Why are liberals less productive in transforming their income into wealth than conservatives? For many high income producing liberals their capital is their high intellect. Or as one liberal respondent, a high income producing physician, said: “[money] income is the most easily renewable resource.” This liberal Phi Beta Kappa, Regent’s Scholar, cum laude graduate never had trouble perpetually generating a high income.
But “if you’re not intellectually gifted or your academic record is mediocre, you can survive in a competitive world by working very hard for yourself and building wealth. Wealth can offset . . . so-called inferior intellect and provide protection from a hostile environment.” [The Millionaire Mind, p. 107] Correspondingly, conservatives who achieve millionaire status are much more likely than liberals to indicate that they have a uncontrollable need to succeed [financially].
People such as the millionaire next door types who have a high propensity to accumulate wealth typically donate a larger percentage of their income than others in the same age and income cohort who accumulate less. Within the high income population wealth is a better predictor of giving to noble causes than is realized income. But there are exceptions, as in the case of Vivian highlighted in the previous blog.
Some may argue that liberals are selfish since overall they do spend more money on themselves and less on others. Part of that is a function of where they live. High income liberals are highly concentrated in the Northeast where the cost of living is significantly higher than in the South or Midwest. High income producing conservatives in contrast are most highly concentrated in the South and the Midwest.
What about differences in happiness, that is, satisfaction with life? Overall, high income conservatives are significantly happier than high income liberals. In harmony with this finding, those who give more are happier than those who give less. Also, liberals are not content with the way things are. In part this could be expected given the fact that they tend to live above their means and to surround themselves with people who have significantly more wealth than they do.
Perhaps it is envy that underlies the need of these people to promote the so-called redistribution of wealth by having those who are more productive in transforming income into wealth allocate a greater proportion of their considerable wealth to the federal coffers. I guess the term ironic applies here. Those who are among the least productive in accumulating wealth in spite of their high incomes advocate that the wealthy “donate” more.
Often highly compensated liberals think of themselves as leaders of provocative thoughts. Their ideas are often more academic than practical. They have an unrealistic view of the importance of their theories and the validity of their ideas. In many ways they do not accurately comprehend what it means to be wealthy or why people strive to become financially independent.