I sympathize somewhat with the conservatives who sneer at limousine liberals. There is something a bit ironic and unsettling about fabulously wealthy movie celebrities, rock stars and sports heroes who speak out for progressive causes as they private-jet around the world to their luxurious homes and vacation spots.
Do liberals lack the strength or will to incorporate their convictions into their lives? Is there a profound disconnect between their beliefs and their actions? Is this an example of bad faith, weakness or simply a fairly understandable paralysis born of financial inertia?
If we look at most people in the wealthier part of the income spectrum, we see that their income is based on market conditions. Of course, there are kleptocrats who obtain wealth by illegal or unethical means, but for the most part the upper class are simply acquiring their wealth through one or more of several legal and accepted means – inheritance, salary, stock acquisition/options, real estate, entrepreneurship, or appreciation of previously-owned assets.
Wealth begets wealth. The rich get richer. It is well documented that financial assets grow faster than wages, and the greater the asset base, the more avenues there are for even greater returns.
Most people who have a certain level of wealth also try hard to avoid taxation. It is deemed perfectly acceptable for everyone to use any legal tax avoidance strategy at their disposal. The rationale may be described as: “Why should I pay more taxes if everyone else is legally avoiding them?” And there are armies of tax lawyers, accountants and financial advisors whose profession it is to maximize this avoidance.
For the most part, liberals who are wealthy wish for a more equitable world. Many of them vote for representatives who are likely to promote programs to reduce financial inequality and possibly raise taxes. Are they sincere in their political stances, or are they simply assuaging their consciences, knowing unconsciously that their wealth is likely to remain secure?
How far would most progressives be willing to go to create a less inegalitarian society? What is clear is that the vast majority of them are not willing to take steps on their own to get the ball rolling. You don’t see anyone following Jesus’s advice to the young ruler to give up all his wealth.
No, in fact you see the wealthy, whether liberal or conservative, living ever more lavish lifestyles because they are simply able to and because the friendship circles they inhabit are all pushing the luxury envelope further each year.
I number myself among them, not because I am fabulously wealthy, but because I participate in a lifestyle that is much more luxurious than most the world could afford. I try to be generous but I acquiesce in the general upward trend of my finances.
Would I welcome a much higher rate of taxation that would reduce my wealth? I believe I would accept it if I felt that everyone was making a similar sacrifice relative to their means. But I would certainly chafe at paying more if I felt the gazillionaires at the top weren’t being aggressively unburdened of their wealth.
Of course there is the possibility that some or perhaps many so-called liberals would shift their allegiances immediately if there were truly an effective move toward a significant re-distribution of wealth.
The financial world is complex, and fairness will never be assured. There is also a powerful state of inertia that exists, keeping the wealthy at the top and the rest below. Moreover, the marketplace is broken and tends to over-reward the top 25% or so while keeping the majority in a state of financial stagnation. It will take fairly dramatic steps or, preferably, a steady flow of baby steps to turn the tide.
Thus, the good-intentioned liberals are in a state of paralysis. Their good intentions are not quite strong enough to motivate them to selfless acts or self-sacrifice, but they seem at least to recognize that their wealth and lifestyles are somewhat grotesque and out of synch with their convictions. Perhaps this disequilibrium will be enough to provide momentum for true socioeconomic progress before social unrest and incivility resurrect an age of revolution.
No comments:
Post a Comment