Thursday, January 7, 2016

A Random Essay on the economics of Bernie Sanders



   To paraphrase part of a lament from Bernie Sanders: The Middle Class is in crisis.
   However, the solution, I fear lies not in jealousy, popular anger and resentment, or in confiscating the wealth of others, and, yet, when you examine Sanders campaign rhetoric and promises, this about all his attraction is.
   Only, it is not the middle class that is in crisis; it is the American nation that is in crisis. In 21st Century America, it seems that understanding history is no longer a thing that we value. As a result, we are seeing yet another assault on the absolute rock bottom individual rights that provide the foundation for the nation : The right to life, liberty, property and the freedom to enjoy those as we pursue our individual choices as to what makes up happy … the pursuit of happiness. You know those things mentioned in the basic statement of principle about what it means to be an American: the Declaration of Independence.
   In Sanders’ view of America, the rights of the individual are secondary to the benefits that can be bequeathed and doled out by the government. So, we see his call for federal Medicare benefits for everyone in the nation, when medical care providers are opting out of the Medicare/Medicaid system because they deny the medical care providers the right to the ownership of their own labor.
   If someone has more wealth or income than you, then this disparity is to be reconciled by the federal government through providing social programs that will bring up those who are on the lower end of the economic scale.  How the government is to pay for this is that it must take the resources from those who have and redistribute it to those who have not.
   According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the per capita income (the amount each person – all 321 million of us – would get if all the income made in a year was distributed equally to all) in the country was $28,555. That means that any individual that makes more than that would have to give the excess to the government to bring up the income for those (including children) who do not make that much.
   However the median household income is $53,482 with the household size being 2.63. That means that, gasp, somebody is making more money than they should be. 
   Of course, under Sanders view of the economy, I guess we could basic place all property and means of production in the hands of the government with each of us employees of the government and then each household would be granted $28,000 per person living there to live on. I mean, what could be fairer?
   And of course, everyone would be guaranteed all the education they wanted and their health care would be paid for by the government as the single payer. Now, you do understand, however, that teachers, professors, doctors, lawyers, entrepreneurs all would be limited to the same income of $28,000 per person, as well as the janitors, porters, technicians, assistants, clerks, ditch diggers, plumbers, mechanics, shop workers and machinists.
   Now, individuals would be allowed approximately 600 square feet of living space in their homes … just to be equal. Of course, if you were that average family that would work out to about 1800 square feet per household, which is what the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development says is the median size for the roughly 134 million housing units in the U.S. So, if you live in something larger, or have fewer people than 2.63, then you need to downsize right now to reduce the inequality. And if you have more than the 2.63, the government needs to provide larger quarters for you.
   Of course, if you live in a house worth more than the median $175k, well … obviously we would need to do something about that. Oh, that is correct: the government provides our housing so our home value to us is zero.
   And you won’t need to worry about a mortgage, so that is $1500 a month that you won’t be paying. And since you don’t own a mortgage, then the $457 you would pay goes to zip because you don’t own anything. And those people who rent? Well, the $920 they pay goes to zip too. I guess the same would be for cell phones, internet service, wi-fi coverage, bicycles, cars, boats, planes, trains, etc.
   Oh, and of course, back to education, all schools, colleges and universities would become public institutions (owned by the government) and so all their endowments and trusts would be spread among all the other schools on a per capita basis so every school got the exact same amount of money to pay teachers, et al.
   Now, I know you probably are saying at this point that maybe it wouldn’t be that bad. You think so? Well, if you truly want equality and no inequalities, then yes, it would have to be that bad. Please, pretty please, study the history of the 20th Century and the first part of this century, where it has been tried so many times in so many different ways … and all of them have failed spectacularly as they fell in to tyranny.
   So, you say, how about just a little inequality (you know, since I am smarter or better than the average bear I get a little more than the averages)? Well, how much inequality are you willing to allow? And who gets to do the deciding what levels which person gets what?
   Now, don’t take this as a defense of Wall Street or the current perverted version of capitalism that is being managed out of Washington, D.C. Personally, I don’t think it is the federal government’s business to bail out any business, regardless of how big it is and how much an impact it might have. Failure is a great corrective for aberrant behaviors.
   And the tax code is what 80,000 pages and umpteen millions of words to do what? It is not raising money for the government, but for giving competitive advantages to the special interest du jour of the month. There should be no credits, deductions, rebates, paybacks and other favors. None, Zip, Zero, Nada. Not that that is going to happen in my lifetime.
   However, what Bernie Sanders – and Hillary Clinton, as well as most of the Republican candidates – is saying is seductive … alluring … enticing … and wrong.
   I don’t expect to see it happen, but society owes us nothing (unless you have a written contract otherwise), government owes us nothing (unless you have a written contract otherwise), but equality before the law.  We as individuals are entitled to nothing but life, liberty (to make our own choices and mistakes and endure the consequences), the right to own property (especially our labor, which we are free to sell at whatever price we can get for it) and to pursue our own dreams of happiness.
   If you don’t believe that … then you really have no clue what really has made the U.S. the magnet to immigrants from all over the world.
   Of course, you can disagree with me … and that is your right and privilege, but I have history and human nature on my side.

No comments: