I caught wind yesterday of the now infamous Tom Perkins letter to the Wall Street Journal.

Perkins is one of the founding partners of the venture capital firm, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.

He is also a billionaire…

And a proud card carrying and outspoken representative of the 1%’ers.

In the letter Perkins compared the “oppressive” government action of the Obama administration against growing income disparity in the U.S. represented by the amount of wealth concentrated in the hands of the 1%, with Nazi Germany’s oppression of a different 1%…the Jews.

According to Perkins “the rich” have now substituted for the Jews as victims of this Holocaust-ical oppression by Obama and his dependency class.

Many have already pointed out in response to Perkins that it was Obama who bailed Mr. Perkins and his cronies out of a real jam back in 2008…so I won’t go there in this post.

The facts stand for themselves.

But what I will do is dredge up some old CRG material that I wrote back when Occupy Wall Street was gaining traction and the idea of income disparity and the 1% were making bold headlines.

Hey, I don’t mean to get overly political in this blog about impact mindfulness. But remember, this is a revolution and the dictator we want to depose is greed.

I believe what Perkins was really saying is let “greed-om” reign.

We misfits disagree…vehemently, but for reasons that might surprise Mr. Perkins.

Read on…

Should There be a 1%?

The graph portrays an alarming picture.

The share of total income by the top 1% peaked in 1928 and 2007 at just shy of 25%.

Wow, does the graph really mean that 25% of all income earned in the U.S. went to that select slither of the population? Yelp, that’s what it means and, moreover, it shows that both high points were immediately succeeded by the dramatic low points of the “Great Depression” and the recent “Great Recession.”

Some would say, therefore, let’s do away with that 1% all together. Take away their great wealth and spread it around to us poor 99%’ers. Even out the playing field, as an uber-liberal might say.

I disagree.

After all, the fact of the 1%’s very existence should give the rest of us something to shoot for, to strive towards. It is that 1% who have achieved what Tony Robbins (who happens to be up there) would call “Absolute Financial Freedom.” That is, the ability not to have to work another day in one’s life and still have the wherewithal to do whatever you want, whenever you want and wherever you want.

That’s a pretty cool state of being. I could really dig some of that.

[I am being a bit facetious in that statement…as I don’t really believe reaching coveted 1% status will actually make you nor I “happy”, nor will such financially motivated action contribute to making the world a better place…]

Yea, the complete removal of money as a constraint upon the enjoyment of one’s life sounds pretty, well, enjoyable.

So, I believe that OWS should not be about denying the 1% their financial freedom. Some have actually earned it.

Rather a better objective would be to enhance the mobility of the rest of us to reach that level. And certainly to remove any government role in helping someone achieve 1% status, or maintain it, at the exclusion of all the rest of us.

And finally, it would help us to be less resentful of the 1% if they were a little more compassionate.

But wait a minute, doesn’t the 1% already shoulder their “fair share” of the burden (taxes)…doesn’t that prove their compassion?

Not by a long shot.

And the current Grover Norquist mandated pledge of no additional taxes to help our nation out of trouble, not even on those most able to afford them, proves the point.

I am not at the point in my political and philosophical evolution (and, boy, have I evolved) to say that capitalism is the culprit…that it is at the root of all the trouble in the world. However, I do believe that the brand of capitalism inspired by Grover Norquist IS…in large part.

Property, or the rights to ownership thereof, should never be allowed such an honorable position…in my humble opinion.

I believe that is where my brand of capitalism departs dramatically from the mainstream.

There are only two ways to put a brake on capitalism run amok. That is by government mandate and by appealing to conscience.

The latter method is what this blog is all about. And I believe it is the most feasible and peaceful one percent solution to greed that has a chance at limiting capitalism’s darker attributes.

image credit: surgprotector via Compfight cc