When is rich too much?

There has to be a point when even pro capitalist folks and the millions of wannabe millionaires in the US start to think this is absurd.

In my book, NO individual or family on this planet should have wealth valued into the billions of dollars.  I'm not saying governments or mobs with torches and pitchforks should levee laws to prevent this from happening; I'm saying that we a human beings in the global 21st Century should collectively agree on a point when too much wealth is moralistically more criminal than recreational drugs, speeding and gay marriage.

I mean my income has GREATLY increased for the next several months, but it's still what many in the US would consider low, yet I think it's pretty darn good (it's an enlisted person's military paycheck).  It would have to increase again at a rate of ~25 times to equate to a yearly income of $1 million.  Not one person NEEDS an income of that amount (and yes, I'm keeping taxes in mind as I say that--even a 50% rate leaves one with enough to buy a superfluous home in JUST ONE YEAR).  THEN there are thousands that make in a year what even this income would take a decade or three to accumulate.  Even if you're one of the rare few that start a small company from nothing and quickly produces a product that half the US buys at least once, is it that easy to forget where you came from or to have little to no sense of what you could do for your community and fellow human beings?  Is your $20 molded-plastic smartphone cover--that could be profitable at $1--a good enough gift to the people of the world?

Huhhh.  Are people just becoming that greedy or are we losing touch with reality this much???

Historical Income Tax Rates in the U.S. or We Just Like to Believe Rich Politicians

In response to 21 September 2011 episode of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and the subsequent googling of past income tax rates…finally

I like it when Jon Stewart points out when rich people are just wanting ways to get richer, but when it comes to people talking about how we can't POSSIBLY grow economically as a nation any taxes are raised by those that can afford it, he should mention the historical federal income tax rates the U.S. has had. 

It doesn't take much time to research creditable, factual info.  Just to give you an idea of what you may find, from 1932 to 1986 the top bracket was never below 50% and topped out at 94%.  During the boom after the Great Depression and World War II, it was around 90%.  When adjusted for the ever-lovely inflation, for most of our income tax history, if a "married filling jointly" household made between ~$100,000 and $250,000, they paid 50% or more. 

That being said, our infrastructure over the past few decades has increased – as it should to some degree for any growing nation – while our taxes have gone down.  If you use almost any other rich country on the planet as an example, we should be paying more in taxes for the physical size of our country and the amount of App Store-like variations on public services.  I imagine it is mathematically plausible to lower taxes SLOWLY over time if things are being managed REALLY well for the long-term, but we obviously have seen this isn’t good for the long-term stability of the economy.  To me, it’s as if you prefer investing for your long-term future by frequenting Las Vegas instead of an “old- fashion” savings account or investing in shiny metals and rocks that still seem to grow in allure since caveman days. 

Now my personal opinion probably means I should just move to another country that has collectively figured it out better instead of saying we need to manage our money better, pay more in taxes, spend more on education, research, public transportation and healthcare (universal).  To me, it's not class warfare to raise taxes a little on very wealthy people; it's class warfare when you don't and MOST people are doing pretty poorly by comparison.  I don’t need a lot to live a comfortable, nice life.  I also don’t want my nation’s government to take from the rich and just give it to the poor – even though this sharing idea is how things worked before civilization if you wanted to survive often.  You’re doing pretty good and the family in the hut or tree next door isn’t doing so well, you share the extras you have. And when you’re down on your luck and they’re doing swell, the favor is returned.  We probably wouldn’t have made it beyond tribes if we had the mentality many have today.  So much for coming together to help your neighbors (towns and states) and fellow tribe members (U.S. citizens) in which sharing what you had with everyone for the greater good was what you had to do to survive in hard times.    

Taxes and government hoopla aside, I think we've become a much greedier, selfish nation than we were just a few decades ago.  There was a time when it was OK to "get by" or that making two or three times more than the national average was a wealthy/rich lifestyle.  What happened to us that 10, 20 or 100 times the national average isn't enough?  Even if you don’t want to take into consideration how well those that live around the poverty line have it in places like the U.S. compared to billions of others around the world, there’s a point when we need to calm it down with inventing more insanely expensive things to spend the money we think we need.      

I understand getting angry about government spending and poor management with good agencies, but we don't seem to care enough to elect decent "representatives" to congress or establish a better way of doing so, so it's kind of hard to complain about that in turn.  Elect the rich and they will try to protect the rich, i.e. themselves. 

U.S. Income Tax Rates from 1913 to 2011, Actual and Adjusted for Inflation 

The Failing of an Orchestra

The Failing of an Orchestra
15 November 2009
Missoula, Montana

In response to the Honolulu Symphony Orchestra filing for bankruptcy and canceling its season.


It would be interesting to know how much of their former budget was spent on conductors and executive staff.

Here in Missoula, Montana, our "professional" orchestra is commonly referred to as a community orchestra by players. This is mostly because they pay $10 per service unless you're a principal player (which would be $15). This is laughable from my experience living in all other parts of the country. Well, Missoula's population isn't that much, about 70,000, with a major university here. The state of Montana doesn't even have a million people. The biggest budget orchestra in Billings pays around $40 per service. OK, it makes sense, right? Not when the music director makes about $60,000 a year. And I'm lead to believe the executive director makes about the same. That's for a 5 to 6 concert season. Utter nonsense.

Now I'll be the first to admit the MD is a great and knowledgeable conductor and I've really enjoyed playing for him, but this isn't a reasonable ratio of pay. The Lyric Opera of Montana here pays a little more; $30 per service for core players. I understand good leadership and direction is very important, but if you can't attract good players and give them good reason to feel they need to practice to earn their pay, you've got a situation on your hands.

Years ago when I first learned that MDs in major orchestra pulled in seven figures a year in most cases, I couldn't believe it. My first reaction was, and still remains, you do know without the players, there is no music. It's one thing if it was a profitable venture, but these are non-profits that survive on donations and government aid (which can't be counted on in this country). To pay a 2nd bassoon or a section string player $100,000 and a MD $1,000,000 (for just a hand full of concerts with guest conductors taking the rest of the season) is bit off the scale of reason. It's not as if they are running the organization like the president or executive director. Now if they were doing both jobs, there would be more justification.

I think these orchestras are doing it to themselves in many cases. Yeah, our culture generally doesn't care for orchestral music on the whole. You've got to adjust for your environment. Although, most people aren't aware how much they actually do listen to an orchestra due to all the films they watch or when they are watching a Seth MacFarlane animated series (Family Guy, American Dad, The Cleveland Show).

Orchestras can't spend money like their product is as popular as an iPhone or is a major sports team. Overvaluing the higher-ups will limit or destroy any organization at some point.