Publisher's Note: Jim Bispo's weekly column appears in the Beaufort Observer.
We would seem to be faced with an administration that is determined to foment class warfare. I hope it remains figurative - but after seeing what went on in Oakland CA, I'm beginning to wonder if that's possible. The warfare up till now has been between the "poor" and the so called "rich". That dichotomy seems to be resonating with a lot of folks, which seems to be emboldening others (even though a whole lot of the big time one percenters are clearly in the anointed one's corner)
What seems funny is that the OWS crowd is hanging out in the D.C outdoors instead of in a relatively warmer basketball arena somewhere. On Wall Street, there are a few folks whose salaries will reach into the millions. At the basketball arena, virtually everyone's wages will be in the millions. So why not go after them?? Or perhaps they should be going after movie stars who make tons of money or perhaps movie producers.
If you stop to consider that somewhere around a third of the anointed one's contributions have historically been from the Wall Street fat cats, what happens if the OWS folks succeed in getting Wall Street salaries and bonuses reduced?? Don't tell me. All the while you thought all his contributions were from the poor and oppressed. Of course they were. Them and the folks who could afford $38,000 to "break bread" with the anointed one. It's just a guess, but I would think you would rarely run into many of those folks at McDonalds or the local soup kitchen. Do you suppose that biting the hand that is feeding their savior could be an unintended consequence of the great OWS uprising?? Or are they simply on a suicide mission??
From the interviews that I have seen on TV, it is not at all clear just what the OWS crowd wants. Every time I see one of them being interviewed, I think back to the last time I was in a supermarket and some spoiled kid wanted something his mother wouldn't let him have. He howled and cried and carried on and kicked and screamed and carried on some more until in seeming desperation his mother finally gave in. Most of the interviews of OWS folks I have seen remind me of older versions of those kids. (I started to say "grown up" versions of those kids but I haven't seen or heard anything that seemed even remotely like a grown up being interviewed.) A lot of noise, but not much rational conversation. These folks sound a lot like they came from the groups who were "awarded" trophies for their participation in sporting leagues regardless of their win-loss record. I suspect it is not difficult to get used to being rewarded no matter what your performance. Like a lot of other things in life, it is only a skip and a jump from there to being entitled regardless of personal performance.
Now we are beginning to see some rather disturbing signs that some folks seem to be trying to escalate the confrontation into something between "young" and the "old". We read in Bloomberg Business Week (11/07/11) an AP article by Hope Yen that tells us, " The typical U.S. household headed by a person age 65 or older has a net worth 47 times greater than a household headed by someone under 35, according to an analysis of census data released Monday." Keep reading and it sounds as though the seniors have been stealing from the younger group. Nothing about hard work, saving, and going to state colleges instead of big time Ivy League schools. Sophistry, pure and simple.
Click here for the full article
My initial reaction to Ms. Yen's sophistry is "SO??".
In the same article Ms.Yen goes on to quote Harry Holzer, a labor economist and public policy professor at Georgetown University as saying "It makes us wonder whether the extraordinary amount of resources we spend on retirees and their health care should be at least partially reallocated to those who are hurting worse than them". He is reported as calling the wealth gap "striking". (It's almost enough to make one wonder what's going on with the Jesuits. Do you suppose someone has been nipping at the Sacramental wine?? Hmmm...)
It is interesting to note that Ms. Yen's JD is from Harvard and Mr Holzer's PhD is also from Harvard. Do you suppose it's the Cambridge water?? Hmmm...
I would certainly be willing to bet that both of these folks are either a part of the 35 and younger cohort or at least far closer to it than they are to the 65 and over group. That suggests that if they work hard enough and long enough and live for another 30 years or so, they may build up a respectable net worth by the time they reach 65; perhaps even reaching 47 times as much as the "new 35 and under" cohort. That would be by about 2041. Do you suppose that either of them will change their mind by then?? I would suggest that the answer is yes if they get there through their own efforts as has the current 65 and over group. On the other hand if they get there through handouts and intimidation....
In any case, making a big deal out of relative "wealth numbers" and the amount seniors spend on health care makes it look almost like these folks are auditioning for positions with Kathleen Sebelius' Department of Health where they can help frame the Medicare coverage and reimbursement policies. After all, with Harvard Professor Donald Berwick (more Cambridge water??) gone, there is an opening there.
D'ya think??
