Contemplating the current crisis...

I've been following the recent uprising in the American marketplace with some interest of late. That interest has drawn me into more than one discussion in some social media forums, most notably Facebook (FB).

Now, FB being what it is, far too often it encourages exposition better served in a blogging forum rather than a discussion forum. But that seldom stops most people (myself included, on occasion).


Lately on FB, quite a bit of discussion arises around photos of protesters who post with text based commentary about their situation relative to the current economic situation. Typically, these images are of those who identify with a group known as the '99%' (those without wealth). However, this morning, one image began circulating of an individual who is of the '1%' who espouses identifying with the '99%'. This has stirred up a bit of controversy.

A good number of my FB acquaintances (who all acknowledge that they are not Milton Friedman or the like), are themselves opining about the current state of the union. And like tensions amongst the protesters in NYC, feelings are running rather high online as well, on both sides of the debate (not that anyone I know has more money than they know what to do with). And several about this most recent photo.

If I was wallowing in wealth, I don't know that I'd want to have to choose. Let me participate in a process that is fair to all (including the wealthy). That's truly what the social contract is about. Not that the wealthy can't be wealthy (lucky bastards), but that they're carrying their fair share of the societal burden (and that they're not getting rich on the backs of those carrying an unfair percentage of the social burden).

The largest part of the problem (as I see it), is the 'Leona Helmsley' syndrome ('only little people pay taxes'). The wealthy (at lest the ones I know) often subscribe to the notion tha they shouldn't have to carry the burden of services they themselves don't consume. While there's an argument to be made there, the problem is that the wealthy who happen to feel that way don't seem to realize that they likely got that way on the backs of those who do. And that while capitalism does allow for the extraction of *all* profit from *every* exchange instead of limiting the transaction to a 'fair profit' (subjective), that leads to the creation of a financial aristocracy, manifesting in 'class warfare' (e.g. protesting); and to do so long term will lead to the inevitable downfall of every economic system that operates on it.



That's why the current social contract is invalid.