INCOME DISPARITY

This leads us into our last important topic to discuss, and related to acting for the
self alone, income disparity. Twenty-five years ago, 12% of the U.S. population
owned 33% of its wealth. Today, 1% owns 40%. Furthermore, those same 1%
earn 25 cents of every dollar of income in the country. The average incomes of
those 1% have risen 18% in the past 10 years alone, while the average income of
the middle class has actually fallen. The average income for a man, possessing
only a high school diploma, has declined 12% over the past twenty-five years.
One in four people working in the U.S. earn less than $10 an hour! And the fair
market value of the minimum wage today is 30% less than it was in 1968!! The
average CEO makes 380 times the income of the average worker. Moreover, in
2007, the top 1% had only 5% of the nation’s personal debt, while the bottom 90%
had 74% of the debt.
A great article about this income disparity was published in the May 2011 Vanity
Fair issue. It points out that, historically, when a society has such a lopsided
wealth distribution the wealthy become less likely to spend on common needs.
Moreover, the wealthy don’t need to rely on the government for education, medical
49
care, personal security or parks for leisure. The government, through a broad tax
base, creates the internet, roads, highways, bridges, airports, etc.
How did this disparity come to happen? Some easy explanations are: advances in
technology, automation of assembly lines, etc. have eliminated many blue collar
jobs; globalization offers a cheaper workforce overseas; unions, once 33% of U.S.
workers, had declined to 12% by the end of 2011. Two other major reasons for the
disparity: tax policy (principally, reducing the tax rate on Capital Gains-- which, as
stated earlier, represents a large chunk of income source for the wealth); and
manipulation of the financial system (specifically the lack of regulations or lax
enforcement of regulations). It is not surprising that virtually all of the U.S.
Senators and most Representatives in the House of Representatives are members of
the top 1% bracket of wealth in the U.S..
What do you think the effect on the 99% is, watching this 1% phenomenon of
income disparity? Too many outside the 1% live beyond their means, as they try
to “keep up with the Joneses.” In 2011, the average Californian had $78,000 of
debt against $43,000 of income. Globalization was mentioned as contributing to
the creation of the 1% disparity, but much of the 1% is able to use globalization to
get richer. Countries around the world compete for business, often by lowering
corporate tax rates, or weakening health and environmental protections, as well as
relaxing labor standards to protect workers.
In the Vanity Fair article mentioned above, the authors postulate that if the rules
were changed and countries competed to attract workers, imagine THAT world:
low taxes on wage earners, education fostered, cleaner and safer environments.
Just remember how the Black Plague eventually improved the condition for serfs
and artisans.
In 2010, 20% of the youth in the U.S. were unemployed, and in some areas it was
close to double that. Those figures, by the way, don't account for part-time
workers who can't find full-time employment, workers who have given up seeking
employment, or those who prematurely retire because they are realistically too old
to find full-time employment. One in seven was on food stamps. One in six
work-aged Americans could not find full time employment. Some other countries
where the top 1% control the lion’s share of the wealth: Egypt, Tunisia, Libya,
Yemen, Bahrain, and Syria. But wait, those are all Middle Eastern countries
populated by oppressed citizens who revolted against their respective governments.
That could never happen in America, right?
50
I find it interesting how topical the discussions of the "1% versus the 99%" have
become (fueled in large part by the Occupy Wall Street movement), given what a
cornerstone concept the 1% versus the 99% realms are in Kabbalah. Now, I am by
no means suggesting that the top 1% of the population (in terms of financial
wealth) is living in a 1% reality and the other 99% are living in a world of lasting
fulfillment. It is simply meant to illustrate that while many talk about the 1% of
the population versus the 99%, Kabbalah’s 1%/99% reality is about consciousness
that leads to lasting fulfillment. The consciousness of sharing with no agenda, for
instance, allows you to understand that you don't lose something when you give.
The consciousness of limiting your desire to receive for the self alone through
restriction is another tool that leads to lasting fulfillment. And that is so difficult
because the desire to receive is so strong. Imagine that you have a stockbroker
who convinces you to buy stock in an internet company. The stock is going up
every day. After your investment has doubled in a fairly short time, he or she
opines that this precipitous rise is due to a bubble and advises you to sell. You sell
and it doubles again. What's your reaction? Are you happy you doubled your
money, or disappointed you didn't quadruple it? Then a week later the stock
crashes, and it declines to 1/2 of your purchase price. Are you now happy? Or
imagine that you have a home that you're selling. You have two buyers. One is
completely rude and arrogant, doesn't even like the house and is just buying it for
his 22 year old son as a college graduation gift. The other is a single mom, sweet
as pie, can't stop complementing you on your home, absolutely loves it, and is
thrilled about the school district. She offers you $50,000 less than the douche. To
whom do you sell? These hypothetical examples only demonstrate how difficult
restriction is and how strong is the desire to receive for the self alone.
Lastly, the Kabbalistic 1% reality is not about “judgment.” It is not about good
versus evil. It is simply a law of the universe that when you live solely in a 1%
world, without restriction, you WILL have chaos and darkness in your life. Just
like if you are a market capitalist with only one concern-- to maximize profits for
the self alone, without regulations, you will cause AND experience economic
chaos.