This guy is the blogging topic of the weekend; his family earns $455,000 a year (addendum: this number seems not to be true) and yet he worries about his taxes going up and the resulting diminution of real income. I think we cannot permanently extend the Bush tax cuts; nonetheless, being a contrarian, I would like to explore the question of when a wealthy person has cause to complain. I read about this guy and his pitchfork and it genuinely scared me, especially his description of Ben Stein and his intermingling of the political and the aesthetic.
Let's say you live in a country which has some rich people, some people in the lower middle class, and some very very poor people. Or let's say you are a non-nationalist cosmopolitan. Or let's say they discovered the indigenous people in Alaska and New Mexico were worse off than we had thought.
In such societies, do the "lower middle class but not very poor people" have cause to complain? After all, some large group of others has it much, much tougher. Doesn't everyone who might suffer a loss have a potential claim to complain? At what percentile of wealth does your claim to complain go away or diminish? Even if it's an exponential function, can't Henderson's complaint lie within the shaded area, small though that region may be? Can't a rich person point out that he has a higher MU of money than a non-rich person might think? Or must that necessarily offend others? What kind of genuflections must he package along with that information, so as to avoid being considered offensive?
Do you have more of a right to complain about taxes if you were going to spend the money, bringing about the treasured "stimulus," noting that right now the wealthy are more inclined to spend? Do spendthrift wealthy people have a stronger right to complain if the multiplier on their potential spending is 1.5 rather than 0.6? Should wealthy people simply acquiesce to any policy change that leaves them in the top two percent, and keep their mouths shut in the meantime?
If you are wealthy, and complain about a pending loss, must you each time note that some people — many people — are worse off than you are? If you read a bad complaint, and complain about it, must you note that other people are stuck reading far worse material? Or is it OK just to complain? What if some other country's rich people support political tyranny, or perhaps an oppressive caste system, or maybe they don't pay any taxes at all? Can you still complain about your rich people? Or must you put in a disclaimer that you don't really have it so bad, given that others, in other countries, are stuck with even worse rich people?
Beware of moral arguments which do not address "At which margin?" I see a lot of attempts to lower the status of Todd Henderson, but not much real moral engagement.
A lot of people just like to complain, and that includes complaining about the complaining of others.
Oddly — or perhaps not – it's the people who feel they deserve their money who are the most likely to give it away.
← Previous Comments
Sleepy_commentator,
So, is your point that I should shut up and be thankful that you do not come to my house in the night and slit my throat? I guess I will stop trying to improve the world and just sit and think about how lucky I am not to be enslaved or killed. And in return, the government can do absolutely anything it wants, because at least it is not killing or raping me?
“Beware of moral arguments which do not address “At which margin?”" Indeed. By the way, did TC address that question or just complain about the complainers by asking it? Hmm.
Irony, noun:
@Ryan Vann:
This is rather late, but I apologize, at least, for not responding to your comment. I must have missed it the first time I scanned through. My later remark to Vangel might, I hope, at least somewhat answer your question with regards to what essential government functions are provided by the federal government. In general, you have good questions, and I do not have any pat answers. Here is a very good Wikipedia page about the U.S. Federal budget for 2010, outlining what your tax money is being spent on. You will notice that about four fifths of the budget is currently taken up by Social Security, Defence spending (including Iraq & Afghanistan), “Unemployment/Welfare/Other” spending, Medicare, Medicaid, the “Children’s State Health Insurance Program”, and interest payments on the national debt. If you feel that any of these are unnecessary in a ‘well functioning’ society, you shall never lack for a person with whom to debate.
@Cliff:
I certainly apologize if you got the impression that such was my point. Rest assured, I am not coming to your house to slit your throat. Nor do I believe that you should cease your struggle to create a better world in which you live. However, you should never believe that the world exists as it does merely because “that’s the way things are.” You should not believe for a moment that a single one of your freedoms exist because you are entitled to them.
It took effort, strife, philosophical innovation, scientific innovation, diligence, dissent, debate, inspiration, experiment; all these things and more, and far too much sacrifice and blood besides, to create them. It requires effort, strife, innovation, diligence, dissent, debate, inspiration, experiment, and yet more again, occasionally even blood, to maintain them. Not a single one of your freedoms is free, nor guaranteed, and in the absence of institutions and systems that seek to maintain them, you will quickly lose them all.
It must be really tough earning over 400k a year. Especially when you budget your money on private schools, luxury vehicles and homes that are too big for even The Brady Bunch.
I mean, jeez, when are you guys going to catch a break?
← Previous Comments
Comments on this entry are closed.