Is anyone at all surprised that we are bailing out the richest and whitest guys at the heads of some of the most irresponsible corporations, while poor and multicolored folks (some certainly with eyes bigger than their pocketbooks) face foreclosure? If you are surprised, you shouldn't be. Most of the economic infrastructure in this country is in place to funnel wealth to those already possessed of great wealth. Most of our "law enforcement" is in place to protect the haves from the have-nots and the want-to-haves. These structures are working quite well in the manner in which they are intended to work.
"Roughly 60 percent of the economic gains in our country went to just to the top .05% of taxpayers. When comparing gains overall throughout the taxpayer base, the so-called middle class had economic gains of just 10% from 1979 to 1997 while America’s wealthiest rose 157% (after taxes). When factoring in the cost of inflation, a 10% gain over almost 20 years actually translates into a loss." (Paul Krugman, NYT, 2002)
Contrary to Saint Ronald the Second Coming of Holy Jesus H. Christ Reagan and his Kool-Aid-drinking Branch Davidian Scientologist-I'll-hook-you-and-Katie-Holmes-up-to-a-fake-machine-followers, that shit does not trickle down; nor is it intended to do so. When Reagan and his circle-jerk Democratic congresses passed legislation deregulating S&Ls, Reagan said "I think we hit the jackpot." Ask John Keating McCain about who cashed in. It sure as hell wasn't the majority of Americans. The same ethic, or lack thereof, holds true with the recent bailouts. Royalty gets their asses saved, the offending CEOs retire with tens of millions, and poor folks get the shaft. To talk about those numbers, of course, is to engage in class warfare or "the politics of envy." Facts are anathema to the Plutocracy. They want us to get all pissed off about queers and abortion while they wage true and effective economic warfare against the rest of us.
So what do we do? It will take a major shift of perspective. The problem is, most of us decry the imbalance now, but would quickly shut up about it and enjoy being part of the Plutocracy if we just had the coin. So we work our fingers to the bone, neglect our kids, and "invest" (which means giving your money to those same rich irresponsible CEOs to play with and lose), all in the hope that we might acquire some of the same expensive, shiny and unnecessary crap that Bob Nardelli acquired through the literal blood and sweat of his employees.
I don't claim purity; I do compromise and buy my boys the slightly more expensive cereal with dried fruit in it, and I do occasionally replace my guitar strings. but I can honestly aver that I have no interest in a BMW or a chic condo. I am perfectly happy with a roof, food, and my used Ford Focus. Hell, if I hadn't totaled it, I would still proudly be driving my 1999 Chevy Prizm. Should I ever get married (admittedly an unlikely proposition), it will not be with an overpriced and blood-soaked little rock.
I don't really want to preach, but the only way to effectively counterract the wholesale redistribution of money from you to guys like Ken Lay, John McCain and Barack Obama is to spend less of it. The Plutocracy wants, in fact desperately NEEDS, you to be in debt, because they own the debt and, by extension, you. The same CEO shipping jobs from Nebraska to China laughs all the way to his summer home when some Nebraska kid goes into hock for a huge truck he can't afford. So spend less. Keep your money and quiet that laughing asshole down. Don't buy a bigger house than you can afford and pay off Ass-boy's yacht with your interest payments.
Much peace
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Well, hard to argue with much in this post, although I can't believe you were driving around in a fancy '97 Prizm while I was driving around in an old '95 Prizm for the last 11 years. (Average cost of ownership minus gas = $1000 per year) Todd, you would be curious to know, drives a 2000 Prizm...
The Ford Focus is a nice car, built on the same frame as my current Mazda3. Of course, it doesn't have zoom zoom.
The one thing I would possibly take issue with is that the reason the poor stay poor as your headline suggests is because quite often the poor aren't that bright. (Or at least, they don't understand the language of money.)
That top of the food chain plutocracy isn't just stuffing that money under their mattress, they are lending it to people to buy houses or investing it in companies that provide jobs. They are bypassing spending that money and LOANING it to people who apparently can't put off their purchases.
The problem is that the lowest tier of society just has to have the latest stuff they see on T.V. The average consumer who hasn't been educated about money is no match for the sophisticated psychological games of the advertising industry. So your conclusion is correct... stop buying crap you don't need. But I'm not sure I'd blame this on the people who quite often took risks and worked hard to get the money they now have and should be free to spend it any way they want. Quite often those people made great sacrifices that people don't even realize. (Doctors come to mind... people complain about them being greedy all the time, but I'm sure not many realize the rigors and debt that a Dr. must undertake to get to where they are at.)
All to often the poor people complaining they aren't getting a fair shake are like the fat people complaining they can't lose weight as they drive-thru for a shake.
Quit buying $100 sneakers and $1000 cel phone plans if you are going to bitch about being broke.
The real shame is that our schools teach us who was the 23rd president or have us memorize the the books of the old testament, but they don't teach kids a darn thing about interest rates, taxes, compounding, opportunity cost or how our money system works.
Every kid in the world will have to deal with money and yet our schools don't want to talk about it because it is more taboo than talking about sex to talk about $$$.
That said, those who work hard, learn the language of money and save while others spend shouldn't have to apologize for their success.
(They should also be pissed off when the government comes in and bails out those folks who bought houses that were larger than they could afford... Of course, the democrats passed the CRA act REQUIRING more subprime loans from banks so that people who aren't really qualified to purchase nice homes can live the American dream at the expense of those who are prudent with their money.)
The question is Alfa Cowboy, would you be as prudent with your money if you had tons to spend? I seem to recall once in H.S. you owed me $5 and I picked you up at the grocery store where you had just bought caviar for a snack... (You of course eventually paid me back,
it just miffed me at the time that paying me back was a lower priority than an impulse buy...)
Of course, we've all learned a lot of things since H.S.
Yes, Maury. I have changed since I was 16. Please accept my humblest apologies for miffing you to the point that it still stings two decades later. If you feel interest is due, please quote an amount and I will be delighted to pay it. Oh and I'm sorry I peed my pants in kindegarten and pissed off your mom while painting the treehouse. Jesus Christ, typical wingnut.
Our values are too different to have a productive discussion. This is not a secret.
Right. It's poor folks' fault they're poor: they should be smarter and know when far more educated and worthy people are speaking the deliberately exclusive "language of money" and trying to sell them economic snake oil so they can pad the books and make their sales quotas. Goddamn poor people wanting a place to live. The fucking serfs oughta know that their place is to do valueless grunt work while their overlords do the "hard work" of risking other people's money, knowing full well they have a golden parachute waiting.
I would pay anybody working construction twice as much as the imaginary job of "investment professional." But as I have posited before, physical (ie real) work has been purposely and methodically devalued for quite some time. But I suppose Hannity tells you to blame that in immigration.
Ha, I don't think our values are so different. In fact, it is part of the reason I enjoy reading your thoughts. I particularly enjoy your rants on religion. You'll be pleased to know I have a clipping of yours from the OWH in which you very pointedly and rightly criticize the church. Good stuff.
For the record, I'm not miffed 15 years later about you putting off paying me back. I was a little befuddled at the time however that you were complaining about being broke the day before and then sitting next to me the next day eating caviar. I just thought it was a humorous anecdote. Of course, you did pay me back, as people of high integrity do. (Unlike those who claim bankruptcy and welsh on their obligations.)
Also, if you will note, I wasn't faulting the poor people in this country, but rather our education system for not teaching them the fundamental life skills they need to make it in this world. Our schools need to teach people about money and they currently don't.
The area that perhaps we disagree on is the fact that I think people who work hard and make sacrifices should be rewarded for their efforts. When I started up my investment business, I went two years without a paycheck. There was no golden parachute but plenty of risk and plenty of hours. I get upset when those who don't work hard and don't take risks demand that I pay more in taxes as my "patriotic duty". Excuse me if I don't want to subsidize the lazy. (Which comes to think of it, explains why I don't like unions...)
It amazes me that you think "investments" are somehow bad? It should be noted my clients are primarily foundations and endowments. When they make money, it goes toward things like education and programs to help communities, libraries in Africa, etc.
While I agree there are many snake oil salesmen in the investment business, there are just as many car mechanics who do "physical, real work" that will just as happily screw you.
There are good guys and bad guys in every business. I consider myself to be one of the good guys of the investing world. I don't see any problem with working hard and saving your money so that your money can work hard for you. In your mind, that appears to be some sort of sin.
Oh, and you can probably drop the Hannity reference. I can honestly say I have never watched his show, and actually I had to google who he was to see what he looked like. I seem to recall not liking the guy, but honestly haven't listened to him long enough to know one way or another.
Post a Comment