Full Black (25 page)

Julia looked at him. “You’re saying the family who has worked hard, paid off their mortgage, and has saved their money should bail out the family who can’t afford their house, much less groceries?”

“It’s not that simple,” cautioned Standing. “What happens if the poor family defaults on their mortgage?”

“Why don’t we examine why they can’t afford their house and groceries? Did they bite off more than they could chew?”

“Who knows? Maybe Mom and Dad just had a run of bad luck. Maybe they both got laid off. That these people have financial problems doesn’t mean they deserve them.”

“I’m not saying they do, but—”

“Answer my question,” said Standing. “What happens if this family goes under and defaults on their mortgage?”

“I assume they’ll be foreclosed on and eventually evicted.”

“Correct,” replied Standing. “And what happens to the house, then?”

“It goes on the market.”

“At what price?”

“At whatever the market will bear,” said Julia. “That’s the way markets work.”

“Not in this case. You see, the bank doesn’t just have one house, it has thousands; hundreds of thousands. It doesn’t want to be in the home ownership business, it wants to be in the money-lending business. Its motivation is not to hang around and wait for the free market system to work. It wants to dump that house as quickly as possible, and to do that, it’s going to dramatically mark down the price. What would that do to the values of the other properties in the homeowners’ association?”

“It would effectively lower them.”

“Which means, through no fault of your own, the equity in your home has been diminished. So, what would make more sense? Losing your equity? Or everyone chipping in together to make sure everyone succeeds?”

The woman looked at him. “You’re offering a false choice.”

“No, I’m not.”

“Of course you are, Mr. Standing. If I have worked hard, saved my money, and paid off my mortgage, I shouldn’t have to bail out another homeowner.”

“Not even if they have fallen on hard times?” he asked. “Imagine if you were in their shoes.”

“I have no doubt that it would be terrible, but it isn’t the government’s job to take money from one group and give it to another.”

Standing smiled again. “Really? What do you call taxes, then?”

“I disagree with a lot of how the U.S. government spends my money, but we’re not talking about taxes.”

“In a way, we are. What happens when the family in our scenario doesn’t pay their share of the fees and assessments of the homeowners’ association?”

“I would imagine that their property would end up getting a lien placed on it,” she replied.

“But in the meantime, the association’s expenses still need to be paid for, and that burden falls more heavily on the other owners. They have to dip into their reserves, or if the reserves are too thin, they have to pay more in order to cover those who can’t. We can push those who have the most to give more, but as increasing numbers of homeowners go under, sooner or later the burden to make up what they cannot contribute will be overwhelming. We won’t be able to collect enough from the wealthiest homeowners to make up for it.

“Wouldn’t it be better, not to mention easier, to simply rebalance the scales? The sooner you can get that family who is in default back into a job and working, the better it is for everyone. The prosperity effect, as I like to call it, inures to everyone’s benefit. This is about recognizing people’s dignity.”

“And in no place on earth,” she said, “have the freedom and dignity of the individual been more available and assured than in America.”

“Human dignity is a global concern,” replied Standing. “There can’t be social cohesion as long as there is such a vast chasm between rich and poor in the world.”

“And you see dismantling capitalism as the answer?” she asked.

“I see unfettered capitalism as the reason the chasm exists. Human dignity cannot be realized without equitable income distribution. Because human dignity and social cohesion matter to all of us, this is an issue that transcends national sovereignty.”

“Therefore it should be dealt with by international law and international governing bodies,” she replied, repeating his earlier statement.

“Exactly,” said Standing. “This is why a global reset would be so good for so many nations, including the United States. As with the homeowners’ association, everyone would benefit. It would give every nation the chance to be rid of its debts and to start fresh.”

“But what you fail to realize is that one person’s debt is another person’s asset. I look at my mortgage much differently than my bank does. To me it’s a debt, one that I took on willingly, by the way, and one that I’m morally obligated to pay back. To the bank it’s a business transaction, which it took on willingly, and from which it rightly expects to profit, thereby serving the interests of its shareholders. No one put a gun to either of our heads.”

“So the housing bubble all happened by accident?” asked Standing.

“No,” Julia replied. “The housing bubble happened for a multitude of reasons. One of the biggest was the government strong-arming banks into providing mortgages to people who didn’t qualify.”

“People have a right to a place to live.”

“You’ll forgive me, Mr. Standing, but I think you and I have a very different view of what rights are.”

“Rights should be what an enlightened government decides is best for everyone.”

The reporter shook her head. “As Americans, we hold that we have been endowed by our creator with our rights. These rights cannot be taken away or limited by any government. We have the right to—”

“Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” Standing said with a wave of his hand. “I know, but tell me how anyone can be happy without a place to live?”

“There’s nothing in the founding documents that says the government owes you a house. There’s also nothing in there that says the government owes you a job, an education, or medical care.”

“Those documents you love so much were written over two hundred years ago,” he replied. “There is no possible way America’s founding fathers could have seen how complex society would become.”

“And if they had been able to see into the future, you think they would have felt it best for people to be ruled over by an elite group?”

“Government should provide opportunity.”

“I agree, but government isn’t the solution to our problems,” Julia stated. “Government is the problem.”

“I wouldn’t have figured you for a radical, Ms. Winston.”

“I’m not.”

“Really? It sounds to me as if you’d like to do away with government.”

“I don’t want to do away with government,” she replied. “I want to make it work.”

“So do I,” said Standing. “And if we all started over together, the global economy would instantly rebound.”

“But once we start over, how would you prevent disparities from growing again? It’s a fact of life that some people will work harder than others. Some people even will choose not to work.”

“We’d need a universal set of rules applied to everyone equally.”

“These rules would also govern capitalism?”

“Absolutely,” he replied. “Capitalism is the source of all that’s wrong in the world. It has become too big for any one nation to regulate. People are hurting and it is within our power to stop that hurt. We are a noble species. It is our duty to lift people out of despair. The only way to do that, though, is to challenge global capitalism head-on, with redesigned international institutions and far more encompassing international laws.”

“All overseen by a global governing body,” she said.

“For collective issues like human dignity and things that affect it? Of course. Individual rights have to take a backseat for the good of everyone’s collective rights.”

“Is there anything this global governing body wouldn’t have control over? It seems that almost anything could be placed beneath the umbrella of human dignity and collective rights.”

“I see what you’re doing,” replied Standing with a wry grin. “You’re trying to box me in.”

The journalist shook her head. “I just find it interesting that a billionaire, someone who has so benefited from capitalism, should be such an outspoken proponent of socialism.”

Standing bristled at the remark. “You’re an attractive woman, my dear, but you had better wise up. Big tits and a pretty smile are only going to get you so far.”

Julia was stunned by his vulgarity. “Excuse me?”

“You have no idea how offensive I find that remark. Do you have any clue, any clue at all how fatiguing it is to be committed to doing good, only to be hammered for it day in and day out by people like you?”

“People like me?”

“Yes, you free-market zombies. All you do is complain about government intervention. You lie to anyone who will read your columns, listen to your radio programs, or watch your TV shows. You tell them we need less government regulation. You tell people that capitalism works precisely because people pursue their own self-interest. You don’t want any checks on that self-interest at all. Every man and woman for him- or herself. No accountability.”

Leading financial figure or not, Julia had no intention of letting his remarks go unanswered. “Your tasteless comment about my breasts aside, Mr. Standing, I never said people in the free market should not be held accountable. I think they should. But the answer isn’t adding more rules, it’s to enforce the ones we already have. If our lazy, inept bureaucrats had been doing their jobs, Bernie Madoff would have been caught. What’s more, the thousands of Wall Street bankers who bundled lousy loans in collateralized debt obligations they knew would tank would also be locked up.

“And while we’re on housing, as far as your HOA analogy goes, I wouldn’t want the value of my home to drop for any reason. If it did drop, then I’d lose equity, but I should decide if I help neighbors in their time of need. The government shouldn’t make that decision for me. Sometimes, it’s not a handout that people need, it’s a kick in the rear.

“If a family has honestly fallen on hard times, then I believe good neighbors would pull together to help them. That’s what we do in this country and we do it because it’s right.

“You, though, don’t want to address how that family fell upon hard times. In your mind, they’re automatically victims. Their situation could never possibly be their fault. If they’re poor, or in financial straits, that’s because somebody else put them there. Somebody stole what was rightly theirs or prevented them from achieving. You’d never think to ask if maybe they purchased a home they couldn’t afford. Did they purchase expensive vacations and flat-screen TVs instead of laying away emergency funds for a rainy day?

“And while you see these people as victims, I and the other free-market zombies, as you put it, see these people as individuals. Individuals empowered to make their own decisions. Neither you, the government, nor anyone else has the right to be in the business of trying to regulate outcomes. You can call it social cohesion, income equality, or social justice. It doesn’t matter. Despite whether the term offends you or not, what you are advocating is pure socialism.”

Standing gripped his butter knife and tried to keep his temper in check. “If asking society to invest in its citizens in order to make life better for them is socialism, then I guess I’m guilty as charged.”

“But you’re not asking society to do these things. You’re trying to force it. You want to subvert the power of nations to decide their own destinies in order to impose a global system of laws overseen by a global system of governance. You’re not only a socialist, Mr. Standing, you’re a socialist who has not only benefited greatly from capitalism, but one who then wants to use those gains to utterly destroy capitalism and replace it with your vision of what will bring about some sort of perfect world where an omnipotent government provides everything people could ever want or need.”

“Socialism and communism are simply terms meant to demonize. I don’t even think you know the difference between them.”

Julia Winston nodded vehemently. “I most certainly do. They both seek public control of the production and distribution of wealth and while many believe they mean the same thing, they don’t. One is voluntary and the other is involuntary.”

Standing rolled his eyes. “Yes, yes, yes. Evil communism forces everyone into what the state wants and socialism is elective.”

“Wrong,” she replied. “Communism is the end game of socialism. Communism is the theoretical, stateless utopia where mankind has been perfected to the point where government is no longer needed.

“A completely voluntary communist society stems from the Marxist theory of evolution. For the Marxists, the communist utopia is the apex of human development—a time at which man has genetically evolved out of his selfish ways and consistently acts toward the common good, completely of his own volition. To get from capitalism to the hypothetical utopia of pure communism, society must be subjected to the tyranny of socialism. That’s where people make their mistake in describing the two philosophies. They think socialism is voluntary and communism is involuntary when actually the reverse is true.

“So in the interim phase between selfish capitalism and selfless communism we have socialism. Under socialism, mankind, for its own supposed good, is subjected to the authority of dictatorship, an enlightened ruling class of elites who control the human environment in egalitarian terms in order that they may steer the proper genetic evolution of mankind.”

Standing looked at her. “You are such an attractive woman, I could almost believe anything you say. I think that’s why FOX News has been so successful.”

“You are changing the subject, Mr. Standing,” said Julia.

“I haven’t changed it, my dear. You have. Don’t you believe in justice? Don’t you believe in people not being allowed to game the system?”

“Of course I do.”

“Then why are you so against making the world a better, more equitable place for all of us?” Standing asked. “You have given me the usual shallow, shopworn defense of capitalism, but you haven’t given me one concrete reason why my ideas are so unreasonable.”