Speaking of milquetoasts...

David Brooks has an op-ed piece in The New York Times on 'milquetoast radicals':

The US economy is probably going to stink for a few more years. It is beset by short-term problems (low consumer demand, uncertain housing prices, and too much debt) and long-term problems (wage stagnation, rising health care costs, and eroding human capital).
Realistically, not much is going to be done to address the short-term problems, but we can at least use this winter of recuperation to address the country’s underlying structural ones, and do tax reform, fiscal reform, education reform and political reform, so that when the economy finally does recover, the prosperity is deep, broad, and strong.
Unfortunately, the country has been wasting this winter of recuperation. Nothing of consequence has been achieved over the past two years. Instead, there have been a series of trivial sideshows. It’s as if people can’t keep their minds focused on the big things. They get diverted by scuffles that are small, contentious and symbolic.
Take the Occupy Wall Street movement. This uprising was sparked by the magazine Adbusters, previously best known for the 2004 essay, Why Won’t Anyone Say They Are Jewish?, an investigative report that identified some of the most influential Jews in America and their nefarious grip on policy.
If there is a core theme to the Occupy Wall Street movement, it is that the virtuous ninety-nine percent of society is being cheated by the richest and greediest one percent. This is a theme that allows the people in the ninety-nine percent to think very highly of themselves. All their problems are caused by the nefarious elite.
Unfortunately, almost no problem can be productively conceived of in this way. A group that divides the world between the pure ninety-nine percent and the evil one percent will have nothing to say about education reform, Medicare reform, tax reform, wage stagnation, or polarization. They will have nothing to say about the way Americans have overconsumed and overborrowed. These are problems that implicate a much broader swath of society than the top one percent.
They will have no realistic proposal to reduce the debt or sustain the welfare state. Even if you tax away fifty percent of the income of those making between $1 million and $10 million, you only reduce the national debt by one percent, according to the Tax Foundation. If you confiscate all the income of those making more than $10 million, you reduce the debt by two percent. You would still be nibbling only meekly around the edges.
The 99-versus-1 frame is also extremely self-limiting. If you think all problems flow from a small sliver of American society, then all your solutions are going to be small, too. The policy proposals that have been floating around the Occupy Wall Street movement— a financial transfer tax and forgiveness for student loans— are marginal.
The Occupy Wall Street movement may look radical, but its members’ ideas are less radical than those you might hear at your average Rotary Club. Its members may hate capitalism. A third believe the US is no better than al-Qaeda, according to a New York magazine survey, but since the left no longer believes in the nationalization of industry, these “radicals” really have no systemic reforms to fall back on.
They are not the only small thinkers. President Obama promises not to raise taxes on the bottom ninety-eight percent. The Occupy-types celebrate the bottom ninety-nine percent. Republicans promise not to raise taxes on the bottom one hundred percent. Through these and other pledges, leaders of all three movements are hedging themselves in. They are severely limiting the scope of their proposed solutions. The thing about the current moment is that the moderates in suits are much more radical than the pierced anarchists camping out on Wall Street or the Tea Party-types.
Look, for example, at a piece Matt Miller wrote for The Washington Post called The Third Party Stump Speech We Need. Miller is a former McKinsey consultant and Clinton staffer. But his ideas are much bigger than anything you hear from the protesters: slash corporate taxes, raise energy taxes, aggressively use market forces and public provisions to bring down health care costs; raise capital requirements for banks; require national service; and balance the budget by 2018.
Other economists, for example, have revived the USA Tax, first introduced in 1995 by Senators Sam Nunn and Pete Domenici. This would replace the personal income and business tax regime with a code that allows unlimited deduction for personal savings and business investment. It’s a consumption tax through the back door, which would clean out loopholes and weaken lobbyists.
Don’t be fooled by the clichés of protest movements past. The most radical people today are the ones that look the most boring. It’s not about declaring war on some nefarious elite. It’s about changing behavior from top to bottom. Let’s occupy ourselves.

Rico says the kids (which mostly they are) in the streets don't have a clue how things really work (hey, Rico was a kid marching in the streets once, and he didn't have a clue, either), but taxing the rich is not (as noted here) gonna fix things for the poor...