
economic freedoms is significant proportion to the wealthiest in a
country. Otherwise, it is a class-based society of elites who inherit
power by chance of birth and control, as they would say, "the masses"
by propaganda, bought government policies, and corporate control.
Substantive democracy cannot last long under such autocratic rulership
when it permeates a majority of a societies activities.
One easy way to measure the "Democraticness potential" of the US is
through wealth distribution. In the case of the statistics I cite here, it is
the divergence over time between the wealth held by the 1% of the most
wealthy and the 80% everyone else in the U.S.
Page and Icons © Mission of Reason™ all rights reserved. Mission of
Reason™ is a non-profit corporation of the state of Colorado, U.S.A.
Text and images falls under the copyright of the author when indicated.
Reason™ is a non-profit corporation of the state of Colorado, U.S.A.
Text and images falls under the copyright of the author when indicated.
 |  |  |  |
MOR - CfaRS
Center for a Reasoning Society
Center for a Reasoning Society
The hard data taken from 1989 to 2003 shows a substantive trend in
the divergence of wealth distribution in the United States of America. It
shows that 80% of the population are becoming increasingly poor,
while the top 1% of Americans (not those who necessarily earned
wealth, but including those who came to it through the poor social
practice of allowing vast inheritance) are acquiring capital at an
accelerating rate. The projections here do not account for this
acceleration and average in a slight downturn in 1991. The base data
comes from material presented by G. William Domhoff of the University
of Santa Cruz, and his site "Who Rules America." When the trend from
1989 to 2003 is projected, even with conservative estimates, into the
future, we can see catastrophic implications unless something is done
to change this trend in our society.
In about the year 2019, 80% of the U.S. will own no capital at all, and
begin servicing an increasing debt. They may live in houses, but they
will owe more with the sum of their investments than they can get out of
them. On the rich side, just after 2030, the top 1% of the richest U.S.
Citizens will have consolidated under their direct ownership practically
all the capital in the U.S.
In terms of democractic principle, the right to own land will be held by a
financial elite. Property rights, eminent domain, privacy in a home one
owns, and the right for fair compensation of property will all be
considerations for only 1% of the citizenry. The American Dream will be
truly a pipe dream. Everyone else will be working for them, either
directly through corporate employment, or indirectly by paying of the
debts they hold to financial corporations and banks that are wholly
owned by those top 1% of the population. In such a situation, with no
viable opportunity to own property because of the policies that drive the
trend above, citizens will practically be living in indentured servitude,
slavery by any other name.
In terms of a reasoning society, a society where social decisions are
made through reasoned analysis before decisions are made, this
portends for the worse. In a decisions where a gross disparity of
wealth is involved between parties, money often trumps reason.
People can commit crimes if they have good lawyers. Cigarette
companies can suppress information about the toxicity and
carcinogenic nature of their products with the use of money alone.
Small countries can be brought to their knees in servitude through the
servicing of debt, or be brought to military compliance through the use
of arms obtained merely by money. Reason can be bypassed with
inordinate monetary advantage, and thus society becomes managed
by unreasonable decisions.
Confucius was aware of the plight that faces our top 1% wealthiest.
Once they acquire their wealth, they find it harder and harder to hear
substantive criticism and hard-to-swallow advice. They attract yes-men
who tell them what they want to hear. History is littered with kingdoms
that fell based on such dynamics, and it is kingdoms to which we
should look for the example of our fate if this wealth disparity trend
does not stop. For that it the type of society, the type of consilidated and
unquestionable power in our midst we are creating.
There is one way out of this that could be implemented in a day. It is
the reinstatement of a healthy inheritance tax. It is not a "death tax" on
those who earn their money. It is an "Anti-Dynasty Tax" that prevents
the consolitation of wealth into the hands of a few who naturally work to
increase this to apparent personal advantage. What they don't realize
is that it is really not to their perosnal advantage. That to be rich in a
poor society is to need to hire body guards, to hire sick staff, to travel
over poor infrastructure, and to need to isolate one's self in order to feel
comfortable. This is not even to their personal advantage.
We need to urgently reinvest this money in infrastructure, free schools
in both k12 and higer-education, a tax-supported public health care
system that is available to everyone. Then the top 1% will be truly
wealthy, for they can travel anywhere and enjoy their interactions with
humanity, instead of needing to be constantly afraid of the society they
created through their own selfishness.
This tax should be compulsory. It will not tax those who have earned
wealth, but will tax those who, without merit or work have been
designated as inheritors. These people should receive, say 5 million,
enough for a truly extravagant life. Invested, they may make more, but
they will not cripple our America with such a sum as is occurring now
with the billions that are being both horded, squandered, and put to
selfish purposes by the current inheritors of our country. Instead, we as
U.S. citizens must reclaim our birthright to democracy, a democracy
where it is possible to be really free in substantive ways. We must
demand it through the legal, economic, and political systems or we,
80% of America, will not have anything, as illustrated above for our own
children.
The information here presented elsewhere by Domhoff comes from:
Shapiro, I., & Friedman, J. (2006). New, Unnoticed CBO Data Show
Capital Income Has Become Much More Concentrated at the Top.
Washington, DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
the divergence of wealth distribution in the United States of America. It
shows that 80% of the population are becoming increasingly poor,
while the top 1% of Americans (not those who necessarily earned
wealth, but including those who came to it through the poor social
practice of allowing vast inheritance) are acquiring capital at an
accelerating rate. The projections here do not account for this
acceleration and average in a slight downturn in 1991. The base data
comes from material presented by G. William Domhoff of the University
of Santa Cruz, and his site "Who Rules America." When the trend from
1989 to 2003 is projected, even with conservative estimates, into the
future, we can see catastrophic implications unless something is done
to change this trend in our society.
In about the year 2019, 80% of the U.S. will own no capital at all, and
begin servicing an increasing debt. They may live in houses, but they
will owe more with the sum of their investments than they can get out of
them. On the rich side, just after 2030, the top 1% of the richest U.S.
Citizens will have consolidated under their direct ownership practically
all the capital in the U.S.
In terms of democractic principle, the right to own land will be held by a
financial elite. Property rights, eminent domain, privacy in a home one
owns, and the right for fair compensation of property will all be
considerations for only 1% of the citizenry. The American Dream will be
truly a pipe dream. Everyone else will be working for them, either
directly through corporate employment, or indirectly by paying of the
debts they hold to financial corporations and banks that are wholly
owned by those top 1% of the population. In such a situation, with no
viable opportunity to own property because of the policies that drive the
trend above, citizens will practically be living in indentured servitude,
slavery by any other name.
In terms of a reasoning society, a society where social decisions are
made through reasoned analysis before decisions are made, this
portends for the worse. In a decisions where a gross disparity of
wealth is involved between parties, money often trumps reason.
People can commit crimes if they have good lawyers. Cigarette
companies can suppress information about the toxicity and
carcinogenic nature of their products with the use of money alone.
Small countries can be brought to their knees in servitude through the
servicing of debt, or be brought to military compliance through the use
of arms obtained merely by money. Reason can be bypassed with
inordinate monetary advantage, and thus society becomes managed
by unreasonable decisions.
Confucius was aware of the plight that faces our top 1% wealthiest.
Once they acquire their wealth, they find it harder and harder to hear
substantive criticism and hard-to-swallow advice. They attract yes-men
who tell them what they want to hear. History is littered with kingdoms
that fell based on such dynamics, and it is kingdoms to which we
should look for the example of our fate if this wealth disparity trend
does not stop. For that it the type of society, the type of consilidated and
unquestionable power in our midst we are creating.
There is one way out of this that could be implemented in a day. It is
the reinstatement of a healthy inheritance tax. It is not a "death tax" on
those who earn their money. It is an "Anti-Dynasty Tax" that prevents
the consolitation of wealth into the hands of a few who naturally work to
increase this to apparent personal advantage. What they don't realize
is that it is really not to their perosnal advantage. That to be rich in a
poor society is to need to hire body guards, to hire sick staff, to travel
over poor infrastructure, and to need to isolate one's self in order to feel
comfortable. This is not even to their personal advantage.
We need to urgently reinvest this money in infrastructure, free schools
in both k12 and higer-education, a tax-supported public health care
system that is available to everyone. Then the top 1% will be truly
wealthy, for they can travel anywhere and enjoy their interactions with
humanity, instead of needing to be constantly afraid of the society they
created through their own selfishness.
This tax should be compulsory. It will not tax those who have earned
wealth, but will tax those who, without merit or work have been
designated as inheritors. These people should receive, say 5 million,
enough for a truly extravagant life. Invested, they may make more, but
they will not cripple our America with such a sum as is occurring now
with the billions that are being both horded, squandered, and put to
selfish purposes by the current inheritors of our country. Instead, we as
U.S. citizens must reclaim our birthright to democracy, a democracy
where it is possible to be really free in substantive ways. We must
demand it through the legal, economic, and political systems or we,
80% of America, will not have anything, as illustrated above for our own
children.
The information here presented elsewhere by Domhoff comes from:
Shapiro, I., & Friedman, J. (2006). New, Unnoticed CBO Data Show
Capital Income Has Become Much More Concentrated at the Top.
Washington, DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
