The Last Arrow?

As I was entertained by the film series Lord of the Rings, I would occasionally wonder what the Elf Legolas (played by Orlando Bloom) would do if he ran out of arrows. In at least most of his combat scenes he never did. Just as with the 20 shot 6 shooters of Westerns past, fiction allows the action to continue unabated, with plenty of hope for a positive outcome.

The real world is far less forgiving. As we face continued adversity against progressive ethics, ethics held by a clear majority of Americans, I wonder if the next attempt to solve our problems is our last arrow, or perhaps worse…that the quiver is already empty.

Although Howard Schultz had been floating (at least publicly) the idea of running for President for the past 6 years, given the charged political climate his recent “float” made the kind of news he hadn’t previously received.  Here was a man with a modest sales background who at age 32 got backing to start a coffee shop, then 2 years later rallied those backers to help him buy a Seattle retail business called Starbucks for $3.6 million.

Schultz took a risk, as did his backers, and turned himself and others into billionaires. Good fortune certainly smiled upon him, but arguably his best reasons for success was his positive treatment of employees, mostly low wage and unskilled, and the millions of Generation X’ers and Millennials who were eager to spend their money on high-priced caffeinated foam.

So I’m watching one of his recent interviews where he chuckles, unsolicited, on what a “stupid” proposal Elizabeth Warren made with her pitch to tax the assets of the mega-rich, as opposed to their income. That one response encapsulated for me the dire situation this nation is in. Here was a supposed center-Left multi-billionaire egotist, who touts himself as a fiscal Conservative, wanting to be President so everyone can have the chance to be just like him. Sound familiar?

Since I started this blog 10 years ago I have several time tried to point out the fallacy of dealing with the inequity of wealth in the United States in terms of income. Anyone who has worked in the field of Taxation, as I did, knows that taxation of income is mired with special interests. The tax laws that govern the simple wage earner are not the laws that impact the mega-rich.

Schultz may be a multi-billionaire, but that wealth was not accumulated with after tax dollars. If Mitch McConnell and Republicans have their way with eliminating Transfer taxes (Death taxes as they call them) Schultz’s earnings may never be taxed.

Warren’s proposal, the first I’ve heard elevated to a National level, merely calls for an annual 2% tax on assets over $50 million and 3% on assets over $1 billion.  Sounds simple, right? It would impact less than 3 tenths of 1% (.03%) of the population. It would generate enough revenue to underwrite health care, expand economic growth with needed infrastructure, and retire most of the National Debt in one generation. The assets of the super rich would grow at a measly 3% to 5% instead of the 5% to 7% percent they currently enjoy. Poor babies.

Could this happen? Not likely in today’s America and certainly not in the Republitrump Party.  Money continues to drive our political system and because of an ultra-Conservative Judiciary (thanks to the Republitrump Party) it would probably take a Constitutional Amendment to make it reality. But does it deserve the sarcastic ridicule of a self-proclaimed Progressive (and self-righteous) billionaire?? It certainly does not!

There are tax laws on the books that have already passed Constitutional muster. They are the existing Transfer Taxes (Estate and Gift taxes). Currently they capture tax revenues like a colander collects water, but revamped and strengthened they could turn around wealth inequity in the Country significantly.  Can that happen? It will not without a revolutionary change in the American view of how Government works.

The wealthy generally and Conservatives specifically have successfully turned the term Taxation into a noun found only in hell.  The world we are currently in with its massive populations and enveloping, lightning-fast communications is like no other period in human history. Yet a majority of Americans have been programmed to view collective revenue in Biblical terms. The fact is that Taxation may be the last arrow in the quiver of a free democratic society, if there is an arrow left at all.

When a proposal such as Warren’s is met with disdain by legions of Americans who would never be adversely affected by it, all because it contains the T-word, we are running out of options. They are somehow more comfortable with the Nation’s wealth, held by a select few, simply compounding on itself.

The idea that taxing such wealth would inhibit the “job creators” turns foolish into tragic. You see, the great engine of economic prosperity happens when wealth (assets and income) are primarily in the hands of those willing to take risks, large and small, just as Howard Schultz did, even if that risk is simply to look for a better job, buy a car, or seek an education. Those who have tens of millions or billions of wealth have moved over to the protection/accumulation phase and are primarily interested in reducing their risk.

The great irony is that the mega-wealthy will suffer under the weight of inequity, just as they would be the greatest beneficiaries of a bottom up economy. When 99.97% of Americans hear a proposal like Warren’s they should at the very least ask: why not?