The Wealth Factor

by Ruth A. Sheets

The “New York Times” columnist David Brooks’ piece published on January 20, 2012 is entitled “Wealth Issue.”  In it he contends that “money didn’t make Mitt Romney.”  He asks if Romney’s character was formed by his wealth.  He answers the question with a no and says that thinking money has spoiled or in any way corrupted him is “preposterous.”

Mr. Brooks then proceeds to say that Mitt Romney has been an exceedingly hard worker “all his life.”  He earned two degrees at Harvard and built a business.  The implication is that if a wealthy person works hard and earns degrees at a prestigious university that his wealth didn’t shape his character in any meaningful way.

Readers are informed that families have a story and that one’s character is actually shaped by the family’s story.  Romney’s story is a series of advancements and setbacks over time by his grandfather and great grandfather, often dramatic changes of fortune, but always with the good fortune winning out.

I find Romney’s story fascinating and I suspect that one can’t help but be influenced by losing everything, then getting it all back again several times as Mr. Romney’s forebearers did, .  However, I suspect that the “money” factor is at least as important in Mitt Romney’s life.  Even Romney’s great grandfather came from money.

I work in one of the poorest communities in Pennsylvania.   I teach “Mentally Gifted” students.  I know that I have students at least as bright as Mr. Romney with as much potential as he had, but my students will not be earning any degrees at Harvard.  The chance that they will get the opportunity to build a business is quite small.  My terrific students didn’t go to the prominent school that leads directly to Harvard because they would never be able to afford either institution.  Their families will not have the funds to help them get set up in business and to help cover their expenses while the going is a bit rough.

My students will have to be concerned about being hired and fired and as most of them are African-American or Hispanic, or a combination of the two, they will not be judged by the content of their character but by the preconceptions of those who might hire them or back their enterprises.

Their family stories are as intriguing and inspiring as Mr. Romney’s yet theirs will not even be recognized because wealth and its acquisition are not part of any of them, and in our society, wealth is what counts.  Wealth determines who is worthy of our homage.  It leads to power and more wealth. 

To be poor means that you have not worked hard enough or taken advantage of the crumbs that have slipped from the table of the wealthy.  Poverty is your fault and if you weren’t so lazy, you’d be rich too.  Anyone who is not a “have” is a “soon to have” if they have the right stuff. ”

Does wealth automatically corrupt those who have it?  Possibly not, but it does mean that the wealthy have the cards stacked in the favor.  They receive its advantages from birth, probably even before birth. 

I can’t help but wonder if Mitt Romney’s arrogance, disconnectedness, expedience would have served him as well had his family been poor or even, middle class. 

Everyone who has succeeded likes to think they did it all by themselves, but that’s not how it works.  Wealth allows its beneficiaries  to start off near the top of the heap, and unless they are really foolish or have other problems, they will not sink below that point. 

The wealthy have every incentive to work hard and strive because they know that even the smallest effort will provide security and yield a level of power that most people, no matter how motivated, will never attain.  Those who are in poverty can only hope that their family story will inspire succeeding generations who, with a lot of luck and support, may be able to rise.