By all accounts I’ve read, the 99 percenters in the “Occupy X” (fill in the “X” with your nearest protest city) movement seem obsessed with income inequality.
I, too, am concerned with the very rich — the bailouts of the very rich. I was against bailouts from the start. The moral hazard of a bailout mentality is extremely dangerous, inimical to a free society.
But that doesn’t make me a 99 percenter.
Why? Well, protestors on the streets believe — well, 49 percent of them believe — that the bailouts were necessary!
How odd. They distrust the rich. They want to tax the rich more. And yet, when the rich fail, they think it vital to “help the rich out.” Is this a result of simply believing in “helping people out in times of trouble”? Or do 49 percent of 99 percenters believe that the wealth of the well-to-do is so vital to the economy that their status as wealthy folks must be guaranteed?
I think it’s probably the latter. Leaning left, 99 percenters are committed to government “management” of the economy. And that includes bailing out unsuccessful rich folks as well as the unsuccessful poor and middle-class folks.
Were they really against inequality, wouldn’t they be happy now that the wealthy have taken a hit, and income inequality has been reduced? At least to a small, Schadenfreude extent?
Apparently, government being in control is the real bedrock issue. For X percent, anyway — X representing a shockingly high number of protestors.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.