As is his wont, Abdul just stirred the pot a little by saying on Facebook:
Ok, let’s make a deal. I’ll concede “income inequality” if you concede “work ethic” inequality.
That’s true, as far as it goes, but as he acknowledged in the discussion thread, the correlation is imperfect. It’s an old theme around here, but seems worth repeating.
Much as we’d like it to be, the economy isn’t a morality play. The economy doesn’t reward virtue. It rewards leverage. Hard work is one kind of leverage, and probably the most accessible form for the average person. Talent is another. Already having money is a big form of leverage. Controlling a bottleneck in the economy (e.g. monopoly or money supply) is yet another.
From the perspective of the person who makes the money, by and large, it seems like a function of their hard work and talent. They are acutely aware that they busted their ass, and they’ve seen, probably carried the load for at one time or another, any number of people who were lazy and talentless. What is often less obvious to someone in that position are the people who are also busting their asses with much less (or no) payoff. And even harder to recognize — on account of Upton Sinclair’s observation about the perspicacity of one whose salary depends on not being perspicacious — is when one’s own good fortune depends on siphoning off some portion of the value created by others.
The lack of insight into the condition of others is not unique to the well-to-do, of course. Just to pick an example, my guess is that there is a high percentage of employees who have no idea that their employer pays extra to Medicaid and Social Security on behalf of the employee for the privilege of employing them. While they no doubt have their own stressors in life, they perhaps don’t know what it’s like to continue thinking about work most of the day, every day, clocked in or out — where the next client is coming from, whether existing clients will renew their contracts, whether your vendors are cheating you, whether you have the company’s third quarter paperwork in order, etc.
In any event, the economy is complicated. We all have our problems. But, by and large, a person’s prosperity is not a good proxy for insight into the person’s moral character.
Dog, this is a very interesting post. The wasting of the middle class is a topic I think about frequently. I am currently reading a book entitled “Who Owns the Future” by polymath and computer scientist Jason Lanier.He makes the point that those that own the “biggest servers”, take facebook, free ride off of content generated by users, and then monetize the advertising related data from these users are destined to get obscenely rich. He compares a star-system based income distribution system with a bell-curve system. Take, for example, acting, or professional sports (or, sadly anymore, law). A relatively small percentage ride on gushers of rising income, while most aspirants in those fields make virtually nothing. They are stuck in the wading pool.
Lanier then talks about the bell curve income distribution and the tools that the middle class once had to trap some rising cash themselves. He gives such examples as unions, licenses, taxi medallions, progressive tax codes, minimum wage and generous social safety nets. Much of this is close to disappearing and the demise of the middle class demonstrates this. Some of this demise is political, some is systemic. As a broadside to the Republican party, tell the electorate under 65 that you want to eliminate the middle class income traps, or “Levees,” as Lanier calls them (Lanier sees income in terms of a rising fluid) and allow the wealthy and high income earners to rise every higher on gushers of money.
I have not finished the book, however, and Lanier posits a system where the big servers pay the peons for content. (or gearing, the English) in terms of increase in risk brought on by borrowing of funds. You use it in a context where it fits and it does not. Your leverage is more of a mechanical-financial tool to demand and receive higher income. I would simply describe leverage as an “edge”, however, that “edge” could be procured.
And with regard to what Abdul said, it contains a tiny bit of truth, but is puerile in explaining the massive income inequality in this country.
“The lack of insight into the condition of others is not unique to the well-to-do, of course. Just to pick an example, my guess is that there is a high percentage of employees who have no idea that their employer pays extra to Medicaid and Social Security on behalf of the employee for the privilege of employing them. While they no doubt have their own stressors in life, they perhaps don’t know what it’s like to continue thinking about work most of the day, every day, clocked in or out — where the next client is coming from, whether existing clients will renew their contracts, whether your vendors are cheating you, whether you have the company’s third quarter paperwork in order, etc.”
Add —
— What it is like to know that (insert number) of employees depend on you to — get that work, make enough profit to provide their family health care insurance, personally guarantee bank loans so that payroll is *always* there on payday, be the first to cut their own salary when cuts have to be made, not sleep at night when receivables are slow coming in, etc., etc., I sometimes wonder why “being your own boss” is so attractive to those who aren’t in that position.