The man sitting at the front door of Wal-Mart last night was someone I once knew. As an elder in our church, years ago, I visited over there when the family was in deep distress and losing their farm. It was mid-80s, and this family wasn't the only one forced to leave.
Last night he sat in motor cart with a wide front basket, a vehicle made for navigating the store. Inside that basket stood an oxygen tank to which he was hooked up. There he sat, greeting customers, and I told myself that Wal-Mart was a wonderful place because that man--now well into his 70s--would have trouble finding employment anywhere else in town, and here he was. "Night, Jim," he said, kindly.
This is not about Wal-Mart. I was there last night. I likely stop in three times a week or so--they've got wonderful day-old bread, cheap cashews, and printer ink. Most everything else too. Maybe too often, I count on Wal-Mart.
But a news story this morning makes clear what's happening in this country. Sam Walton's six children own as much wealth in the United States of America as 30% of the entire population. There are no typos there, no misprints.
Let's do the math. Google tells me that this morning, the population of the United States of America is right at 307 million. I'm no math hot shot, but it seems to me that we're talking about roughly 92 million people. Let's just get this straight--the six Walton heirs own as much capital as the lowest 30%, or the lowest 92 million Americans. Here: 6 = 92,000,000 Yes, it does.
Let's be graphic about it. The six Walton heirs own as much money, geographically (you might say) as the entire populations of the five most populace states--California, Texas, New York, Florida, and Illinois. We're just counting heads here, but let's say it again--those six Walton kids have as much wealth as the total population of this country's five most populace states.
Or this way. Those six kids have more wealth than the numbers of people in Arkansas, Kansas, Utah, Nevada, New Mexico, West Virgina, Nebraska, Idaho, Hawaii, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Delaware, South Dakota, Alaska, North Dakota, Vermont, Wyoming, and, oh yeah, Washington DC--combined!!!
I don't want to be misunderstood. I'm not saying those six kids have more money than those states, only that those six kids own as much wealth as a number approximate to the entire populations of approximately 18 states of the Union.
Sylvia Algretto, who's a labor economist--and therefore almost certainly a socialist or communist, right?--makes the case here. Read it for yourself.
I just don't understand the Christian right. That kind of income inequality isn't a sin? Do good righteous people simply avoid reflecting at all about the gospels?
Okay, let's play ball with Mitch McConnell. These Waltons--they're the job-creators, right? Let's stay out of the way of the super-rich and let them do their noble work. This is America, land of the bootstraps. Freedom means freedom from government. Liberty means the pursuit of happiness, my happiness. Oh, beautiful for spacious skies. . .
"The share of wealth held by the top fifth [of Americans] is about 87.2 percent while the bottom four-fifths share the remaining 12.8 percent of wealth," or so says Ms. Algretto. But there's more. "The riches of those in the top 1 percent are about 225 times greater than that held by the typical family--it was 125 times in 1962. . ."
That's an arc that looks alarmingly like the dorsal fin of a great white shark.
Somewhere along the line we'll reach a tipping point, don't you think? While good Christian patriots may fly the glorious flag of freedom, income equality is not only growing more and more unimaginable, it has to, eventually, spell real trouble in this country, trouble as in violence.
I'm sitting in a warm basement on a cold December morning. I'm overweight, I'm not suffering, and I'm more than comfortable. Last night, at a local church, I served up a free dinner to tons of folks much, much more poor than I am. But it seems very, very clear that this nation can't go on peaceably the way it is. It just can't.
Perhaps the sky isn't falling yet, but if you look up, you've got to be blind not to see more than a few cracks in the ceiling.
6 comments:
Calvin addressed the disparity between the rich and the poor by strongly urging the rich to relieve the needs of the poor: “for where do the more fortunate get their wealth except from the poor?” However, more structural reform is needed today, especially in the USA where one person, and even two persons, on basic wage cannot possibly provide for a family. The Republicans, who like to portray themselves as having 'family values'is the party always resisting raising the minimum wage! In places like Sweden and other 'socialist' countries there is very little disparity of income and people are much happier, healthier and less prone to violence. A more equal distribution of wealth would give people more dignity, as they would not have to depend on charity.
Well Jim, here's your chance to show your socialistic colors. You can support your team and do your grandkids a huge favor. You can buy them all Packer stock for Christmas....You can show all the Jerry Jones, Sneiders and Bowlens of the world how it all should WORK...and your grandkids will love you to boot. BUT, you better hurry, my guess out of the 250K shares, there are less than 30K left since Tues.
Hmmm...OK; I keep seeing the line in the sand drawn by those who want to "occupy" whatever they can get their hands on, or by those who would rather "have a tea party" than actually "serve" tea in a cup to anyone that holds a sign up at the corner.
Let's stop the rhetoric and roll up our sleeves all ye that profess to follow the Son!
The problem is not whether we are socialist, or capitalists; wealthy or poor; stockholder of the Packers or box seat holder at Wimbledon. The problem is...are we really ready to follow Christ's commands- clearly this is what he made a condition: John 14:15, "If you love me you will keep my commandments."
Christ summed up those commands in: "Love your neighbor as yourself." That means- get off your --s and do something about the poor that we have with us always.
This is not a Republican or Democratic commission- but one that we must follow because he who did died for us did so that we could have grace, most abundantly; wealth that is overflowing; opportunity which is unending.
Sorry, I just get riled when I read sloganeers rather than servants- and that is what this election seems to be all about.
Thank you Brother! Amen. Let's also pray for the "rich", who may also be "poor".
I'm glad someone pointed out that greed and the disparity between the rich and poor are NOT exclusively Republican issues. Plenty of Democrats hoard their money, too. However, the mentality of sharing with the needy in an unconditional manner was not something I noticed often while I lived in Sioux Center, Iowa, and attended the college where Jim teaches. Our focus as a Christian college community was more on "personal piety" than social justice issues. That ethic was definately realted to the college's overwhelming support of Republican policies. There's a lot to be said about personal piety, but social justice is--I think--at least just as important for Christians. I don't promote the college (nor Reaganomics) to my own kids.
While it seems unjust to have the type of income disparity you document, I do wonder more about the question of how the Walton heirs administer their wealth. I do know that they are busy using some of it to build John Brown University. I realize that you're not railing on the Waltons, but making a point about the sustainability of a structure that can create this level of wealth disparity--a good question to ponder, to be sure.
In terms of generation of prosperity for many, I'll still take a more open entreprenuerial atmosphere (such as in the U.S.) over a more socialist atmosphere (such as in most of Western Europe). It does put more responsibility on the wealthy for good stewardship, but it does at least structurally create wealth to be shared.
Post a Comment