So, isn't this really the question that OWS is about and the one that is underneath all wrangling about taxes and spending and all the rest? How much is enough, and who decides? Who decides who gets whatever is enough?
So far, the answer to the question in the United States is that there is never enough. You can never have enough. You can never be rich enough. The name of the game is MORE. GROWTH to infinity. As has been pointed out by others, that is not the way a living system operates, unless that system is cancer. In the last several years, the answer has included the idea that who gets more are those who already have. Somehow, we are told, they do not have enough.
So let us consider, really, how much money does it take to live an "enough" life in the United States? Surely, the Federal Poverty Level measure is much too low - $22,000/yr. (or so) for a family of 4 is NOT ENOUGH given the realities of our current system of transportation, health care, etc. The minimum wage is NOT ENOUGH. What is?
The "American Dream" as we know it is TOO MUCH -- it is unsustainable from many perspectives. We know that all of us must do with less if only from an ecological standpoint (see Bill McKibben and anything in Orion magazine), but we also know that many of us live with sheer opulence - the 1%, the .01% and the .001%. That is TOO MUCH. Bill Gates at 50 Billion -- he has TOO MUCH. A system that allows for the creation of this much wealth in the hands of the few is neither a just nor a sustainable system. I, for one, am not afraid to say, "your wealth is fundamentally unjust. It is too much for one person to have. A system that encourages such fortunes is also fundamentally unjust."
So, for a family of 4 in the United States in 2011, how much INCOME a year is ENOUGH (yes, it depends on location, etc.), and how much WEALTH is ENOUGH?
How do we decide?
For me, living in a relatively rural part of Virginia, given that we have to pay a mortgage, individual insurance with a high deductible, a car payment, a student loan, utilities and other living expenses, $70,000-$75,000 a year would be ENOUGH for us as a family, allowing for college savings for our kids, a modest vacation once a year, a kind-hearted holiday season, the capability to pay bills when they come due, and some eating out. Of course, if one of us had a job with good health benefits, we wouldn't need as much. We don't currently have enough in terms of income, and times are tough for us. As far as wealth goes, we don't have any - negative wealth, in fact. It might be nice not to be in debt. That's really it. No need for a fancy car, a condo at the beach, a boat, a mobile home, an extra house in the mountains. If any of those things were possible in the future, that might be OK, but we do not feel entitled to such luxaries, particularly when we know that U.S. patterns of consumption fuel so much suffering in the world at large. I fear that some in the "middle class" might, however, feel that they are entitled to such things (in the real meaning of the word 'entitlement') because of the so-called "American Dream."
For me, the "American Dream" -- making money -- is not my goal. My goal is to earn a living, to have enough. But not too much.
Don't we need to start saying, as a society, that NO - you are not entitled to be rich on the backs of everyone else? In fact, wealth can only exist (a la Elizabeth Warren) because of everyone else, not in spite of them. There is NO SUCH THING as a "self-made" man or woman. Ubuntu - I am because we are. Yes, all of this is part of what OWS is about (in my estimation), but what I am suggesting is to give voice to what is underneath the slogans, to initiate a dialogue about "enoughness."
Thoughts?
