St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-03-17
THE EXTRAVAGANT RICH.


THE EXTRAVAGANT RICH,
1t gives one a feeling of discour-
agement to read the article of An
drew Carnegie in the Forum on
What Would [ Do With the Tariff %
not at all for what that eminentIy
practical man would do with the
tariff if it were left to him to ar
range, but because of the palpable
pandering to a feeling already too
prevalent, the envy of the rich, and
the tendency to punish them simply
because they are rich.
One expects such talk from the
demagogue who seeks to build his
little pedestal on the prejudices and
envy OF men, and from the profess
sional agitator who finds his liveli-
hood in persuading his fellows that
they are necessarily wronged be-
cause some are wealthy and some
poor, neither making the necessary
discrimination as to how the wealth
was obtained, but one does not eX-
pect such catering to the baser pas
SlonS of men from a man like Car
neSie. He would tax highly ''the
luxurious rich 1.-The rich man of
fashion" should smart for his in
dulgence n"superfine foreign broad
cloth, silk hat, kid gloves, fine silk
umbrella" and the costly glass of
rare old wine he sips. His grand
dame flourishes her fan, f1ourishes
plays her exquisite laces and arrays
herself in superb silks" mot one
workingman in the land uses these
luXuries."
1t is not that these people should
not be taxed, but that they should be
taxed because they are rich, because,
in an unexpressed sense, there is
something odious in the mere fact of
being rich, Indifferent as to how the
riches were acquired, that makes it
seem as if this sensible man is DELHI
erately playing to the galleries. There
is a lavish use of demagogic phrase
needless otherwise. Possibly a
lurking sense that he himself is
enormously wealthy, with a con-
sclouSneSS that it is not all due to
his own business capacity, but is
very largely due to his partnership
with the federal government, which
enabled him to make vast and I'M
earned profits, that impels him to
borrow the rant of the merely sedi-
tious brawler.
But, motive aside, there is a fall
lacy in this proposition to tax the
rich because their extravaganza
vents itself in luxuries. Where will
the line be drawn? What are lux
uries? Who are the rich? What
constitutes wealth? How is it ac-
CURED? Luxury is never more than
relative. 1t is never positive thing.
The glass of beer the day laborer
drinks is as much luxury to him
as his champagne is to another. A
pipe Of tobacco to the man who
needs clothes is more a luxury than
a Havana is to the man who wants
nothing. But the greater fallacy is
that the rich are eXtravagant and
luxurious. Some of the rich may be
SO, those who never earned their
wealth, but nine out of ten rich men
spend but trif1e in mere luxuries.
however much they may spend in
surrounding themselves and families
with comforts.
The man who, aided oniy uy his
business capacity, has acquired
wealth knows too we'll the value of
money to waste it in frivolity. He
Didn't get rich by being extrava-
CANT. Money is not accumulated bv
scattering it. "a penny saved is a
penny earned" No tax on Iuxuries
would take a penny from Hettv
Green or Russell Sage. 1t may be
mere parsimony with them that
makes them eschew luxury and ape
penury, but with the mass of men
who have gained wealth it is the
lifelong habit of sparing, of saving.
of looking on extravaganza as the
door opening the way to the poor
house, that keeps them from sip
ping costly wine or wearing foreign
broadcloths or supplying their
danes with feathers and laces.
If there is a class in this country
that is extravagant it is not the rich.
but the poor and those in middle
class circumstances. Ninety men
out of a hundred, they say, who en-
gage in business fail, and it is ex-
travagance more than business in
capacity that causes the failure.
The salaried man lives up to his
wage as a rule, taking UP the slack
of any increase with an INDULGENCE
in larger expense account. Rich
and poor alike are fearfully ex-
travagant in their kitchens in the
eyes Of the thrifty Frenchwoman.
These great stores retailing textiles
could not exist did they rely solely
for patronage on those whose wealth
justifies the purchase of their COSTLY
fabrics. 1t is the great middle class
who buy better than they need or
can afford that sustain them. These
form the really extravagant class.
NMNuEDo Enr lIEhI-rn