Melvin B. Miller
Editor & Publisher

Goals for a maturing America

American settlers must have been greatly inspired by the celebration of the Fourth of July 200 years ago. The independence of the United States was 30 years old and opportunities for whites seemed unlimited.

The total population of the country, excluding Native Americans, was only 5.3 million in 1800. To put this in perspective, that is only 65 percent of the present population of New York City. The vast American West beckoned daring settlers to establish substantial farms. Others could head toward more populous areas to take advantage of opportunities presented by the Industrial Revolution.

With the exception of abolitionists and their sympathizers, most Americans were unconcerned with the plight of blacks. At that time, 20 percent of the population was black and most were slaves. Those celebrating their freedom from foreign oppression in 1806 apparently did not find it anomalous to oppress others. However, with the passage of the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1865, Americans decreed that slavery would no longer be tolerated.

The “American Dream” is a concept that is constantly maturing and developing. Change is necessary to adjust to different circumstances and keep the nation vibrant. In the mid-19th century the great West was open prairie. The Homestead Act of 1862 offered 160-acre plots to those willing to settle there and farm the land. In 2006, the U.S. population approaches 300 million, and conservation of the environment has become a far greater concern.

The concept of “rugged individualism” is one of the enduring legacies of the frontier spirit which characterized our nation 200 years ago. It took guts to pack up your family and head west. There were no support systems to help in the event of a misadventure. Every individual had to rely on his own stamina and resources.

America is not that kind of place today. With people so close to one another, a certain level of interdependence is essential. Although the idea of “rugged individualism” lives on, support systems financed by the government are far more essential for the smooth operation of the country.

Congress recognized this fact in 1913, amending the U.S. Constitution to allow the federal government to assess and collect income taxes. Ever since, there has been a constant debate as to how the tax system should be structured. Should the rich pay a higher percentage of their income than those with less?

In 1806, many Americans were mindless of the inequality inflicted upon blacks by the institution of slavery. Two hundred years later, most Americans are unaware of the dangers of the present income inequality. The top 10 percent of earners now receive 42.9 percent of all income. That is the greatest disparity in 65 years. And the top one percent earns 16.2 percent of all income.

Progressive taxation is one way to reduce the gap. It makes no economic sense for the government to run substantial deficits simply to provide tax cuts to the wealthy. Greed has now so run amok in America that people seem to be unaware that the “rugged individualism” so necessary 200 years ago must now, in a more populous society, be ameliorated by concessions to the general good.

One hundred years from now, people will reflect on how Americans resolved the problems of today. Will they find that greed trumped the nation’s commitment to equality? Or will they find that American ingenuity found a way to reconcile economic fairness and equality of opportunity?