About Me
Friday, August 24, 2012
Labor Day
Recently I
saw a bumper sticker that said, “Americans don’t redistribute wealth, they earn
it.” I find this sentiment intriguing for several reasons. One is that distributing wealth is what governments do in complex societies, and what they have done
since humans began making the transition from hunting and gathering, when
wealth was tied up in the earth, there was no surplus, and resources were taken
from the earth on an as needed basis.
As people became sedentary and began
farming, societies began to have a surplus, and rules needed to be established
for how that surplus would be distributed. As societies became increasingly
complex, new classes of people developed who contributed to society in ways
other than growing food. These included warriors, priests, artisans and
politicians (royalty), the latter deciding who got what share of the surplus.
Since that time, societies have rarely distributed wealth to those who have
worked the hardest (those who have earned it), but have used complex social,
economic and political criteria to determine who should get what share.
So it is in our society. One way of
looking at our history is through the lens of distribution, and the ebb and
flow of biases in how the economic rules are created that determine who gets
what share of national resources. For example, movements like organized labor
and progressive era trust busting, sought to change the rules to prevent the
redistribution of wealth from labor to capital. And over the last several
decades the supply side movement (remember when George H.W. Bush criticized
Reagan’s “voodoo” economics?) has pressured government to prioritize capital
over labor. Over the last thirty years, those who have their wealth wrapped up
in labor, in the potential for earning wages and salaries, have seen their
share of the surplus dwindle compared to those whose wealth is tied up in
capital.
Growing up as a pastor’s kid in the
1970s, I remember being struck that working class members of our congregations
had a higher income than my Dad. Hourly laborers were noticeably and
consistently better off than my father who had a master’s degree (granted he
was a pastor, not exactly a high wage profession). Those were relatively good
days to have wealth wrapped up in one’s labor. And the populism of those days
looked down at the lazy rich who didn’t earn their wealth, but got it from
someone else’s labor. Today’s populism celebrates the rich as job creators, and
looks down at those who rely on food stamps (freeloading on government
assistance) because their minimum wage job at Wall Street isn’t enough to make
ends meet.
To be sure, forces like
globalization and automation of production are factors in this shift. But suppression
of low level wages has been a matter of government policy. I remember being
shocked in the 1970s when the business pages of the mainstream media expressed anxiety
at the prospect of rising wages. Oh no! Workers might make more money! What
surprised me most was that this was just taken as an economic fact. Increased
wages are bad for the economy.
Labor Day is an occasion to remember
those in the Labor movement who have paved the way for the masses (us) to have
a decent life, to not have to work 12 hours a day 7 days a week for a pittance,
to receive a just wage, and to lead a reasonable comfortable life. These are
good things, just things, reflecting biblical values, shalom values. Labor Day
is more than just summer’s last hoorah, but an occasion to remember our date,
celebrate what we have, and commit ourselves to a just sharing of what God
created for all of us.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
For a well documented follow up to this comment on laborers in the U.S. today, come to Sojourners class on Sept. 2, when Joann Smith, of Seniors for Peace, will make a presentation on "Labor Justice." Ervin Beck
PHIL, THANKS, GOOD ARTICLE. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN VERY RELEVANT MATERIAL FOR US TO PONDER IN A LABOR DAY SUNDAY SERMON. ORA TROYER
Post a Comment