Paul Caron has published links to the entire series of blog posts written by me, Professor James Maule and Professor Linda Beale on the issue of Wealth, Taxes and Politics:
- Jim Maule (Villanova), A Tax Policy Determination Clue (1/6/10)
- Linda Beale (Wayne State), Who’s Rich? What’s Going on With Those Freshwater Economists? And More Posts Worth Reading (1/7/10)
- Peter Pappas (The Tax Lawyer’s Blog), Two Professors, an Angry Bear and Hate the Rich Syndrome (1/8/10)
- Jim Maule (Villanova), If a Wealth-Dominated Congress Is So Great, Why Are Taxation and Other Policies Such a Mess? (1/13/10)
- Linda Beale (Wayne State), Too Much Wealth? More Dialogue on the Issue (1/14/10)
- Peter Pappas (The Tax Lawyer’s Blog), Professors Maule and Beale Respond; Pappas Cowers then Regroups (1/15/10)
- Jim Maule (Villanova), Is It Any Wonder That the Tax Law is a Mess? (1/20/10)
This last post, by Professor Maule, is particularly interesting and, I think, gets to the heart of our differing world views. I happen to believe that high moral character generally (not always, of course) is a predictor¹ of material success. Mr. Maule clearly doesn’t.
Here’s a sampling of the Professor’s post, but be sure to read the entire thing (emphasis mine):
The point isn’t a matter of intelligence, which, of course, can be measured in many ways. The point is one of wealth and representational democracy. The notion that wealth represents success, and success represents intelligence, and that intelligence is best over-represented in Congress, falls apart at every stage.
Wealth represents material success, but has nothing much to do with moral or spiritual success.
The ranks of the wealthy are packed with people who, if not criminals, have engaged in morally, socially, and theologically questionable or inappropriate behavior, ranging from the sale of defective products, through the exploitation of powerless and desperate workers, to purchasing influence to change the rules to their own benefit at the expense of others.
Though many may admire these tactics, once the desire for wealth is pushed aside, it is easy to see the extent to which the addiction to greed, when pushed beyond sensible limits, jeopardizes the nation and representational democracy.
The ranks of the poor and the middle-class are likewise packed with people who have engaged in morally, socially and theologically questionable or inappropriate behavior. I think it’s universally accepted that there exists an inverse relationship between crime – especially violent crime – and wealth.
That the insidious tactics listed by Mr. Maule are regularly engaged in by some who hold power there can be no doubt. But, as Lord Acton’s dictum holds, power and corruption are synonyms not because the corrupt seek power, but because those who obtain power become corrupt by virtue of having obtained it.
Power tends to corrupt – and it corrupts the poor and weak just as readily as it does the rich and strong.
Footnote:
¹ My belief is based partly on Abraham Maslow’s theory of the Hierarchy of Needs which, in general terms, holds that there are five levels of human need:
- Psychological
- Safety
- Love/belonging
- Esteem
- Self-actualization
Each prior level of need must be attained before the individual can graduate to the next level.
The widely accepted theory of the Hierarchy of Needs tends to support my contention that successful, self-actualized people, are more competent to run government (i.e. to accept facts, solve problems, be moral and creative) than are individuals who are stuck at the lower rungs of the hierarchy (i.e. ordinary people).
Here is Maslow’s famous chart of the hierarchy of human needs:
1 response so far ↓
1 Barbara Phillips Long // Jan 25, 2010 at 12:49 pm
Perhaps you might understand some of Professor Maule’s points better if you read Barbara Ehrenreich’s book “Bait and Switch: The (futile) pursuit of the American dream.” The final chapters in particular, where Ehrenreich focuses on the current corporate tendency to support self-aggrandizement at the expense of the lives and careers of fellow workers, is a depressing indictment of financial success in the U.S.
People need moderate intelligence and a modicum of good manners to get ahead, but the problems with WorldCom, Lehman Brothers and Enron all point to corporate cultures where Christian theological ideas of morality were all undermined by the worship of the short-term bottom line.
Currently, I believe that an attractive face and body and a certain degree of cleverness are more predictive of success than intelligence or moral character. Do you believe Abraham Lincoln would ever have become president if he had run in the last 30 years?
Please don’t confuse the incidence of reported crime — often violent — with the incidence of white-collar crime. In addition, please do not confuse the incidence of reported crime with the incidence of morally questionable behavior in the boardroom. The poor aren’t the people who set up the crime-reporting databases nor are they the ones who enforce the laws.
Many professors believe in a meritocracy because they feel the meritocracy has rewarded them. But there are many people who are deserving of such rewards and have not received them — in the professorate, one may simply look at the number of qualified faculty members laboring as adjuncts. Before colleges and universities began cutting tenured positions, many of those adjuncts would have been part of the academic meritocracy, and to say they were somehow less deserving, rather than unlucky victims of well-paid penny-pinching administrators, is to avoid harsh talk about the moral issue of exploitation. “Thomas H. Benton’s” columns related to the topic in the Chronicle of Higher Education are illuminating reading.
Many ordinary people making around $30,000, $40,000 or $50,000 a year feel their votes don’t count because when it comes time for Congress to make decisions, only the lobbyists and the wealthy friends of members of Congress are heard. Many people in these pay ranges are moral, success-oriented college graduates. Do a survey if you doubt their cynicism — talk to voters and nonvoters. Find out if those middle-class people think their representatives and senators listen first to the people and second to lobbyists and the wealthy. Ask if Congress is corrupt. Ask if corporations are corrupt. Ask them if they think the tax code is fair. Ask them if high moral character is essential for success. Ask some open-ended questions and get people to say what they would like changed in Congress and in the federal government.
Then survey people who are poor and unemployed and survey people who earn more than a quarter of a million dollars a year. Compare the results and report the perceptions, or commission Dr. Terry Madonna to do it for you.
Finally, I think you are missing a point with Maslow. From my perspective, a society that provides respect and the possibility of achievement to every diligent, thoughtful person will have more people who exercise creativity and inventiveness. The lack of respect for the working poor and the middle class in this country is destroying their ability to contribute to the future of the nation. (For instance, look at the number of economically disadvantaged students who come out of college or have to drop out of college and carry huge debt as a result of their attempt to become more secure and respected in their working lives.) The problem isn’t that middle and lower class workers haven’t achieved — the problem is that they aren’t being allowed to have the economic, social and political security that would make a more equitable, just and creative United States run using fact-based policies and laws.
Leave a Comment