Romney is rich. He is very rich. He is fifty times richer than Obama, ten times richer than George Washington and 1,800 times richer than me. He also pays less taxes than you or I. How is that possible? Don't we live in a country with a (somewhat) progressive tax code?
I know what you are going to say: it's because he gets his income from dividends rather than from honest, hard work. Thanks to former President George W. Bush, the capital gains tax was lowered to 15%. If paying 15% taxes instead of the usual 30% isn't bad enough, Romney accuses people who are not in his league of suffering from envy. **
Every month or so I hear a report that income inequality is still increasing in this country. I am supposed to accept it, as if it was a law of nature. But I know that the majority of Americans are against such extreme inequality. Don't we live in a democracy? Isn't universal suffrage what this political system is supposed to be based on? Since the 99% wants more economic equality, why is the reverse taking place?
The democratic process is supposed to guarantee that everyone participates in who gets elected, but I realize now that it doesn't automatically mean that we have the power to influence political decision making.
What you and I are up against is the power of money that the few rich have. And it looks like the power of money is winning out. Big time. No matter how many 99%-ers there are, if your net worth is only 1,800th of the net worth of the likes of a Romney you can kiss your income equality dream good-bye. In his brilliant essay on Oligarchy and Democracy, Professor Jeffrey Winters explains that there are two types of power at play in a democracy like ours. The more money you have, the more 'Material Power' you can wield in politics, pitting it against 'Participation Power' of the many. The Material Power Index shows that people with extreme wealth have an MPI 10,000 higher than an average citizen.
They have used this power to rewrite the tax code. When taxes were first introduced in this country, only the richest 10% of Americans were being taxed but they have managed to shift the burden of taxation downward ever since. This is where Mr. Romney comes in. He makes no bones about what he stands for: protecting the interests of his class.
What makes me even more upset is having to witness the battle between the rich and the super-rich during the Republican debates over the past weeks. Romney, the 'super-rich' (net worth $250 million), battling Gingrich, the 'merely rich' (net worth $6.7 million). One being accused of vulture capitalism, the other of having profited as a 'lobbyist' for Freddie Mac. How exactly, pray tell, does that help me and the rest of the non-rich?
This infighting in the Republican party gives the excesses of capitalism a bad rap which it deserves, but it mainly shows that, whereas in the past the rich and the super-rich were in the same camp, they are now finally starting to attack each other. The mountain top is not that big and everybody wants to stand on it.
Let's face it, America is an Oligarchy and oligarchies are bad for democracy. I think this country should adopt the ancient Athenian system of 'Sortition', the drawing of lots from a large group of adult volunteers for selecting government officials in order to counteract a tendency toward oligarchy in government. We do this when we select juries. Why not do it to select our government?
As the situation stands now, no matter how many crooks in high places we expose, there are no repercussions for them. What is the point of exposing the bad guys if we don't have the power to do anything about it?
It is said that Americans do not hate the rich, but admire them. That they see them as a role model. But who wants to be governed by someone whose net worth is 2000 times more than yours? There is a limit to what even Americans will tolerate in terms of inequality. Up to now, the very rich have been smart enough to not be too much in the political limelight. It is much more effective to use your money in the background to influence politics. But with someone like Romney in the White House, things would be different. He would become the new Royalty and we, the 99% would be the serfs and farmers, like in ancient Rome. Is that what we want this country to become? leave comment here
** Whenever the 99% (we) criticize the 1% (them), their pat reply is that we are engaging in “class warfare.” This works very effectively, because in America, anyone accused of “class warfare” is considered as evil as a socialist. But President Obama had a great reply to this: he said that it’s not “class warfare,” it’s math!
