Income Inequality

     I do not deny income inequality or the enormous increase to the one-tenth of one percent at the top.   However, I strongly object to it being made the centerpiece of the country's ills as the media and those roaming the streets would have you believe.   Don't shoot, but the numbers mostly reflect the natural laws of supply and demand, not nefarious plots against the middle class.   If there are 100 million people capable and willing to move a box, the pay will reflect the oversupply of labor, conversely at the other end for a singular Steve Jobs  rewards will be unlimited.  (Yes, there are millions of examples in-between.)   

     One bit of good news for the middle class is that from 1979-present, the decrease in the size of the middle class was from movement up not down.   Clearly the implosion of the credit bubble had a more adverse effect on the net worth of the middle even though the top lost a higher percentage of their wealth.   Losing $2 million out of $20 million just isn't the same as losing $2000 out of $20,000.   

     Capital gains during the boom years of technology created enormous wealth at the top but didn't change the value of labor at the bottom.  That's normal, not a sign of oppression or evil.  Ironically, it was Congressional limits put on executive salaries in 1993 that led to the explosion in stock grants with the the obvious results during a bull market. I mention that to illustrate the untoward results when government thinks it is smarter than capitalism.   

    Static skill levels of those remaining in the middle is another of the many other factors making the charts of inequality deceptively extreme.    That aside, increasing government transfer payments or forcing those financially responsible to cover the imprudence of others is really bad economics.  

    Some solutions that would be more productive than marches, would be to increase one's skill levels, learn new ones, get really creative, take any available job to stay in shape and possibly hear of opportunities that won't be found on internet games sites.  No one is exempt from misfortunes or disappointment but whining in the streets is soooo unattractive.  A basic moral safety net for the needy is an absolute necessity but having taken on too much debt or not having a job, while sad, is a temporary setback not a justification for riots or shifting responsibility to others.  

     It is an egregious delusion to believe that the system is "rigged" only for those at the top.   I realize that Obama's propaganda machine keeps that falsehood alive for political purposes but it has a dreadful effect on the psychology the country. The road upward is as open as ever for those not crippled by promises of government salvation or grandiose expectations.  

      The anti-capitalists amongst the occupiers are so misguided to sacrifice freedom for a bureaucratically controlled economy.  How many abject economic failures do there have to be, for the left to know that government management is not a solution? All forms of socialism impose ceilings on prosperity which will always stems government's ability to keep promises of an adequate floor.   Sweden, which is the size of CA but with near homogeneity, stands virtually alone at social success.  Krugman's continued use of Sweden as an example for America should be evidence enough to recall his Nobel. 

     The press and administration's continued support for OWS and willful blindness to the clear and present danger of lawless mobs threatens the security of us all.   When authorities turn a blind eye to mobs protesting at private homes, threatening executives,  destroying public property, taunting police and hindering the ability of businesses to operate, those of us who still believe in the rule of law need to speak out.  I resent the concept of the "99%" as it in no way accurately describes the majority of us not in the 1% earning over $380,000 but who are deeply grateful to be living in the freest and most prosperous country in history.   

     Those roaming the streets could very well cost the country both freedom and prosperity.  With the complicity of the media, Obama's agenda has done enormous damage to both already.  It always amuses me that the affluent left does not understand that they won't get to keep their wealth either if the subversive groups hiding behind OWS achieve the collapse of the system that they are seeking. Hasn't the intelligentsia ever studied the French or Russian revolutions?   

      My recognition of Obama's failures and extreme ideology in no way implies praise for the other end of the political spectrum.   I find both cringe worthy.  Watching the right make excuses for Herman Cain is every bit as offensive as watching the left pretend that ows is organic, peaceful, and properly focused.   My position presently is that there is a 100% chance that Obama will continue his assault on individual liberty and aggressively pursue his dreams of wealth redistribution, amnesty and carbon taxes, but that there is at least a 50% chance that Romney is qualified to reverse the worst of Obama's agenda without miring the country in conflict over the right's social positions.  Another second wasted on DADT or NPR funding just might put me over the edge.