The video says it all and any comments would be superfluous. A similar picture could probably be drawn in all "developed" nations.
The only question (which the video doesn't tackle) is: "What, if anything, do we do about it?" Or, perhaps more to the point: "Can we do anything about it?", "can" meaning both "do we have the power?" and "are we willing to put in the effort?".
Looking at history suggests that nothing much is done until conditions get so bad that there is a revolution and that having a revolution is like flipping a coin: the result may be an improvement or may leave things as bad as, if not worse than, they were before.
I also noticed that the apparently level-headed presenter shared the American superstitious dread of "socialism". Therein lies the problem, I think, at least in the US: any attempts to change things to help the needy are perceived as "socialist" and therefore proscribed before they leave the drawing board.
I had seen this analysis but not the video explaining it, which makes a huge difference in terms of disseminating the message.
Re "socialism" true it sounds ridiculous to us (Europeans) but Americans are a different story - this is a country where collective bargaining in some states is illegal, hello?
So, my sense is that the narrator brought "socialism" up preemptively and it is probably a smart thing. Even the most progressive American will have a hard time accepting values associated (accurately or not) with "socialism."
Personally I have a hard time believing that competition is always so healthy.
Silver Tiger and Pink Panther,I entirely agree with all of your comments. Revolution leads nowhere as it only replaces one set of middle-class leaders with another who harbour a different set of grudges, or political values, but the rest of humanity seems to reap no benefit. I hasten to add that as a member of the middle class, I am not criticising my fellow class members, just stating what I regard as a truth.
Most of our politicians start life in the middle classes and then, as is only natural, start to work their way up the ladder. In so doing, they lose contact with the everyday realities of most of the population.
Furthermore, I have no real complaint against the super-rich who simply live on a different planet and are completely insulated against real life. Do the self-made billionaires really remember what it was like when they were slaving away in their garages? I think not. Their view of the world will probably be a rose-coloured one, sweetened by fond memories of a world that perhaps never really existed. Their children have never known anything different and for them a world of hyper-privilege is completely natural.
The only real way to change things, in my opinion is to raise awareness among the top 1% that life for the rest of us is not as comfortable as we would wish; somehow we must also curb the greed of CEOs and their myrmidons. Greed, however, is a universal human trait. Who wouldn’t fill their boots if given half a chance? The only way to do this is via aggressive taxation, but in the world we live in, we all know that money flows across borders at the click of a mouse. Starbucks, Amazon et al. have shown us that only too well. Therefore a 65% tax, let’s say, on hyperwealth will only net 65% of nothing. As I said in a much older post, the only thing we can do is tend our own garden.
With regard to dreaded Socialism, I feel that the narrator’s comments might have been somewhat tongue in cheek.
The video says it all and any comments would be superfluous. A similar picture could probably be drawn in all "developed" nations.
ReplyDeleteThe only question (which the video doesn't tackle) is: "What, if anything, do we do about it?" Or, perhaps more to the point: "Can we do anything about it?", "can" meaning both "do we have the power?" and "are we willing to put in the effort?".
Looking at history suggests that nothing much is done until conditions get so bad that there is a revolution and that having a revolution is like flipping a coin: the result may be an improvement or may leave things as bad as, if not worse than, they were before.
I also noticed that the apparently level-headed presenter shared the American superstitious dread of "socialism". Therein lies the problem, I think, at least in the US: any attempts to change things to help the needy are perceived as "socialist" and therefore proscribed before they leave the drawing board.
I had seen this analysis but not the video explaining it, which makes a huge difference in terms of disseminating the message.
ReplyDeleteRe "socialism" true it sounds ridiculous to us (Europeans) but Americans are a different story - this is a country where collective bargaining in some states is illegal, hello?
So, my sense is that the narrator brought "socialism" up preemptively and it is probably a smart thing. Even the most progressive American will have a hard time accepting values associated (accurately or not) with "socialism."
Personally I have a hard time believing that competition is always so healthy.
Thank you for sharing the video.
Silver Tiger and Pink Panther,I entirely agree with all of your comments. Revolution leads nowhere as it only replaces one set of middle-class leaders with another who harbour a different set of grudges, or political values, but the rest of humanity seems to reap no benefit.
DeleteI hasten to add that as a member of the middle class, I am not criticising my fellow class members, just stating what I regard as a truth.
Most of our politicians start life in the middle classes and then, as is only natural, start to work their way up the ladder. In so doing, they lose contact with the everyday realities of most of the population.
Furthermore, I have no real complaint against the super-rich who simply live on a different planet and are completely insulated against real life. Do the self-made billionaires really remember what it was like when they were slaving away in their garages? I think not. Their view of the world will probably be a rose-coloured one, sweetened by fond memories of a world that perhaps never really existed. Their children have never known anything different and for them a world of hyper-privilege is completely natural.
The only real way to change things, in my opinion is to raise awareness among the top 1% that life for the rest of us is not as comfortable as we would wish; somehow we must also curb the greed of CEOs and their myrmidons. Greed, however, is a universal human trait. Who wouldn’t fill their boots if given half a chance? The only way to do this is via aggressive taxation, but in the world we live in, we all know that money flows across borders at the click of a mouse. Starbucks, Amazon et al. have shown us that only too well. Therefore a 65% tax, let’s say, on hyperwealth will only net 65% of nothing. As I said in a much older post, the only thing we can do is tend our own garden.
With regard to dreaded Socialism, I feel that the narrator’s comments might have been somewhat tongue in cheek.