Taxing And Voting

“The more things change …”

I think I've said that before. Not that it was original in the first place, but I think I'm repeating myself.ⁱ

The same is true of the subjects I choose to think about and to discuss. And one I can't get out of my mind, because the media talk about it every day, is the “Occupy Wall Street” protest in Zuccotti Park.ⁱⁱ In the past I've focused on its apparent lack of goals with the single exception of “Tax the rich,” which seems to have become their mantra. It's not clear whom they consider rich, although it seems to be everyone other than themselves. The rich are the “one percent” who, according to their ideology, are making out like bandits by stealing from the rest of us – the “ninety-nine percent.” They're not paying their fair share which is why we cannot pay our credit card bills, mortgage loans, health care costs, student loans, food costs, and the like.

I've noted in the past that raising the taxes on the “rich” wouldn't really solve our problem, and would not only attack the jackals we loathe, but those whom we love and lionizeⁱⁱⁱ (even if we do envy them a little). As a matter of fact, though I can't prove it, I suspect there are more people we love than those we hate on the one percent list. Most, of course, we've never heard of.^iv

But the real issue is us, not them, even though we focus on the others. It's easy to hate people we don't know – people whose names aren't even familiar. What we want is “equality” and they are depriving us of it. We're very different from our ancestors and, to a degree, we lack self-respect. If there is something wrong, someone else is to blame. We are being acted upon by forces greater than ourselves. We are impotent. If (read “when”) we don't succeed it's because of “them.”

But that is merely cover for our own greed, laziness, and failures. Thomas Edison is quoted as saying, “None of my inventions came by accident. I see a worthwhile need to be met and I make trial after trial until it comes. What it boils down to is one per cent inspiration and ninety-nine per cent perspiration.”^v,vi That was then. Now we purchase lottery tickets in the hope that we can cut out the perspiration. We don't really expect to win, but hey, you never know. What we're really looking for is a handout. We call it an “entitlement” since we are all entitled to whatever we need. We shouldn't have debts no matter what we want. (If we cheat on our income taxes it's because everyone else does it, and besides, the “rich” should be paying them for all of us.) What we need is socialism.^vii We shouldn't lack anything, and the others should be no better off than we – even if they work harder.^viii The “Bell Curve” should be replaced by a golden spike: instead of a range of incomes, everyone should have the same earnings. That would obviate the need for tax differentials since we'd all be getting, and paying in taxes, the same amount. Differentials based on accomplishment, or for any other reason, encourage competition, and we all know how harmful that can be.

But putting aside the specifics – or the lack of specifics – what is happening is a mass movement, much like the civil rights movements of the late 1950's and early 1960's, the movement for educational “relevance” of the early 1960's, and the anti-Viet Nam movement later in that decade. And the participants are the current version of the “Moral Majority.” The mantra may be different, but the psychology is the same. It's the psychology discussed by Eric Hoffer in the early 1950's in his book, “The True Believer.” Belonging to a movement along with others validates our own views – indeed, it validates us. We are part of something bigger than ourselves, even if we don't fully understand what it is or what are its implications. And if we have no goals of our own – if we feel isolated – we can immerse ourselves in meaning.

Unfortunately, the result is protest for its own sake. We become part of a fellowship of protesters who may not be any more enlightened about the goals of protest than we. In fact the message of the movement is not especially important except insofar as it serves as the current battle cry. To a degree, the messages of the various movements are interchangeable. It is the process that is important – the chance to be part of something important. It is a rebellion against authority.^ix It is anarchy,^x and we can get away with it because there are so many others.

Who are those others? Who participates in these protests? It seems to be the same group irrespective of the stated aim. That group consists of white,^xi middle and upper-middle class Americans^xii who see injustice wherever they look. That is not to say that, in the great battle of Good against Evil, there is not such injustice. But looking at the call of the protesters may not be the best way to understand why the demonstration is occurring.

It is more interesting to note what Americans do about their disgruntlement. If the goal is to change America in a particular way, it would seem that the best approach would be to choose representatives who would institute the policies they demand – whatever they are. But that does not seem to be the goal, and the logical solution is not one that, by and large, they're willing to undertake. In 1962, when the entire House of Representatives stood for election, as well as one third of the Senate, 47.3% of the voting age population turned out.^xiii,xiv In 2010, with the same positions up for election, we were down to 37.8%. In presidential years the trend has been in the same direction: in 1960 the turnout was 63.1% while in 2008 it was 56.8%.^xv While I can't get national figures for 2011, I know that about 16% of the citizens in my town (“city”) voted for mayor this year. Even if we allow for those below voting age, it is a disappointing, but telling, percentage.

I don't know if the protests will still be going on a few weeks from now when this is published, but I suspect they will – at least in some of the locations where they're now taking place. Even if they have no interest in putting in the effort to solve the problems about which they complain, people enjoy the camaraderie which accompanies mass protests. And they'll rejoice in doing so even if the neighborhood in which they hold their event is trashed, and its economy destroyed.

Next episode: “Edison Was Wrong” -- Wherein I take exception with myself – well, sort of.

i     That's what happens as you get older.

ii    The movement has spread elsewhere as well. It is said to have originated based on the protests which have formed a large part of the “Arab Spring.” In those protests the participants were prepared to risk their lives for their goals.

iii    For example, entertainment stars like Oprah Winfrey and sports stars like C. C. Sabathia. And lots of others in the public eye who earn large salaries but are admired for it. (According to the web site of the Major League Baseball Players Association, the minimum salary for the 2011 season is $414,000. TV and movie stars often get more for each performance. And a percentage, which, in keeping with their rich status, is closer to one percent than ninety-nine.)

iv    Less than half of the group are CEO's and Wall Street financiers and bankers according to a study by Indiana University economists cited in the (Mount Vernon, New York) Journal News, November 14, 2001. The majority are medical professionals, lawyers, computer workers, mathematicians, engineers, technical workers, salesmen, workers in “blue-collar and miscellaneous service jobs,” people in real estate, business operations workers, entrepreneurs, professors, scientists and, of course, media and sports professionals. It's a diverse group with only their incomes as a common link.

v     According to Wikiquote, it is a “statement in a press conference (1929), as quoted in Uncommon Friends: Life with Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, Harvey Firestone, Alexis Carrel & Charles Lindbergh (1987) by James D. Newton, p. 24.”

vi    “One percent” and “ninety-nine percent.” That sounds familiar. Almost as if those who lack inspiration, whose livelihood, as it says in the Bible, depends on “the sweat of [their] brow[s]” – those whose wages depend on the work they do, are being treated unfairly.

vii    Of course we can't call it that. “Socialism” is a dirty word.

viii    And they'd be fools to work harder in a society that addresses all their needs irrespective of their effort.

ix     And especially our bosses. Perhaps also our parents and religion?

x     A poll by Penn, Schoen and Berland, in addition to demonstrating that more than half had participated in prior efforts at political action, states that 98% would support civil disobedience and 31% violence to achieve their goals.

xi    Baruch College researchers, business analyst Harrison Schultz and professor Hector R. Cordero-Guzman, state “Occupy Wall Street would qualify as stuff white people like. The sample of non-white people, ..., is too small to even analyze.”

xii     It's interesting that the poor – those with the most to gain by raising the taxes of the “rich” and increasing entitlements for themselves – are underrepresented. 13% were unemployed and 13% earned over $75,000 (information from the cited members of the faculty of Baruch College School of Public Affairs). Put differently, 87% are employed. The hard-core unemployed and the poor are not, for whatever reasons, the main participants in this cry for equity.

xiii   Infoplease.com. The source they cite is the Federal Election Commission.

xiv    I'll have a little more to say about voting in a future essay. And, possibly, more about taxes.

xv    Actually that was an improvement over 1996 when President William Clinton ran for reelection. The turnout was 49.1% and President Clinton received less than half of their votes.