Let's rethink how we distribute wealth

There was a heading in one of our local newspapers the other day which struck me. We've all heard the line before. "Rich Get Richer."

"And the poor get poorer," we all respond, in unison. It's not all that odd. Isn't it always the case? But it does make one stop and think. As always, I look for solutions to this alleged problem. This may be because I am a former math teacher! I am constantly looking for ways to improve the lot of mankind.

There are two variables at play here. The first is the question, "Why is this happening? Is it even a bad thing?" And secondly we must ask ourselves, "What are the ramifications of policies which lead to this gradual widening of the gap between rich and poor?"

In answer to the first question, when our economy is doing sufficiently well, it allows those who have the wherewithal to invest to reap ever greater profits. Not a bad idea, as long as there is some sharing going on.

So how do you suppose we can stem the widening gap? How can we hold the uber-rich non-elected leaders of our societies more accountable? An interesting example of un-solicited leadership in this regard is Warren Buffet. He is, undoubtedly, one of the richest people on Earth, and one of its greatest philanthropists, via his Buffet Foundation. And he intends to give more than 80 per cent of his net worth to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation upon his death.

But not all the super-wealthy of the world are so generous. Many of them are, in fact, rather stingy. Should they be held accountable? Should they be forced to share?

One sure way of doing this, of course, is by taxing them. We of the middle class shudder when we hear the word "taxes" because reducing our net income from a comfortable $35,000 to a not-so-comfortable $29,000 has a visceral effect on our ability to deal with life. Not so the reduction of someone's net from $35 million to $29 million.

But if you changed the regime of taxation to one where anyone who earns less than around $40,000 doesn't pay any taxes, while the very wealthy may pay up to 80 per cent... I can hear a sigh! Wouldn't it be nice?

In Europe, the rich pay a much higher rate of taxes than those less fortunate. And they pride themselves in doing so! No flat tax there. Whereas in America -- where we, unfortunately, get a lot of our directives -- they pride themselves on having more millionaires per capita than any other country in the world, while they have 30 million citizens who don't have health care.

The second variable in the equation is this. What are the effects of having this widening gap between the rich and the poor? Most often, not all are included in the wonderful increases in profits the rich enjoy. As a matter of fact, there are some countries -- oil-rich countries like Nigeria and the Sudan -- where the poor don't share in the wealth of their countries at all. And when there is this gap, the poor have a tendency to rise up, either in a criminal way or as a movement or revolution.

There was an interesting comment made by one of Steve Paikin's guest on "The Agenda" just recently. This fellow said that the greatest contributor to crime -- a.k.a. civil unrest -- was the size of the gap between the rich and the poor. As an example of this he pointed to the country of South Africa, where there is still a huge gap between the white farmers and the black citizens of the Townships. There the crime/murder rate is even higher than that of Texas. And conversely, countries where there is a high degree of social welfare -- without being especially hard on the capitalists -- have a much lower crime rate. I guess the taxation occurs at the individual level and not at the corporate level.

So which way do we as Canadians want to see our country going? Must we always reward the rich man or should we focus a little more on the "sharing" part? You tell me!

---

Durham resident Dirk van der Werf likes to mull over the state of the world. He is a frequent contributor to this space.