|
All economic downturns have
political ramifications. What the actual effect will be is determined
to some degree by the psyche of the nation itself. In the Great
depression of the 1930's Germany turned to Adolph Hitler to lead
them out, while America turned to Franklin D. Roosevelt. One
must admit those were two radically different responses to the
same reality.
With that political insight
in mind, I went to the United Kingdom early this year to examine
the way our closest ally, under a newly-elected Tory, that is,
conservative, government has decided to tackle the economic crises
in that country, in order to compare it with the approach of
the newly-elected Democratic, that is, liberal government of
the United States. The comparison was instructive.
Today, David Cameron is
the occupant of 10 Downing Street as the Prime Minister of a
coalition government. He did not win a majority in the last election
and had to patch together a ruling coalition by entering an alliance
with the Liberal Democrats, a perennial minority party that represents
a position somewhat to the left of the Tories, but to the right
of the Labor Party. Labor, you recall, led first by Tony Blair
and later by Gordon Brown, was in power when the economic crisis
of 2008 rattled the stability of both Great Britain and the entire
developed world. The political reality is that if you are in
power when a crisis comes, you get credit for the crisis. So
Labor, i.e. liberals, were blamed for the economic collapse in
England, while Republicans, i.e. conservatives, who controlled
the White House in America, were blamed for the collapse in this
land. David Cameron's election thus represents a reaction to
Blair and Brown while Barack Obama's election represents a reaction
to the presidency of George W. Bush
There is not as much of
"the blaming of big government" in Great Britain as
there is in the United States for government there has not been
demonized in recent years as it has been here. The UK's National
Health Service, for example, is hailed by both the conservatives
and liberals as an asset not a liability. The NHS does provide
universal health care for all its citizens and is not even debated
politically today except wherever the tension between quality
care and cost efficiency appears. Even the well established English
conservatives with whom I spoke simply do not understand why
the United States will not move to a single payer government-run
system. The people of Great Britain cannot comprehend the fear
of government that permeates America's national political debate.
They simply do not understand why privately owned health care
companies should make profits for their shareholders on peoples'
health. Health care is a right of citizenship in the UK; it is
not a privilege of wealth. Great Britain's health care system
has cut costs by developing well trained ancillary health care
professionals to treat routine sicknesses, while quickly referring
the serious illnesses to the supervising MDs. Despite the political
propaganda one hears in America about the shortcomings of "socialized
medicine" in Great Britain, the fact is that the overwhelming
majority of their citizens are almost completely satisfied with
the NHS. As I listened to and engaged their comments, the one
thing that I found to be incomprehensible to the English was
the way money manipulates public opinion in the United States
by employing fear as a major force in creating public policy.
The United States has the most expensive health care in the developed
world and yet in every measure of health care effectiveness from
life expectancy to infant mortality, the United States ranks
near the bottom among the developed nations of the world. These
statistics violate our national self-image so deeply that we
find them hard to believe and seek to explain away their reality.
The facts are, however, that there are enormous profits in our
health care system and those who are the recipients of these
profits defend their vested interests both passionately and expensively.
If one will trace the money that fuels various aspects of the
political debate in America, from the Tea Party movement to the
Religious Right, to the campaign directed against the recent
health care bill, one will discover that it comes from the same
source, rooting ultimately in Texas Oil. Texas, once an independent
republic and still distrustful of any national authority, spews
more venom against the national government and spends more money
to do so than any other state in the Union. They call this passion
a commitment to "States Rights," but, as everyone who
grew up in the South knows, that is little more than a respectable
cover for not wanting to pay minimum wages and not allowing people
of color to be treated with equality and fairness. The role of
money in politics in America is quite frankly beyond the imagination
of most Europeans.
Great Britain is a more
highly-taxed nation than the United States. One cannot, however,
compare the tax rates in the two countries until one reckons
with the fact that the English people all have access to free
medical care and until recently paid almost nothing for the education
of their children and young people from kindergarten through
the university. Health care and university educations are major
costs in the average American family.
|
The citizens of Great Britain,
for example, have an income tax that is graduated according to
income levels with 10% at the low end rising to over 50% for
incomes above £450,000 ($725,000). The inheritance tax,
dubbed the death tax by American conservatives, is also much
higher in the UK than in the United States being 40% on estates
over £350,000 ($500,000.) The English were amazed to discover
that Americans can shelter the first $5,000,000 in every family
from any inheritance tax. They also pay taxes to local governments
that are generally not as high as property taxes are in America.
They do not have state income taxes because they do not have
that level of government.
The other major source of
government funding in the UK is called the "Value Added
Tax" or the VAT, which is collected on any purchase people
make except for food and children's clothing. This is a national
sales tax. Until very recently the VAT was pegged at 17.5%. In
terms of our dollars this meant that for every $10 purchase,
the Brits would pay $11.75.
Given this British tax structure,
in order to rein in the current deficit, the Cameron government
has done two things. First, they tripled university fees from
about £3,000 ($4,500) a year per student to about £9,000
($13,000) a year per student, a figure that would still be a
bargain when compared to American university charges. It was
this provision that was blamed for the recent student riots and
even the widely-reported attack on the automobile carrying Prince
Charles and Camilla. Second the Cameron government raised the
VAT - national sales tax - from 17.5% to 20%. Now every $10 purchase
will cost $12.00 and big ticket items like automobiles and large
appliances will be significantly higher. A £30,000 ($50,000)
automobile in the UK, for example, will now cost £36,000
($68,000). We were in England when these increases became operative.
A highway toll of £4.50 (about $8.00) on one day became
£5.00 (about $9.00) the next. A cup of coffee in England
averages between $4.50 and $5.00. Yet so far as I could tell
from individual citizens, the public press and television news
there was little more than resignation to this tax hike. No one
suggested that these higher taxes might sink the weak economic
recovery now going on. The UK also taxes gasoline heavily with
the cost of a gallon of "petrol," as they call it,
now in the $6-$7.00 per gallon range.
Compare that response with
the tactics of our government. With the deficit soon scheduled
to be equal to the gross national product (GNP), our congress
and president agreed on a "compromise" that saved the
top two per cent of wealthy Americans from facing the elimination
of the Bush tax cuts that were written to expire on December
31, 2010. This extension was successfully championed by the Republicans.
In the compromise additional benefits for the unemployed and
low income Americans were added to guarantee Democratic support.
Not one thing was done to address the deficit. Instead this extension
of tax advantages will add about a trillion dollars to the national
debt over the next decade. The joy ride of spending beyond this
country's means is thus destined to roll like a boulder down
the side of a mountain, headed for a disaster that seems inevitable.
Both of our political parties seem intent on protecting their
political bases at all costs, but at the expense of the well-being
of our nation.
One of the principle teachings
of our religion is that of personal sacrifice for the well-being
of the whole. That religious principle must find a political
expression. Ours is a great nation, worthy of our sacrifices
to maintain the gifts we treasure - freedom, liberty, justice
and opportunity for all. Health Care and Education should be
our birthright not a privilege enjoyed only by those who can
afford it. That will never be possible unless we find a way to
pay for it. The government is the corporate expression of us
all; it is not a sinister power. It exists to carry out the purposes
of the nation. All Americans want to have a strong national defense;
government protection for our savings; assurance that our businesses
are honest and run fairly; that our monetary system is secure;
our food is safe; our veterans, wounded in the service of this
nation, are properly cared for; our drugs are pure, and our highways
are built and maintained. These things are worthy of the taxation
it takes to provide them. Fairness in the tax code is essential
and those who have been made wealthy by the opportunity they
have had in this country need to stop seeking special tax privileges
and offshore havens and pay a fair share of the burden a great
nation requires.
This is not a call to
class warfare as some right-wing politicians claim. It is rather
a call to basic fairness. Class warfare is present when the wealthy
in power require heavier taxes on the poor than they do on themselves.
We have had that kind
of class warfare for too long. America can do better than that.
~John Shelby
Spong
|