Should you reveal your success, or hide it...?

The finding of that study is not surprising, but it has little to do with political beliefs, affiliation or propaganda. It is also not limited to the last 20-30 years or to the US, either.

The fundamental reason behind distrust, resentment and hate of the affluent is simple: being human.

We are imperfect creatures, and wealth and power can bring out the worst in us. Throughout history, this worst side of human nature has been demonstrated by both those who have wealth/power and those who don't.

You are correct in saying that the have-nots look at what the rich have and (1) want to have it for themselves and (2) resent the rich for being rich and having "stuff" when they themselves do not. It's a perfectly natural reaction. They're envious; it's human.

And because it IS human, this reaction isn't limited only to those who really are poor. The person who has $10 million almost certainly looks at the one with $100 million in a similarly envious way, as does that one when looking at the possessor of $1 billion in wealth. The BIG difference, though, is that they do not simply envy/resent those with more; they set out to acquire it for themselves.

The have-nots (even if they're making a decent income) don't know how to get it for themselves, since they're job-oriented and working at a job will never propel them into the ranks of the rich. They may do well and even become comfortable financially, but will continue to resent/hate the affluent as the study found because the wealthy not only have more to begin with, they also have the know-how of increasing their wealth.

(This can be very, very frustrating. In a parallel situation, imagine watching your golf partner regain last season's form with only a few weeks' play, while you yourself can't put up a decent score until mid-June. Makes you want to club him -- literally -- doesn't it?) *g*

I think we can agree that most people are not suited for self-employment and/or entrepreneurism. Have-nots know, either consciously or instinctively, that they lack the temperament/drive/ability to strike out on their own and this fuels their envy, too. It's a cycle, yes, and it's not going to begin changing until envy is no longer part of the human makeup.

Envy is only one side of it, though. The flip side, which contributes just as much flame to the issue, is the human tendency to press one's advantage. We may not like it much or even want to admit it, but it's in each one of us to some extent.

At the benign end, it's the tendency to want/have more than one needs, "a little extra"...extra money, another vehicle, more clothes, etc. All the "just in case" stuff. Logical and practical, they are for the most part justifiable. Kept at this level, the tendency is not a problem.

But, just like envy, it too, mushrooms, and people acquire more, better, bigger stuff just because they want to. Simply owning it fans envy, but often the tendency doesn't stop there. People use wealth and power to get and press their advantage, to dominate others, be it financially, socially or emotionally.

Historically, wealth has been used time and again to establish and maintain dominance, i.e., to keep the have-nots not having. Initiative and drive were prohibited. Today, we certainly have the freedom and opportunities to do our own thing and work to become as wealthy as we want, but that doesn't mean the tendency to dominate is buried in history.

Unscrupulous landlords still exist, demanding exorbitant rents for substandard housing. Price-gouging shopkeepers do business every day. Service providers charge well above the going rate if they find a captive audience. These examples are not isolated but they aren't the norm, either. However, enough of them happen every day to give the general impression that the practices are more common and widespread than they really are.

In the wake of the Enron calamity, many of us have probably wondered, even in passing, about the accounting practices and ethics of other large corporations. While it was happening, though, the company as a whole likely viewed its actions as the best strategy for its own future: more, better, bigger.

So, the upshot of the whole question -- hate/dislike of the affluent -- is the result of two major contributing factors, both part of human nature. Of themselves they are certainly not political. The tie-in to politics comes into play because of traditional[/i] affiliations, but haves and have-nots exist on both sides of the aisle -- as does grandstanding. This is not a political issue and it is pointless and misleading to try and make it one.

What it comes down to, I think, is how much responsibility we owe to our fellow humans. Some people will always be takers and there's not anything we can do to change that. I don't believe in unlmited handouts or unearned entitlements and over the years I have put in way more money into the public trough than I will ever get back. BUT I also believe we are all responsible for our "community," be it local, national or global, because in the end, if the community doesn't make it, neither will we.