Hope Hill Van Buren is the richest person in the state of Rhode Island. She lives in Middletown and is estimated to be worth something like 1.3 billion dollars. She is amazingly wealthy and that concentration of wealth seems unnecessary and counterprouctive. Nevertheless if I were wielding revolutionary powers and redistributing wealth at my whim, she would be far down my list of targets.
The reason that I would choose, say and investment banker, over Mrs. Van Buren is that her family earned their money making soup. She is the heiress to the Campbell's soup fortune and I think it can be said that the Campbells company was contributing to the wealth of society. Meanwhile much like outright criminals, other wealth is simply stolen by people who act as parasites on society.
While I might consider myself a progressive. Many don't because of my belief in the free market. I believe in social justice and even the redistribution of wealth, but not in the power of the government to choose winners and losers. I believe that the free market is flawed, but I lack the abiding faith in institutions that many people who call me unprogressive have.
In between scouring the Internet for a safe place for my money, I read an article postulating about first generation wealth. The idea being that most first generation rich folks have an idea about how hard it is to earn money, while the subsequent generations are just terrified of losing it. It seems to highlight the difference between someone who builds wealth and someone who siphons wealth.
This led to another interesting article contrasting Bill Gates and Carlos Slim. Whatever you may feel about Bill Gates, there's no doubt he added to the wealth of America. Can you say the same about the bankers at Goldman Sachs? It feels more like they've simply put themselves in a position to put a tax on all the rest of us. They're basically snake oil salesman and we pretty much have to buy the oil.
I think getting to the bottom of this difference is pivotal in deciding what kind of economic activity to encourage. I think it can be easy to say the free market doesn't work, but I think it's a better tool than many. I think progressives should simply make the case for directing it, rather than replacing it.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/hide comments
