iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Law Professor's Blog Post Sparks Controversy Over Why The Rich Don't Feel 'Rich'

Cash

Huffington Post   First Posted: 09/21/10 10:14 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 06:45 PM ET

UPDATE: Citing a "firestorm" of "lies and misinformation," Henderson vowed on his blog this morning to quit blogging. "I misunderstood the technology, and the consequences are devastating for me personally," he writes. "I am sad to leave, but my family has to come first, and my blogging has caused them incalculable damage." Henderson told Business Insider that his family is "on the verge of disintegrating."

Law professor Todd Henderson's now-infamous blog entry about the mindset of the rich has incited such an uproar that he felt he needed to delete it.

An "electronic lynch mob," he wrote yesterday, "caused untold damage to me personally." But despite the apparent hate-mail, the original post, which University of California, Berkeley, economics professor Bradford DeLong re-posted for the sake of the "conversation," has also inspired a legitimate debate about an idea that typically makes people either furious or embarrassed. In short, the rich don't feel "rich."

In response to Obama's proposed tax hike for people making more than $250,000 a year, Henderson writes, ironically, "that makes me super rich." He goes on, for nine paragraphs, to explain why he actually isn't rich, finally extending an invitation to Obama to "judge for himself whether the Hendersons are as rich as he thinks."

The responses, some of which DeLong has posted on his blog, are largely aggressive. Law professor Michael O'Hare mockingly compares Henderson to someone in "scuffed Gucci loafers and tattered Armani," living in a "million-dollar hovel." But others are more thoughtful.

After first refraining from comment, DeLong made the point that those who are indeed rich don't feel that way. Here's Delong

Instead, Mr. Xxxx Xxxxxxxxx looks up. Of the 100 people richer than he is, fully ten have more than four times his income. And he knows of one person with 20 times his income. He knows who the really rich are, and they have ten times his income: They have not $450,000 a year. They have $4.5 million a year. And, to him, they are in a different world.


And so he is sad. He and his wife deserve to be successful. And he knows people who are successful. But he is not one of them--widening income inequality over the past generation has excluded him from the rich who truly have money.

And this makes him sad. And angry. But, curiously enough, not angry at the senior law firm partners who extract surplus value from their associates and their clients, or angry at the financiers, but angry at... Barack Obama, who dares to suggest that the U.S. government's funding gap should be closed partly by taxing him, and angry at the great hordes of the unwashed who will receive the Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security payments that the government will make over the next several generations.

Felix Salmon concurs, adding some gentlemanly defense of Henderson:

There's no doubt that people earning $250,000 or more are rich. The simple ability to dismiss a whole class of expenses as "only a few hundred dollars per month in total" makes you rich.


But by the same token, many rich people don't feel rich, and so describing them that way gets their backs up. And in fact it's good that the rich don't feel rich: it means they have more incentive to keep on earning and producing and adding value.


So maybe we shouldn't be so rude about the likes of Todd Henderson: without rich people constantly striving for extra dollars, America would be in an even worse position than it is. But equally, we shouldn't take their pleas seriously.

And Paul Krugman points to the culture that has produced Henderson's attitude, which seems to be largely shared by Ben Stein:

But 30 years ago people with high but not super-high incomes generally felt ashamed of themselves for griping -- or at least, felt that they would be ridiculed if they gave voice to their gripes. Today, all restraints are off. The fuss over Messrs. Henderson and Stein is the exception that proves the rule: they wouldn't be providing this spectacle if they didn't normally swim in social circles where complaining that you only have 9 or 10 times median family income is considered totally acceptable.


Pretty soon, we'll be having serious, completely un-self-conscious discussions in major magazines about the servant problem.



FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
UPDATE: Citing a "firestorm" of "lies and misinformation," Henderson vowed on his blog this morning to quit blogging. "I misunderstood the technology, and the consequences are devastating for me perso...
UPDATE: Citing a "firestorm" of "lies and misinformation," Henderson vowed on his blog this morning to quit blogging. "I misunderstood the technology, and the consequences are devastating for me perso...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,470
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (52 total)
06:56 PM on 11/04/2010
Look-he worked hard for his money, yes.
So do I.
A few years ago I dragged my uninsured butt to work with bronchitis for a couple of months once. I could barely walk. I did this so that I could afford to buy the medicines to get over said bronchitis.
I work hard, too, full time-overtime lately... and after I get needed sinus surgery from the county after wrestling with their hospital system for over a year, right around Christmas, I'm going to start looking for that second job. Right now I'll just get sicker if I try.
I barely can cover my expenses, can't save any money, am in debt to my mother, live in her old house(she bought a new one), haven't had my teeth cleaned since '99, am trying to learn to grow some of my own food, fix my own car, and I dumpster-dive to see what useful items I can avoid actually buying.
This guy has NO IDEA how hard the rest of us have it-but I guess the one thing he can't afford on his budget is a clue.
08:42 AM on 10/02/2010
Continued..... However if he wants to make his objections public, then he best be prepared to deal with it. There are multitudes of people out there who are less fortunate than Mr. Henderson, myself included and believe me I come in contact on a daily basis with people who cant keep a roof over there head, let alone a roof with a $500,000 price tag that by the way was mortgaged to the roof and later supported by my tax dollars. So in the end don't expect a warm response, expect the type of response you'd get in the real world. This numbnut is so out of touch that it is sad and at the same time it is was revolutions are based on.
08:22 AM on 10/02/2010
mkl67, while Mr.Henderson made no overt actions claiming want of pity, the fact of the matter is that he did. I have no doubt that the subject matter of his article was how it was going to affect "HIM", I seriously doubt he gave much thought to how it might affect his landscaper, or Polish maid , etc. in fact he goes to great pains to express that his hired help is "LEGAL", which only leaves me walking away with the feeling that he is covering his own "A**". Not only that but if you look at Mr.Henderson's figures concerning how he would be affected, he's completely off the mark. This man is complaining about how he will have to let go of his landscaper then his nanny and finally his "HOUSE", believe me there are much nicer houses away from Hyde Park, Chicago, and I'm sure his $500,000 fixer upper money, could have been better spent in a Chicago suburb. Plain and simple, he bought that house along with it's location for "STATUS", nothing more, nothing less. And finally in closing I'm going to state that I'm well aware that most people reading this post make far more than I do. My main objection to Henderson's post is that it was the wrong content at the wrong time. If he wants to complain about the potential tax increases, privately with his peers, cool, more power to him.
12:04 AM on 09/30/2010
Nowhere does Henderson ask you to feel pity for him for having to give up his nanny or gardener...he's simply pointing out that when he can no longer afford to pay them because money is being sent to the federal government, they will lose income...will taxing him and putting them out of work help anything? He is not asking you to feel sorry for the fact that he owes hundreds of thousands in student loans, only pointing out that he invested heavily in time and dollars in order to earn the income he and his wife earn. Why shouldn't he expect a good return on his investment? Haven't they earned a nice home, retirement savings, a decent education for their children? Why would anyone work so hard or invest so much if that wasn't the goal?

I don't see a pity party here...I see a sincere objection to the idea that he and his wife don't deserve the comfortable, if not lavish lifestyle that they've worked so hard to earn, and that because they don't deserve it, the government has the right to take it. We should all, rich, poor or in-between, be just as up in arms about this idea.
07:49 PM on 09/30/2010
Do people who, rather than going to college or grad school, worked a 9 to 5 job every day in order to rent an apartment and buy groceries, not deserve a nice home, retirement education, a decent education for their children?

People act as if those who missed out on college and grad school were at home toking up or partying all day and night. Trust me, as a college grad from a major university, I know there is a LOT more partying at college. It's a lot easier taking interesting classes than bussing tables or hauling garbage.

People like Henderson should be rewarding for working hard, both in school and now, and for his skills, which are needed for a well-functioning society. But to say that he deserves SO MUCH more than another person who has worked a job, without fail (and often under harsher conditions with less job satisfaction) is really to misunderstand equality. It is to think that Henderson is someone better than other people, that he's like some sort of royalty.
09:26 PM on 09/30/2010
Yes, they deserve a nice life too...The point is you can't give them that by taking money away from Mr. Henderson. $2500 from Mr. Henderson isn't going to reduce the deficit...does anyone really believe Washington will not spend every penny it takes and then some? It's not going to lift anyone out of poverty...instead it will slow economic growth, kill jobs and push more people into poverty. The money that Mr. Henderson earned won't be spent helping the struggling working class, it will be spent helping to get a multimillionaire Senator re-elected, or to create a cushy job for another Washington bureaucrat. It quite possibly send Mr. Henderson's DC counterpart's kids to private school instead of his.

Meanwhile there is less money for Mr. Henderson to spend in his local neighborhood, actually contributing to some real, working class people's livelihoods. It's too bad in their rush to condemn Mr. Henderson as a "whiner", people have missed the whole point of his post. What makes people think that the federal government can use Mr. Henderson's money more effectively and efficiently than he can? What possible evidence points to this conclusion?

Some are filled with glee at the thought of Washington taking money away from people like Mr. Henderson, even if it helps no one, because they just like the feeling of taking someone so successful down a peg. If we can't lift the poor, we might as well sink the rich. Class envy at its finest...
06:31 PM on 09/27/2010
Right now I live on a diet of ground turkey, ramen noodles and canned vegetables. When I can actually make it out to do grocery shopping it always occurs to me that myself, Professor Henderson and Bill Gates are paying the same amount for a loaf of bread, a bar of soap and on and on and on. And it strikes me at the amount of disconnect that certain people have when it comes to distinguishing between minor inconveniences and surviving on a day to day basis. I think tomorrow I'm going to splurge and go out and get some bagels, ketchup, hotdogs and some swiss cheese and make myself a new sandwich I'm going to name a "Todd Henderson". While I'm eating it I'm going to think about Professor Henderson and his current dilemma and hope and pray that things get better for all of us and not a day too soon.
06:18 PM on 09/27/2010
After following this story for the latter part of my afternoon, in between looking for jobs that just don't exist right now and pondering if I will become homeless by this December, I decided to take time out of my busy day and extend my personal sympathies to Professor Henderson and his family. I'm sure from his perspective it must be very tough right now, difficult decisions abound such as letting his Nanny go or discontinuing his lawn service but if I could just take a moment to describe the type of decisions I face and many, many other people do. By the way my heart truly goes out to those that are less fortunate than me and I'm sure there are many. After a suicide attempt last year and then being diagnosed with clinical depression it became harder and harder for me to hold down even an entry level job which I lost this past April, thank goodness I qualified for unemployment insurance because without it I'd be homeless by now, but that will be running out in a few weeks so who knows and it appears that I'm too healthy to qualify for disability so here I sit applying for jobs that I'm not sure I'd be able to hang onto anyways. I water down my shampoo to make it go further, take old pieces of soap and mold them together and I'm having a very hard time relating to Professor Henderson's position. To Be Continued...
02:40 PM on 09/25/2010
I think something that should be said in the debate over the effect of the tax provisions, but hasn't been, is this, "small businesses" would bear the brunt because of their already favorable tax status. This effects "small business because they don't want to incorporate. If they incorporated then they would be taxed on the corporate profits and then taxed on the income they draw from the company. So say you have a small business making $1,000,000 in profits. The taxes on that would be $324,317.50, assuming one owner, and he would keep $675,682.50. Same situation but he has incorporated rather than being an S-corp. Same $1,000,000 profit, but then the corporate tax of $340,006, and then if he pays himself the remaining $659,994 as salary, he is again taxed as personal income another $142,047.25, so his total take is reduced to $517,946.75...basically, I guess my point is that by filing as an S-Corp and having the corporate profits treated like their individual income, rather than getting taxed both as corporate profits and individual income like a C-Corp, the "small business owner" is getting an advantageous tax position and hence I don't feel bad for them at all if they have to pay the additional 3% over $200,000
01:53 AM on 09/25/2010
The issue for the Hendersons is that they are income rich but asset poor. Due to their long education, they have late careers. Now in their late 30s they still have huge student loans to pay off. Plus, they made expensive life choices. Their children are going to private school. In 2005, they purchased a 100+ year old fixer-upper with 4,700 sqft living space. They will have lost equity in it. Hence, focusing on their asset position, they may feel poor, in fact they may have negative wealth. Many readers, in contrast, will compare the Henderson's lifestyle to their own and will (not surprisingly) disconnect.

It did not help that Prof. Henderson was a bit spotty on the exact details of his situation. While he described his income as 250k+, readers quickly analyzed that his situation was likely one of 400k combined income. He also did not reveal that his house was 4,700 sqft and twice the average price for the area. Seemingly, he omitted facts that made his situation less "sympathetic". Finally, he also argued that he could not afford an accountant and thus not take advantage of tax saving opportunities. This sounded financially unbelievable, and logically unsound

Sadly, Prof. Henderson's biggest "mistake" was to blog about his own situation. He made it personal, and thus took on the personal wrath of so many others. ... High IQ, low EQ. A costly mistake for him. Personal attacks are unwarranted.
12:40 AM on 09/25/2010
Poor guy. I am sure he and his family must truely be suffering right now. I understand that life is difficult, in fact my husband and I have both lost are jobs only 6 months after we had our 2nd child. We are now losing our home and can not even find minimum wage jobs; so I can really symapthize with a man who ONLY has a 'few hundred dollars" to spend at the end of the month on extras. I'll be praying really hard for him and his family at dinner tonite while I feed my family ramon noodles for the 5th night in a row!
06:28 PM on 09/24/2010
One reason the 'tax cuts' are so popular is the way they are 'framed'.

To hear the rich tell it, the money is coming out of their pockets as taxes and given to someone who doesn't want to work. This should be proven wrong over and over again.

If you take Social Security out of the picture, because we prepaid a lot of that, and if you take away the too high charges to Medicare it starts to look much better. Both programs are paid for by the workers for the workers. Even Medicare should not be rolled in with Social Security because SS is a trust and Medicare money is used immediately and is at the mercy of the medical field.

What I see is promises to other pensions not being honored. Did they never plan on honoring them?

Medicaid, then it is not that big of an amount spent to help others. If you don't count the corporate welfare.
06:15 PM on 09/24/2010
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:kpzaEp0IVw4J:truthonthemarket.com/2010/09/15/we-are-the-super-rich/ site:truthonthemarket.com/ Xxxx Xxxxxxxxx&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=safari should take you to the Henderson story.
01:31 PM on 09/23/2010
I read the original post... this guy moaned and groaned about how at the end of the month, he only had a "few hundred dollars" of discretionary money left to spend.

My husband makes a good living and I'm lucky enough to be able to stay at home with our daughter and we have another child on the way. We put a budget together every month and we're lucky if we have any discretionary money left. We're doing better than almost everyone we know because we paid off of all of our credit cards and only have a mortgage and a car payment.

So I don't want to hear your whining about how little discretionary money you have. Suck it up like the rest of us. Want a date night? Put the kids to bed, pop your own popcorn, rent a movie, or better yet watch a movie you already own and have a date night at home.

And quit your bitching. No one wants to hear it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CraigVale
01:25 PM on 09/23/2010
Disgusting that folks who never had to decide whether to pay an electric bill this week as opposed to next week feel so poor. Million dollar homes, cars worth as much as my home. What really pisses me off is that they REALLY DO feel like they are being left behind. 2% of the super rich owning 94% of the nations wealth and still not satisfied til they have it all. When that happens so will the demise of our nation occur. They could care less as they'll take their wealth offshore if it's not already there. Such a pity....
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
zelduh
Democrats: the REAL American patriots.
03:57 AM on 09/23/2010
THOUGHTS:
------------------
Why do we tax LABOR more than simple "capital gains?" People's work is undervalued and overtaxed. Making money by simply buying stock is taxed at a lower rate. People who earn 250K pay the same FICA and Medicare as someone earning 90K. HOWEVER, if they earn that 250K through investments, while sitting by their pools, watching Fox News, or reading the paper; they don't pay any FICA/Medicare.

The Historical TOP Tax Rate from 1913 to 2010 (http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=213) shows that
Congress lowered the tax rate from 92% in 1953, to 35% in 2010 - BEFORE TAX DEDUCTIONS (that only they enjoy) that lets them pay far less than their actual tax bracket.

If tax cuts for the top 2% are eliminated, they will reinvest in property, plant and equipment (PPE) - and they might hire people - because these expenses are deductible. Payroll is 100% tax deductible, dollar-for-dollar; and the depreciation on PPE is deductible.

The SBA (http://www.sba.gov/advo/research/) defines "small business" & collects data, including tax returns: see table 1.4 on p. 15 of the most recent Small Business Economy report, released Dec 2007. Out of a total 26.4 million small business tax returns, over 20.5 million fall in the LESS THAN$100,000 category. http://www.sba.gov/advo/research/sb_econ2007.pdf

Also, read this:
http://ask.metafilter.com/104398/Obamas-Small-Business-Tax-Revenue-or-Profit

Facts are such a bummer.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
zelduh
Democrats: the REAL American patriots.
04:04 AM on 09/23/2010
I really believe that Capital gains should be taxed AT LEAST as much as labor (if not more.)

Maybe I am simply being selfish (to be honest, I lost lots in the market crashes and my 401(k) was also decimated.)
03:10 AM on 09/23/2010
Don't know many old money; however, the rich I know don't mind working in a garage and eating ramen, inventing stuff and charging as much as people are willing to pay for their inventions. Some care about the material things but they mostly enjoy the chase. By instinct, they don't like it when Robin Hood is that the door.