On life’s terms
The rich get richer
Commentary by JOELLEN COLLINS
Everywhere I go lately, I notice a growing
gap between the haves and the haves-not. As someone who is still a member of the
great middle class this country has nurtured in my lifetime, I try to look at
the evidence from the perspectives of those on either end of the economic
spectrum.
Driving to Boise recently, I saw the
parade of private jets here for the Allen & Co. conference and imagined the
reactions of, say, a worker in the gardens of the homes along the Valley Club,
the inhabitants of those homes, and someone like me. I am grateful for the
beauties of a place like the Wood River Valley and the infusion of income to
friends of mine who work for the Allen Co. every summer. We appreciate the
energy and class that such people bring to our area. And yet I can't help but
compare the relative ease with which our guests inhabit this resort with the
struggles of a couple I know trying to buy their first house. Similar stories
have been told often of late: Trying to find a place to live within reasonable
commute of work in Ketchum is extremely difficult for anyone with a modest
income. I wonder how teachers pay for their homes. Certainly it requires two
incomes or perhaps a healthy inheritance to sustain the burden.
My parents taught me to budget a quarter
of my income for the expenses of housing, including upkeep, taxes and
decorating. I don't know many people who spend that small of a percentage on
housing
I am fortunate that I no longer require a
large home. Otherwise, I might be frustrated with the size of my condominium. I
have raised my children and live a rather modest life. I chose education as a
career in a time when television didn't lure viewers into the homes of the rich
and famous or show lavish lifestyles. I didn't marry for money but for love. I
can honestly say I'm not jealous of people with loads of money. Many have made
choices and worked hard to acquire wealth. All I really want money for is some
sense of security, travel and the ability to be with those I love when I want
to. I am not sorry that I didn't live a more materialistic life, though, as I
face retirement, I wish I had invested my savings a bit more wisely. But I don't
regret the choices I made, nor do I need fancy cars, expensive toys, diamonds or
furs. In short, I am lucky that I don't need to buy a home today.
As we face the coming elections, we will
hear ad nauseum about how the two campaigns represent the "real" folk. Both
parties have wealthy men leading their tickets, and we must all respect that
reality. I will be listening for their suggestions for putting our country in
better financial balance. I think it is important for our elected
representatives to empathize with those of lower economic status, to see life
from the viewpoint of the bus boy or the lawn trimmer or the drivers who serve
them. The haves need to listen to the haves-not, the prosperous to the poor.
I recently read two juxtaposed items on
the front page of the New York Times. One examined the proliferation of stores
that cater to low-income people using vouchers for food as part of a major
federal nutrition program called the WIC. It contained a shocking statistic: 47
percent of all babies born in the United States each year participate in the
program. Forty-seven percent! Next to that was a feature on the thriving
business of making cakes for "finicky brides having their cakes delivered by
airplane," at a cost as much as much as $5000 plus shipping of $500. One baker
was quoted as saying, "When you're spending $200,000 for a wedding, a cake that
costs $5000 is not all that expensive." My reaction is one of dismay.
I understand the perception of those in
third world countries that this country is selfish and has a distorted sense of
values. I know Americans have good hearts, and I treasure the generosity of my
community, but I can imagine America from the other end of the lens. Well-earned
wealth is part of the American Dream. Wealth at the expense of others, a la
Enron, is not. Instead of haves and haves-not, let's aim for haves and
haves-enough.