Political Extension of the Risk

Politically extending the risk by means of public policy confirms income class and the current value of the risk in a zero-sum proportion.

The current debate is consumed with income-class valuations. Which income class, for example, is more worthy of risk protection--the class more, or less able to "take" the risk? It is a question that is economically motivated (the zero-sum) but politically (ideologically) determined.

Income is not only the measure of success, it is the variable that determines it. The more income (the ability to pay), the more protection from the risk which, by virtue of the accumulation, extends from it. No better way to protect yourself from risk than to determine who takes it when and how, and even more important, politically, why?

Why is a philosophical question, and while it is a speculative endeavor it does not preclude empirical measurement. Quite the contrary, it is empirically verifiable by very clearly defined class distinctions.

Like Skinner said about psychological motivation--you can't see it but you can measure its effects.

The effect of tax cuts for the rich, for example, has yielded an obvious zero-sum benefit. Those representing the rich, of course, argue the effect was neither caused by the benefit (accumulation of income) nor intended to cause harm (consolidation of lower-class assets into upper-class income). While the motive is speculative, the effect is clearly verifiable.

Now that the wealth is so consolidated that the only risk to be taken is the risk nobody wants, the capital accumulated is ready to merge and acquire assets distressed by the accumulation. At this point, the risk is so over-extended, the additional unemployment produced by M&A will push the economy over the edge.

The political risk (the gamma) is so extensive, even the typically complacent, ideologically compliant middle class is radicalized. The recession has made moving into the upper class so verifiably improbable, and being busted down (the risk being extended to anyone of lesser means) probable, the probability of risk is reaching its fullest, ontological extent.

The probability of risk (change) is never zero. It is always 100 percent.