Last week, Michael Moore published his story about Life Among the 1%. In his article, he talks about the day he learned he was going to be given $3 million for his first film and describes the decisions he made about how he was going to use that money and live his life after transitioning from welfare to millionaire.

In his post, he wrote about the reaction from his working class friends to the announcement that he had sold his movie:

The day was filled with high-fives and “Way-ta-go Mike!”s. When you are from the working class you root for each other, and when one of you does well, the others are beaming with pride — not just for that one person’s success, but for the fact that the team had somehow won, beating the system that was brutal and unforgiving and which ran a game that was rigged against us. We knew the rules, and those rules said that we factory town rats do not get to make movies or be on TV talk shows or have our voice heard on any national stage. We were to shut up, keep our heads down, and get back to work.

Moore goes on to explain some of the decisions that he made after receiving the money. He decided that he would pay all his taxes and not claim the many deductions he may have been eligible for. That amounted to $1 million going to the government. He decided to use half of the remaining $2 million to establish a charitable foundation. With the remaining $1 million, he paid off his debts and those of his family, contributed to a variety of good causes in the United States and abroad, bought a car and an apartment, and put the rest into a low-interest savings account (wanting to stay away from “the casino known as the New York Stock Exchange”).

Moore says that a friend once told him:

“They have made a huge mistake giving someone like you a big check. This will make you a very dangerous man. And it proves that old saying right: ‘The capitalist will sell you the rope to hang himself with if he thinks he can make a buck off it.’

There appears to be an assumption that anyone with money will buy into the system. That all members of the 1% are a big part of the problem. For the most part, that assumption may be correct. However, it isn’t universal and the example of Michael Moore shows that.

Is this really just about the 1%?

One of the things that bothers me about the discussion around the 1% and the 99% is that it assumes the problems and the responsibilities of everyone in the 99% are similar. They are not. The people in the top 10% and even 25% have much different lives and opportunities to contribute to change than the bottom 25%. If you want to get a sense of where you lie, you can check out some of the statistics for the United States or this handy calculator for Canadians. You can see, in both countries, despite the numbers being somewhat different, that the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer.

Most people reading this are probably not part of the top 1%, but it is likely that a lot of you do make up part of the top 10% or 25%. If you do, ask yourself as part of the wealthier side of the 99% what you could be doing differently. There is more to this movement than protest. Action is needed, whether that is on voluntary or forced redistribution of wealth or opting out of the system that has put a stranglehold on our society.

Think about where you put your money. Think about how you spend your money. Think about where you place your vote. Think about what percentage of your income you donated to charitable causes. Think about how your job is contributing to a solution or to the problem. Think about whether you are paying a fair wage to the people who work for you. Think about whether you are making sustainable choices when it comes to food, energy and transportation. Think about all of these things because it isn’t just the 1% that needs to change.

Even within the 99%, there is a lot of work to be done.

Related Stories

Michael Moore Rallies Madison Protestors (Video)

Iraq Veterans Announce Support For Occupy Wall Street

Move Our Money: Will You Do It? Why? (Or Why Not?)

Politicians and critics who wonder why the Occupy movement hasn’t disappeared with cooler weather should read a study just released by Citizens for Tax Justice. “Corporate Taxpayers & Corporate Tax Dodgers, 2008-2010” makes uncomfortable but important reading.

The study looks at 280 of America’s largest companies, all of them on the Fortune 500 list. These are high-profit corporations so it would be reasonable to expect them to be fair contributors to the system that allows them to operate. After all, they benefit from roads, schools, hospitals, parks and other amenities and services tax dollars provide.

As it turns out, between 2008 and 2010, 78 of them avoided paying any taxes at all. That is only one way these corporations raided the futures of millions of their fellow Americans. Robert McIntyre, Director at Citizens for Tax Justice and lead author on the report, says, “These 280 corporations received a total of nearly $223 billion in tax subsidies. This is wasted money that could have gone to protect Medicare, create jobs and cut the deficit.”

Some of the highlights, or low points, of the report:

• 38 corporations had negative tax rates all three years. Pepco Holdings topped the list, at -57.6%, with General Electric second at -45.3%.
• In 2009 49 companies paid zero or less federal taxes
• In 2008, 22 of the 280 companies did not pay one dollar in federal taxes, but they received $3.3 billion in tax rebates. In 2010, those numbers jumped to 37 companies that paid no taxes but received $7.8 billion in rebates.

The list of tax avoiders and subsidy recipients includes a lot of familiar names, such as Boeing, Yahoo, Yum Brands, Marathon Oil, FedEx, Hewlett Packard, American Express, and Time Warner. Corporations point out they are doing nothing illegal paring their taxes to nothing and receiving rebates. They are merely abiding by tax laws. However, as the report points out, “The laws were not enacted in a vacuum; they were adopted in response to relentless corporate lobbying, threats and campaign support.”

Tax reform is desperately needed in a country where the growing gap between rich and poor is leaving the country at risk for social instability and continuing economic chaos. However, “GOP candidates for president are all promoting huge cuts in the corporate tax or, in several cases, even elimination of the corporate income tax entirely.”

The whole report is worth reading, especially as campaign rhetoric heats to the melting point in advance of the 2012 elections. Should elected politicians be held accountable for this untenable situation? Can voters make them change the system? What do you think?

Related Care2 Stories

Top 10 US Corporate Tax Avoiders Named on Senate Floor

Top 25 Hedge Fund Managers Make Almost $1 Billion Each – And Pay Less Taxes Than You Do

Cantor Tells Republicans to Dig in on Tax Increases

On Wednesday, Syria agreed to an Arab League plan to end seven months of violent crackdown on protesters and begin a dialogue with the opposition within two weeks. The Syrian government’s acceptance of the plan was met with much skepticism and for good reason. Just two days later, on Friday, at least 15 were killed; opposition groups also said that 25 had been killed on Thursday. Nabil Elaraby, the League’s secretary-general, said on Saturday that the “failure of the Arab solution would lead to catastrophic results for the situation in Syria and the region as a whole.”

Omar al-Hamwi, a 40-year-old Syrian activist, described President Bashar al-Assad’s regime as simply doing “cosmetic surgery” in accepting the Arab League’s terms to end the violence. Most of the killings have occurred in the central Syrian city of Homs, which has been a focal point of the uprising that began after a group of high school students were arrested for writing anti-government graffiti on a building in the southern city of Deraa on March 15. On Friday, others were killed in a town southwest of the capital of Damascus. Activists also said that two people who were not protesting were killed, as they attempted to cross the border to Jordan.

The Arab League plan calls for Assad’s regime to withdraw tanks and armored vehicles from the streets of cities and towns such as Homs where protests have been centered, to end violence towards protesters and to release political prisoners, whom the league estimates to number about 70,000. After those steps are taken — within two weeks of the plan’s announcement — the Syrian government is to initiate dialogue with the opposition.

Syrian state television reports that the Syrian interior ministry has called for an amnesty for anyone who turns in their weapons from Saturday to November 12, a concession to mark the Eid al-Adha feast. Through spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, the US State Department has advised against anybody turning themselves into regime authorities. The Syrian government, which released 553 people arrested during the protests, has responded by accusing the US of “blatant interference in Syria’s internal affairs” and of funding the “terrorists groups” whom Assad’s regime claims are fomenting unrest.

Syria has faced growing international isolation, certainly from the US (which recently recalled its ambassador, Robert S. Ford, for reasons of safety) and European countries, though China and Russia have continued to support Assad’s regime. In a recent interview aired on a Russian TV station, Assad spoke of the “strong ties” between Russia and Syria; the past few weeks have also seen pro-Assad demonstrations including one in Deraa in which one sign proclaimed “The dialogue will start by trying Bashar.”

The Local Coordination Committee, which assists in organizing and documenting protests, offered a tentative welcome to the Arab League proposal, while expressing skepticism about the regime actually carrying it out. Other activists expressed outright doubt about Assad’s regime. Adib Shishakli, a Syrian activist based in Saudi Arabia, said that

“We have reached the point of no return. This regime keeps promising but on the other side suppression and violence increase.”

Adeeb Mohamed, a student, described the Arab League proposal as “all talk,” adding that “The regime will never implement it because as soon as they withdraw the tanks, the regime will fall.” The Syrian National Council, which was recently created in Turkey, said that it had not yet received the proposal.

Assad’s government has stuck to its initial statement that the protests are caused by foreign conspirators and Islamists. According to the regime, over 1,100 government forces have died in suppressing the protests. The United Nations says that over 3,000 civilians, including 200 children, have died.

Previous Care2 Coverage

Foreign Intervention in Syria: What Will The West Do?

US Envoy to Syria Recalled Over “Credible Threats” To His Safety

Libyan Officials Recognize Syrian Opposition As Legitimate