When I talk to people about the issues I care about, I get a lot of "right! RIGHT! So what do you suggest we do?"
I have to admit that I am not always a how person when it comes to big thinking. I am a why person.
Earlier today on my personal Facebook page I posted this little five minute video about perception of wealth in the United States and who's holding it. I'd suggest watching it because it's compelling (albeit a little biased. Put on your critical thinking cap, partner.) I put it up because I thought it was an interesting launching point for conversation about what we value about capitalism and some of its pitfalls rather than to make some sort of political statement, but there seems to be confusion about my intentions right down to people like, say, My Dad.
Anyway, I'm sure I'm about to annoy someone, but whatever. I'm still piecing this together for myself, and I want to talk about it in a thorough way and in ways that matter to me. It's a reflection of what we care about, of our priorities as a society and a culture.
So first let's tackle this issue of the word "distribution" and worse, omg, "redistribution."
Honestly the knee-jerk implication of these words has never really sunk in for me until today. Okay, so, in economics (or stats) when we talk about "distribution along a curve," we're talking about arrangement. We're not talking about about someone doling stuff out or someone going out and taking stuff from one group and giving it to another.
For example, we could do a distribution curve on the number of freckles people have. Freckles: you just have 'em or you don't. Maybe you have a few. Maybe you have a squillion. Since the world is not comprised mostly of white people who get a lot of sun exposure (surprise!), if I were a betting woman I'd guess that very much of the population doesn't have many. Whatever. We ccould take a snapshot of everyone's freckles today and look at the distribution of freckles across humanity in graph form.
Anyway, so distribution just means a look at what everyone has or who has a particular characteristic, stuff like that. You can show a distribution of cicadas in North Carolina over a 17 year period. Whatever it is, the point is, it's just Where Stuff Is.
Now, when we talk about economics and talk about Markets, the tricky thing is that markets are driven by human behavior. Everyone gets so steamed talking about this because inherent to the conversation are issues that are fundamentally driven by these real, human, ethical elements:
Sometimes we're merely talking about the theory behind these perceived inequities and giving consideration to what might right a distribution along a curve that looks undesirable for whatever reason. Moreover, it involves thinking about why certain distributions feel intuitively wrong and what factors might influence those distributions.
In this regard, economics is a very philosophical practice. ::trumpets sound::
It's also very much about the social contract.
Part of the way that our contract works, the way that we retain respect for our own transactions, the reason we are willing to exchange and trade with each other on this very human level, is because implicit in exchange and trade is the idea that both sides are receiving value. Otherwise, and here comes that word, things don't seem fair.
I think that's why everyone is so flipped out about this 1% thing. I can only talk about myself, but I don't harbor resentment towards a family of brothers that builds a billion dollar business from scratch. If they want to shuttle the whole family around to football games on a private jet I just don't care. I don't get particularly mad about highly paid CEOs--but maybe I should. That's for another day.
Today I just want to hit on this one key point that arguably feeds into the folks on the graph holding the stacks of money in the five minute video.
Full disclosure: this is not a personal character indictment of ghost traders, hedge fund folks, etc. I have accepted bottles of champagne from these folks and may have, at one point or another, kissed one or two of them.
The thing is, from an individual market standpoint where I have to work to get my share of the pie, if bankgambling is such a profitable thing to do, it would make sense, then, for me to stop what I'm doing and go write algorithms for a big bank.
Usually, fundamentally, we are okay with someone being paid to do something that we find valuable. We don't care what it is: we'll pay for physician's services. We'll pay for Teddy Ruxpin. We don't really harbor resentment towards Mattel for making said Teddy Ruxpin, save for whatever [coughoverratedcough] value it had for our kid in 1988.
The point is, at least when we are talking about redistribution of the wealth generated by brilliant banking gamblers (and that's what they are), we may feel particularly angry because it feels like no value is generated in their acquisition of the money except for the algorithm itself--in this way, it's sort of like he's designed a very brilliant money tree that only he has access to. Moreover, there feels like no way to get that money back into the market in a way that we can engage with in a meaningful way.
(Hey, Elizabeth, are your clients sometimes hedge fund folks? Why yes. Yes they are.)
That being said, in no way do I have any sort of policy ideas about this, nor have I convinced myself that I'm totally right, but I know that it's illegal for me to copy and print money--even if my money-printing machine is brilliant and inscrutable and hidden away from the masses.
At this gut level, at least for me, playing with money to earn more money, and then federally subsidizing those private corporations who are largely in business to do so to what is beginning to trend towards the detriment of the group, towards the real, palpable decline of the middle class, well, that's when we have to start talking about our values.
Maybe I can suggest a how. Maybe it shouldn't be legal.
Written by Elizabeth over 1 year ago
David Mamet advises actors to stay out of graduate school in his 1997 book True and False. Stay Out of School is a cultural investigation into how and why avoiding school for anyone became good advice-and what we can do to change that.
Be the first to receive new posts and updates here:
I respect your privacy.
For all inquiries, including keynotes, media appearances, workshops for your business, non-profit or gov't agency, and advisory roles please send me a message using the form below. I would love to hear from you!