Michael, it is true that most of the wealth in America is held by people over fifty. But realistically, much of that is in the real estate they own with mostly paid-off mortgages, not in readily available cash. So your statistic is misleading.
I believe that personal watercraft should be controlled because NO ONE has absolute freedom (although perhaps you think you do). When your freedom abridges mine, then we need to compromise. Man is a social animal, capable of acting for the greater good, and when you pollute the water I swim in, disturb my peace with the loud noise of your watercraft, and kill wildlife with it, then you are abridging my rights, and we need to meet somewhere in the middle. Certainly there are places where personal watercraft are not as dangerous to the environment or disturbing to the peace as others--for example on manmade lakes. These compromises are already being made, and pretty fairly so far as far as I can tell, so that you get some of your needs met, and I get some of mine met. That seems like an excellent way to handle the situation.
I am aware of the set-up in Chile, with their pension programs. I guess we will all see how they feel about their investments as the South American economies continue to fall apart, and their stock portfolios become almost worthless. While the really young people have time to remake their retirement money, what about the ones who are retiring and need it in the next couple of years? That's one of the reasons that I support a mixed system, with some government investments and some part controlled by the individual.
But really, the statistics that most Americans are in the stock market now is misused to argue that they have become sophisticated investors. Only 12% of Americans, for example, have portfolios of individual stocks. Most people never get beyond choosing between several mutual and money funds in their employer-sponsored 401K accounts. And there are lots of people who barely subsist on what they make, or have a catastrophic illness or divorce or lose a job in their late forties and never really get another good one. All of these people work hard and pay taxes, and would be lost without some Social Security pension they can depend on for a large part of their retirement money, limited as that retirement may be.
I spent last night catching up on some of my reading, and there is a very interesting article in the December/January 1998 issue of Worth about how the religious right threatens gung-ho capitalism. Apparently Gary Bauer, who is running for president, is leading a conservative Christian movement away from the libertarianism you espouse, and more towards Christianity as Jesus espoused it. Bauer says "I am no longer content to let libertarian think tanks make economic policy."
The article points out that there is a large segment of the right in America which don't want Washington screwing around with Social Security, don't want a flat tax, don't think the rich pay too much in capital gains taxes, and don't think it's okay when American jobs depart for low-wage, third-world countries.
"If there's any doubt about the power Bauer can throw around, consider the debate over Social Security privatization. In an op-ed in The New York Times, Bauer denounced privatization as financially risky--and anti-family, because the system it would scrap allows women to concentrate on raising families instead of working. Bauer, stretching to make his point, also claimed that, for privatization to work as well as some of its advocates project, the Dow would have to hit 52,000 in the year 2012.
. . . Just last summer, Bauer sided with President Clinton and congressional Democrats on the question of whether low-income families should be eligible for the $500 child-care tax credit even when their net income-tax liability is less than $500. Newt Gingrich and the Republican congressional leadership held that a tax credit for people who don't pay taxes isn't a tax cut at all--it's welfare. Like Bill Clinton, Bauer believed that the intended beneficiaries were hardworking people who paid payroll taxes--just the kind of families who need a helping hand. In essence, the battle became one of class, and in that battle, Bubba and Joe Six-Pack aren't on the same side as Steve Forbes.
. . .The Bible says many things, but nowhere does it teach that the main duty of government is to support stock prices with investor-friendly policies. Nowhere does it command that companies must have the legal right to pursue profits when their actions, such as closing down a factory or laying off workers, disrupt the lives and economic security of America families. And Jesus, as . . . Gary Bauer . . . reminded me, didn't encourage His followers to get rich. In fact, his advice was just the opposite: "Sell all that you own and distribute the money to the poor . . . then come, follow me" (Luke 18:22)."
(from "Conversion on the Road to Wall Street", by Walter Russell Mead in Worth Magazine) |
