Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The Trillionaire and the Homeless Person

Opinion

The Trillionaire and the Homeless Person
A politician counting money in front of the US Capitol Building.
Getty Images, fStop Images - Antenna

There have always been and there will always be rich people and poor people. That is inherent in the nature of man in non-collective societies.

But while our Founding Fathers—in particular John Adams—recognized that nature is filled with examples of inequalities in man's material possessions as well as in his mental and physical attributes—and that's just the way it is—he felt strongly that each person has the moral right to change his circumstances, the moral right to equality as well as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And that government's role—as stated in the Declaration of Independence—is to "secure" those rights.


How? By providing each person with the opportunity to pursue those rights, to pursue his dreams. Government's role is not to change people but to provide people an equal opportunity to change themselves if they so desire and live good lives. In this, we have in many ways failed.

The most critical component of providing all people with that opportunity is to ensure that all children are provided with an equal opportunity to receive a good education. That is currently not the case in the United States. In every state, there is a vast discrepancy between school districts in well-to-do areas and those in poor areas—whether rural or the urban ghetto—in the amount of money that is spent per pupil. And while spending more money does not necessarily ensure quality education, it is generally the case that districts that spend more money per pupil do provide a better education to their students.

The reason for this discrepancy is that the way in which schools are funded in this country is a recipe for inequality. Local property taxes account for 45% of school funding; another 45% comes from the state, with the federal government contributing only 10%. Although states often apply equalization—between districts—formulas, they usually don't work. As a result, children who grow up in areas that have a better tax base receive a better funded, and typically a better, education. Poor children on the other hand—both White and people of color—never receive the education that gives them the equal opportunity that is promised in the Declaration of Independence to pursue happiness. Without an education, one can pursue nothing in today's world.

But a secondary education, while critically important, is only the beginning to opening up opportunities to pursue one's dreams. The fact that one is born poor in an urban ghetto or in a rural area does not indicate the intelligence or inherent ability of a child. If a child is properly nurtured by his schooling, even if he is not nurtured at home, he can achieve amazing things. And so the government and universities working together need to find ways to insure that no child with the requisite intelligence and skills is denied the opportunity to further himself.

The other factor that is critical to the people's opportunity to pursue happiness is the quality of the environment in which they live—meaning the air they breathe, the water they drink, the parks they visit; meaning the non-material things that make a huge difference in a person's life. This is usually what's referred to as "the public good." The government has had a mixed record on providing for the public good; both the Reagan and Trump administrations have been particularly dismissive of the public good.

Implementing truly equal education opportunity and better providing for the public good will cost a lot of money. And that's where the very rich—the millionaires, billionaires, and now trillionaires—come in. In 1913, the U.S. ratified the 16th Amendment to the Constitution which created the income tax. The tax was a progressive tax, meaning that those who could afford a higher tax rate—who could afford to pay more of their income to support the government's efforts to defend our country and provide for the public good—were asked to do so.

And that's what the income tax accomplished for the 65 years between 1915 and 1980. The income tax for the very rich hovered during this period between 75% and 90%, except for 5 years preceding the Great Depression. But then Reagan's first tax cut lowered the top rate from 70% to 50%, and the second cut lowered it to 38.5% in 1987 and the rate has remained at roughly that level since, with the Trump cuts lowering it several percentage points more. In addition, the Internal Revenue Code provides so many loopholes for the very rich that they pay even less. The system is so broken that many of our most profitable corporations pay no income tax.

The battle cry should not be, "Tax the rich," but "Pay your fair share." The result of a succession of Republican administrations lowering the tax rates on the rich while providing almost no break for the middle class has been a massive cut in revenue that could have paid for government programs that support the public good—not just for people but programs to repair our bridges, etc. The rich have been made richer, the poor have remained poor and America has been weakened..

If America is to be true to its founding principle that all Americans have an equal right to pursue happiness, to pursue their dreams, then the government must act in such a way as to ensure that they have the opportunity to do so, which includes tending to the public good. If people choose not to, or they fail at their effort, that is their responsibility. The government's sole responsibility is to ensure that all have an equal opportunity to make of themselves what they will.


Ronald L. Hirsch is a teacher, legal aid lawyer, survey researcher, nonprofit executive, consultant, composer, author, and volunteer. He is a graduate of Brown University and the University of Chicago Law School and the author of We Still Hold These Truths. Read more of his writing at www.PreservingAmericanValues.com


Read More

The Populist Left and Right Just Bought the Same Housing Policy
white and red wooden house miniature on brown table

The Populist Left and Right Just Bought the Same Housing Policy

At midnight on July 11, the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act became law without a presidential signature, the largest housing statute since 1990. President Trump refused to sign it, dismissing it as "a big yawn" and holding it hostage to an unrelated voter-identification bill. The timing matters because the price it is meant to address keeps climbing: the median existing home sold for $440,600 in June, roughly 49 percent higher than in 2020. Democrats say Trump snubbed struggling families. Republicans call it a win for homeownership. Both are selling a law that will do far less than either claims.

Start with the provision everyone is talking about. Section 901, titled "Homes are for People, Not Corporations," bars large institutional investors, defined as entities controlling 350 or more single-family homes, from buying additional single-family houses. It is the populist centerpiece, the line that lets a Republican Congress and a Democratic minority both claim they stood up to private equity.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person holds a check from the U.S. Treasury Department.

As America debates Social Security and federal spending, older adults face rising costs and financial insecurity. Here's why retirement policy affects every generation.

MargJohnsonVA/Getty Images

We Will All Grow Old Someday

America is debating budgets, taxes, deficits, and spending priorities. Those discussions are necessary. But amid the political arguments, we cannot lose sight of a simple truth: every budget reflects our values.

Nearly every American hopes to grow old. Yet growing old with dignity has become increasingly difficult for many seniors living on fixed incomes. Rising housing costs, groceries, utilities, insurance premiums, and prescription drug expenses continue to strain household budgets. For many older adults, retirement is no longer a season of security but one of constant financial calculation.

Keep ReadingShow less
As Trump’s Tariff War With Canada Drags On, This Border Community Suffers Without a Voice

A semitruck drives across the Sault Ste. Marie International Bridge from Canada into the United States.

Emily Iris Elconin/ProPublica

As Trump’s Tariff War With Canada Drags On, This Border Community Suffers Without a Voice

On the northeast edge of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, nearly 1,100 people gathered in late June for the International Bridge Walk across the long span that links two cities with the same name: Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, and Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario. Both the sun and the sentiments were bright.

“We don’t like to say there’s a border there, because we’re twin cities. We’re one family, the countries of Canada and the United States,” Don Gerrie, mayor of the Michigan Sault (pronounced “Soo”), told the crowd ahead of the annual walk.

Keep ReadingShow less
Empty money in wallet.

What does it mean to be the working poor? Explore the gap between poverty and a living wage, why millions of working Americans struggle, and solutions to reduce economic inequality.

photobyphotoboy/Getty Images

The Concept of the “Working Poor” Should Be Unacceptable

What does the phrase "working poor" mean? The first point is that you are working; you have a regular job—you aren't working catch as catch can; you are employed. But despite working, you are poor. What does it mean to be poor? It turns out that "poor” means different things depending on what standard you apply.

Some definitions seem rooted in the old institution of the poorhouse, which was a home for paupers. Thus, dictionary.com defines “poor” as having little or no money or other means of support. To me, that’s the definition of being destitute, not poor.

Keep ReadingShow less