Poll: The Rich Are Ashamed
Forget bailouts, nationalized corporations, and high taxes – the clearest evidence of America’s emerging socialism lies in new research about wealth and guilt.
The richest Americans, defined by the study as those with at least $100,000 in discretionary income, are ashamed of their wealth.
Fifty-four percent of respondents admitted that they “feel guilty purchasing luxury goods in the current economic climate.” More surprising is the finding that only 29% of respondents want to be considered wealthy.
Since when did wealth become a reason for shame?
It’s certainly not for those of us who aren’t in Sic Willie’s “eleventy kabillion dollar” club.
And since when did people not want to be considered wealthy? Seriously, that’s like not wanting to be considered attractive.
It’s pathological, this normalization of the exceptional.
At work here is what I’ve termed a middling effect … which is incidentally the name of my forthcoming book, the theme of which I am at liberty to say only that it’s about middles and effects.
Anyway, it’s all manner of upside-down when wealth is cause for shame.
Because that necessarily means that poverty – or worse, mediocrity – is cause for pride. That’s downright unpatriotic … and spending is a patriotic act, as George W. Bush famously taught us.
But back to the topic of socialism, which is where I began.
That the rich are ashamed to be rich – and feel too guilty to enjoy their bounty – certainly points to twilit capitalism.
On the other hand, decreased spending among the wealthy means that – as goes the warning – the rich get richer. Among the wealthiest survey respondents, the savings rate increased by 20% this year, thanks to their decreased spending.
It’s an ironic twist that nobody could have predicted.
Could the dawn of socialism presage the rebirth of the aristocracy?
Of course not – be it income tax, corporate tax, property tax, payroll tax, capital gains tax or death tax, government’s going to find a way to get that money somehow.
We’ve got to “spread the wealth around,” remember?
Comments
By Pat Hendrix on May 1st, 2009 at 9:58 am
Socialism? Because of the astronomical jump of the top rate from 36% to 39.6%? Yes, how unprecedented in American history. Except it isn’t. In 1918 the top rate was 77%, over 90% from 1934 to 1964 when it was lowered to 70%. In 1982, it was still 50%, 11% lower than what is being proposed.
Oh, and socialism is when the government controls the means of production and distribution. Please explain where that is taking place? Even the banks, which were bailed during the Bush Adminstration, have maintained their boards. The automakers, also bailed during the previous adminstrations, have control of their own boards, too. You really think the government wants to be the banking and car biz? Ugh, no.
Additionally, we have seen the same types of bailouts in the 1980s. Chrysler, Harley, New York City, and the Savings and Loan industries were all given similiar treatment. Was Reagan a socialist? By your reasoning, he was.
There’s a reason nobody takes you people seriously.
By roofus on May 1st, 2009 at 10:48 am
yes, i agree with pat. how many tax cheats are on obama’s cabinent? at least five at last count. it seems if you are a democrat paying taxes must be optional. i’m thinking i’ll jump ship like specter.
incidentally pat, the bail-outs you mentioned did not occur when repubs controlled the house,senate, and presidency as the dems do now.
also, pat, in the 80’s the tax write-offs were more numerous, the super-rich sheltered their wealth in “endowments” and “charities” and “yachts” and the like. the laws have changed and it’s harder to shelter wealth now with the exception of UBS which is refusing to hand over names of over 30,000+ americans who are illegally evading taxes…
By Mande Wilkes on May 1st, 2009 at 10:57 am
Pat –
Your argument might work with regard to people who swoon at the sound of Reagan’s name, or for people who talk about “how it used to be” in America.
I’m neither of those.
The American government has been screwed up, in one way or another and to varying degrees, pretty much since its inception. Citing last century’s tax rates doesn’t magically foreclose criticism of the current tax code. Neither does mentioning Reagan, that mendacious symbol of wistful once-and-again nostalgia.
That the government has always sucked doesn’t preempt discussion of the fact that it continues to suck.
-Mande
By Pat Hendrix on May 1st, 2009 at 11:36 am
“mendacious symbol of wistful once-and-again nostalgia”
Mande, “mendacious”?
And the point I was making had nothing to do with “government sucking” or closing debate of the current tax code (by the way, when I ask you a question, I’m not preempting discussion – I’m engaging in one). In any event, the point I was making is that calling the current president a socialist is insipid. And if we were to use tax rates and the purchasing of bank stock as proof of marxism, then you can probably cast every president in the 20th century as a commie.
If you really want to engage in a discussion about the policy, great. If you want to battle strawmen and toss around silly words like socialism, I’m afraid nobody aside from a few loons on the right are going to take you seriously.
And Roofus, TARP passed during the Bush Adminstration. First loans to the auto makers also during the last administration.
By Gillon on May 1st, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Mande, your derogatory comments about American gov’t. would seem to indicate that you must be of the anarchist political persuasion. Compared to that, socialism, and heck, even libertarianism, doesn’t look so bad. I hope that you haven’t reached the bomb-throwing stage yet. And Pat, I like your style.
By roofus on May 1st, 2009 at 1:26 pm
the baby boom generation is the most selfish in the history of america. every previous generation has sacrificed so that their children would have more opportunity and a better life. not so the boomers. they are stealing from their children and grandchildren who will inherit financial bondage from the moment they draw their first breath.
australia, anyone?
By Mande Wilkes on May 1st, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Gillon -
My derogatory comments about the American government indicate only that I am sentient.
-Mande
By Pat Hendrix on May 1st, 2009 at 2:27 pm
The only use of “sentient” that didn’t come off as smug and silly
Supreme Court Rules Tennesseans Are Sentient Beings
James “Bud” McCardle, a thrice-divorced, unemployed father of 11, rejoices at the news of the Supreme Court’s decision. Boone County Judge Ernest G. Tubbs had previously ruled that McCardle was a non-sentient being.
WASHINGTON, D.C. (AP)–In a victory for advocates of states’ rights, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 yesterday that Tennessee citizens are sentient beings with a capacity to make certain decisions for themselves.
Chief Justice William Rehnquist, writing the Court’s majority opinion, stated that, “The absence of higher forms of cognitive thinking skills on a statewide level does not preclude the application of the individual liberties guaranteed in the First Amendment to the residents of that state, no matter how strong the evidence is toward their collective lack of intelligence.”
The landmark decision, which experts say will forever alter the definition of a living organism south of the Mason-Dixon line, is based on the highly controversial McCardle v. Bratton case. In 1993, Boone, TN resident James “Bud” McCardle, a thrice-divorced, unemployed father of 11, was declared a “non-sentient being” by a Boone County judge after leaving his 2-year-old daughter in a car for eight hours while he attended an all-day NASCAR funny car time trial.
In his decision, Boone County Judge Ernest G. Tubbs defined sentience as “the ability to perform certain basic functions, such as feeding oneself and avoiding falling off bridges,” a definition McCardle failed to pass. McCardle was one of several thousand gap-toothed Tennesseeans arrested that year for a “profound and utter lack of brains,” sparking a nationwide debate over the collective sentience of the state of Tennessee.
Among the evidence cited to demonstrate the non-sentience of Tennessee: Opryland USA and Dollywood theme parks; its extreme proximity to similar cultural backwaters Alabama, Mississippi and Georgia; and the state’s dead-last ranking among U.S. states in citizens-to-books ratio (70,000:1).
Argued Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor in her statement yesterday: “Mr. McCardle and the other countless Tennesseeans who exhibit no sign of cerebral activity are sentient solely by virtue of the blood flow to the brain, regardless of the frequency and quality of activity with which the said brain happens to be engaged.”
O’Connor did qualify her remarks, adding: “Exceptions to this rule are the many Tennesseeans who continue to argue against evolution theory and its place in the state’s public schools, despite its firmly established place among the natural sciences for more than 150 years.”
Four members of the Court, led by Justice David Souter, dissented from the majority. Referring to the legal tenet of “implicit non-applicability,” Souter noted that, “The Founding Fathers clearly never intended the Bill of Rights to be applied to the chromosomal dumpsite that is the Volunteer State.”
Dana Hughes of the American Civil Liberties Union lauded today’s decision as “a recognition that government officials must not be allowed to overly encroach on family matters, even families of profoundly stupid Southern morons.”
By Pat Hendrix on May 1st, 2009 at 2:37 pm
When you guys read Mande’s posts, do you ever think of this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wv4×2s9HR88
By cerius on May 1st, 2009 at 3:11 pm
roofus my man,
In addition to not having to pay taxes, don’t forget that democrats get sweetheart land deals–(remember Tony Rezko (sp?)–you and I would’ve done time in the slammer had we been involved in such a deal…
By GGIH on May 1st, 2009 at 4:50 pm
i’d criticize Mande’s word choices, too, but it’s too much like shooting fish in a barrel.
By Laurin on May 1st, 2009 at 10:54 pm
Maybe the wealthy people are just being humble. But I could see why that wouldn’t occur to Mande. Good luck on that best-seller book! I’m betting the premise of the book is about how to use a thesaurus.
By The Senator on May 2nd, 2009 at 7:52 am
Hendrix we think you may “protest too much”… I can’t get no… satisfaction… and I tried and I tried. Call Obama he will give you love like nobody can. SH
By cerius on May 2nd, 2009 at 8:02 am
Pat,
Speaking of brainless morons from the “backwater” state of Tennessee…isn’t that where Al Gore, environmental mega-profiteer hails? You know, that internet-inventing-enviro-cultist? The guy that rents scenic river land inherited from his rich daddy to a MINING COMPANY…
Was it not just this past year that your “cultured” New Yorkers trampled a man to death at a Walmart Christmas sale?
Hmmm…backwater, indeed!
By Gillon on May 2nd, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Just a thought, but if the good citizens of Tennessee(you know, that’s the state whose football coach said that USC football players would end up working in car washes, and then lied about saying it) had shown a little loyalty and voted for their native son in 2000 instead of his opponent, this nation would have been spared eight years of George W. Bush.
By cerius on May 2nd, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Gillon,
Good point. Then again without Bush II, there would be no Obamajesus to save us all!
By okey on May 2nd, 2009 at 8:23 pm
Cerius,
Obamajesus gonna’ save us from those eeeeviill Bushcheneyhilter waterboarders. Obamajesus knows that those fine, upstanding, misunderstood, sucidal, mass-murdering Islamofascists —-who murdered over 3,000 unarmed, American civilians in one morning– did not, I repeat, did not deserve the horrible nasal lavages which those eveevill Buscheneyhilter CIA types performed on them. O the horror of waterboarding! Obamajesus gonna’ fix them real good.
Maybe even Obamajesus gonna look into Waco and why Jenet Reno’s orders led to the incineration of 70 innocent American children. Then again, Janet Reno is a democrat, so I guess Obamajesus will look the other way.
By lou on May 3rd, 2009 at 7:06 am
You people need to google FMR, LLC. They owned Enron, 5% of AIG( the largest shareholder), Circuit City, Chrysler, GM, Countrywide Mortgages, big shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and Fidelity Investments.
Go look at rich people. Google FMR then understand that they alone are responsible for the entire financial crisis.
They oughta feel guilty.