I made a point in this post about people being upset at wealth accumulated for no obvious reason. Historically speaking, when people accumulated wealth for doing no obviously productive work, the results were far bloodier than a bunch of folks choosing to live in a tent on a Wall Street sidewalk for a few months. A couple centuries ago, the French went straight to the guillotines. I wonder what they would have said about our peaceful protests?
My trivial editorial comments aside, the point about wealth accumulated for no reason is that this creates pressure on a society to find new ways to redistribute wealth. It’s not a trivial issue. Historically speaking, failures to redistribute wealth have led to war or revolt. I like our modern-day alternative to rolling out the guillotines: taxation. Occupy Wall Street contended that a banker earning a massive bonus from a bank during the biggest bank-induced financial crisis of all-time was evidence of a systemic failure. I think the protest made a good point. But if such bonuses were taxed at, say, 90%, would anyone have bothered to protest?
It’s sometimes hard to untangle a protest of the system with a protest of its failures. If you are the sort who feels no person should ever earn $20 million dollars, you are protesting the system. If you are the sort who feels someone who earns $20 million should be taxed at 90% marginal income tax, then you are protesting the failure of the system. I think there’s a reason why Occupy Wall Street protested the system rather than the failures – it’s far easier to protest a system than the failures.
Footnotes / one last thought...
1. No, I'm not running yet...
In fact, someone who goes out to protest marginal tax rates isn’t far off from running for office – gather a few signatures, print a few bumper stickers, and suddenly the protester has launched a campaign. I suppose this is another reason to protest a system rather than its failures - it seems like an awful lot of work to run for office.
