This website is a work in progress.  I would like to add to the narrative below with images, preferably stylized drawings/graphics, but I’m willing to consider photography that captures the ideas.  If you would like to submit a graphic for consideration, please email it to elijahfang@yahoo.com with a written certification that the work is your own work and not that of others or copyrighted material and you are submitting it for indefinite inclusion on this website free of charge.

 

Wealth

 

A Thought Experiment on Wealth

The following is a short thought experiment to determine what wealth is.

 

When most of us think of a wealthy person we think of a person who has an abundance of money, property, and other valuable, costly things. 

[Picture of man on throne like chair with stacks of money, gold and jewels around him.]

 

But are these things really wealth?

 

What if we take this man and his wealth and put him on an island with no other people, and no way to contact anyone else?

[Picture of same man, on same chair, with same money, gold and jewels surrounding him but on island.]

 

This island is a great piece of land.  It is arable, has a perfect growing season, enough water and rains, mineral deposits that would suffice any demand for mined materials, forests full of high trade timber trees, edible plant and animals, and the coast is abundant in edible fish species.

[Picture icons of all these characteristics.]

 

But, is this man still wealthy by the standard definition of wealthy?

 

Because there are no other people he will have to construct his own home, provide clean potable water, get rid of his own sewage, harvest food and fuel, and provide transportation and healthcare, all for himself.

[Picture icons of all these chores/tasks.]

 

His day to day chores to complete this work to sustain himself, even at a basic level of comfort, will be grueling and require many more hours of work than the typical 40 to 50-hour work week we expect to sustain our lifestyles with.

[Picture of people on way to/from work and something iconic of a 40 hr work week (time stamp clock?)]

 

In addition to the work he will be required to perform to meet daily needs for a simple, survivable life, if he wants entertainment, art or any culture, he will have to put the work and effort into creating it himself.

[Picture of man, now looking ragged, trying to play homemade guitar, act out play etc.]

 

Clearly, this man, when isolated from a population, even when the things most of us consider wealth are still in his possession, has no way to live a wealthy life.  This is because there are no people around to provide the labor to provide the goods and services that we associate with living a wealthy life.

[Picture of man looking ragged and desolate still surrounded by jewels and gold.]

 

You could of course argue that the man’s home (or homes) should also be transported with him to the island because they are a part of his wealth. 

[Picture of a couple of mansions on the otherwise empty island.  Man staring happily out of window of one or looking comfortable on the balcony.]

 

It is true that for a while he would be comfortable having shelter and whatever stored food water and energy the homes contain, but that would quickly run out and the homes would reach a state of disrepair because of a lack of materials and labor to provide upkeep. 

[Picture of dilapidated mansions and man looking miserable again.]

 

This thought experiment shows there are two aspects of wealth.  One is having the amassed currency or other highly-valued things, and the other is having people available to provide labor so there is something the currency or valued things can be exchanged for.  At minimum, to lead a comfortable life, there must be sufficient people around to perform work to provide fundamental goods and services such as food, clean water, shelter, energy, protection and medical care for wealth to have any practical value.

[Picture of wealthy man back in society handing keys of sports car over to valet at expensive restaurant with doorman holding open restaurant door.]

 

How is Wealth Obtained?

There are several ways to obtain the things we generally associate with wealth, i.e. money, financial securities such as company stock, gold, jewels, property etc.

 

The simplest is to inherit the wealth.

[Picture of person inheriting wealth (perhaps lawyer reading from will?)]

 

Wealth can be stolen in a criminal way, but carries the risk of being punished under the law.

[Picture of bank robber with police in pursuit.]

 

The most common way most of us acquire wealth is by work.

 

There are two common ways to acquire wealth via work.  The most obvious and common is to do the work yourself and get paid in return.

[Picture of factory worker, desk clerk, garbage collector etc.]

 

The other way is to sell the product of other people’s work at a higher price than you pay them to work.

[Picture of factory owner getting paid for truck load of goods as it’s being loaded on the factory bay.]

 

Selling others work at a higher price than you pay them may sound like the working people are being taken advantage of but this is not necessarily true.  Someone for example who opens a factory and organizes workers in an efficient manner and has the advantage of buying in bulk can pay her employees more than they could earn as individuals making the same product on their own and make a good profit for herself.

[Picture of several people on a production line making lots of goods versus a single person making a few of the same goods in an inefficient manner.]

 

A Living Wage

The point at which a problem develops is when workers are paid so little that they cannot live a reasonably secure and comfortable life working a 40 hour work week.  When this occurs the workers must choose whether to work more than 40 hours or to live in what most people would consider substandard conditions during which life is mostly a miserable chore.

[Picture of person clocking out of one job and into another (perhaps taking off construction helmet and putting on evening waiter uniform: two clothes hooks: one labeled “Day Job” with construction clothes & helmet; and the other labeled “Night Job” with waiter’s uniform) versus person/family living in a squalid apartment.]

 

In most developed nations there are laws that dictate the minimum wage a person can be paid.  The idea behind the laws is to ensure that someone who works full time (40 hours per week) can live at a standard of living that most would consider minimal but reasonable.  Unfortunately in many nations the minimum wage has not been increased to keep up with the cost of living and many people are being paid far less for a 40 hour work week than any person could live off of.

[Picture of employee in fast food restaurant putting on uniform/apron to start work with handbag next to her from which is protruding several overdue bill statements.]

 

The problem of people being paid less than they can live off of for full time employment has become magnified by a hyper-competitive business market and the stock market.  Businesses are expected to generate as much profit as they can to reward their share holders maximally without regard to the pay of their workers.

[Picture depicting stock prices rising while workers’ pay checks stagnate or decline.]

 

Upper management who make decisions that bring in maximum profits are paid exceedingly high wages and bonuses.  Often the easiest way to increase profits is to cut the wages of staff who have a skill set that can easily be found amongst job seekers.

[Picture of executive doing presentation to board of directors showing profit balance sheet and striking out the number for the line item for employee pay and reentering a lower number.  Board of directors are joyous and are handing him a large bonus check.]

 

Another tactic, used more for salaried employees especially when there is high unemployment, is to tell the employees that they must produce more work for the same pay thereby allowing management to cut some positions.

[Picture of manager looming over desk employee as employee frantically tries to take on additional work of co-worker who is in the background leaving his desk with a box of personal items having been laid off.]

 

Contribution of Low Wage Earners to Work of High Wage Earners

Very wealthy working people are paid very high sums of money for their working time, whereas impoverished people are paid very little sums of money for their working time.  The widespread belief is that those who are paid large sums of money deserve such payment because their skill is in high demand, rare and therefore commands a high market value. Likewise, those paid low wages receive the market value of their work which is low skilled or in low demand and often is centered around providing the fundamental goods and services we consider as the baseline of a reasonably comfortable and secure existence.  Unfortunately these lower wages are often less than can support a single person or family to live what most would consider a reasonably comfortable life in return for 40 hours of work per week.  Such people must work much more than 40 hours per week and/or their wages must be supplemented by social welfare programs such as food stamps.

[Picture of CEO in chauffeured car versus low paid worker clocking out of one job but putting on a uniform to go to their second job.]

 

A point of view seldom considered is that each hour the high earner is not obliged to work at producing the fundamental goods and services they require is an hour the high earner can put towards their high earning activity.  So, isn’t the work of lower paid individuals who work to produce the fundamental goods and services required by the wealthy also a contribution towards the work output of the high earner?

[Picture of CEO walking down business corridor with many people bustling in background performing other work.]

 

When one person gets paid $8/hr for doing menial work that most people could learn to do effectively with a few days or weeks of training, for example janitorial work, and another person gets paid several million dollars per year for doing highly specialized work that most people would not be able to do even if given the opportunity and unlimited training, for example a CEO of a high technology company, we say that is the result of a free-market. The person with the talent and skills gets paid what employers are willing to pay for them.  Of course the employer is paying such high amounts because they expect to make more profit from the good decision making ability of the highly talented/skilled person.  Most reasonable people would agree that the very talented and skilled, whose abilities are rare, should be rewarded (be made wealthy) to encourage others with similar talent to excel and make innovations in work methods that make us all a more productive, efficient society.  However, if we look back at the person making $8/hr who works 40/hrs per week and still cannot make enough money to support themselves with the basic fundamental goods and services, can we say that the system is fair?  If someone works a full work week (and let’s assume that most people consider 40 hrs/week a full work week) in an occupation, that is needed as proved by its existence, then shouldn’t they be able to earn sufficient money to support themselves and their family to a minimal level of comfort and security that most people would consider reasonable?  In fact is it not true that the person doing the janitorial work at $8/hr at the high-technology company is assisting the CEO making several million dollars per year by eliminating the necessity of the CEO and other highly talented/skilled people from having to do the janitorial duties themselves?  If, at the end of her long day of making executive decisions, the CEO had to get the mop and bucket out and clean the executive restrooms there would be a significant loss of valuable CEO time that could be put to improving the company’s business.  The same applies to all the other workers below the CEO that perform work which, if they did not do it, the CEO would not be able to do her job.  This concept also applies to others who do not work for the CEO’s company.  Without the construction crew repairing roads the CEO would not be able to drive to work.  Without teachers in schools or private tutors the CEO would need to take time to teach her children at home.  Without people harvesting in fields and raising livestock, the CEO would need to perform subsistence farming like our ancestors in addition to showing up to the office.  This concept may seem overstretched, but in fact it is absolute truth; without other people, the individual could not achieve anything resembling what we consider a wealthy lifestyle.  Despite enormous natural talent the CEO would be forced to live a minimal existence, struggling each day for mere survival.

[Picture of CEO trying to do all the things mentioned and also work at her job.]

 

How Wealthy Nations’ Benefit from Low Labor Costs of Poor Nations

Those in developed, wealthy nations profit and live lives of relative comfort because of the cheap labor of people of other countries with impoverished populations.  Simultaneously, this availability of low cost labor keeps the wages of the less wealthy populations within the wealthy nations low by increasing the pressure for companies who employ their country’s workers to reduce wages to compete.

 

It is also true that without this cheap labor most of the population of wealthy nations would not be able to afford non-essential goods such as electronics and durable goods such as washing machines, dishwashers and automobiles.  The cheap labor takes advantage of people who, due to various repressive circumstances, live in what would be considered dire poverty in the developed nations.  These people and families live in slum accommodations with multiple families sharing what would be considered a single family residence in wealthy nations.

[Picture of factory with impoverished workers making electronics etc. to be shipped to wealthy nations.]

 

The Fallacy of Freedom to Choose Not to Work

Some justify impoverished labor forces by arguing that the labor force is comprised of individuals who have the freedom to work or not to work, and they can choose not to work if they believe the wage is not fair compensation.  This however is false.  A worker in a society where circumstances have brought about low wages for labor has little choice but to work for unfair wages and working conditions or starve.  While this is a “choice” it is not what most people would consider to be freedom and the right to pursue happiness. [Picture depicting someone considering choice of working for less than living wage or not working and starving.]

 

Many people also argue that the populations of wealthier democratic nations, as free citizens, have a choice to leave poor paying jobs.  This is not true.  Many people have to stay in jobs that do not pay a fair, living wage because there is no alternative.  Many have to stay in jobs because they are dependent on the healthcare benefits for themselves or another member of their family who are sick.  Not only are there no other jobs available that would pay a fair, living wage with healthcare, the ultimate alternative, that of opting out of the workforce and earning a living off of the land is not a viable alternative either.  In developed nations there is no arable land a person or family can start to work and farm to live via subsistence farming.  Arable land is either owned, private property, or is designated as government controlled lands. 

 

As an animal that is born onto the earth, our natural mode of survival is to work the land and hunt to survive, or be hunter gatherers.  Neither of these options are available in most developed countries in the world, and for good reason.  If lands were not controlled, they would be exploited and ruined by the masses and those seeking to reap a quick profit with no responsibility for sustainability or preservation of the land.

[Picture of someone or family setting out into “uncontrolled free lands” with bow and arrow and basic farming implements, but on arrival finding the land is desolate and barren and has been ruined by trash, unregulated waste disposal, mining and deforestation and polluted rivers/streams] 

 

Given there is no alternative but to take part in the commerce of capitalism, the population must insist that the deal include a fair, living wage, healthcare for the workforce, and the wealth from the labor force be fairly distributed in a way that permits a dignified and secure existence for the workers.  Simultaneously it must provide enough incentive for entrepreneurs to work harder, be smarter and evolve the working methods so we, as a workforce, produce more efficiently.  It is a fine balance between the two.  There has to be adequate incentive and rewards for having unique talent and skills, but also the rewards to those few, rare individuals cannot be so great that the vast majority are left in miserable circumstances because too large of a portion of the wealth of the workforce is being kept by the top, elite few.

[Picture of scales or other symbol demonstrating the balance between social stability/safety nets and opportunities for businesses entrepreneurs]

 

Exploited Workforces

Policies that discourage importation of goods manufactured by exploited workforces should be insisted upon.  Companies that use exploited workforces should be called out for their part in this immoral practice. 

 

Saying that if XYZ Corporation didn’t provide work at low labor rates the population would be in a worse situation is not a valid argument.  This argument is used by employers as an excuse to increase their profits by avoiding paying laborers in developed nations with minimum wage requirements.  Increasing a population’s quality of life from rural squalor to industrial squalor is not a success story.  It occurs when employers see an opportunity to exploit a population in dire circumstance.  If a company is going to profit from the work of a workforce, it must be responsible for providing reasonable working conditions and a living wage for them.  Companies that do not abide by these conditions should be excluded from selling within our society.

 

We should insist that the goods we purchase have been produced by manufacturers that pay a reasonable wage, even if those goods are produced in another country.

[Picture showing goods with certificates stamped on them verifying they were produced by workers working paid a living wage.]

 

Inheritance of Wealth and the Perpetuation of Concentrating Wealth:

We all like to try to provide our offspring and future generations of our families with better opportunities to live better and more fulfilling lives than we ourselves did.  However, amongst the very wealthy, this can also lead to the concentration and stagnation of wealth in just a few top, elite families.  There must be a limitation of the amount of stored wealth that can be passed from generation to generation without it being applied to expanding the economy and circulating back amongst the population. 

 

Like a battery stores energy, wealth is a storage of the value of work by the labor force.  A small group of people having control of a large portion of that stored wealth leads to stagnation of the economy.  Eventually this stagnation is harmful even to the privileged who have control of the wealth as the infrastructure of the nation around them degrades due to the stagnation.  In extreme circumstances this can lead to an abundance of crime or even civil rebellion.

[Picture of violent social rebellion.]

 

Interest on Loans: Keeping Generations in a Cycle of Poverty

Interest on money is a primary reason the vast majority of people work a lifetime and yet have little or no property or valuables to pass on to their offspring.

 

A hope for many is to provide their children with either a fully paid off home or a good portion of the cost of a home so that they will not have to pay interest on their homes which uses a large portion of most people’s earnings.

 

Unfortunately many people today must finance their retirement years by selling off their property and valuables, or using a reverse mortgage.  This means their children will, like them, have to start with nothing, have to work a lifetime just to make ends meet, and like their parents finance their old age by selling off their property.  This cycle ensures generation after generation of cheap, desperate labor.

[Picture of older couple selling off their home and possessions to fund retirement with their children sometime in the future being shown a will with a zero balance]

 

Stock Market Rapid Sales and Complex Investments

The idea behind the stock markets of the world is to provide a place where people can invest in companies to promote growth of companies that have useful products.  Ideally this should be good for the company – providing usable funds to expand, and good for the investor as they see their investments grow.  However, today we have such practices as day-trading and even buying and selling within a matter of seconds using computers.  Complex investments are created that are more of a gambling tool than an investment in a company.

[Picture showing market traders at a roulette wheel or similar analogy]

For many middle-income people stock shares are the only viable option for their retirement funds.  Rapid trading and complex gambling investments make the market volatile and risks the life savings of many middle income people.

 

Regulations should be considered to limit or ban rapid trading and complex investments that serve more as gambling tools than to promote the growth of companies.  If a stock buying practice only serves to make those whose business it is to buy and sell the shares a profit, and does not help the actual company the shares are a part of, the practice should be banned. 

 

The benefit to companies and shareholders of not allowing shares to be sold for some minimum time (one day, one week, perhaps even one month) after they are purchased should be considered.

 

Future of Too Little Work, Too Many People

As technology advances producing more machines that can perform the work of people, less workers are needed. 

 

A large development that is just on the horizon as of the early 21st century is the self-driving vehicle.  Once perfected these vehicles will put many people out of work.  Truck drivers, bus drivers, taxi drivers will all be unnecessary.  These jobs today are moderately well paying and are the primary income of many households.

 

As more occupations are replaced by machine labor we will have a large portion of the population that is not needed to work.  Eventually we will need to consider a base living wage that is not dependent on work, but is given as a right of existence.  This will be a difficult transition for our societies where the concept of a capable, able bodied person receiving pay without working is considered immoral by many.  However, the alternative to a base living wage without a requirement to work will be to have a large segment of the population who have no legal way to make a living.  When legal options are not available to people to survive they will certainly pursue illegal options.  It is no coincidence that criminal gangs rise up in impoverished communities where there are few alternatives to lead a life of reasonable comfort and security other than crime.

[Picture of dystopian future with few very wealthy people cautiously walking down street full of people begging, scamming/hustling, prostituting themselves or lurking to commit crime]

 

How Can We Change the Situation of So Few Having so Much and So Many So Little?

The first step is to understand that wealth is not created by the individual and it is dependent on having a population of workers to provide labor to create wealth.  The second step is to spread this knowledge to others.  Once many people understand this concept we can change the system by voting on policies that promote more of the wealth we create being more fairly divided.  Voting for policies such as minimum wages that are frequently revised to keep up with the true cost of living, and policies that promote workers receiving a fair share of the wealth they create.  A fair taxation system that taxes the very wealthy in a manner that allows and encourages entrepreneurship, but also funds public works and infrastructure, our military, and social programs that ensure a reliable safety net for the workforce and population must be prioritized.

[Picture of handshake between obviously wealthy individual (owner of industry) with a worker and some icon of a fair deal . . . contract or similar?]

 

If you found this website interesting here are some other websites you may be interested in:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/

 

http://www.theguardian.com/uk

 

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/

 

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show

 

http://www.tolerance.org/immigration-myths

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

 

http://inequalityforall.com/

 

http://www.fastcompany.com/

web counter
web counter