I hear the term wealthy used so frequently, mostly with a derogatory connotation, I thought why not take a shot at defining it from an ordinary person’s perspective.  Certainly not the first nor the last to attempt this but I have always thought there was a certain level of unfairness in how this topic has played out in the broad media.

From a working-class perspective the “wealthy” are the enemy, right?  Or are they the envy, or both? I suppose the view from the top, or even the ultra-wealthy, this topic receives little air play. Yet from the middle to upper middle, there is a wide perspective with many variables that must be considered.

To be clear, I am not wealthy, not in the terms of the way I define it. Eldest of five and son of a carpenter, we did not have much. I did learn work ethic and how to be a man from my father during the early years. But I did everything else the hard way. No money for college I went mostly part time at night for years. My jobs as a young man were widely varied and low level. Until I found employment with Digital Equipment Corporation in 1973.   Starting in the warehouse, it was the very early days of the micro-computer revolution. It changed my life.

Growing up near Princeton New Jersey I was exposed to plenty of wealth. Working with my father during the summers, as a “finish” carpenter he had work in the homes of the wealthy. The area had much of it, executives who commuted to New York’s Wall Street and the like.   Those with family wealth. It is an entirely different, almost alien, world to the one our family shared.

Geographic and Markets

The U.S. Census Bureau reported in September 2017 that real median household income was $59,039 in 2016, exceeding any previous year. This was the fourth consecutive year with a statistically significant increase by their measure.^[1] This generally implies that half the households earned less and the other half earned more. I don’t know about how you view it but, to me, here in 2018, $5,000 a month is certainly a livable wage. Yet, its probably okay in Pittsburgh or Des Moines but not in New York City or Washington, DC. In those markets you need two $60,000 incomes to live reasonably well for a family of four.

The View from the Left

I’ve heard some on the left describe $120,000 annual income as wealthy (Barrack Obama for one). Others a bit higher but very few on the left will acknowledge that real wealth is either possessed or accumulated at much higher income rates (either from capital gains or salary and benefits/stock). The reason is simple, numbers, the pinnacle of importance is numbers of voters. Once you reach those six figure incomes and above, either as small business owners, professionals (doctors, lawyers, accountants, et al) or those in the corporate world, their perspective begins to change. Managing their tax liability is a higher priority in conjunction with how to accumulate wealth (family nest egg) through investments and the like. The neighborhood their children play in and the schools they attend (and the type of classmates they experience) become a significant priority. Status symbols come into view, the home they own, the car they drive and the clothes they wear.

Not that these early stage upper middle-income citizens are not a target for the left, they are, with a strategy that leans more heavily on social issues. Different for the much more numerous middle, lower middle and lower income strata of population where economic justice is the battle cry. It’s a delicate balance seeking the votes from the upwardly mobile on social issues while calling them wealthy (and therefore part of the economic justice imbalance so often touted) to the lower income voters.

The view from the right

Much like the left, Conservatives depend heavily on the wealthy. The Conservatives freely admit it. The Liberals consistently publicly deny it but privately know they cannot compete politically without huge donations from the wealthy (the height of hypocrisy). The wealthy, knowing this, hedge their bets by donating to the left and the right.

Conservatives are all about the American dream. How hard work, integrity and education can take you to any level you desire. And there are many, many examples of the truth in this proclamation over centuries. The stark differences come in where the right starts to define wealth. The right knows a household income of $150,000 doesn’t indicate the possession of wealth. Far more likely this is a hard-working household with the goal of some day accumulating enough wealth (maybe two million in today’s dollars) to lively reasonable well after educating their children, managing their tax burden, investing wisely and, hopefully, surviving the financial ravages of the healthcare system. Knowing they are attentive to these topics, Conservatives see upper middle-income earners as prime potential voters, regardless of what their political inclinations may have been prior.

What Conservatives see in this scenario are reasonably intelligent potential voters who will be interested in messages about limiting the size of government, its ever growing cost and intrusions in their business; ensuring we are not truly threatened by foreign powers by maintaining a superior military capability; support for government functions that serve to protect our citizens at home; and support for institutions that serve to sustain the Judeo-Christian principals upon which this country was founded.

The problem with this approach is there are more voters attuned to the message of the left than those attuned to the messages of the right. And, quite frankly, until every American citizen considers themselves upwardly mobile, upper middle-income members of American society, there must be a voice for those who have not been able, for any reason, to achieve that status.

Although I believe something approaching an upper middle-income lifestyle for every family of American citizens is someday possible, this will certainly not occur in the Boomer generation’s life span. Not until automation fully reaches the point where the grass is mowed, the crops are picked, sheetrock is hung, etc., without manual labor, will the need for uneducated and untrained workers disappear. As workers begin to achieve the dream, and move out of the left’s sphere of influence, the left continues to replenish their numbers with actions supporting open borders.

So What is Wealth

I have quite a bit of experience in the world of upper middle income living and I can tell you those families are far from wealthy. Even if they have lived reasonably well, educated their children and saved diligently, it’s likely that they are still exposed to the vagaries of market forces, increasing taxes and government fees (the new “tax” machine), a personal healthcare debacle, among other dangers, well into retirement, that could have devasting financial effects on their lives.

So once again I digressed a bit. But, the point is, many will define wealth to serve their purposes. To me, if you have enough money accumulated to have an annual income of a half million dollars or more from the interest alone on 30-year Federal government bonds (approximately 22 million in principal is necessary at today’s rates), you are wealthy. Someone with that kind of money can probably survive almost anything the American government, healthcare system or financial markets can throw at them. Obviously, there are those who earn much, much more on their accumulated wealth. Short of that minimum threshold I described, you are potentially exposed because you have to invest in riskier instruments to achieve the level of income you desire. Or, a health catastrophe could decimate your savings. In my humble opinion the ability to solely, safely live on the income generated by your very safely invested money, never touching the principal, for generations, is the definition of the entry point of true wealth.

(1)^ “U.S. Household Incomes Rose to Record in 2016 as Poverty Fell”. Bloomberg.com. September 12, 2017. Retrieved October 14, 2017.

A theme that often comes to mind when I ponder some sort of news worthy business, political or other sort of currently public confrontation (or more likely, repeatedly news worthy over time) is “what are they (the parties involved) afraid of”. The question always seems to quickly distill the source of the conflict and expose the tools for resolution. But the parties involved must want resolution and be willing to compromise; a set of conditions decreasingly present in high profile conflicts.

One good example is the conflict between public school teachers unions (and affiliated political associations i.e., lobbyists and political party leadership) and opposing parties merely interested in a better education for their communities and children. These opposing parties can be, on one end of the spectrum, education governing bodies like school boards or local government. Or, on the other end, those that think teachers unions and associates are merely political pawns for the left. The reality is these are all interested parties, and no one is completely wrong-headed. But the number and diversity of views of the parties involved does tend to complicate the debate.

My question is what are the public school teachers afraid of?

• Pay for performance – the rest of the entire world has to deal with this every day
• Meeting standards – ditto
• Private education – no one I know is paying less property tax which, as far as I know, is the predominate funding source for public primary and secondary education. So traditional funds that support public education are not being diverted to other governmental fiscal needs that I am aware of in any significant amounts.
• A voucher system – again, we all have to face a very competitive world when it comes to generating a livelihood for our families. Higher quality public education outcomes will blunt any incursion by private education. No parent beyond the wealthy (a whole other discussion for another day about what that word means – in this case we’ll generalize to mean >$500,000/year in annual income) wants to pay property tax AND for private education. *
• Not to belittle a massively painful topic but postponing the school shootings discussion for another day.

Those who are promoting these ideas are primarily interested in creating the very best educational opportunity for their child. Beyond providing for the child’s basic needs and teaching them manners/values, there’s no greater responsibility for a parent.

The truth of the matter is public education teachers are trying desperately to cling to an antiquated system. Like any antiquated system, disrupters (home schooling, organized private education, etc.) have arrived on the scene for several sound reasons. The two primary reasons are, the quality of public education is seen as declining, and the secular nature is seen as devoid of imparting important values.

As municipal leaders attempt to address the quality issue, while balancing financial resources, the flight to private education progresses. Teachers and their unions are aligning themselves with political forces they see as in their corner. The Democrat party is exploiting this fear and works to obstruct progress while the elites of the party act duplicitously by sending their children to private, often prestigious, primary and secondary institutions.

Fear is a very powerful motivator. The forces of disruption will exacerbate the situation as the teachers dig their heels in in a failing attempt to hold on. Their prospects for success are dim, as many other “institutions’ experienced at the hands of increasingly powerful disruptive forces. As the quality of public education continues to decline, those that can escape will. More fear and even panic will creep in.

Some may cry foul and proclaim this post is overly harsh on the teachers. Again, teachers are poorly led and are merely reacting to what they are told by those who supposedly have their back. The coming train wreck could potentially be avoided but that’s quite unlikely. It may well be too late to avert disaster and the catastrophic, life-long effects on children underserved in public education. We can hope that the teachers, union leaders and their political allies would come to their senses and agree to changes that will serve them and the children better in the long term. My guess, its highly unlikely this poisonous symbiosis between teachers and their leadership will be materially affected until the demand for public education declines further and teachers stand up to force a new set of leaders and a new strategy.

*full disclosure – our family did pay property taxes and for private education for our two children from middle school through high school. When we moved to Montgomery County Maryland we were led to believe the schools were among the best in the country (in hindsight we would have been much better in Howard County schools with much higher ratings). To our surprise the Montgomery County Schools were not nearly as supportive or accommodative for children with special needs (our eldest is ADHD) as the schools in Virginia. After our eldest child was the subject of unprovoked violence at the hands of another middle school student, TWICE in the first two months. With no action taken by the school (they didn’t even call us to tell us our son had been injured – just sent him home on the bus with a large contusion), we put them in private school at great additional expense. The private education experience was a tremendous success for both.

Is it my imagination, or are there many, many more extremely bad drivers on the roads now?

My observations:

• General surliness and lack of civility
• Common “rules of the road” frequently ignored (or never taught)
• Use of turn signals now optional
• Traveling at 10 to 20 MPH above the speed limit on secondary roads commonplace
• Too many lacking confidence acting indecisively
• Too many having too much misplaced confidence doing crazy, dangerous things
• And, the most dangerous and maddening, the staring at the phone types

Generally, there are three types of drivers.

• The good doobie – conscious competent – generally good drivers who pay attention, know/observe the rules of the road, who do their level best to drive safely and reasonably within the law
• The dingleberries – unconscious incompetent – frighteningly poor drivers (capable of all of the above list, in clusters of foulness) who, unfortunately, are not in touch with the reality around them most of the time
• The dimwits – conscious incompetent – not too bright, terrifyingly poor drivers who just don’t care, even sober – so stupid, self-serving and surly that any sort of encounter can lead to road rage behavior

How often you encounter these and in what proportion depends on where you are doing most of your driving. My impression is the zone from southern Virginia to Georgia is very different than the other two regions (the northeast, meaning northern Virginia up, and Florida) of the east coast.

Moving to the Charlotte N.C. 45 years ago, as a 25-year-old from New Jersey, I first was a bit leery of those I passed on the street who made great effort at eye contact and to say good morning. And it wasn’t just a few, it was everyone! Being a generally friendly person (I know, so few in New Jersey – or the northeast in general – but I was one of the few and now I knew I belonged in the south!) I quickly adapted as an enthusiastic participant. Four years later I was married and moving to Richmond VA. (BTW, I know this is a digression but trust me, its relevant!)

After 15 wonderful years in Richmond I took a job that required us to move to the Maryland suburbs north of DC. Great career move, but 15 years later we had more than enough and planned our move back to Richmond.

When we returned to southern Virginia eight years ago, from those 15 years in the DC area, a part of the motivation was to go back to the slower paced, more civil community we remembered. Although it was much as we remembered it when we returned, over the past eight years it too has changed.

Richmond is recognized as a foodie town by many. The region is also recognized for its reasonable cost of living, governmental fiscal discipline and its southern culture. Its central location has the mountains, the beach and DC just two hours’ drive away – a great feature!

So Richmond, especially when we moved there from Charlotte in 1980, had a pace of life that extended to driving behavior. Richmonders were knowledgeable, courteous, and safe in their driving. As the years have moved on (and an ever-growing number of dimwits and dingleberries have migrated here for all of the aforementioned reasons) the driving scene has changed dramatically and not for the better. Of course, not everyone who has moved to Richmond in the past eight years are dingleberries or dimwits. But those relatively normal and nice people do not stand out in a crowd like the “dims” and the “dings”.

Sadly, there is just so much traffic and hatefulness in that greater DC area, we try to stay away. We try to avoid even driving through the area to visit friends and family. When I am asked about my time in the DC area I tell them “if not for the traffic, the lack of civility, the crime and the cost of living, what’s not to love?” I also know there is a lot of economic activity there, during boom or bust. And many are attracted to those possibilities. I was too and, from a career perspective, it was a great move. But man, it is truly great to be away from that place, if not for the traffic and drivers you must deal with alone.

The title of my introduction implies I am considering sharing some thoughts. Well….I believe I have quite a bit to say but….we’ll see about that.

I have thought for many years about writing as a vocation and an avocation. I have a couple reasonable ideas for books but I am uncertain I can muster that level of commitment at this stage. Blogging presents a couple of intriguing notions for me. First, I can see if I can sit my severely ADD keyster down frequently enough to demonstrate some writing discipline. Second, I have longed for an outlet for my observations and perspectives on a very wide range of topics.

I cannot promise that my notions will be deeply academically researched. I can only say they are generated by whatever brain power and logic I can muster, some amount of time in the thought caldron, and will always come from the heart.

So if you are here, then welcome and thank you. If care to comment your thoughts are always welcome; provided they are presented in a civil tone. I am a great believer in civility, especially in disagreement and intellectual discourse.

Oh, I almost forgot, the blog’s name and its potential intended meaning. I have always found the willow tree to be a bit fascinating. Widely rooted as well as reaching upward toward the heavens, its branches reach almost directly back down to the earth. Rooted, yet shallowly, implying a sturdy outward appearance but hiding a high level of tenuousness and vulnerability to mother nature’s harsh side. How all that relates to what happens here we’ll have to see…