http://blog.pappastax.com/index.php/2010/01/21/wealth-taxes-and-politics-jim-maules-surrebuttal-the-hierarchy-of-needs/ tax, finance, politics, culture Wed, 08 Sep 2010 07:20:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 http://blog.pappastax.com/index.php/2010/01/21/wealth-taxes-and-politics-jim-maules-surrebuttal-the-hierarchy-of-needs/comment-page-1/#comment-4065 Barbara Phillips Long Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:49:02 +0000 http://blog.pappastax.com/?p=13450#comment-4065 Perhaps you might understand some of Professor Maule's points better if you read Barbara Ehrenreich's book "Bait and Switch: The (futile) pursuit of the American dream." The final chapters in particular, where Ehrenreich focuses on the current corporate tendency to support self-aggrandizement at the expense of the lives and careers of fellow workers, is a depressing indictment of financial success in the U.S. People need moderate intelligence and a modicum of good manners to get ahead, but the problems with WorldCom, Lehman Brothers and Enron all point to corporate cultures where Christian theological ideas of morality were all undermined by the worship of the short-term bottom line. Currently, I believe that an attractive face and body and a certain degree of cleverness are more predictive of success than intelligence or moral character. Do you believe Abraham Lincoln would ever have become president if he had run in the last 30 years? Please don't confuse the incidence of reported crime -- often violent -- with the incidence of white-collar crime. In addition, please do not confuse the incidence of reported crime with the incidence of morally questionable behavior in the boardroom. The poor aren't the people who set up the crime-reporting databases nor are they the ones who enforce the laws. Many professors believe in a meritocracy because they feel the meritocracy has rewarded them. But there are many people who are deserving of such rewards and have not received them -- in the professorate, one may simply look at the number of qualified faculty members laboring as adjuncts. Before colleges and universities began cutting tenured positions, many of those adjuncts would have been part of the academic meritocracy, and to say they were somehow less deserving, rather than unlucky victims of well-paid penny-pinching administrators, is to avoid harsh talk about the moral issue of exploitation. "Thomas H. Benton's" columns related to the topic in the Chronicle of Higher Education are illuminating reading. Many ordinary people making around $30,000, $40,000 or $50,000 a year feel their votes don't count because when it comes time for Congress to make decisions, only the lobbyists and the wealthy friends of members of Congress are heard. Many people in these pay ranges are moral, success-oriented college graduates. Do a survey if you doubt their cynicism -- talk to voters and nonvoters. Find out if those middle-class people think their representatives and senators listen first to the people and second to lobbyists and the wealthy. Ask if Congress is corrupt. Ask if corporations are corrupt. Ask them if they think the tax code is fair. Ask them if high moral character is essential for success. Ask some open-ended questions and get people to say what they would like changed in Congress and in the federal government. Then survey people who are poor and unemployed and survey people who earn more than a quarter of a million dollars a year. Compare the results and report the perceptions, or commission Dr. Terry Madonna to do it for you. Finally, I think you are missing a point with Maslow. From my perspective, a society that provides respect and the possibility of achievement to every diligent, thoughtful person will have more people who exercise creativity and inventiveness. The lack of respect for the working poor and the middle class in this country is destroying their ability to contribute to the future of the nation. (For instance, look at the number of economically disadvantaged students who come out of college or have to drop out of college and carry huge debt as a result of their attempt to become more secure and respected in their working lives.) The problem isn't that middle and lower class workers haven't achieved -- the problem is that they aren't being allowed to have the economic, social and political security that would make a more equitable, just and creative United States run using fact-based policies and laws. Perhaps you might understand some of Professor Maule’s points better if you read Barbara Ehrenreich’s book “Bait and Switch: The (futile) pursuit of the American dream.” The final chapters in particular, where Ehrenreich focuses on the current corporate tendency to support self-aggrandizement at the expense of the lives and careers of fellow workers, is a depressing indictment of financial success in the U.S.
People need moderate intelligence and a modicum of good manners to get ahead, but the problems with WorldCom, Lehman Brothers and Enron all point to corporate cultures where Christian theological ideas of morality were all undermined by the worship of the short-term bottom line.
Currently, I believe that an attractive face and body and a certain degree of cleverness are more predictive of success than intelligence or moral character. Do you believe Abraham Lincoln would ever have become president if he had run in the last 30 years?
Please don’t confuse the incidence of reported crime — often violent — with the incidence of white-collar crime. In addition, please do not confuse the incidence of reported crime with the incidence of morally questionable behavior in the boardroom. The poor aren’t the people who set up the crime-reporting databases nor are they the ones who enforce the laws.
Many professors believe in a meritocracy because they feel the meritocracy has rewarded them. But there are many people who are deserving of such rewards and have not received them — in the professorate, one may simply look at the number of qualified faculty members laboring as adjuncts. Before colleges and universities began cutting tenured positions, many of those adjuncts would have been part of the academic meritocracy, and to say they were somehow less deserving, rather than unlucky victims of well-paid penny-pinching administrators, is to avoid harsh talk about the moral issue of exploitation. “Thomas H. Benton’s” columns related to the topic in the Chronicle of Higher Education are illuminating reading.
Many ordinary people making around $30,000, $40,000 or $50,000 a year feel their votes don’t count because when it comes time for Congress to make decisions, only the lobbyists and the wealthy friends of members of Congress are heard. Many people in these pay ranges are moral, success-oriented college graduates. Do a survey if you doubt their cynicism — talk to voters and nonvoters. Find out if those middle-class people think their representatives and senators listen first to the people and second to lobbyists and the wealthy. Ask if Congress is corrupt. Ask if corporations are corrupt. Ask them if they think the tax code is fair. Ask them if high moral character is essential for success. Ask some open-ended questions and get people to say what they would like changed in Congress and in the federal government.
Then survey people who are poor and unemployed and survey people who earn more than a quarter of a million dollars a year. Compare the results and report the perceptions, or commission Dr. Terry Madonna to do it for you.
Finally, I think you are missing a point with Maslow. From my perspective, a society that provides respect and the possibility of achievement to every diligent, thoughtful person will have more people who exercise creativity and inventiveness. The lack of respect for the working poor and the middle class in this country is destroying their ability to contribute to the future of the nation. (For instance, look at the number of economically disadvantaged students who come out of college or have to drop out of college and carry huge debt as a result of their attempt to become more secure and respected in their working lives.) The problem isn’t that middle and lower class workers haven’t achieved — the problem is that they aren’t being allowed to have the economic, social and political security that would make a more equitable, just and creative United States run using fact-based policies and laws.

]]>