In early January 2014, Bob Lonsberry, a Rochester talk radio personality on WHAM 1180 AM, said this in response to Obama’s “income inequality speech”:
Two Americas
The Democrats are right, there are two Americas.
The America that works, and the America that doesn’t.
The America that contributes, and the America that doesn’t.
It’s not the haves and the have nots, it’s the dos and the don’ts.
Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society, and others don’t. That’s the divide in America.
It’s not about income inequality, it’s about civic irresponsibility.
It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office.
It’s about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country. That’s not invective, that’s truth, and it’s about time someone said it.
The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting “income inequality.” He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just.
That is the rationale of thievery. The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. Vote Democrat.
That is the philosophy that produced Detroit. It is the electoral philosophy that is destroying America.
It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.
The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have enslaved them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victimhood and anger instead of ability and hope. As stated before their followers are living on the government plantation.
The president’s premise – that you reduce income inequality by debasing the successful – seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices.
Because, by and large, income variation in society is a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibly have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure. Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income.
You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college – and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education.
You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course.
Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.
My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income inequality between us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome, but, our lives also have had an inequality of effort. While my doctor went to college and then devoted his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant.
He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine.
Does that mean he cheated and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.
It is not inequality Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail.
There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure.
The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy.
Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and shortsighted decisions.
Barack Obama and the Democrats preach equality of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring inequality of effort.
The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get.” Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society.
Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster equality through mediocrity.
He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on power is based on using the votes of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts. It is a false philosophy to say one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization.
What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That’s what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow.
Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the truth to Lincoln’s maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.
Excellent! Well done! Many thanx, Post Scripts!
He could have just said “If you’re poor, it’s your own damn fault” and been done with it.
“The America that works, and the America that doesn’t.”
Some just can’t. Why do you have to be so mean-minded and resentful?
“The America that contributes, and the America that doesn’t.”
Some just can’t. Why do you have to be so oblivious and unkind?
http://www.norcalblogs.com/postscripts/2014/02/27/house-divide-americas/#comments
Chris I hope one day you will know how incredibly sad it is to hear an American say such a thing.
The man said nothing of the sort! He didn’t place blame on anything or anyone! He correctly stated the condition in which we all now live. The man talked about freedom and personal effort/responsibility. he talked about diminished freedoms and oppression. It doesn’t matter how we start out in America…the opportunity exist to better ourselves if we take it. It exists more profoundly and dynamically when our government isn’t intruding and playing outcome equalization games. The man nailed it!
Emotionally it’s uncomfortable to face. We might have to give up blaming and resenting others. We might have to accept where we are, let it go and ficus on doing better. We might have to shoulder the responsibility ourselves.
Apparently you would rather play the blame game and resent those who happened to be born with more than you…those feeling might even move in the direction of hate for those born to wealth given the right push. Does it occur to you that your attitude keeps you trapped and makes you the perfect tool for those who gain power by diminishing yours?
You are a victim of your economic birth status. You are at the effect of it. It forms your attitude and is in charge of your choices. You’ve made some smart choices…staying in school for instance. Not sure about your major but it could play out well. But the choices you make in terms of politics and how they will affect your future? You are lost and
will be until you wake up.
Some things just ring true. We know it the instant we hear it. This is one of those things. On some level even those who squirm know it rings true. Freedom and individual responsibility represent the best possible combination for personal and community satisfaction and progress…the best possible hope for happiness.
“The man said nothing of the sort! He didn’t place blame on anything or anyone!”
Tina, did we read the same article?
Some excerpts:
“The America that works, and the America that doesn’t.
The America that contributes, and the America that doesn’t.
It’s not the haves and the have nots, it’s the dos and the don’ts.”
“Because, by and large, income variation in society is a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibly have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure. Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income.”
“Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and shortsighted decisions.”
The author is undeniably saying that if you are poor, it is most likely because you made “foolish and irresponsible” decisions.
Now that is true in some cases. It does not, however, have anything to do with our current system of income inequality. The author totally misrepresents the problem when he writes:
“He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just.”
Either this guy has no idea what income inequality is, or he is deliberately creating a strawman argument.
Income inequality does not mean that “some people have higher incomes than others.” That will always be true. No one in power on the left has proposed a totally Communist system wherein everyone has the same exact income. That is ridiculous.
What we on the left are saying is that the gap between the rich and the poor has grown due to a system that is rigged in the favor of the rich. It is a system where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. This system is not good for the majority of Americans.
For the most part, American liberals have put forward modest proposals for how to reduce (not destroy) this gap. A minimum wage that is similar in value to the one we had in 1968. Unions with the strength they had during boom times. A small increase on taxes for the rich. Taxing capital gains the same as income so that the wealthy don’t pay a lower tax rate than the middle class.
No one has said that everyone should make the same amount of money, or that it’s wrong for people to get rich. But nearly everyone, including Republicans, would like to see income inequality reduced. One poll showed that rich and poor, Republicans and Democrats alike wanted a more equal income distribution than we have now. When asked about ideal income distribution, most respondents picked numbers that were similar to Sweden’s.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/09/25/poll-wealth-distribution-similar-sweden/
It is a serious mistake to underestimate the importance of income inequality on our economic troubles. It’s one thing to argue that liberal solutions aren’t the right ones. But to argue that income inequality isn’t a real problem, and that it doesn’t matter because there will always be rich people and poor people, is to insult the intelligence of the American people. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what this author does.
I’d also like to add that it is extremely divisive to claim that there is “the America that works, and the America that doesn’t.” This is pure Randian shlock designed to scapegoat the poor for our economic problems. It’s “the makers v. the takers,” as FOX News put it. It’s class warfare against the poor, and it’s wrong. It doesn’t accurately describe the situation at all. Most people on welfare do work. It isn’t enough.
And yes, I know that liberals engage in class warfare against the rich too. I hope those wealthy victims of the “progressive Kristallnacht,” as one millionaire recently put it, can find some solace as they weep uncontrollably into their pile of money. 😉
Chris you use the word poor very broadly. You include people who could work and choose to live on welfare, people who live on welfare and don’t bother to try to better themselves, people who drop out of school and never apply themselves, people who have children by different fathers using government programs as a substitute provider. We aren’t talking about a few people and by now a lot of them live this way because in one way or another they have been taught it’s all they can expect from life.This condition is heartbreaking for them…it is reprehensible that we would continue to do the same thing even after seeing the harmful result to them, to neighborhoods, to the economy and the nation.
Additionally you have the gall to say that the reason we would post this is just to beat up on poor people when in fact it is a very troubling condition and a subject worthy of honest discussion.
How FDR’s New Deal harmed millions of Poor People:
“No one in power on the left has proposed a totally Communist system wherein everyone has the same exact income…”
Of course not. They don’t have to. Communists gave up trying to force the communist model long ago in favor of the gradual shift. They have come very close to achieving the goals they outlined in the 1950’s and 1960’s to one degree or another. Here are a few of the most obvious that have been achieved:
“What we on the left are saying is that the gap between the rich and the poor has grown due to a system that is rigged in the favor of the rich. It is a system where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.”
Who rigged that system, Chris? Do you really think that creating large swaths of poor, poorly educated citizens has helped this situation? Do you think that tax policies that send companies out of the country help this situation? Do you think that government expenditures on the bloated and growing bureaucracy help? Do you think that the cost to business of complying with government regulation helps? That one thing cost business and consumers 12% of GDP in 2009 or $1.75 trillion. Corporate pre-tax profits for all businesses totaled about $ 1.46 trillion that year.
The poor and middle class are getting poorer because the left loves big government. The salaries and benefits of bureaucratic government workers are also part of the problem not only at the federal level but at state and local levels as well. Money is either chased out of the country or goes to feed massive government…never mind the programs. Federal spending last year was around $3.5 trillion…do you think that helps the poor and middle class to achieve financial success?
While the politicians keep you focused on corporate profits by inducing envy and resentment they are sapping the economy on several fronts.
“For the most part, American liberals have put forward modest proposals for how to reduce (not destroy) this gap.”
They offer the poor crumbs! And you think they are doing the poor a favor! You go so far as giving them lots of support for offering the people crumbs! People are risking their lives to come to America just for the opportunity and what do they find in the land of the free? People who are content to eat the crumbs spilled from the government table.People who cannot seem to grasp the notion that they could do so much better relying on themselves. People that have been duped.
“One poll showed that rich and poor, Republicans and Democrats alike wanted a more equal income distribution than we have now.”
That has always been true in America. The division and debate is how to get there.
“Republicans and Democrats alike wanted a more equal income distribution…”
The word distribution is leftist. I reject this word for the conservative side. It suggests we are the worker group and some big government hand will at the end of the work day hand out to each his allotment. The language is used to cement the idea in the minds of the people that they do not have what it takes to manage their own lives or finances but must be cared for and managed by the elites.
Republicans want more opportunity for people. We want as many people as possible to be engaged in work and profiting from their own labors. We want them educated so they know how to earn, save and invest. That’s not the same thing as organizing to extract more from the company without offering greater or more valuable effort. It isn’t the same as artificially deciding the value of work and artificially pressing wages higher.
“But to argue that income inequality isn’t a real problem…”
That has NEVER been the rights argument. It is the straw man the left sets up as the rights argument.
“It’s “the makers v. the takers,” as FOX News put it. It’s class warfare against the poor, and it’s wrong.”
The left creates the condition then blames FOX News for noticing…pretty neat trick. And you, like a fool, fall for it.
“And yes, I know that liberals engage in class warfare against the rich too.”
Class warfare is for votes. The poor are kept dependent and used to get votes. A lot of the rich are leftists that help the Democrats do it! The war actually hurts all Americans. The strategy is simple, create massive dependency in the middle and poor classes then wage class warfare to stay in power.
Wake up Chris. I think America could be in the last throws of relinquishing all our freedoms with the cheery aid of a dumbed-down citizenry. You think money is the issue. Fool! The issue is power.
Tina, you are still contradicting yourself and still trying to deny the obvious meaning of this article’s argument. You say it has “NEVER been the right’s argument” that income inequality is not a real problem. But that’s exactly what this article says!
“It’s not about income inequality, it’s about civic irresponsibility.”
“The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting “income inequality.” He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just.”
“Because, by and large, income variation in society is a result of different choices leading to different consequences.”
“My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income inequality between us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome, but, our lives also have had an inequality of effort.”
I am often puzzled by how you can post something that has a very clear meaning, and then deny that meaning in order to soft-peddle the message and make it sound nicer than it really is. You did this last week by claiming that “Rush did not say gays were assaulting straight people,” after I posted a quote where he said those exact words. Why do you do this? Do you really think it is convincing to deny what’s right there in black and white?
I don’t see how any conversation can be productive between us when you behave in such an intellectually dishonest manner.
Wow, a 20 year old responds to Michelle Obama after she called his generation, “Knuckleheads.”
“An open letter from a Knucklehead to Michelle Obama.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VRzFBM6mUY&feature=player_embedded
Here is a perfect example in support of Tina’s argument.
Union-backed federal law helped create the Northeast propane shortage:
The Northeastern U.S. is struggling to keep the heat on during this year’s frigid winter which has caused a propane shortage, but a union-supported federal law is preventing abundant domestic propane supplies from getting to where consumers need it the most.
The 94-year-old Jones Act has prevented Northeasterners from getting cheap, abundant propane from Texas, instead forcing them to pay more than $100 a metric ton for propane from Europe — 4,000 miles away.
The Jones Act makes it illegal for non-U.S. ships from transporting goods between U.S. ports, and is backed by labor unions, shipyards and shipowners. The law’s proponents argue that it’s necessary for national security and economic reasons.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/28/union-backed-federal-law-helped-create-the-northeast-propane-shortage/#ixzz2uk0b7rND
Chris: “You say it has “NEVER been the right’s argument” that income inequality is not a real problem.
It hasn’t.
“But that’s exactly what this article says!”
NO! It says that there are two basic attitudes today…one is an attitude of self reliance and the other of entitlement. One of contribution and the other of standing around with your hand out. One of effort and the other sloth.
You do realize that the working poor are not part of the non-contributing side in the divide. You can’t get the meeessage because you always have a knee jerk response to people who talk honestly about conditions and problems.
“I am often puzzled by how you can post something that has a very clear meaning, and then deny that meaning in order to soft-peddle the message and make it sound nicer than it really is”
You would be puzzled because you don’t get it.
If anyone is “soft peddling” a message its you, pretending that people who are poor are all just trying real hard and they are being held back by mean people wit money…when that isn’t true.
You also hard peddle in the other direction as you attempt to characterize what I’m saying. For instance, you probably think now that I lack empathy for people born into and stuck in poverty. In fact I’m just willing to talk honestly about the conditions and the attitudes that are often formed when people live in those conditions and are being used politically. It’s heart breaking and its frustrating to see the wasted lives and to see mothers and fathers watch their kids give up on themselves and turn to drugs, crime, prostitution or joining the ranks who exist on welfare. It’s frustrating to see the affect this condition has on our nation as a whole. As someone who has witnessed the change in attitudes it is incredibly frustrating to realize the roll that politics has played in perpetuating the conditions. I’m here every day in part because I hate what has happened to nearly 1/3 of the population.
Democrats refuse to admit that their approach has not worked…just throwing money at the situation will not solve the problem of poverty…fifty years later its time to do something different and they will not budge. Try breaking the Democrat/teachers union coalition to change the schools. Poverty could be changed dramatically within a generation or two if parents could get their kids out of the bad schools and into good schools or if bad teachers could be fired! Republicans backed vouchers and charter schools as one place to begin. In most cases this has worked well for the few who get the opportunity. But Democrats fight these ideas; they discredit and fight all attempts to try another way to lift people out of poverty and to break the chains of entitlement thinking. They fight to keep the status quo because it represents a political power base.
“Do you really think it is convincing to deny what’s right there in black and white?”
Black and white? You don’t want to know what Rush thinks. There is nothing black and white or definitive in your attacks. What you put in black and white does not represent what Rush thinks…it represents a portion of a monologue or exchange with a caller that could be satire, could be something he is quoting, could be something he says sarcastically, could be something he says and doesn’t mean just to tweek the left who listen to him just in order to be insulted or angered. They don’t care any more than you do to know what Rush actually thinks.
“I don’t see how any conversation can be productive between us when you behave in such an intellectually dishonest manner.
I don’t know what to tell you Chris. I can’t change how you approach these discussions or the filter through which you process what I write.
On the other hand there’s a chance that you, Chris, are confused because some of this is starting to get through. Confusion sometimes precedes the ah ha!
Peggy a lot of people have also relied on cheap coal for their heating. Obama’s policies on coal have also not helped the situation. The price of gasoline hasn’t either.
The question that begs for an answer is, “What changes could we make that would maximize opportunity for all Americans?”
Any policy that helps bring the cost and availability of energy is one.
Tax rates that encourage production and investment another.
A simplified tax code is another.
Repeal and replace Obamacare is another.
A plan for debt reduction is surely needed.
The people are weary…it feels like the seventies again.
Let me try this again:
“It’s not about income inequality, it’s about civic irresponsibility.”
“The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting “income inequality.” He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just.”
“Because, by and large, income variation in society is a result of different choices leading to different consequences.”
“My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income inequality between us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome, but, our lives also have had an inequality of effort.”
I don’t know what I could possibly do to convince you that the author is clearly saying that income inequality is not a real problem. If you can’t see that, you lack basic reading comprehension skills.
“Black and white? You don’t want to know what Rush thinks. There is nothing black and white or definitive in your attacks. What you put in black and white does not represent what Rush thinks…it represents a portion of a monologue or exchange with a caller that could be satire, could be something he is quoting, could be something he says sarcastically, could be something he says and doesn’t mean just to tweek the left who listen to him just in order to be insulted or angered. They don’t care any more than you do to know what Rush actually thinks.”
The specific comments I pointed to fall into Rush’s decades-long pattern of spreading fear and hatred toward minorities. He wants older white, straight, Christian males to feel like they are being persecuted by everyone else. That is so obvious that it doesn’t even need explaining. That’s what Rush does. This is a guy who complained that the NFL was being “feminized” because of their help to raise awareness for breast cancer research, for God’s sakes! You can deny the man’s bigotry and irrationality all you want, but that only makes you just as irrational. You don’t know him any better than I do; all you know is that he’s a very influential conservative, and therefore he must be defended at any cost.
This exchange between an NYC mayoral candidate and Sam Stein pretty much represents the GOP’s incoherent stance on income inequality:
SAM STEIN: Do you see wealth inequality in New York City as a problem?
LHOTA: Wealth, income inequality is a problem. Here’s the only way…
STEIN: Isn’t that what de Blasio is talking about though?
LHOTA: Yeah, and he has no way of dealing with it.
STEIN: But you just said it was divisive to talk about inequality, but now you think it’s a problem too.
LHOTA: No, I don’t think it’s a problem. You said ‘does it exist,’ it exists. I don’t think it’s a problem. I don’t think it’s a problem, it exists.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLwhAXVu-ko
So whether a Republican seems to believe income inequality is a problem or not seems to change from minute-to-minute. “It’s a problem when Obama can be blamed for it,” seems to be the general position.
And here’s an article by Michael Tanner in National Review arguing that income inequality is not a problem:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/287643/income-inequality-myth-michael-tanner
Sure you want to use the word “NEVER,” Tina?
Chris not making enough money to care for yourself or your family is a big problem. But it is an individual problem. Solutions for that individual are most likely to materialize and can best be addressed in a thriving and growing economy that gives that individual options and choices. The number of people in this group has grown significantly under the leftist policies this administration has used since the end of the recession in spring 2009. Everything Obama has done has made the situation worse and it’s made it worse in one way or another for everybody.
People having wealth is not the cause of this.
Taking more cash from the wealthy and the private sector is not a solution. Investing more in an overbearing and wasteful bureaucratic government is not the solution. The solution is not found in discouraging investments and spending in the private sector. If anything we need MORE of that voluntary investment and spending in the private sector.
“Income inequality” is a term created for a political game…it is the next monster in the closet. It is another leftist scam! Your anger about this “injustice” will take you to the polls to vote for Democrats…power is the reason for the issue. they don’t give a $h#t about the poor. They care about gaining and keeping power and they will use you to achieve the only goal that matters to them.
I am not going to sit here and allow you to shift accountability for the economic mess, and the human suffering, that President Obama and the radical leftists under him have made with another tale of victimization blamed on Republicans, the rich, trickle down economics or any other thing the left can prop up and demonize to avoid scrutiny of their own and their presidents failures.
You lack basic reality skills. You think like a victim. You think in terms of classes of people and you view opportunity as something that can only be given by government. As long as you remain stuck in that box you will not be able to see things clearly and you will fall for every damn straw man the left throws up to deflect your attention.
Wake up!
Just because you don’t understand doesn’t mean there isn’t something to understand.
““Income inequality” is a term created for a political game…it is the next monster in the closet. It is another leftist scam!”
So, is this an admission that you were not being honest when you claimed that Republicans have “NEVER” claimed that income inequality was not a problem?
Tina: “Investing more in an overbearing and wasteful bureaucratic government is not the solution. The solution is not found in discouraging investments and spending in the private sector. If anything we need MORE of that voluntary investment and spending in the private sector.”
I agree. Thankfully, raising the capital gains tax does not discourage private sector investments or savings.
“Leonard Burman, who teaches economics at Syracuse University’s Maxwell School, presented a graph at the joint hearing that plotted capital gains tax rates against economic growth from 1950 to 2011.
He found no statistically significant correlation between the two. This was true even if Burman built in lag times of five years. After several economists took him up on an offer to share his data, none came back having discovered a historical relationship between the rates and growth over those six decades.
Gauntlet Thrown
“I certainly did throw the gauntlet down for the true believers,” says Burman. “If they found the relationship, they’re saving it for a special time.”
More proof that the rationale behind the Bush tax cut doesn’t hold up comes from the Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan group run by the Library of Congress. In mid- September CRS released a paper that analyzed economic growth and changes to the top marginal tax rates, both for personal income and capital gains, from 1945-2010.
“The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment and productivity growth,” it concludes. “The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the pie.”
It hasn’t always been a foregone political conclusion that the capital gains rate should be lower than that for income. The 1986 tax overhaul ushered in by President Ronald Reagan pegged capital gains at the same rate as the highest personal income bracket, which was reduced from 50 to 28 percent.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-04/study-finds-benefit-is-elusive-for-low-capital-gains-rate.html
Chris: “So, is this an admission that you were not being honest when you claimed that Republicans have “NEVER” claimed that income inequality was not a problem?”
No. I was being honest. You just refuse to get what I and others who talk about this are saying. Drop the contentious crap Chris.
Here’s the conclusion from the Tax Foundation report linked above”
Democrats have been fighting for higher taxes for decades…other countries meanwhile have lowered their taxes and made doing business there very attractive for the big companies. That’s the real reason our jobs have gone overseas…Democrats will not compete…they will not make our tax burdens competitive in the world. This harms small business too as the economy at home slows.
Does it ever occur to you, Chris, that the party you favor doesn’t know how to play this game game to win? Doesn’t care whether you have opportunity? The radical elites of the party only care about growing a bigger centralized government with them in charge.
Read about whats happening in New York after the election of De Blasio in the New York Post.
Attitudes and higher tax rates cause the wealthy to take their wealth and leave places where their already huge contribution gets no respect.
“No. I was being honest. You just refuse to get what I and others who talk about this are saying. Drop the contentious crap Chris.”
*sigh*
The problem is not that I am unable to understand your argument. The problem is that you can’t seem to decide what your argument actually is.
First you posted an article claiming that income inequality is not a real problem.
Then you denied that Republicans have ever argued that income inequality is not a problem.
Then you literally wrote that income inequality is just a “leftist scam,” which would mean that income inequality is not a real problem.
I didn’t imagine this with my puny, prejudiced liberal mind, Tina. This is what you said.
For you to sit there and continue to deny your own words is not just dishonest. It’s delusional.
Also, tax flight is a myth, Tina.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/16/business/high-taxes-are-not-a-prime-reason-for-relocation-studies-say.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
http://publicassets.org/press/press-releases/another-report-debunks-tax-flight-myth/
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3556
Chris its a shame you don’t understand what I’m attempting to tell you. It’s a shame that you prefer to play gotcha.
Income inequality is a great distraction from the real problems we have and the solutions that would work. In that respect it is not a problem. The problem is that conditions are not favorable for individuals stuck in poverty and despair. They have few options and the policies this administration favors won’t help…they will hinder. They will make matters worse.
Republicans do not say the condition does not exist; they do say that the growing condition is a result of progressive policies, attitudes, morals and values. They point out that Democrats have purposely set out to create this condition for their own self interests and power.
I didn’t say YOU imagined it. I said that the term is being used by radical leftists to gin up support in the coming election…it’s an old favored tactic…the one they always use. It’s one of your favorites, a straw man to distract from the real issues.
Now you can choose to think I’m crazy or delusional;it makes no difference to me. But it might make a big difference to you to get this straight. Were I you, I’d at least give that some consideration.
Democrats have divided this nation into the “haves” and “have nots” for decades. They have used division to promote themselves to power and win approval for bigger government and higher taxes. They have systematically created the condition in which we now find ourselves and are doing everything they can to blame it on the rich, on corporations, on Republicans…anyone or anything but themselves. And yet, look, with the passage of healthcare they have gotten every big government proposal they wanted for the last seventy years…all requiring more revenue (money) to flow out of the private sector to feed the beast of big government. We are a nation on the road to serfdom…no longer free and capable citizens but hapless and helpless wards of the state.
The cost has been horrendous through the decades and what has been the result? After all of the government spending our children are poorly educated, the poverty rate is growing, the middle class is collapsing, our prisons are full, our financial and military strength is sapped, and our nation has a massive and growing debt. Oh…and there is a very good chance that the monetary policies we’ve pursued over the past five years will soon bring inflation…just to make things even more exciting.
I can’t think of a single reason to believe or support anything any liberal suggests to improve things…not one.
“tax flight is a myth
Not for people who move to avoid high tax rates. It happens in America and it happens around the world. It isn’t the only reason people move but it is one of the big ones for people who do make a lot of money. Anyone in that position would consider it…even you.
Economic conditions in general are often the cause no matter what your economic class.
IBD:
Human beings will always try to pay the least mount of tax possible…ALL human beings will. If moving saves a rich person 20-30 thousand a year that’s a house payment…and it is their money!
New York Times reports are even more questionable.