|
|
May 18, 2013
|
|
|
|
 Embracing ‘Enough’Posted on Feb 10, 2012By David Sirota Of all the no-no’s in contemporary America—and there are many—none has proven more taboo than the ancient doctrine of dayenu. Translated from the original Hebrew, the word roughly means “It would have been enough.” The principle is that a certain amount of a finite resource should satisfy even the gluttons among us. I know, I know—to even mention that notion is jarring in a nation whose consumer, epicurean and economic cultures have been respectively defined by the megastore, the Big Mac and the worship of the billionaire. Considering that, it’s amazing the word “enough” still exists in the American vernacular at all. But exist it does, and more than that—the term’s morality is actually starting to suffuse the highest-profile debates in the public square. After the financial meltdown, for example, Congress witnessed an unexpectedly spirited fight over enacting pay caps at bailed-out financial institutions. Beneath the overheated rhetoric, the brawl revolved around determining how much is enough to compensate Wall Street’s government-subsidized scam artists. Today, that conflict has metastasized into a battle over taxes. Marked by mind-numbing arguments over Mitt Romney’s IRS returns and esoteric catchphrases like “Buffet Rule,” the skirmish is really just a proxy war over how much individual income we are going to collectively deem “enough” before the next dollar of income is subjected to a less preferential levy. Even at the state level, “enough” has gone mainstream, as New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, just signed an executive order barring state contracts from going to firms that pay executives more than $199,000 a year. Again, the idea is that such a salary is more than enough to attract skilled workers to taxpayer-funded firms. Advertisement At the University of Colorado, for instance, oilman-turned-president Bruce Benson recently floated the “not enough” rationale in defending a $49,000 raise given to an administrator already being paid $340,000 a year. “I’ve got to pay for good people,” he said, implying that such a huge salary boost, paid for by massive tuition increases, was barely enough to keep the university competitive. Similarly, USA Today recently reported that new college football coaches now make an average of $1.5 million a year—a 35 percent year-over-year increase from their immediate predecessors’ average of $1.1 million. Though Republicans regularly claim public employees such as teachers, police officers and firefighters are paid exorbitant salaries, the GOP almost never notes that coaches tend now to be, by far, states’ highest-paid public employees. Coaches retain that status in the face of budget pressures because school administrators constantly insist that they never have enough coaching-salary money to retain the best talent. In all of these conflagrations, the forbidden six-letter word—enough—is the omnipresent ghost raising necessary-but-uncomfortable queries such as: Is a million dollars enough before one faces slightly higher taxes? Is $199,000 a year enough for a government contractor? Is $350,000 a year enough to attract a “good” university administrator? Is $1.1 million a year enough for a college coach? It’s a shame such self-answering questions even need to be asked. But with Gallup’s latest poll showing most Americans believe a $150,000 annual salary makes one “rich,” it’s clear most of us would probably respond with an emphatic “yes” to all of them. That’s because most of us know what “enough” is. Now it’s just a matter of openly embracing it and finally replacing the era’s ethos of greed with a much-needed spirit of dayenu.
© 2012 Creators.com  Previous item: Judge Puts Heart Into Prop. 8 Ruling Next item: Romney’s Overriding Ambition New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy. |
How the IRS’ Nonprofit Division Got So Dysfunctional
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation | Google+
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
By oddsox, February 14, 2012 at 11:16 am Link to this comment
Ohiolibgal:
You may get your wishes, I fear, but they won’t work.
On taxes:
Remember that JFK’s and Reagan’s across the board income tax rate reductions generated INCREASED tax revenues. (Not so w/ GW Bush’s in 2001).
So raising rates now may not result in the increased revenues you seek.
Anyway, income taxes are plenty progressive as they are, I wouldn’t be so distraught over the rates as much as with the loopholes.
We need to abolish regressive payroll taxes (a tax upon labor) and fund FICA/Medicare under a consumption tax model.
—-
IMO, legalizing marijuana for recreational use will not result in the tax revenues you seek either, unless you outlaw home growing.
Do that and enforcement becomes impossible.
Many other unintended negative consequences, a step down a long, dark road.
As for Sirota, I wonder if he would embrace “dayenu” on our 15+Trillion Dollar (and growing) national debt.
Report thisBy ohiolibgal, February 13, 2012 at 9:17 pm Link to this comment
Under Eisenhower, a republican, the highest marginal tax rate was 91 or 92 % every year he was in. That may have been a bit much so under JFL, LBJ, Nixon and Ford it was in the 60-70% range.
Of course then the Death Valley Days B actor took office and slashed it…and the Lewis Powell strategy began to kick into high gear.
Now the R’s whine like crazy about the top rate maybe being moved up to 39%.
Put it to half of where Ike had it, legalize pot and tax it, invest heavily in green energy and infrastructure, and as in the beer ad, here we go.
It can all happen if the light bulb goes off in enough of the duped middle class millions who have been carrying water for billionaires for some time.
It’s time to wrestle this nation away from corporate rule and begin to unwind severe (real in this case Romney) economic inequality.
Report thisBy stand to reason, February 13, 2012 at 1:23 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Enough. The disease that will certainly decimate humanity or is
Report thisin the process of doing so. Just like a drunk, no matter how
currently drunk, will beg for more liquor. Only in this case the
fiat money involved won’t cure a damn thing, only exacerbate
the illness. Reminds me of how funny it would look for a bunch
of aliens landing here and finding so many relics of dead
humans all with large amounts of gold and gems in their
perpetually open mouths.
By BlueNeck, February 13, 2012 at 7:07 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Yes, I know that “basta!” means enough. I was talking about the feeling Father Roy Bourgeois says he has when he uses “basta.” He means that he’s had enough and whatever is enough must stop. So enough can evoke both positive and not so positive feelings. You can step away feeling satisfied and grateful, such as a delicious meal; or wanting to stop something, such as an injustice. Of course, these are only my feelings. Enough could inspire other feelings as well.
Report thisBy Dardón, February 12, 2012 at 5:02 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
RE emphatic “BAH-stuh!” (basta) for “halt!” —— ‘basta’ means ‘enough’ it doesn’t
Report thismean ‘halt’
By oddsox, February 11, 2012 at 6:30 pm Link to this comment
Marian Griffith, you ask:
“Why do you think it was the students that started revolting through the occupy movements?”
Same reason so many retired folk are active in the Tea Party.
They don’t have jobs so the have the time.
Report thisBy 70yoh, February 11, 2012 at 6:19 pm Link to this comment
is too much ever enough?
peas!
Report thisBy BlueNeck, February 11, 2012 at 12:17 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
“Enough” immediately conjures up two feelings. One feeling is satisfaction, followed by awe, gratitude, and rejoicing; the other is halt!, followed by indignation, organization, and action.
I think I will incorporate a hearty “di-YA-nu,” into my repertoire to express satisfaction. (I found that pronunciation for dayenu on the Google machine.) I already use Father Roy Bourgeois’s emphatic “BAH-stuh!” (basta) for “halt!”
This article inspired me to say basta! to the salaries given to presidents, CEOs, chair(wo)men, executive directors, etc., of some major non-profits. They too should be saying dayenu at $150K too. According to Wiki, Bill Donohue of the Catholic League makes just a little over $399K annually. Also, according to Charity Navigator, Cecile Richards of Planned Parenthood Federation makes $350.5K a year. Makes me wanna hurrrl.
Certainly there must be thousands of capable, imaginative, and thrifty candidates willing to replace overpaid executives in the non-profit sector. I, for one, feel that these inflated salaries indicate a lack of awareness for the average American who seeks to financially support the missions of non-profits with scarce, disposible dollars. Perhaps they receive more money from foundations whose executives also make over-the-top salaries, so what the rest of think doesn’t really matter.
Report thisYes, it’s all relative; but I still say, “enough.”
By Anarcissie, February 11, 2012 at 10:00 am Link to this comment
Scarcity is the lifeblood of capitalism; therefore, as long as Capital rules, there can never be enough. Should sufficiency appear, it must be destroyed.
Report thisBy Marian Griffith, February 11, 2012 at 3:20 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
@do over
—-The insanity of modern life is spinning ever more out of control.—-
The good news is that it is a terminal state. Any system that is out of control either crashes to the ground or spins out into space.
The bad news is the damage this crash is going to do to those unfortunate enough to be unable to escape it.
@Oddsox
—-Who is going to decide what is enough?—-
This is exactly the question that prevented sanity from being restored to a system that a steadily increasing majority of the population feels need adjustment. And the argument that is used by those who take home an order of magnitude more than most people feel is reasonable to prevent any discussion about how reasonable it is that a manager takes home 200 to 500 times as much as his least paid employee in the USA (and tens of thousands times as much if he can manage to offshore his factory as well as his profit).
I have another observation for you, though. Western society and culture only began to develop at a greater pace than the rest of the world -after- it shed the system where 99 pct of the population supported the remaining 1 pct (*) in a state of near enslavement (they could not be bought or sold but were otherwise the wholly owned property of the land owners).
Report thisAlready we are seeing signs that what tradionally identifies the American culture is stagnating as more and more poor are dropping, effectively, out of the economy.
A feudal system, which is where we are currently heading, is inevitably stagnant and at odds with an educated (and thus competitive) population. You can not, at the same time, have a population that is satisfied with living at subsistence level ruled by the whims of their (heriditary) lords and masters, while at the same time highly educated to develop and construct new technologies. Why do you think it was the students that started revolting through the occupy movements? They could see for themselves a future of indentured servitude where they were virtually enslaved to the banks through their student loans and they had the education to try to do something about it.
And don’t forget that the ‘the law only protects the rich and noble’ reality that played a large role in the American revolution and shaped much of the country’s constitution.
By do over, February 10, 2012 at 11:27 pm Link to this comment
The insanity of modern life is spinning ever more out of control. Crazy is the new normal. It’s as if our minds polarity is inverted. Logic and rationality are gone, imbalance and irrationality are ever present. Existing coping mechanisms are failing The evidence of minds breaking down are everywhere. Creative thinking and coping are lost on all but the few who have embraced alternative independent thinking. A confrontation with reality awaits us in the near future and people are overwhelmed to the point of denial. In this world enough is unrecognizable. Wealth is a weak buffer against a tide of our past actions coming full circle. The bitter harvest is upon us and hope is a four letter word. The times of weeping and gnashing are here. It is in these times that the price is paid.
Report thisBy agelbert, February 10, 2012 at 8:33 pm Link to this comment
Greedy people have no empathy. People without empathy will cherry pick any set of ideas, economic system or even a religion to emphasis their predatory paradise free from empathy as the natural course of evolution or human behavior.
It’s a massive perversion of reality and the truth, of course; but as Noam Chomsky said, the reason the rich adopted the term “survival of the fittest” with their own predatory concept of what that means from Darwin while totally ignoring or suppressing Darwin’s other research and that of his contemporary, Herbert Spencer, (the creator of the term “survival of the fittest”!) that argued just as favorably that cooperation is intrinsic and required for species survival, is that the rich twist the data to suit their mindset and then sell it to us as “scientific truth”. Survival of the fittest, when it excludes cooperation and altruism from predation is convenient to the “never enough” greedsters that own the media nad Wall Street, but is still a bankrupt, unscientific piece of fiction.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjermDZ1qfI
Report thisBy oddsox, February 10, 2012 at 6:17 pm Link to this comment
so, David, the question becomes:
Who determines what’s enough?
Some Gallup poll?
Pundits like yourself?
Our elected representatives?
Supply & demand in a free marketplace?
You see, I would choose the latter.
Report thisIt’s sad that we’d probably disagree.
By Angel Gabriel, February 10, 2012 at 5:49 pm Link to this comment
How can anyone be fairly compensated by ANY company? If we humans only live
Report thisfor - say, 80 years and spend their entire 45(?) years more or less, working life, in
servitude to someone else what’s REALLY enough? I suppose we need to leave that
question up to Zionism to answer for us do we?
By nikto, February 10, 2012 at 4:36 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
God will say,“enough!”
And the Human Race will vanish.
Report thisBy felicity, February 10, 2012 at 12:17 pm Link to this comment
So long as the-market-will-bear-it, ‘it’ will
continue to increase (geometrically?) - there’s no
such thing as ‘enough’ in a capitalist economic
system.
Wonder why college tuition has gone through the roof?
Report thisAs soon as student loans became available, the
‘college’ market reacted accordingly, that is, the
market could then ‘bear’ the astronomical rise in
tuition. (Student loan debt now exceeds the total
credit-card debt.)
By Brad, February 10, 2012 at 10:42 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
“Enough” is an important word for the future of the human species, in general. Hopefully, the generation of tomorrow will look on extreme wealth in the same way we judge the idea of kings and princes.
Report thisBy Fibonacci65, February 10, 2012 at 8:51 am Link to this comment
The Buddhists believe that “less is more,” and Thoreau believed all should “simplify, simplify, simplify.” As an aging hippie, I still live this way and find myself disgusted with the obscene wealth people love. And I have met the one per centers—they are so often shallow, unintelligent and boring. Until money can buy brains and a personality, I’ll stick with the Buddhists and Thoreau.
Report thisBy balkas, February 10, 2012 at 8:00 am Link to this comment
sirota also never misses an opportunity not to postulate or posit a cause for “not
Report thisenough”, or “worship of billionaires’ syndromes.
he merely enumerates or describes events; which, by the way, are well known among
us who want less of everything—from making ever ‘better’ weapons, lies to making
ever better lipstick, toothbrush, santa claus, store, etc.
the cause for the above quoted behaviors is inculcated shame of appearing poor [and
thus uneducated, less knowledgable, peasantlike etc.] to rich or very rich people.
the teachers [imbuers of shame] are the ONEPERCENT and their high paid servant
class.that includes every MSM columnist i know of!
btw, would schooling be mandatory if it wouldn’t be such a great tool in enserfing,
miseducating, or pavlovizing kids? thanks
By Dr Bones, February 10, 2012 at 6:14 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Land of the $$$$$$$$$$$$$
Report thisBy ardee, February 10, 2012 at 5:49 am Link to this comment
A sick culture valuing individual wealth over the needs of the community.
Report thisBy kerryrose, February 10, 2012 at 2:28 am Link to this comment
My son loves ‘Family Guy.’ Yesterday while he was watching I saw the characters hock Wheat Thins crackers.
I wonder: Isn’t Seth MacFarlane rich enough yet that he does not have to prostitute his characters who are supposed to ironically represent such distasteful acts of greed and consumerism?
Report this