People have been sounding alarms about the rich getting richer (and the poor getting poorer) for over 150 years. In fact, A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol. 2, quotes no less a person than former president Andrew Jackson invoking this aphorism way back in 1832:
When the laws undertake … to make the rich richer and the potent more powerful, the humble members of society … have a right to complain of the injustice to their Government.
What’s more, the laws of practically every country on earth have invariably undertaken to make the rich richer. That includes socialist/communists countries, like China and Cuba, where laws purport to prevent glaring disparities in wealth and income.
This is why I am so bemused by all the media fuss about Oxfam, the international anti-poverty organization, sounding a similar alarm. It stems from a report Oxfam released on Monday, which executive director Winnie Byanyima summarized as follows:
The richest 1% have seen their share of global wealth increase from 44% in 2009 to 48% in 2014…
Do we really want to live in a world where the 1% own more than the rest of us combined?
(CNN, January 19, 2015)
But a report telling us that the ‘wealthiest 1% will soon own more than the rest of us combined’ is about as newsworthy as reports telling us that China will soon overtake the United States as the world’s largest economy.
In any event, the media are making a fuss especially about Byanyima attending the meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, this week to present Oxfam’s concerns. For anyone familiar with the Bible, this probably conjures up allusions to Christ entering the temple and overturning the tables of usurious moneychangers and greedy merchants; or of Christ admonishing the Pharisees and Sadducees against a man gaining the whole world, and losing his own soul.
Except that this too strikes me as much ado about nothing. Not least because I’m on record decrying Forum organizers for continually inviting do-gooders like Byanyima just to help them feel good, not to make them do good. Here, for example, is an excerpt to this effect from “Why All the Fuss about the World Economic Forum,” January 30, 2006.
_________________
The World Economic Forum … is an annual event at which corporate titans, international bankers, world leaders, and a smattering of celebrity do-gooders gather to bloviate about the impact of world developments on their respective businesses, personal wealth, and collective conscience. Politicians and celebrities change from year to year, but the regulars are invariably the same CEOs, investors, and managers who represent the world’s super rich.
The forum is promoted as ‘impartial and not-for-profit; it is tied to no political, partisan or national interests.’ But movers and shakers know the reason an invitation to this retreat is so coveted is that it’s a rare (and rarified) opportunity to see and be seen amongst the people who really rule the world. And, the PR value of such images alone is priceless…
The wealthiest one percent would have the rest of us believe that Davos is all about addressing world economic problems that affect our lives. That’s why the most talked-about feature of their gathering is not the (main-event) schmooze-fests for business opportunities; rather, it’s the (undercard) gabfests for charitable causes – at which invited guests sit on panels and blow hot air on issues like climate change and the plight of the poor.
__________________
To be fair, President Obama took a significant step towards redressing this gap in the United States five years ago, when he prevailed upon Democrats – who controlled Congress – to pass his healthcare reform bill (aka Obamacare). But it reeks of garden-variety pandering that he waited until the “fourth quarter” of his presidency to begin proposing legislation that would tax the rich to pay for such things as free community-college education for the poor and rebuilding America’s crumbling infrastructure.
As I write this, I’m listening to him tout this and other redistributive policies (mostly having to do with closing loopholes rich folks and corporations use to avoid fair taxation) in his annual State of the Union Address. If implemented, they would close the gap between rich and poor considerably.
Unfortunately, Republicans – who now control Congress – are so ideologically committed to passing laws to make the rich richer that they even regard Obamacare, which makes healthcare affordable for the poor, as a political abomination. Therefore, Obama knows full well that all of the social and economic justice items he’s championing now have about as much chance of becoming law as I have of becoming president.
I have listened to enough State of the Union Addresses to know that they invariably amount to a triumph of style over substance. Nothing demonstrates this quite like the most memorable thing about President Obama’s first address last year being not something he said, but a congressman yelling, ‘You lie.’
(“2011 State of the Union Address,” The iPINIONS Journal, January 26, 2011)
No doubt this is why PBS NewsHour felt obliged to report earlier this evening that only 2 of the 18 proposals Obama made in his 2014 State of the Union Address have become law….
Meanwhile, you are probably wondering how the rich feel about the prospect of Obama “spreading their wealth around” – as so many of us voted for him in 2008 hoping he would do.
Well, the following excerpt from “Super-Rich Irony,” October 5, 2012, provides some insight. But I should preface it by noting the commendable exception of some of the super rich, most notably public-spirited philanthropists like Bill Gates and progressive-taxation champions like Warren Buffet.
___________________
I find it amusing when people regale me with a story or opinion that mirrors one of my published commentaries. Such was the case yesterday when a colleague vented her incredulous take on an article in the current issue of the New Yorker titled: “Super-Rich Irony: Why Do America’s Super-Rich Feel Victimized by Obama?”
Of course the irony is that the super-rich (aka the one-percenters) are the ones who have benefited most from his presidency…
Most notable are Wall Street bankers whose firms he bailed out and who raked in record profits as the DOW rose an unprecedented 56 percent. But they are joined at the hip by corporate CEOs — whose companies are sitting on trillions in profits and who earned so much in compensation, their despair must be some perverse form of thriver’s guilt.
__________________
On the other hand, Chris Rock triggered viral interest a few weeks ago, when he quipped that there would be riots in the streets if poor people knew how filthy rich the rich really are.
Except that the French Revolution erupted precisely because poor people knew this. Moreover, it’s not only the case that technology has enabled poor people to know all about the “secret lives of the super rich;” but rich people have become even more conspicuous in consuming their unprecedented amount of wealth.
But, apropos of rich irony, one of the reasons today’s poor are unlikely to revolt is that they are too busy pretending to be rich. More to the point, technology has also enabled poor people to live virtual lives in which they have more in common with rich people than with each other.
(Karl Marx lamented that religion is the opiate of the poor masses, which induces the complacency of “illusory happiness.” Social media is giving religion a run for its money in this respect.)
Not to mention that partisanship in America has become so dogmatic that millions of poor, uninsured folks support politicians – whose sole agenda is to repeal Obamacare – just to honor their membership in the Republican Party (of the rich).
That said, I couldn’t end without reprising this pet peeve about the annual gathering in Davos. As you read it, bear in mind reports about as many as 1,700 private jets crisscrossing the pristine Swiss Alps, taking attendees to and fro:
To hear these rich folks lamenting about the depletion of the ozone, the increasing gap between haves and have nots, and the almost criminal waste of non-renewable energy, one would think they jet-pooled to Davos on ethanol-fueled airplanes; whereas they all flew in on gas-guzzling, air-polluting private jets.
(“Attendees Emit More CO2 than Solutions at World Economic Forum,” The iPINIONS Journal, January 29, 2007)
Frankly, all of the above makes clear that all talk of redressing the gap between rich and poor (including calls for a “New Magna Carta” no less) is, well, just hot air. I mean, am I the only one who sees that the more the rich talk about helping the poor, the richer the rich become…?
Related commentaries:
Why all the fuss…
Super-rich…
2011 SOTU address
More than solutions…
* This commentary was originally published yesterday, Tuesday, at 10:11 p.m.