INCOME INEQUALITY: Let us watch as this phrase gathers momentum. It is like being present at the birth of “Global Warming”. We are hushed in awe. Before us silently spinning, a vast sphere of gas about to reach critical mass. Fusion is initiated… a Star is born! And we are witnessing it!
Rather than “wasting” time on proving that this is indeed both a problem and one that is within the government’s purview we get the bum’s rush to find a solution. We must not allow ourselves to be stampeded into accepting this premise. Income Inequality is merely a statistical construction. Like “the economy” it has no independent actual existence.
Why is it taken as a given that INCOME INEQUALITY is a problem? Maybe a society’s level of income disparity is directly related to a higher standard of living among the poorest members? Is this untrue? Or is it true? I do not know. But, I suspect that those who rile about INCOME INEQUALITY are equally in the dark.
Since they do not know whether or not INCOME DISPARITY results in a higher standard of living for the poorest members of society or not, to what may we attribute their commitment to lowering this inequality? The fact of the matter is that the well being of the poorest members of society is not even considered by “big-hearted” egalitarians. Even if the poorest people in this country have a standard of living the envy of most of the world’s middle classes, the elite are unmoved.
From private Pre-K to private school to Ivy League the elite and their wannabes have been indoctucated to a state of conditioned response that would impress a BF Skinner: Inequality bad; equality good. Inequality is in and of itself “bad”. But why?
The Post Modern Elitist has learned the clever rhetorical device of placing their premise as a condition in a “problem” they seek to “correct”. Like “what to do about Global Warming?” To even begin an answer is to accept the premise. This is why the Climate Gangsters always bring in “green jobs” to their rhetoric. Once the rube rises to debate the economic benefits of “green shoots” he has acceded to the premise that man-made global warming is a reality, and that it is a crisis.
Their minds have been filled from birth with the premise that equality is the sine quo none of justice. Talking about how to “manage” income inequality, no matter the proffered cure, whether “market based” or through government intervention accedes to the premise that Income Inequality is a problem, and a critical one at that.
To whom is Income Inequality a problem? Certainly it is not to the wealthy. The poor would surely prefer more wealth rather than income equality. The evil is to convince the poor that they are poor because others are too wealthy. This will not help the poor. Every single attempt at creating a Utopian cornucopia of equality has resulted in the same sad totalitarian state. Is it the Middle Class that would benefit from the lessening of Income Inequality? That is the most ridiculous proposition of all! The Middle Class nearly by definition is the class aspiring to become wealthy. It is the Middle Class that the elites seek to destroy. Historically the Bourgeoisie (the Marxist term for Middle Class) is the only new thing under the Sun. It arose in the interstices of feudal society. It prospered by diligent effort, thrifty habits, sobriety and those family values based upon particular religious values. Merchants, artisans and professionals created wealth. For the first time in human history the Land Holders lost their monopoly over the production of wealth. Capital came to compete with Land. The rise of The Modern world lay in this conflict and its resolution.
What we see now is the end of the trajectory of that unique occurrence in history, the Middle Class and its republican form of government. Who prospers when Income Inequality is attacked? Not the wealthy, the poor or middle class, but only the Political Class will prosper. They use the Poor both as a threat to bring violence upon the Middle Class and as numbers to win elections. The Political Class is the final incarnation of the Princes and the Priests. Once Income Inequality becomes an established “issue” upon which the State has an interest, all manner of economic decisions come under the control of Politics. When every decision is a political one, Totalitarianism is present.
Let us never, not once engage in any discussions on how best to “solve” INCOME INEQUALITY. We need be ever mindful that to do so is to accept its legitimacy as a political issue.