Individual Interest vs. Public Interest: Playing by the Rules

"Only little people pay taxes," Leona Helmsley said once upon a time. Has anything changed since then? No!

I hate politics. To me, politics is about taking care of your own interests (or those of your particular group) at the expense of the public interest. In my view, political behavior and self-interested behavior are the same thing. Whether it is the Republicans in the House of Representatives voting unanimously against the recent economic stimulus legislation so that the Democrats will have to take all the blame for it if it fails or the several nominees to top jobs in the Obama administration who have had to admit (after being caught) that they had not paid their full share of taxes, politicians are greedy, self-serving SOBs.

So are the bankers and the others in the financial industry who accepted taxpayer-supported bailouts and then distributed the money to their executives as bonuses. After all, those guys did such a great job, didn't they? And then there are the auto industry executives who ran their companies into the ground, the financial advisors like Bernie Madoff who bilked investors out of billions of dollars, and the oil companies who love to rip off consumers, etc. When I think of it, I wonder why I bother to complain so loudly about politicians.

Of course, we won't even talk about the news media, which try to keep the nation in a constant state of turmoil to satisy the 24/7 news cycle and rejoice (as unobstrusively as they can manage) when they have a disaster to report on. And if they don't have a real disaster to talk about, they always seem to be able to invent one: "Does the Obama family use enough dental floss? Are they at risk of periodontal disease? Should we be worried about this? We'll have more on this emerging story in the next half-hour."

And while we're at it, I am angry with all the greedy people in this country who just couldn't buy enough, spend enough, and borrow enough to keep up with their neighbors and are now alternately whining about how much they're suffering and patting themselves on the back for every small step they take toward acting the way financially responsible people have done all along.

On the other hand, I do have some sympathy for the people who sell space bags and self-storage units. They have been fulfilling a genuine need to provide storage options for people with too much stuff, and now they are probably going broke. In fact, companies that rent self-storage units to the public have all sorts of difficulties, ranging from finding units filled with fertilizer (stinky!) to others filled with illegal drugs. But it can get worse. One woman found a mummified baby in a self-storage unit, and others have contained cremation urns with the ashes of someone's dear departed. And then there are the people who try to live in their self-storage units. What's so strange about that? Self storage. Get it?

Okay, let's be serious. It seems to be human nature to not want to live by the rules that "regular" people live by, and it seems to be an equally human trait to deplore other people's greed and lack of responsibility. Who didn't wince when Leona Helmsley allegedly drew a distinction between herself and the "little people," who had to live by the rules and pay their taxes? But isn't that what people like Timothy Geithner, Nancy Killefer, and Tom Daschle must think, too? (Maybe we just won't mention Bill Richardson and his corruption investigation.) And Geithner got away with it! Those financial guys can get away with anything!

A Dog of Property

My dog Peterkin has a lot of possessions. I did a brief inventory yesterday, and I counted the following: 2 dog beds, 1 traveling crate, 2 everyday water bowls (plastic), 2 ceramic water bowls, one small and one large, 6 feeding bowls, consisting of 5 small white Corelle bowls and 1 ceramic dog dish with a tasteful pattern of bones on the outside (His cousin Monique the poodle has an identical bowl. They were received as Christmas presents a few years ago.), about a dozen dog toys, mostly stuffed, with at least 2 soft plastic toys, 1 collar (with dog license, rabies tag, and ID tag), a harness and 2 leashes (4-foot and 6-foot), combs, brushes, and other grooming tools, shampoo and conditioner from Drs. Foster & Smith, cans and packages of dog food, pills (he takes a small dose of phenobarbital twice a day), tooth brushing paraphernalia that he refuses to use, several towels, including the infamous "green towel" that lives near the back door and is used for feet wiping, and an inexpensive fleece throw from Walmart that is known as his "nesting material." The nesting material is usually in a heap on "his" chair in the living room. I have probably missed a few things, but Peterkin is definitely a dog of property. Yorkies have their own laws of property, by the way, which it is well to know and obey.

Now, a dog of property is a legal conundrum. In law, dogs are property, so they can't own property. Only "persons," real (people) and artifical (corporations), can own property. Peterkin does not like being thought of as property, although he can't deny the fact that he was purchased from a breeder for the sum of $650.00 plus tax. Plus tax! Yes, I had to pay sales tax on him, so Peterkin is most certainly property. When I told my mother about this, she made two observations: 1) She never would have bought Peterkin because he was a boy, and everyone knows boy dogs are dirty. She was certainly right about that. 2) She never would have paid $650 for any dog. That is outrageously expensive. It is expensive, but there are plenty of dogs that cost more, and if I had bought one of Peterkin's sisters, I would have had to pay more for her.

I rarely think of Peterkin as property, although I am aware that I have to have him licensed every year and I am legally responsible if he bites the plumber. I generally think of Peterkin as something between a buddy and a child. I think he considers me to be his mother. I got him when he was only 10 weeks old, and a boy needs a Mommy when he's that young. So I am his mommy as well as his owner. I do everything for him, and in return he gives me loyalty, affection, companionship, and plenty of aggravation. I wouldn't be without him for the world.

Not too long ago, property tycoon Leona Helmsley left her considerable estate to her pet Maltese, named Trouble. Since then, Trouble has been a lot of trouble for Leona's surviving relatives. People have made a lot of jokes about Trouble as heiress, but I can see Mrs. Helmsley's point of view. Dogs are nice to you, even if you're not very nice. They don't care if people call you the "Queen of Mean." A dog like Trouble will give you the big hello when you get home from bossing people around and doing whatever it is that tycoons do. A dog doesn't care if you did time for income tax evasion. Dogs are nicer than people. Leona Helmsley knew that, and Trouble became an heiress. I imagine Peterkin expects to inherit a packet one of these days, too, but he may have to settle for dog chews and that lengthy list of possessions cataloged at the beginning of this message. Poor thing.