I did not grow up with money, but I was a smart kid and got scholarships to attend top notch schools with other kids who did grow up with a lot of money. During my high school and college years it was always more than a little strange, and admittedly often painful, to have a Close Encounter of the Money Kind with someone who grew up with a vastly different financial security blanket than I did.
My classmates were good people – smart and funny, talented and ambitious in diverse ways. But there was always a kind of eye-glaze thing that happened when the conversation would suddenly turn to money, perhaps because my classmates were going on a family holiday over Christmas and I was staying at school to fulfill the work study part of my financial package.
I don’t recall being jealous of a friend whose journey through life was more padded than mine. But I do recall being affected by comments that were not, I don’t think, designed to hurt me intentionally, but were rather the result of a kind of money-blindness that would lead to a youthful callousness about something that I assumed (and I still do) could only come from an utter lack of awareness about all the things that money buys.
I remember being tired by junior year because I’d had to work right through every summer and holiday break. A friend suggested I just quit my job and take off the rest of the summer, completely ignorant of the fact that I would have to drop out of school if I did. She didn’t know what to say when I told her it wasn’t possible.
Years later at a reunion with one of my high school chums, whom I hadn’t seen in many decades and who had become very wealthy in the interim, I told him how much I had admired and liked his successful father, who had always been very kind to me when we were growing up.
I was incredulous when he told me that in his opinion his father hadn’t really been all that successful…not when compared to the amount of money that he, was now making. I said, “But you took over your father’s business. You couldn’t have done that without him. How can you say that?” The stare, oh the stare…
Years after that, when I began designing and making fine jewelry and selling it nationally, I needed a lawyer to do some things for me and when she told me her fee, I practically gagged and said, “I don’t have that kind of money.” She responded by saying, “That’s impossible. Don’t you have a rich relative who can give you the money?” When I told her that I didn’t, she said, simply “Huh. How strange.”
Strange? Or just uncomfortable for her?
She herself was what we have all come to call A Trust Fund Baby. She worked hard. There was no question about that. She was smart. And talented. But within all that education, talent and smarts, there was a disturbing blindness to the reality of people unlike her, a kind of cold shoulder thrown in the direction of someone whose life circumstances were different than hers, circumstances that might require a different kind of thinking and understanding…not the sort of thinking, analysis, empathy and understanding of others she would be likely to find in a law book.
Each of these people I suppose would now be called a member of the 1%. I dislike labels and groups. They feel so exclusive, and not in a good way (Is there such a thing as a good label or group?).
While I used to defensively scream and yell about being called a Bleeding Heart Liberal, now I readily admit that I am. While I used to cringe when in the company of a colleague who might (teasingly) accuse me of being a Marxist when I defend the need for social, cultural and educational programs, now I readily say, “Okay…what’s so bad about being a Marxist? And can you really call me a Marxist if I have worked since I was 14, supported myself my entire life, started my own business with my own money, have always paid my own bills and believe in the value of working hard…all the while believing that it’s impossible to have a civilized society without social programs?”
I don’t think inheriting wealth is inherently bad. I don’t think that anyone can say that being born into a wealthy family is a bad thing. Circumstances are circumstances. In Buddhism it is said we choose our families, from which we will then learn many things (that is an over-simplification, but…nonetheless).
No, the issue with having extreme wealth or its opposite is a lack of consciousness about how it affects the conversation, relationships, communication and inter-relationships with those around us. My childhood chum was insulting to his father when he dismissed his success and, without being aware of it, was insulting to my mother who had so much less money than his father it was laughable…insulting because his money had created a barrier between him and his understanding about, his knowledge of, other people.
The attached talk between Paul Krugman and Bill Moyers centers on THE BOOK that has everyone talking this past week, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by French Economist Thomas Piketty. Here is but one quote from this interesting and short talk about Piketty’s book, which is being hailed as the most important economic to me in decades:
We are headed into a future dominated by inherited wealth, as capital concentrates on fewer and fewer hands giving the very rich ever greater power over politics, governments and society. For those who work for a living, the level of inequality in the US is probably higher than any other society at any time in the past anywhere in the world, Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century
And here is Moyer’s introduction to the discussion of the essence of the book – Inherited Wealth and how it affects everything in our lives:
Patrimonial Capitalism is the name for it, and it has potentially terrifying consequences for Democracy. Over 3 decades between 1977 and 2007 60% of our national income went to the richest 1% of Americans. No wonder the 1% doesn’t want the 99% to read it. – Bill Moyers
I admit that my heart is Socialist, Liberal, Marxist, but so too, apparently, are the hearts of Thomas Piketty and Bill Moyers and Paul Krugman, and I feel that I am in good company.
Capital in the Twenty-First Century is being written about everywhere, this week, but since I’m featuring a Paul Krugman talk with Moyers, you can read more here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/25/opinion/krugman-the-piketty-panic.html?ref=opinion
Columnist Biography: Paul Krugman
Paul Krugman joined The New York Times in 1999 as a columnist on the Op-Ed Page and continues as professor of Economics and International Affairs at Princeton University.
Mr. Krugman received his B.A. from Yale University in 1974 and his Ph.D. from MIT in 1977. He has taught at Yale, MIT and Stanford. At MIT he became the Ford International Professor of Economics.
Mr. Krugman is the author or editor of 20 books and more than 200 papers in professional journals and edited volumes. His professional reputation rests largely on work in international trade and finance; he is one of the founders of the “new trade theory,” a major rethinking of the theory of international trade. In recognition of that work, in 1991 the American Economic Association awarded him its John Bates Clark medal, a prize given every two years to “that economist under forty who is adjudged to have made a significant contribution to economic knowledge.” Mr. Krugman’s current academic research is focused on economic and currency crises.
At the same time, Mr. Krugman has written extensively for a broader public audience. Some of his recent articles on economic issues, originally published in Foreign Affairs, Harvard Business Review, Scientific American and other journals, are reprinted in Pop Internationalism and The Accidental Theorist.
#thomaspiketty #PaulKrugman #CapitalInTheTwentyFirstCentury
http://billmoyers.com/episode/what-the-1-dont-want-you-to-know-2/
April 27, 2014 at 6:43 pm
It does seem to be a sort of “mind set,” doesn’t it Karla Clark? Meanwhile, I think it’s important to say that there are people of extraordinary wealth who are VERY conscious are working very hard to bridge what often seem to be insurmountable financial and social gaps. I just wonder…is THAT taught? Or is one born with it? I tend to think that parents who will be passing on tremendous wealth to their children are bound to teach them things not found in reading, writing and ‘rithmetic books!
April 27, 2014 at 6:54 pm
I had a similar situation at school, my rich grandfather paid for a highly exclusive school, while my mother was extremely poor. The main thing it taught me was that money didn’t buy the important stuff, like contentedness.
April 27, 2014 at 6:58 pm
thank you for the interesting read.
April 27, 2014 at 6:59 pm
The thing that brings harmony is a sense of appreciation regardless of one’s position on the wealth scale. I’ve friends that make minimum wage and friends that buy homes from professional baseball players. I am proud of my wealthy friends and they inspire me. I am also proud of my min. wage friends and they remind me to be thankful for all that I’ve been blessed with.
I deplore the idea of judging an entire group of people by a single commonality. It is simply wrong to do so.
April 27, 2014 at 7:00 pm
Greetings Daniela Huguet Taylor ! Well, such a family situation as the one you describe is where it can get very interesting, indeed. No, money does not buy contentedness or happiness or health. Many wealthy people get divorced over and over and over again, and need bigger and bigger and bigger cars and houses in order to feel “content,” and there are all sorts of problems that come out of it. No matter the circumstances, there is always a window of consciousness and awareness through which one can walk… I think it is going to be interesting to see the conversation that comes from this book for some time to come. It’s not the sort that is going to be easily swept under the rug, I don’t think…
April 27, 2014 at 7:05 pm
Yes, as teenagers they used to party with such reckless abandon that it seemed more like despair.
April 27, 2014 at 7:07 pm
Another wonderful and thought-provoking post. My kids have grown up with “less than” what they see others having around them. Just this week my 12 YO son complained that he looked poor.He noted he brings soup ad apple juice for lunch while the other kids get pop to drink and buy the crappy school lunch . It was hard not to laugh. Imagine a poor child complaining because he gets hot soup and juice for lunch? it is all relative. He is among the only kid who gets a home made lunch. EVERY. DAY> But he sees friends with all the tech equipment and expensive shoes. It hurts me. But the unawareness that you speak of, that others have is amazing to me. The idea that everyone has a full savings account, or a rich relative- or a rich relative they would actually GO BEG FROM! Years ago a small group of friends and I all become underemployed at the same time. Everyone moaned equally about being broke. I had $28 in the bank. But my friend, when she said she was broke, meant that she had to dip into her $30,000 savings account. Perceptions vary 🙁 I think the future is well laid out in the theory that the political state and democracy itself is at risk in the US. I dare say, I am not really sure democracy really exists at all, except in theory.
Sorry – a bit rambling :-0
April 27, 2014 at 7:08 pm
Jim Preis I agree with you. I don’t think Thomas Piketty is judging an entire group of people. Nor is Moyers. Nor is Krugman. I think what Piketty is pointing out is what happens, exactly (globally), when the kind of appreciation you are describing does not happen. The world is not in harmony. It isn’t. And lack of consciousness about what happens when there is enormous disparity between financial strata is a result of that….
April 27, 2014 at 7:23 pm
miri dunn that story is something I can relate to…because I remember it so well. My…things haven’t changed in the home-made regard! There was a perception that fast food was better…and that home-made and lunchbox meant you were poor…or poorer…or less well off. Kids are tremendously affected (smiling at you here and you know why) by differences in economic status between their friends because they are trying so hard to fit in…to be liked, to be the same. And also because kids can be cruel. You as a mother can laugh certain things off because you know who you are.
As Daniela Huguet Taylor points out…contentedness is something money can’t buy and it often comes with age and accumulated life experiences.
I would be lying to you if I didn’t admit that there were many times that I tortured my mother about buying me new clothes because I so much wanted…not so much to look like my friends…but not to be singled out by them if I dressed differently. And that is, in a way, a kind of jealousy. It’s something else…but I don’t quite have the right word for it at the moment…something to do with wanting a protective barrier…the protective barrier of sameness.
April 27, 2014 at 7:28 pm
I intend to read this tomorrow when I can do so easily on a computer instead of my phone small screen. I willnote that Mr. Krugman was a regular customer at my Caribbean island bar because he has a condo just down the road from it. Most of my customers had no idea who he was and he never made a big deal of it but rather just came off as the nice guy having lunch with his wife.
April 27, 2014 at 7:38 pm
I realize now with hindsight that I was extremely lucky to have been very non-materialistic even as a kid, so that I didn’t suffer much at all in that sense. I was able to hold my own (and sometimes more) in class, and that was what counted for me.
April 27, 2014 at 8:10 pm
I try to tell my son that we are not the kind of people who care about material things- but the truth is, if I had the money to spoil my kids, I would. When my daughter was 12, and time for new winter coat for the season, she asked me “Can I get one with a price tag?”. She meant something new and not second hand. Broke my heart!
April 27, 2014 at 8:29 pm
I completely understand that sentiment miri dunn. You are trying to protect your child. Wow…what a question: Can I get one with a price tag? That just does me in, Miri….does me right in.
That said…there is a difference between buying your child a car and a Ferrari. Well, I suppose that if every kid has a Ferrari it is the same thing as buying them a tricycle, right? In that sense…Yes it is all relative. But just because a kid asks for something and you can afford it…it doesn’t mean they should have it.
Having money is a great privilege…whether it is earned or inherited. I rather think being alive is a great privilege…and Yes, I too, have made myself “feel better” by spending money that I ought not to have spent. It is very difficult when in the grip of that to get out of it. These days I think of college kids often…as I do executive assistants working with uber wealthy bosses.
Many years ago now I remember standing at a window in a business in New York City when it was pouring rain. I mean a monsoon. All the women standing there had only one pair of shoes and they weren’t going to ruin them in the rain. The CEO of the company came by and asked why they weren’t all going home (she had a car waiting for her) and one of them ventured, “Saving our shoes.” Oh the stare, oh the stare…I somehow think that is what the real issue is…
April 27, 2014 at 8:33 pm
“saving our shoes” … I live it Giselle Minoli
April 27, 2014 at 9:10 pm
/sub
April 27, 2014 at 9:13 pm
Giselle Minoli excellent points about the MANY social feedback loops that play into this, and the power of peer pressure, social proof, asf.
April 27, 2014 at 9:23 pm
People confuse concepts and adopt easily the stereotypes being a marxist differs from being a communist(urss) lenin differs from staline. Marx was influenced by Kant ( who is the founder of traditional liberalism) Marx wrote about equality he made theories to improve society … Stalin killed 20 million people … sharing some ideas with marxists should not be like a ‘stamp of shame ‘
For me no country on this earth was ever liberalist or socialist
How USA can be liberal and democratic if it’s ruled by wallstreet and silikon valley ?
(And other countries also )
I read last week in a german newspaper that every 6 weeks the head of american and europeen federal banks hold a meeting to ‘discuss’ political and economical issues in Brussels and the costs of this 2h ‘secret meeting’ 15 M. $$
Vive la democratie !
As for growing up in a poor or rich family I think someone who respect himself will look and talk to the other as other not as a rich or poor other.
No children should never get everything ( material) cause in that case they will stay children for ever ( and not in the good way)
I think ‘respecting’ is the key that should be given to childrens before ferraries Ipads or even food or water !
April 27, 2014 at 9:40 pm
stuart richman how silly of me to assume that everyone knows who Paul Krugman is. Thank you for reminding me that they don’t. I just added his bio to the end of the post.
April 27, 2014 at 9:53 pm
Giselle Minoli we had several notable persons besides Mr. Krugman as regular customers at the bar from the worlds of sports, journalism, finance, and entertainment to name a few. Even when people knew who they were they were treated as just another customer both at my place and island wide which was one of the reasons perhaps they enjoyed the hospitality of our island.
April 27, 2014 at 10:20 pm
Nancy H I agree with you that people use “labels” without thinking what they mean. Part of the reason I don’t like them. But in the USA, we are Communist phobic, Socialism phobic, Liberal (Bleeding Heart or Otherwise) phobic, and anyone who is supportive of social programs in general is considered a Socialist or a Marxist. Frankly, I’m not entirely sure most Americans have read any Marx…and it would mostly be Kant Who? Huhhhhh???
That said, I think this phobia is left over from the 60s (in our near history…although it certainly isn’t the only one) when it was the age of free love, and anti-War demonstrations and students were rising up against the establishment and questioning everything. Well, isn’t that what students are supposed to be doing? Questioning things? Why are we in this War? Should we be in this War? Are our politicians on the take? Are we polluting the atmosphere? Should we make big business pay for oil spills and acid rain and, well, I could go on and on and on.
So, essentially, anyone who questions anything is a liberal Marxist socialist contrarian in the US. But now there are esteemed economists who are questioning things too and suddenly the dialogue is changing.
Because, last time I checked, rich or poor we drive the same roads, ride the same subways, breathe the same air and are warmed by the same sun.
N’est ce pas?
April 27, 2014 at 10:37 pm
I have had the opportunity to associate with all classes of society. I attended a school in Charlottesville, Virginia where almost all the students were from wealthy families (we were relatively poor), and I attended a small Bible school in a small town in North Carolina where almost all the students were lower middle class (we were relatively rich). I think Giselle makes good points, though I disagree about the solution. My co-workers are quite aware that they are paying a higher tax rate than the wealthy (when combining all taxes, including payroll taxes) and are getting little in return. They aren’t enthused about a collectivist government increasing their burden and restricting their choices.
The divide is deep – usually not due to ill will, but simply a lack of understanding. Workers try to avoid talking to their employers because they don’t know how to relate to them and are concerned that they might say something that gets them in trouble. Each layer of management doesn’t want to tell the next level up what is really going on because they rightly fear they will be seen as incompetent (even though they are not) and lose their job. Without adopting a guise such as that of Captain Gars, a CEO will find it impossible to know what is actually going on in his own company. With the end of racial segregation, Americans developed a system of economic segregation that may be even more dangerous in the long run – many wealthy people now live in communities filled only with the wealthy, and in consequence have almost no ability to relate to others – including the highly-skilled but informally educated workers who are largely responsible for our technical society actually working. (I once spoke to a man who worked with Greenpeace in the 1970s who told me that even then most of the volunteers were trust fund kids who were absolutely useless at anything – and that Greenpeace was eager to have him on a mission simply because he was the only one who had practical skills such as repairing engines and plumbing.) $20 can be the difference between making it and not making it for many of the people I know – and yet frequently they get in a bind because of poor choices. It can be a self-fulfilling cycle: bad circumstances lead to poor choices, and poor choices lead to bad circumstances. There’s no easy solution.
Fortunately, the world is getting richer. Much richer. The upside is that even a little bit of capital now might be sufficient to provide a comfortable living in twenty years. The downside is that many people are in debt, and their labor is declining in value – they are being replaced by machines. The other downside is that our government is very much in debt, and doesn’t appear to be in a position where it can recover. Fortunately, I think people will be willing to help each other out – but we are going to go through a period of significant disruption.
April 27, 2014 at 10:42 pm
Well, now Joseph Parker PMP I would say that I am, much like a salad bar, a conglomeration of a lot of things – some of them conflicting, some of them not. I am a Liberal in the sense that I believe we need social programs and I believe in Doing the Greater Good. I am a Capitalist in the sense that I believe in making money and controlling my own fate. I funded my own business, so in that sense I don’t know what I am, frankly…except, perhaps, extremely naive! 😉 That said, I am also a socialist because I don’t think the be-all-end-all of any person’s life should be about making money and keeping it. I think we all have an opportunity to positive effect the world around us. ( miri dunn thinking of you again!).
There are those who might say that Bill Gates did not accumulate vast wealth in order to help other people. In the end I would disagree…he tied the world together through a communication system that made it possible for people to work together. I don’t care whether it was or wasn’t Melinda who inspired his philanthropy. That he is a philanthropist is what matters.
I live in New York City, where it is impossible to walk down the street without being reminded of the many extraordinary things that very wealthy people have bestowed up New York – libraries, universities, hospitals, scientific research centers, theaters, museums and on and on and on.
I live in New York City, where you can go to a play one day and read the Playbill and see who has invested in the show and then go to a special exhibition at a museum the next only to discover that the same wealthy and very involved individuals invested in that as well.
So in that sense you are right…it is not wealth or non wealth that matters. It is all about consciousness. And the particular point that I think Krugman/Piketty are making is about the gap that occurs between the making of the original wealth and the inherited wealth on down the line, where consciousness, social concern, a desire to contribute can all diminish over time.
I for one don’t see a conflict in your own statement. It is complex. Life is not as simple as labeling people Haves or Have-Nots, Can-Dos or Don’t-Dos, Good or Bad, Smart or Stupid, Lazy or Ambitious.
But…when I asked a wealthy friend why he doesn’t write a book teaching young women who don’t come from money how to invest what they do have so that they can improve their financial circumstances, do you know what he said? He said, “I don’t know how to turn nothing into something. That’s very hard to do.”
Thank you Joseph Parker PMP for your thoughtful response. I do appreciate it.
April 27, 2014 at 11:08 pm
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
April 27, 2014 at 11:15 pm
Great article.
April 27, 2014 at 11:27 pm
Thank you Gagarin Miljkovich and Marilyn Perry.
Alan Light University of Virginia (Yes? No?) is a great school. And what an interesting education you had between that environment and a “small bible school in a small town in NC.” It is these opposing experiences that I think we either need to have naturally or must come to experience during not only our education (formal or otherwise) and in our work environment. At the moment, I’m concerned that higher education – the cost of it – is going to weed out all but a certain socio-economic cut, whose experiences of life will be similar. It’s hard to stretch outside of one’s own experience when that is the case. One of the reasons that traveling is so beneficial. In a certain sense, we can do that here on G+, because there are so many people from around the world conversing here.
But…I wasn’t aware that I’d offered any particular “solution,” just raising the convo! 😉
Your point about CEOs being cut-off from real conversation with their employees is spot on. I have witnessed it over and over and over again…due, Yes, to the fear of being fired, but also due to witnessing what happens when threatened with losing a toe-hold in the corporate establishment. There are those within it who will always have an easier time…because of connections…and those who have a more difficult time because of a lack of them.
Whatever the case, silence is indeed the greatest sedition and one of the reasons it is so difficult I think to be a great CEO…who has to bridge that gap between pleasing the shareholders, keeping up competitively globally, and attracting and keeping good employees. It is tough.
And to speak to your last point, I think this will be our greatest gift if we can wrap our minds around it…how to think entrepreneurially so that we can help one another out…instead of the ages old reliance on climbing up a corporate ladder, the rungs of which are hanging by a rusty nail…
April 27, 2014 at 11:50 pm
Giselle Minoli Actually, I was in 3rd and 4th grade at the time, so it was St. Anne’s-Belfield – though my mother did get a Master’s at U.Va. and I had a good friend, Dr. Bice, who was one of the vice-presidents at the University. (I delivered his newspaper.) STAB was far more exclusive than U.Va.
The “solution” I referred to was Marxism, Socialism, or collectivism in general. Marx did have some good insights, but also some huge blind spots. I believe we may be moving towards a system that embraces the best of communist and libertarian thought, but I believe libertarianism (and particularly voluntaryism) will need to be the senior partner.
The short version is that we need money as a feedback mechanism that lets us know what is working and what is not, and we need private property so that people can have security in their possessions – but the means of production will be so cheap and ubiquitous and available from so many sources that no one will go without their basic needs being met. In short, the people will own the means of production – but those means of production will not be collectivist factories with thousands of workers, but small-scale machines owned by individuals and staffed by robots and computers that can replicate themselves.
April 28, 2014 at 1:54 am
Joseph Parker PMP I think that the demographic of the 1% does not fluctuate “wildly.” Indeed, I think the point of Piketty’s book is that the demographic is perpetuated by wealth (as opposed to income) and is therefore quite stable.
I also think the modest proposal put forth by the economist is perhaps, a capitalist as much as a Marxist, idea. He suggests that we treat income, whether it is from labor or capital gains, the same. And that we impose a tax on wealth.
To me, the growth of wealth is a proxy for the sum total of dependence upon the society that enables it. And the suggested tax would be proportionate to that dependence. The radical notion is to recognize that the more wealth you have, the more you are dependent upon laws and tax loopholes and legislators and courts and other parts of our infrastructure to keep it. The idea is to make transparent (and more efficient) the current amounts of money paid to bend and corrupt that infrastructure to something that represents a truer (perhaps impossibly idealistic) capitalist system, rather than the borderline criminal system we now enjoy.
I sympathize with your questions as to who makes allocation decisions. I’m not a fan of ism’s and their usually inflexible solutions to society’s, family’s, and individual’s problems. But that is more of a how-do-we-allocate-the-money question rather than a who-should-be-paying-for-the-damage that our current system visits upon those who, through no fault of their own, were born into one family rather than another.
April 28, 2014 at 2:39 am
Hi Bill Abrams. Indeed a radical notion. I can’t tell you how many people with whom I’ve rather list touch over the years because the entire conversation was about how to hang onto their wealth, or about money in general, or about taxes. It can be mind numbing boring when disassociated from the culture within which that money exists. The overriding message here is not money , but how we buds it. Like a drug perhaps?
April 28, 2014 at 2:58 am
Giselle Minoli Yes. It is like a drug in that, for many people, it consumes one’s waking moments and disturbs ones’ sleep. As Joseph Parker PMP perceptively observed, it can infect and distort all the addicted’s relations with the world around him or her.
April 28, 2014 at 3:54 am
Joseph Parker PMP Bill Abrams is ever the thoughtful reader and commenter, well read and with an interesting background of diverse experiences that allows him to converse, Yes, epically, about virtually everything. Rock on!
April 28, 2014 at 11:14 am
Joseph Parker PMP Welcome to Salon Minoli.
April 28, 2014 at 12:41 pm
I really think people ought to pay attention in History class more often. A lot of the world would not seem so outrageous/offensive/unfair/unjust/ridiculous – in fact, being less ignorant about human history and civilization just gives you perspective and objectivity and a length of vision that makes little affairs seem small and marginal.
However, that doesn’t sell newspapers, ads for media time or headlines.
April 28, 2014 at 2:54 pm
Well Will Hahn that was the irony/cruelty/blindness of my childhood friend on the one hand dismissing his own father’s accomplishments and denying that it is far easier to take over a company started by someone else (his father) who did all the hard work for decades…quite literally giving his son something substantial, grounded and already successful to work with and turn into an even bigger success…and on the other hand admitting that he couldn’t write a book to help young women who don’t come from family money learn how to grown their savings accounts…because he doesn’t know how to turn nothing into something.
Isn’t this called Hubris? Or…Denial? Or…Ignorance? Or…Arrogance? Or…some combination of all of these.
However…because there are so very many accomplished and wealthy people who do care about the communities in which they live, I would hate to see them punished because of people who don’t. That would never sit well with me.
Theoretically I don’t have any issue with people giving their money where they want. But as Piketty and Krugman point out…I don’t want them controlling the politics and government of my country to protect their self-interest.
April 28, 2014 at 8:42 pm
Hello Alex Schleber and thank you. It IS complicated isn’t it? I’m rather sad to note that I think that much in the same way kids inherit money and fortunes from their parents and grandparents, so too do they inherit their belief systems and often their political affiliations and every attitude that goes with them. While I have occasionally met a kid who has decided to part company with a parent politically, doing so is often a path fraught with problems. There is frequent and tremendous pressure to two the family value system in the same way that employees are pressured into towing the company line and believing what the boss believes.
And so, Yes, Bill Abrams the 1% is relatively the same because even thought he people may change, they are dragging alone with themselves inherited belief systems. Some of those belief systems are great and visionary and progressive. Some are not.
April 29, 2014 at 12:06 pm
For what it’s worth, below is a link to David Brook’s assessment of Piketty’s book. Brooks is a well-known conservative journalist. I read his column in the Times regularly because he’s smart. And willing to look at both sides of an argument. And he frequently brings a quirky viewpoint to bear in an article. He points out what he perceives to be shortcomings in the book…but in the end he identifies himself as a quasi-Marxist. Who knew? How delightful! A quasi-Marxist. Sort of like being a little bit pregnant? 😉
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/25/opinion/brooks-the-piketty-phenomenon.html?mabReward=RI%3A2&action=click&contentCollection=Dance®ion=Footer&module=Recommendation&src=recg&pgtype=article
April 29, 2014 at 1:21 pm
The book of Piketty find his embryonic thesis in a search done in 2010 by George Corm ” le gouvernement du monde ” ( world government ) the book talks about how globalization wich have 2 meanings in french: – globalisation ( and it is when we talk on a financial and economic level)
– Mondialisation ( and it is when we talk on a cultural and social level like )
The author argues that the bad thing about globalization is that it has emerged essentialy on a financial level which contributed to enlarging the gap the chasm between rich and poor ( the rich become richer and the poor become poorer, not only on individual level but between the States and that what happened in Europe with the Greek and other poor countries of the EU when we force countries into globalization without real reforms it leads to economic and social crises that is well known maybe for some people it is not fair to have what Piketty calls ” global taxes” but I think there should be a global regulation to watch the economics of citizens and states like the watches on Human rights it may seem a bit utopist but this view isn’t much better than to think that continuing in this way may lead to WW III ?
The raise of Nazism in Germany and of totalitarism in other countries was the effect of economic crises and the gaps that took place between the members of society… and I believe reduicing gaps is the key to maintain peace and avoid the raise of fanatism many writers and political scientists have been talking that in a few years the hyper american power will be ruined and it will come the time to the rise of China and Russia ( clash of civilizations) …
I don’t know how much we can say that these previsions are likely to happen but what is sure is that the Marxism has failed and the Capitalism has failed.
We need a new system that takes the ” best of the two worlds” so that globalization happens on all levels and by globalization I hear multiculturalism, NGOs, cultural economic and scientific exchange and sharing between countries Not the hegemonic and dominance of one country or one system or one oligarchs classes …
April 29, 2014 at 1:33 pm
Btw Giselle Minoli if we continue like that we can turn this post into a mini think tank 😉 :)))
April 29, 2014 at 1:33 pm
Nancy H perhaps that is why Brooks refers to himself as a QUASI-Marxist, instead of just a Marxist. So the next step would be for Capitalists to identify themselves as QUASI-Capitalists…the suggestion being that they care about something more than just making money? Whether nationally or globally?
April 29, 2014 at 1:40 pm
I don’t really know how we can see the word Quasi ?? Maybe the worlf MarxiCapi or Capimarxi could be more ” fashionable” ??
My quest. Would be how to make them care …
April 29, 2014 at 1:44 pm
Quasi, in English Nancy H does NOT mean fashionable in any sense of the world. It really means “sort of,” or “partly,” in the sense here meaning that there are concepts of Marxism that Brooks believes in and supports and parts that he does not. I would argue that in fact this is a very caring position, in that he is being discriminatory and thinking it through carefully, rather than, for instance, simply declaring himself to be one or the other without any awareness.
I might add that the terms “socialist,” “Marxist,” “Communist” are viewed very differently in the United States than they are abroad.
May 4, 2014 at 8:53 am
I just lucked on to this discussion (don’t know how I missed it until now). Great post and discussion thread.
May 4, 2014 at 10:02 am
Giselle Minoli thanks for sharing.
The following articles describe Piketty’s arguments used in his book “Capital in the Twenty-First Century”:
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117429/capital-twenty-first-century-thomas-piketty-reviewed
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/may/08/thomas-piketty-new-gilded-age/
May 4, 2014 at 1:56 pm
Hi Darryl Collins and João Ferreira. It was nice to wake up to both of your comments after having watched (at home last night) The Wolf of Wall Street, which, Yes, I know was meant (possibly) to have been some sort of over-the-top satire, but which unfortunately the truth about the way some massively powerful people approach capitalism. João Ferreira I will read the articles you attached…thank you very much for taking the time. Have a good day everyone.
May 4, 2014 at 5:21 pm
Btw, Giselle Minoli, check out what just came via paul beard:
“The new aristocracy”
plus.google.com/104119855035793551431/posts/NmbyLXm7wep
May 4, 2014 at 11:47 pm
2 quick items I just came across:
– Oldie but goodie
twitter.com/paulg/status/323875236225363968
-not read yet but about to:
http://www.salon.com/2014/02/02/why_youre_wrong_about_communism_7_huge_misconceptions_about_it_and_capitalism/
May 5, 2014 at 12:45 am
Alex Schleber you are a fabulous research assistant! 😉 Thank you very much. I’m pathetically behind on my reading today. Bear with me…
May 24, 2014 at 4:23 pm
Did Thomas Piketty Get His Math Wrong? Here come his critics, as they should, as is fair in journalism:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/24/upshot/did-piketty-get-his-math-wrong.html?action=click&module=Search®ion=searchResults&mabReward=relbias%3Ar&url=http%3A%2F%2Fquery.nytimes.com%2Fsearch%2Fsitesearch%2F%3Faction%3Dclick%26contentCollection%3DMovies%26region%3DTopBar%26WT.nav%3DsearchWidget%26module%3DSearchSubmit%26pgtype%3Darticle%23%2FThomas+Piketty+criticisms
April 4, 2017 at 7:21 am
Are you frustrated in life. What type of wealth do you want? Today the
Lucifer has order us to bring member to his kingdom. Are you tired of poverty,
then contact us today via:davidcastrosmith@gmail.com or Whatsapp +2347032335365
BENEFITS GIVEN TO NEW MEMBERS WHO JOIN ILLUMINATI.
1.A Cash Reward of $500,000.
2.A New Sleek Dream CAR valued at $300,000.
3.A Dream House bought in the country of your own choice.
4.One Month holiday (fully paid) to your dream tourist destination.
5.One year Golf Membership package.
6.A V.I.P treatment in all Airports in the World.
7.A total Lifestyle change.
8.Access to Bohemian Grove.
9.Monthly payment of $1,000,000 into your bank account every month as a member
10.One Month booked Appointment with Top 5 world Leaders and Top 5 Celebrities in the World.