In the US a huge problem with all 'trickle up' policies is that they require legislative intervention. Laizie Faire (sp?) economic systems stabilize with huge income and wealth disparities. In the US a combination of social atomization (probably a result of immigration--Americans feel relatively little organic connection to neighbors compared to the Dutch or Scandanavians) and Puritan heritage (meaning that wealth is regarded as both a sign of virture and an absolute right) have made trickle up policies very difficult to pass in the US.
In short, 'trickle up', 'share the wealth' policies are regarded as un-American.
I agree with what you are saying, but couldn't there be another factor? I'm wondering: from 1450 to 1600 or 1700s (whenever real colonization of the Americas began) was there any middle class in Europe? There had to be some tip over point where a person could see that he didn't have to be a surf, or go into the priesthood, or join an army to become better than the situation he was born into. I'm sure the industrial revolution played a part in that, but were there any worker strikes in Europe before America?
I'm just trying to imagine a world where Americas became another Europe with all the old ways. Instead of toiling on farms for some wealthy landowner, they toiled in a factory for some wealthy factory owner. I'm sure for some of the more socialist list members, this is the system we have now but I'm trying to be realistic, in my fantasy world.
While anecdotal evidence is bad, I've know plenty of people who lived before and during the depression who say "We weren't poor. Maybe we only ate meat twice a week, or had tough winters, but we made due." Human nature was the same back then. They knew who the truly poor families were and I doubt as many people died of starvation or were homeless. (When the population as a whole had a normal supply of food and shelter.) Some families did have tough times from lack of work or losing one or both parents for whatever reason, but not a small fraction brought it on themselves through drinking or other non-productive behaviors.
What I'm trying to come around to: "trickle up" for good or evil has been in place seventy years, at least as government policy, and it certainly hasn't eliminated the poor, it has probably increased. I know this is a bad statement. I don't want to hear about Herr Doctor's diamond shaped society because for 10,000 years there was no such thing. We can't expect this recent change in the human condition to be stable. I'm not saying it should go away, and we should fight however hard we can to keep it, but there will be ups and downs. What I'm more worried about is being dragged down, not by consolidation of wealth at the top, but by everyone below. (Another stupid, bad statement, but this is the last line I wrote and I'm going to bed. The rest was written before.)
Let's be honest: the poor in this country are far better off then the poor in other countries. That does not give me or them any comfort. Yes, I'm isolated from the truly poor people where I live. I know I don't do enough to help, but a tax system that forces me to help is the worst thing to do.
I have to ask: how many of us sci-fi readers think of the Star Trek universe as the best, as far as humanity is concerned. Would we look at earth 2350 and see no poverty? The first season of ST:TNG had the crew waking three deep sleep humans. Sure, just like Bones in ST IV: The Search for Whales, the doctor could treat their maladies, but Crusher also cleaned their addictions, and they talked about having no money. Do we believe that human nature has been cleaned also? Everyone works, no one covets anothers' things, there is no envy or greed? (Lust and to a lessor extent jealousy are still there, just look at Kirk.)
Kevin T. - VRWC
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
