Public vs Private Wealth – Breaking Free
A More Democratic Economy
A 1787 newly minted United States of America wasn’t far removed from an old Europe where not so long before all property belonged to the crown or state; where only a hundred years or so earlier John Locke had first defended the idea of private property at a time when most of the property was still in the hands of the crown or aristocracy. Locke was talking about land and a person’s right to the fruits of their labor. Then, property often meant land; it being the major means of producing goods and services. Then as now, property is a form of wealth.
In 1787 France, the wealthiest 10% of the population owned 90% of the wealth; the wealthiest 1%, 60%. In England, during the same period, the wealthiest 10% owned 89% of the wealth; the bottom 50%, 1%.
In 1787, Europe was still in the process of shaking off feudalism; a monumental achievement; hadn’t gotten to “How should it be?” in regard wealth distribution.
Earlier, in 1776, America’s founders, too, had done something most monumental. They asked, “How should a people be governed? “. In response, wrote the one for the ages Declaration of Independence. Their not quite as sterling 1787 Constitution’s 5th Amendment speaks to the rights of private property owners; does not speak to “How should it be?” regarding the distribution of that private property, or to wealth disparity.
Looking back, it should have. Today, America’s wealthiest 10% own 67% of the nation’s private wealth; the bottom 50%, only 2.5%. Between 1981 and 2021, $50 trillion of US wealth moved from the bottom 90% to the top 1%. Today, the US has 756 $ Billionaires while only slightly more than half of its workers make a living wage.
Locke was of the 17th and 18th centuries; our Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the 18th. A world so different from now. “How should it be?” today in a 21st century America? A 21st century world?
Declaring property to be a form of wealth and defining private wealth as that wealth owned by non-governmental entities, public wealth as wealth owned by a state entity, and collective or cooperative wealth as private or personal wealth owned by all members of a group; how should a nation’s wealth be distributed? Its income?
Positing that a nation’s government is responsible for the safety and well-being of its citizens; that this responsibility includes ensuring that they are housed, fed, have adequate healthcare, have access to education, and are free from foreign or domestic threat:
I: How much, which parts of our nation’s wealth should be publicly owned?
If the internet in the US were publicly owned, we would undoubtedly have 5G coverage on the order of China’s; it would be easier to regulate social media. Here, in the US, dogma got in the way. As usual, wealth controlled the government and the economy; and dictated the narrative. In a way, 5G is today’s Interstate; Artificial Intelligence (AI), tomorrow’s. If AI belongs to the public: All Americans will benefit. It will be easier to regulate. If it doesn’t, it will belong to a handful of half-baked $Billionaires with little or no regulation. Think about Sam Altman, Mark Zuckerberg, Google, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, … owning AI as private property. This, under the purview of today’s anti-regulatory, pro-private property Supreme Court. SpaceX’s Starlink has made Elon Musk; Amazon, Jeff Bezos; Facebook/Meta, Mark Zuckerberg into unelected, unqualified geopolitical powers. Too much already.
A nation needs good roads that are accessible to everyone. Needs a well-trained and well-equipped military for its defense. A well-educated, well-informed citizenry gives it a better workforce and government. An easily accessible good healthcare system provides citizens well-being, and security; and makes a nation more productive. If we had national universal healthcare, our healthcare system would cost half as much as it does and be as good as France’s. Housing is a basic necessity; should not be a commodity. If the economy, (the economic model employed) doesn’t provide the requisite housing, the public sector (government) should step in and do so. Dogma be damned.
- How dependent should a nation be on private wealth for producing goods and services? No limit as long as it can do so efficiently and effectively without jeopardizing national security.
II: How much, and which parts, of our nation’s wealth should be privately owned?
For some goods and services, when there is competition, private ownership works well, maybe better. For others, it doesn’t work well, maybe not at all. When and where private ownership cannot provide and equitably distribute the requisite goods and services, the government should ensure that it gets done. This should be the criteria. But throughout time, wealthy interests have been able to control governmental and economic policy; to dictate the narrative. A prime example of this is our current healthcare system. Its being private is not based on merit. In comparison to most advanced nations, we Americans pay twice as much for half as much. It is private because its being so benefits wealthy interests.
Public schools are a great invention, have been instrumental in our advancement, make the nation wealthier and stronger; are one of our nation’s greatest assets. Lately, they have been under assault by wealthy interests who don’t want to pay the taxes needed to fund public schools. They would rather turn them into assets that provide them a return.
In times when wages are high and employment plentiful, and building sites cheap; the market might supply enough housing. In these times, under the current economic model; even highly subsidized private enterprise can not meet the nation’s housing needs. Housing is a necessity. It should not be a commodity. Stepping in to fill a need such as housing is the essence of government responsibility.
Healthcare, education, and housing are necessities for living; never should have been commodities. When the economic model being employed fails, these become the responsibility of society, the government. The costs for doing so should fall to those who benefit most from the economic model being employed, i.e., the wealthy.
- How much of a nation’s capacity for producing goods and services should be privately owned? A matter of what works best.
- Would we be better off if private wealth was more evenly distributed? No doubt. Too many have too little while a very few have too much. Operating under our 1787 Constitution and our current Supreme Court, those very few wield far too much control over our governance, our economy. After buying all the toys they ever dreamed of, they still have more left over than they can possibly spend; turn to playing games with America, the world. This election cycle, Elon Musk spent far more than $250 million of his more than $250 billion pay-to-play to get a despicable person elected President. Jeff Bezos’ pay-to-play cost his Washington Post a similar amount. A mere pittance. Their return on investments alone is more than anyone needs. This while upwards of one-half of the US population does not have enough.
- How should private wealth be distributed? Everyone should have enough. No one should have enough to control politics, to keep others from having enough.
- Should there be limits on private wealth? Certainly. The uber-rich have far beyond a reasonable share. Plus, the world would be better off without them.
III. Given the current choice of economic model, should we concentrate more on income distribution than on the distribution of wealth?
Today, one-third of Americans don’t have enough income to buy the things they need to live. In an economy where virtually everything one requires to live must be paid for with money — The answer is yes. Given the progress of automation, the dominance of financialism in our economy, and the existing disparities in wealth and income, we need to be looking for alternative ways of distributing income and wealth.
- What are some better ways to distribute income?
Today, we need more jobs with higher wages. Unlikely. Today and tomorrow we should ask, “How should it be?”; look at alternative economic models. For example: We could look at things like citizen equity in the means of producing goods and services as a means of addressing the loss of jobs and wealth distribution in today’s economy. Today, in America, things like 401ks accord this ownership to the well-paid.
- Should the nation’s productive capacity be collectively or cooperatively owned, with every citizen an owner, sharing in the returns?
Having now elected a twice impeached, convicted felon whose campaign was funded in large part by our very own $ billionaire oligarchs Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, et al to be president; we are now officially a pay-for-play Banana Republic.
This, in no little part, is because a “Declaration of Independence from the Tyranny of Wealth” is long overdue. The impact would be as monumental as that of the original Declaration of Independence. In no little part because, our 18th century Constitution is antiquated, outdated; was always flawed. Could not, should be asked, to last this long; through so much change. It is time for America to form a committee of our best political thinkers charged with its revision. Charge it or another like it with writing the Declaration of Independence from the Tyranny of Wealth.