Latter-Day Marxist


9348753_448x252A week ago, the White House Marxist declared that income inequality was the “defining challenge” we face. If Obama really means what he says (which he almost never does) he could begin by giving up the millions he has already pocketed and the fancy houses and the fancy vacations he funds with taxes coming from Americans who are scraping to make ends meet. Or he could close down Obamacare, the largest redistribution of income from the have nots to the haves in our lifetimes. Or he could end his economic and regulatory programs, which have produced poverty and deprivation not only for the present generation but for generations to come. But don’t hold your breath. None of the filthy rich progressives around Obama will see the light or give up a dime. You can rest assured of that.

I guess if one is so eaten up with envy of the other guy’s toys, or is delusional in the Marxist vein, income inequality can seem a problem and even a challenge. But no person in their right mind thinks that all people are equal in ability and talent. Not even a five-year-old. Consequently, unless you are prepared to take away individual freedom (which, granted, is a thought in the back of every progressive mind) there will be income inequality forever. It’s inevitable. And just that simple. The only question is whether rewards for those extra brains and talents will be distributed by an impersonal open market, or by a political mafia that will make sure the redistribution flows into the pockets of their political friends. Now where do you think all that Obama stimulus money actually went?

Every battle with the left – progressives, Marxists, Democrats – is a battle for freedom: freedom of the individual to earn as he or she sees fit to earn; freedom to keep and spend the fruits of his or her labor. (Every tax dollar is time spent in indentured servitude to the government.) Barack Obama is an enemy of freedom. And the whole Democratic Party along with him. His fight against income inequality is a war against us all.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Servo1969

    Marxist…
    Communist…

    It’s such a fine line.

    • veritaseequitas

      Obama straddles both.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      Communists use socialism as a pathway to perfect communism. Communism doesn’t actually exist in the real world but socialism does. So I suppose the only difference is intent. Some promote socialism as an end, and others as a means of pushing forward towards communist Utopia.

    • tagalog

      I don’t know if the line is really all that fine. Marx called specifically for a communist state as part of his analysis of how to remedy class oppression.

      • WW4

        I’ve heard Marx described as a good diagnostician but a poor clinician. Good at pointing out the side effects of capitalism getting its way, hapless at prescribing solutions.

        • tagalog

          It’s a good claim, but I have my doubts about Marx even as a diagnostician, due to some objections of some scholars and economists over the Labor Theory of Value. But I’m caviling.

  • truebearing

    “None of the filthy rich progressives around Obama will see the light or give up a dime. You can rest assured of that.”

    Now that is a fact the elite Left doesn’t want publicized.

    Yes, those One-Percenters are making even more money from Obama’s criminal crony agenda, but they’ll tell us it is the evil Koch brothers, or a small business owner, or maybe a doctor that are the oppressors.

    Obama is a Marxist, but he is also a narcissist of pathological proportions. He will do whatever it takes, use whatever tactics he needs, to fulfill his two key goals: destroy the nation that he was elected to lead, and increase his personal power. Like all Marxist dictators, the second goal is his ultimate priority. All of the egalitarian nonsense is a cynical ruse designed to motivate the army of useful idiots. He couldn’t care less about equality, and no narcissist ever has.

    • Ellman48

      Narcissists are not about equality. They are about WORSHIP. Worship of their persona, leaving a historic legacy, acquiring wealth and fame, crushing opposition, rewarding supporters, etc. How it is that so many people cannot see this man for what he truly is – narcissism incarnate – is beyond my comprehension! Everything about him is so obvious and transparent that it boggles the mind to understand how so many are deceived.

      • Phil Slipper

        He’s been giving me the creeps for years now. I can’t stand the sound of his pompous voice or the sight of that self satisfied face. With only one exception – I enjoyed the look on his wife’s face as he flirted with the Danish PM at The Big Funeral.

  • kilfincelt

    I think that conservatives should demand that all those in the federal and state governments earn salaries and benefits no higher than the average income earned by Americans. At the same time all of Obama’s millionaire and billionaire supporters should also agree to being paid the same salary as average Americans. Anyone with assets greater than the average American must than distribute that difference to the rest of us then people will see the Progressives for the frauds that they are.

    • Spinoneone

      What you propose really is a definition of “communism”, i.e., equal participation in the wage pool. Even Commander Zero hasn’t gone quite that far.

      Second, as the article notes, “even a five year old knows that.” Yep, everything I needed to know to succeed in business I learned in kindergarten. ‘Tis true.

      • EarlyBird

        Thank you for that bit of common sense.

        • todd555

          Downvote for Gaybird.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        “What you propose really is a definition of “communism”, i.e., equal participation in the wage pool.”

        No it’s not at all. It’s a simple suggestion to index salaries of government officials.

    • guest

      They’ll find some way to weasel around it. Official salaries make up very little earning in all their schemes.

    • WW4

      I’d rather legislators be at least forced to read the legislation they endorse. I’d go so far as to say they should write it, as well–but I’m no utopian dreamer!

  • CowboyUp

    He certainly isn’t concerned with work equality, especially for himself.

    • BS77

      I ll believe the bureaucratic socialist elites when they start living in the projects, quit taking the first class flights and vacations, and turn their bloated salaries over to those who require “income re distribution” It’s all in Animal Farm….read it again.

  • PatriotInk

    “Income equality” is just another Marxist ruse to force themselves as the authority in all relationships, public and private.

    • WW4

      Calling it “inequality” is…unhelpful, to say the least. Inequality is a fact of life.

      But calling it an “income gap” and acknowledging its adverse consequences is to only acknowledge the obvious.

      http://www.theamericanconservative.com/millman/some-inequalities-are-more-unequal-than-others/

      • PatriotInk

        “Income gap” is one of many illusory titles for Marxists to employ as a ruse to force a totalitarian ideology that carries with it its own brand of cruelties. What is ignored is the truth that any man’s income is based upon his own abliity to perform.

        • WW4

          “any man’s income is based upon his own abliity to perform.” Ideally wealth should accrue to the brightest and most able and in the most viable system that would happen. But we know that’s not always the case. There’s plenty of people whose incomes are based on luck, birth, and other things that have nothing to do with their innate ability to perform. One big reason for the American Revolution was that there were a lot of mediocre people whose wealth was owed primarily to birth and luck making decisions about people who were trying to determine their own destiny.

          We are not fully formed autonomously at birth–we are raised within a society which informs that ability to perform, and the policies of that society directly affect that ability. It’d be great if everyone had strong families who teach self-control, etc. Unfortunately we don’t live in a utopia and we never will. So every society–every one since the dawn of time–has to make determinations about the allocation of resources to maintain stability. And that is why the income gap is a cause for concern.

          • PatriotInk

            Worded like the good little Marxist that you are….

          • WW4

            Spoken like the Pavlovian goose-stepper you are….here, boy! here, boy! fetch!

          • PatriotInk

            LOL!!! Okay.

          • tagalog

            The quoted statement, “any man’s income is based upon his own abliity to perform,” could have come right out of Locke’s Two Treatises of Government.

            Funny how two diametrically opposed philosophers could come up with the same rationale for both command systems and free markets, namely, that one is entitled to own the value of what he can produce.

    • MrUniteUs1

      Kind of like calling anything designed to help American’s making less than six figures is called SOCIALISM.

  • CurmudgyOne

    From FrontPage and elsewhere, we constantly hear the drumbeat of “What’s wrong with Obama and his administration,” to the point there’s hardly any reason for reading what follows the headlines. It’s always a reprise of smething we already know.

    David, tell us what we can do to stop him, remove him, end his wasting of our nation? Give us cures for this disease. Bring us a way to fight it and beat it back to the pit it came from.

    We all know what’s wrong. Tell us what WE can do to fix it — and I don’t mean just ordering books from FrontPage (that never get shipped to us, by the way).

    • Sgt Maj

      CurmudgeOne:

      Vote for conservatives in the House and Senate next November and convince everyone you know to do the same.
      Nobama can go play golf every day of his last two years because he won’t get any of his socialist agenda passed with Republican majorities on both sides of Congress.
      He’ll be totally impotent parked on the front nine.

    • popseal

      11,000,000+ new Democrats from Mexico will not help solve our dilemma.

    • jjcbj

      I am in very strong agreement with you. I am sick of hearing what ought to happen to these vile people, obama, Reid, Pelosi, etc. I don’t think they will ever be brought to justice for what they are doing to the nation, its people, including my children and grandchildren. I hate to do it because I’m not very spiritual, but I must fall back on the belief that they will pay in the next life for all the damage they have done in this one.

  • Sgt Maj

    Didn’t they try the Nobama Life in the Soviet Union, Cuba, Red China, East Germany, etc?
    Look what great success they had in those countries!
    Maybe we can get Nobama to sell his idea to Putin and help implement it there as a Moscow resident. He’d feel right at home!

  • nomoretraitors

    “which, granted, is a thought in the back of every progressive mind”
    No, I think it’s in the FRONT of every “progressive” mind (and I use the term mind very loosely)

  • tagalog

    Marx was way wrong all right, but he’d turn up his nose at a dialectical moron like Obama.

    • DinaRehn

      Since he’s long passed away there is no way of knowing that for sure.

      What exactly are you basing that on?

      • tagalog

        What I base that on is that Obama doesn’t give the slightest indication of thinking about what he does in any way other than politically. He doesn’t think about things in Marxist terms, but instead in terms of what the Democrat Party has stood for in the past. He is clearly not a historical philosopher, in fact I doubt if he thinks of history in any organized way. I suspect that his historical sense is grounded in “we were slaves, then we were discriminated against, we’re still being discriminated against, and now I’m in charge and I’m going to change things.” That seems to be about as sophisticated as he gets in his historical analysis.

        He never talks about capitalism or class-consciousness, and he doesn’t do anything in any classically Marxian way to approach those subjects. Instead, he talks about redistributing wealth and class envy, subjects that Marx touched on only in terms of the working class organizing as a class and taking over the means of production by communist revolution. You don’t hear anything like that from Obama, and he has done little to take over the means of production. In fact, he just recently sold all government ownership of General Motors, suggesting that he’s NOT a Marxist.

        The closest he gets to Marxism is to talk about bringing into existence a government system that allows the poor, via government control, to drain the wealth produced by the middle class and the rich. He’s woefully disorganized about how he’s going to do that.

        • DinaRehn

          1). How do you know the man’s thinking?

          2). Explain his talk of ‘wealth inequality’?

          • tagalog

            1.) I judge what he is thinking from what he does, says and has written.

            2.) He’s always been a redistribution person. That alone is not very Marxist. Every leftist, Marxist or not, has been in favor of that.

          • DinaRehn

            1).No – you made claims as to his thinking – NOW, how are you able to do that?

            Are making claims as to being a mind reader?
            —–
            2). Now that you admitted to having the views of the Marxist ideology, why don’t you detail his differences with that ideology?

            Please explain how Barack Hussein parts company with the organized evil that is socialism?

          • tagalog

            DinaRehn, I didn’t make a single claim about what Obama’s thinking – truly, reading comprehension is a good thing when you seek to parse what others have said – what I DID say is that there are indications as to how he’s thinking; how do YOU know what other people are thinking unless it’s from the things they say and do?

            What does it mean when you say “Now that you have admitted to having the views of the Marxist ideology…?” Are you claiming that I’ve said I’m a Marxist? I know a bit about Marxism, I’ll certainly admit that; it appears to put me a bit over your head.

            Socialism and Marxism are not exactly the same thing (for example, socialism does not call for class consciousness or communist revolution to bring about reforms – see Edouard Bernstein, nor does socialism insist that the bourgeoisie is the current oppressor class). I’ve been talking about Marxism, how did socialism get into this discussion?

          • DinaRehn

            So now we’re into the part of the debate where is down to arguing minutia and you start issuing insults because you can’t dredge up any facts to bolster your contentions.
            And now you’re trying to back track:

            tagalog:What I base that on is that Obama doesn’t give the slightest indication of thinking about what he does in any way other than politically. He doesn’t think about things in Marxist terms, but instead in terms of what the Democrat Party has stood for in the past. He is clearly not a historical philosopher, in fact I doubt if he thinks of history in any organized way. I suspect that his historical sense is grounded in “we were slaves, then we were discriminated against, we’re still being discriminated against, and now I’m in charge and I’m going to change things.” That seems to be about as sophisticated as he gets in his historical analysis.
            http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/david-horowitz/latter-day-marxist/#comment-1157952232

            Definition of socialism
            a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
            (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.
            http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/socialism

            The various forms of Marxism or Socialism or whatever form of Collectivism doesn’t really matter to the organized evil that it is now does it?
            Look at Obama signature ‘accomplishment’ – Obamacare and how it follows right along with Marxist doctrine:————–

            Love It or Hate It, Obamacare Redistributes Americans’ Wealth
            Not everyone comes out ahead as a result of the Affordable Care Act. Somebody has to foot the bill when you shift that much wealth.
            To do so would have handed his enemies the kind of weaponry they craved, validation that Obama was indeed some sort of “socialist” who believed in “redistribution.” It could have killed the effort in its tracks, then and there.
            http://www.nationaljournal.com/health-care/love-it-or-hate-it-obamacare-redistributes-americans-wealth-20131121

            From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs. Karl Marx

          • tagalog

            If anybody’s arguing minutiae (please check your spelling – it’s embarrassing to use “big” words when you don’t know how to spell them), it’s you.

          • DinaRehn

            Do you know the difference between singular and plural?

            And you accuse me of arguing minutia?

          • EarlyBird

            Tagalog, can you believe this bimbo?

          • tagalog

            EarlyBird, see her post below.

            DinaRehn, I didn’t make a single claim about what Obama’s thinking – truly, reading comprehension is a good thing when you seek to parse what others have said – what I DID say is that there are indications as to how he’s thinking; how do YOU know what other people are thinking unless it’s from the things they say and do?

  • srlucado

    The Stalinist-in-Chief won’t stop until someone stops him.

    And I’m not surprised that he shook hands with Raul Castro–I’m surprised he didn’t bow. Isn’t that how he usually treats his superiors?

  • WW4

    Well, 50 years ago we had a booming manufacturing sector and the middle class could not only feed their families but put kids through college and retire relatively comfortably. They bought goods and services. They were the engine of the economy.

    Now many of those types of jobs have been outsourced, the middle class is shrinking, costs are making college and health care prohibitive, retirement is being postponed–which means they aren’t buying as many goods and services. Or they are–but that money does not then circulate. People who would be building stuff now get jobs clerking at Best Buy and Lowe’s and have to draw on gov’t assistance. Want to continue this way?

    The question is: what has happened in those 50 years?

    Not everybody belongs in college. Not everything needs to be manufactured in the states. But we have been sold a bill of goods about “remaining competitive in the global marketplace” while increasingly relying on government for answers.

    I’m a big proponent of educational overhaul. Germany has kids training for manufacturing at age 15 and 16. Those kids then go build BMWs. I think that’s the tip of the iceberg we need to address. It needn’t be addressed by mere taxation. But the income gap is real, and a real problem for national stability.

    • NotEasyBeingGreen

      I haven’t been on here before, but as a pretty strong progressive, I’m glad I stopped by today. I know we’re supposed to hate each other, and I’m a communist, and you’re a fascist, but I actually like a lot of what you’re saying. I totally agree that not everyone belongs in college, and that the Germans, by having a great apprenticeship system, are able to create good jobs for less academically skilled folks. I also like what you say about the income gap being real. Anyway, it’s more interesting over here than at Alternet, where I agree with all the writers and the commenters just want to rail against what a horrible right-winger Obama is. You guys would love it.

      • reader

        Being a “progressive,” you’re so brain washed that you don’t even recognize what the real meaning of words is. Do you know what a “fascist” is – really? Chances are – not a clue. Fascism is an Italian brand of socialism with the nationalist rather than the international emphasis, with the same populist core as in communism and national-socialism, aka naziism. In other words, fascist are/were more benign socialists than the commies and the nazis are.

        • Seek

          Congratulations. You have passed the final exam of Jonah Goldberg 101.

      • MLCBLOG

        Let me be the first to welcome you, brave soul, to the dialogue. May you enjoy and learn.

      • todd555

        What gay forums do you hang out at these days?

    • EarlyBird

      Man, you are singing my tune.

      I find it appalling that we have given in to this cult of four year education as the only thing worth pursuing after high school. Bring back trade schools, but updated for the modern economy. There are companies such as GM which have plants down in Kentucky (or some place in the South) and oil companies in Houston, who have to set up their own training programs inside high schools to ensure a workforce which is trained for their blue collar-but-high tech jobs. Certain sectors are desperate for highly skilled technicians who don’t need a four year degree, but can’t find them here in the US. You mentioned Germany. We need to model their system.

      We also need to overhaul our entire approach to higher education, including that four year program which doesn’t seem to work out too well for graduates nowadays.

      As for Ross Perot, I laughed at him. Now I’m not laughing. He was right.

      • WW4

        Yes. I think attitudes are getting more open about not needing university right after high school. In our community we have been able to unite the manufacturing sector with the high school and community colleges for observation and hands on experiences. The message is “Here’s what you can do, now, with a little training. You can make good money. And guess what, in 5 or 10 or 20 years, you can go still go to college–and work may even help pay for it!” Best part is these kids work and stay in the community, as do their $.

        In our case, we may look to the levels of government for support–but not for the solution. That’s the kind of thing that can get us past the partisan need to be “right” and into the citizens’ need for good stewardship.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      “The question is: what has happened in those 50 years?”

      Unions forced manufacturers to move to locations where their competitors had gained an advantage with nonunion labor. That’s probably the single biggest problem other than the propaganda of resentment and envy rather than taking up the challenge to make it through one’s own efforts.

      • WW4

        Unions became a parody of what they were meant to be, but unions were undeniably an integral part of middle class prosperity, back then. Just as the pendulum swung too far left, it swung back too far right. The case you often hear about (because it is an extreme, yet everyday example) is the comparison between the staggering wealth of the Walton family, and the Wal-Mart workers who draw on public assistance. It’s hard NOT to draw a moral conclusion from that. And its true that tax rates were higher in the prosperous 50s/60s while CEO compensation was much lower.

        Lest anyone think I am favoring government over “fat cats,” I should point out that these “fat cats” ARE our government–if not direct participants, then funders of those who are. Their counterweight tends to be career politicians who promise the moon and stars to the people.

        Twas ever thus, maybe, but I would submit in those postwar years you had partisanship, but those people in government also had a moral/stewardship perspective, and understood where tax money should be invested to keep the economic ecosystem healthy and balanced. Now you have a more naked power/cash grab between the parties.

        • tagalog

          I have argued successfully many times that it is unions that have kept big business honest.

          I also note that in communist societies, unions are suppressed on the rationale that they do not represent ALL of the working class, and that it is government who represents that class, not the organizations of workers.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          “Unions became a parody of what they were meant to be, but unions were undeniably an integral part of middle class prosperity, back then.”

          Mmmmm, you’re not lying. But the key point is that union culture is killing domestic manufacturing for the most part. They could in theory be “rebooted” along a more productive line of thinking – value added negotiations rather than zero sum approach. But if someone is smart enough to understand that they probably won’t value union membership and certainly not union politics very much, or at all.

          In theory a guy that had a lot of power that really cared about the middle class, someone say living in a big white house somewhere that was really smart could lead the way. But no such luck. This someone would also have to understand how things are actually produced successfully. Or at least have some understanding of successful strategies (as opposed to being omniscient).

          Class warfare will continue for some time I think.

    • http://europa-antiqua-arca.blogspot.com/ para_bellum

      The left only pretends to care about the gap. Or more precisely, it does care about it, but its actual policies usually worsen it — on purpose. It causes the disease, then sells you the “cure.” Like how Microsoft alternately creates broken OS upgrades then gets you to buy the “fixed” version. Income inequality is the lifeblood of the left. If there were a solid middle class and less inequality, no one would vote for welfare and state-provided healthcare. The left needs inequality to exist, much like how it creates phantom racism which it then “fights.”

      Student loans are a good example. Yes, of course a sensible policy for reducing inequality would be training in trade skills. That’s precisely why the left pushes programs like gender studies. They don’t want to fix the problem, they want to exacerbate it with “solutions” that don’t work. And profit off it: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/11/25/federal-student-loan-profit/3696009/

      • WW4

        Can’t disagree, although from what I’ve observed about university life is a re-orientation toward the practical and marketable specifically in the “soft” fields. I think gender studies is not quite as fashionable as it was 20 years ago.

  • popseal

    As spot on right as this article is, the willing intentional ignorance of the American public will not hear it. The Three Monkey Media always aids in the process of enforcing it and promoting more of it. Ours is an echo chamber. Theirs is a padded cell.

  • Jeff Ludwig

    Excellent article. For additional analysis I hope you will be interested to read my article about the top 1% found at http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/has_the_top_1_caused_our_economic_woes.html

  • MrUniteUs1

    Let he who has not bought products Made in China cast the first the stone.

    • fiddler

      Having formerly been in two unions I can say with authority: Slothful, self-centered, low quality, give a rip, protected, over-paid Unions drove the automobile industry to Japan. Remember Bill Clinton stating that we would be crazy not to trade with China? C’mon you are weakly trying to ascribe blame to greedy Americans. Really, isn’t it stupid to pay more for the same thing just so you feel “warm” inside? I think college degrees are largely over-rated. You don’t need calculus, women’s studies, and numerous other BS courses to fix computers, to weld, to be an electrician, or HVAC, or construction, etc, etc. It’s an opportunity to keep tenured “profs” where they are on their indoctrination soapboxes.

      • MrUniteUs1

        Enjoying my American made Moto X

  • Jeff Ludwig

    I would also recommend the chapter on the twentieth century in Richard Pipes’ book Property and Freedom. He explains in depth how we have shifted from having to resist absolutist tyranny (as we did in the 18th century) to a different type of tyranny (of the majority) in the name of equality. It’s interesting to read his well reasoned and well researched take on these matters, but at the same time, Prof. Pipes does not have any formulaic answer. He cautions us to be more “reasonable” and “balanced” in our use of government. Yet, I believe the threat to liberty actually has almost apocalyptic significance. That’s why I’m in prayer so much. I read Psalm 7 yesterday and felt uplifted although I’m still a little down today. The prospects for the “good life” in America seem to be dimming at an accelerated rate everyday. What will life be like for our children and our grandchildren? The issues being discussed by Mr. Horowitz are not only ideological and economic, but are deeply personal.

  • DinaRehn

    Our socialist national leader sure is trying to redistribute the wealth:

    CBO:Top 40% Paid 106.2% of Income Taxes; Bottom 40% Paid -9.1%, Got Average of $18,950 in ‘Transfers’
    (CNSNews.com) – The top 40 percent of households by before-tax income actually paid 106.2 percent of the nation’s net income taxes in 2010, according to a new study by the Congressional Budget Office.

    At the same time, households in the bottom 40 percent took in an average of $18,950 in what the CBO called “government transfers” in 2010.

    Taxpayers in the top 40 percent of households were able to pay more than 100 percent of net federal income taxes in 2010 because Americans in the bottom 40 percent actually paid negative income taxes, according to the CBO study entitled, “The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2010.”
    http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/cbotop-40-paid-1062-income-taxes-bottom-40-paid-91-got-average-18950

    • EarlyBird

      Your statistics are meaningless without pointing out that top tax rates have gone from 91% in 1950 (while Ike was in the White House and we were fighting communism) to 35% today:

      http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_24065108/wealth-gap-widens-richest-1-percent-earn-biggest
      And the fact that the top 10% of Americans made 50.4% of all income earned last year.

      http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_24065108/wealth-gap-widens-richest-1-percent-earn-biggest

      Put another way: The wealthiest as a group are growing smaller and smaller, but vastly more weathy, while their *official* percentage of income tax is at near historic lows. All while the poor are growing every day in terms of numbers and the middle class is shrinking. *This is just the official figure they would pay if they didn’t have massive loopholes, and couldn’t dodge capital gains taxes, etc. A person making $450,000,000 today pays the same income tax as someone paying $450,000.
      It is not “socialist nationalism” to look at these figures and be aghast at what is happening to the middle class. No, it’s not just drop-outs, losers, “the blacks” and Welfare queens who need policies for the middle class, and need some government help either: it’s most everyone.

      • DinaRehn

        When has been the ‘mercury news’ been an accredited source for economic data over the CBO?

        Let’s see some excerpts, links and data from real reference sources.

        • EarlyBird

          This is news to you? You actually doubt this information due to the source (which was just one of the first ones that popped up on the Googler.
          Here are historic tax rates, provided by none other than a site dedicated to the “overburdened American tax payer” (which I consider myself).
          http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/history-of-federal-individual-1.html
          Here’s the Business Insider’s take on the wealth gap:
          http://www.businessinsider.com/wealth-and-income-inequality-in-america-2013-4#a-couple-of-years-ago-professors-dan-ariely-and-michael-norton-asked-5000-americans-about-wealth-and-inequality-1
          And the Economist’s:
          http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/10/income-inequality-america
          The Wall Street Journal:
          http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304672404579186223105265440

          • DinaRehn

            Excerpts please – and again, where did they obtain their data?

          • EarlyBird

            Oh Dina, read the articles, please. I can’t do it for you. This is not news: there is an enormous wealth gap in America. And the earth revolves around the sun.

          • DinaRehn

            I took the time to provide excepts to show I had REAL data – why can’t you do the same?

            Is it because you don’t have anything but meaningless suppositions that can’t be supported in reality?

          • reader

            Don’t waste your time on a marxist troll posing as something else it can’t even define what. I’d think it’s a bot, but bots have to be smarter than this.

          • DinaRehn

            I understand what you’re saying – but a lot of time it’s worth showing that those of the national socialist left have nothing on which to base their load of barrack.

          • EarlyBird

            You’re an absolute fool, Dina. If you wanted to believe that the earth was flat, you woudl, and would call NASA space sattelite pictures the work of socialists.

            Your “conversation” with me is the equivalent of you plugging your ears and yelling “lala laalaalalla…I can’ hear you!”

            What an ignorant buffoon you are. You sure are on the right website.

          • DinaRehn

            You have yet to back your original assertion.

            What exactly is your point on this whole matter anyway?

            It has been my experience that those of the national socialist left start in to the realm of school yard insules when they’ve lost the argument and have no facts on which to bolster it.

            You following that true to form.

          • EarlyBird

            “What exactly is your point on this whole matter anyway?”

            You can’t make this stuff up, folks! Hah!

          • DinaRehn

            What?

            You can’t even answer that question?

            Are you dare to impugn my intellectual acumen?

          • EarlyBird

            Um… You don’t have “intellectual acumen.” You have an intellect and you may have acumen at something.

            My point: Indeed, we have a very large, and very, very well established wealth gap in the country. We have not had this kind of disparity in wealth between the wealthy and the middle class since about the 1920s. Every person with a shred of data and intelligence recognizes and accepts this, from the most left-wing socialist to the most rapacious capitalist. Okay? I will not debate that with you any more than I will debate that the sun sets in the West. If this is genuinely news to you, you must be living under a rock, and I can’t possibly help you. If you want to debate this point for the sake of debating, don’t bore me. This FACT is not some left wing propaganda.

            And this poses a problem for our economy, the quality of life of individual Americans, and the quality of our democracy. Again, this is accepted by All the Above. If you actually care to read anything which doesn’t merely reinforce your ignorance, you’ll get this. And no I will not do your homework for you.

            Nor is this is an argument for socialism. The reasons for this disparity is the rise of global competition, outsourcing by large corporations and a very whacked out tax system.

            To me, it means we need to start getting back to a regular, old fashioned tax system, where the very rich pay a lot more than the middle class. And stop with the nonsense that has gotten us into this mess, aka, “Trickle Down Economics,” which has been proven in the past 30 years to NOT “float all boats on rising tide,” but instead enriches the already rich while gutting the American middle class. And stop calling every act of government attempt to maintain a middle class “socialism!”

            Now, go do some reading from respected business journals like the ones I’ve been linking you to. Get educated.

          • DinaRehn

            My intellectual abilities are irreverent in light of YOUR inability to answer a simple question or questions.

            You have YET to disprove the figures I provided, All you done is post bare links to articles that supposedly bolster you point – in other words, you expect other to prove you point for you.

            You see, IF you had data to refute my original post, you could have simply posted an excerpt of said refutation and been on your way – But you didn’t did you.

            Again:
            I presented data to which you said

            Your statistics are meaningless

            Then I asked: When has been the ‘mercury news’ been an accredited source for economic data over the CBO?

            Let’s see some excerpts, links and data from real reference sources.

            What is the source of their facts?

            And you refused to answer with real data.

            You refused to back up your assertion that

            Your statistics are meaningless

            You have yet to do this.

            So what are we to conclude for this?

            Finally, please tell everyone how you can ‘spread the wealth’ around except by the point of a gun?

          • tagalog

            Your intellectual abilities are irreverent? Do you mean “irrelevant?” Or are you asserting your atheism or something?

          • DinaRehn

            Fixed that – spell check error.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            A “wealth gap” is a good, a necessary thing. We need upward mobility to create incentives to work hard and create valuable stuff.

            People that argue otherwise are stupid communists. How stupid do you have to be to promote communism without realizing it?

          • CosmotKat

            You really are full of crap. Leftists confuse a lot of things, but income inequality will prove to be one of the biggest idiot issues that you have brought up. Try thinking in these terms then we can discuss:

            Do We Care About Income Inequality, or Absolute Well-Being?

          • tagalog

            What intellectual acumen are you talking about?

          • DinaRehn

            Again, that issue is irrelevant in light of YOUR inability to answer any questions.

          • tagalog

            So you don’t know?

          • DinaRehn

            That is irrelevant – the question is whether ‘EarlyBird’ can actually answer a straight question.

          • tagalog

            Well, I must admit, you’re doing a superlative job of demonstrating that whatever EarlyBird’s failings in that regard might be, you’re certainly world-class at the selfsame thing.

          • DinaRehn

            Again , my capabilities are irrelevant in light of the fact that ‘EarlyBird’ can’t actually answer a straight question.

          • CosmotKat

            name-calling and insults are the last resort of the ignorant.

          • reader

            This tool is a peanut endlessly bouncing around with the same drill. It’s not here to argue or learn. It’s here to troll.

          • DinaRehn

            It’s tactics are very indicative of those of the national socialist left in that it can’t manage to answer questions and yet falls back on juvenile invective when it’s run out of dodges for those questions.

            Not that it’s has yet to back up it’s original assertions that is made – clearly indicating that I can’t do so.

            Our socialist national leader sure is trying to redistribute the wealth:

            CBO:Top 40% Paid 106.2% of Income Taxes; Bottom 40% Paid -9.1%, Got Average of $18,950 in ‘Transfers’
            (CNSNews.com) – The top 40 percent of households by before-tax income actually paid 106.2 percent of the nation’s net income taxes in 2010, according to a new study by the Congressional Budget Office.

            At the same time, households in the bottom 40 percent took in an average of $18,950 in what the CBO called “government transfers” in 2010.

            Taxpayers in the top 40 percent of households were able to pay more than 100 percent of net federal income taxes in 2010 because Americans in the bottom 40 percent actually paid negative income taxes, according to the CBO study entitled, “The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2010.”
            http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/cbotop-40-paid-1062-income-taxes-bottom-40-paid-91-got-average-18950

          • tagalog

            National socialist left? What’s that? I didn’t know that socialists were nationalistic – I would have guessed just the opposite.

          • DinaRehn

            Definition of national
            Pronunciation: /ˈnaSHənəl/
            adjective
            of or relating to a nation; common to or characteristic of a whole nation:this policy may have been in the national interest a national newspaper
            http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/national?q=national

            ———–

            Definition of socialism
            a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
            (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.
            http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/socialism

          • tagalog

            So what is the connection you’re making between the two terms?

          • DinaRehn

            Where did I state there was a connection?

            I merely defined the words.

          • tagalog

            Well, no, you referred to “national socialism” in two posts.
            But who’s counting?

          • DinaRehn

            So?

            I used two words – are you claiming that we can no longer use them?

            How “Liberal” is that?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “I didn’t know that socialists were nationalistic”

            It depends on what you mean by nationalistic. It might not be comparable to the zeal of the famous Germans, but some other socialists are also proud of their nation. Most seem to feel more kinship with the international socialist movements but that doesn’t always mean that they want a supra-nationalistic sovereign. I guess a national socialist would be someone that wanted to keep their culture and borders (nation) but transition (or keep) the economy and economic policies tilted towards “socialism.”

            France probably has a lot of those kinds of folks. I’m sure you can find them everywhere but we just don’t talk about it much. In America, it’s hard to be both a nationalist and socialist because all of the pro-socialist (communist) propaganda focuses on how evil we are as a nation, while other nations are often characterized as victims of our “imperialism.”

            Still, it’s possible. I’d just be careful about using the term.

          • tagalog

            Of course, you’re right. I was just being contrary because of the Nazi implication.

          • EarlyBird

            Dina, I have a feeling that you don’t want to address any data that bumps into your preferred ideology. But since you can’t be bothered to read anything and demand to be spoon fed, here are a couple of excerpts:

            Business Insider: “It’s not just Occupy Wall Street protesters that are worried about wealth and income inequality.

            Now people like Bill Gross, manager of the world’s largest bond fund at Pimco, are warning that the problem is making the U.S. less productive, while star investors like Jim Chanos worry that people will have less incentive to participate in the economy if they have decided that “the game isn’t fair,”

            Forbes: “The disparity between the nation’s top earners and the bottom 80 percent has grown exponentially over the past three decades, and it’s been exacerbated by the Great Recession.”

            Diane, please recognize: it is not true that by simply eliminating taxes and regulation that everyone’s boats float on a rising tide (I used to believe in Reaganomics too). It is not true that Americans do best when they are completely abandoned by government. It is not just losers and lazy minorities who need government – average people do. It is not “socialism” for government to spend and look after the “common good.” It’s in fact as old as America itself. Our “every man for himself” policies we’ve been doing for 30+ years are what is radical and un-American and it has gutted the average American middle class family. You do not have to ascribe to a socialist agenda to want some balance back.

          • DinaRehn

            I presented data to which you said

            Your statistics are meaningless

            Then Iasked: When has been the ‘mercury news’ been an accredited source for economic data over the CBO?

            Let’s see some excerpts, links and data from real reference sources.

            What is the source of their facts?

            And you refused to answer with real data.

            You refused to back up your assertion that

            Your statistics are meaningless

            So what are we to conclude for this?

            Finally, please tell everyone how you can ‘spread the wealth’ around except by the point of a gun?

          • EarlyBird

            Oh Dina, you’re ridiculous, and you know it! I bury you in articles from respected BUSINESS journals stating that there is a massive wealth gap, and that the gap is bad for our economy and society, and that these concerns are coming from business leaders, and its not enough for you because I have apparently not excerpted, packaged and prepared a book report and delivered it to you on a silver platter.

            You are the very definition of partisan stupidity! You lazy, ignorant little girl. Surely you must have enough sense to be privately embarrassed. As if ANY information could possibly penetrate your ideological bubble.

            How do I even get sucked into serious “discussions” with the terrified, ignorant partisan right wingers on this board to begin with?

            And who the F**K suggested that I wanted to ‘spread the wealth around” at all, let alone by the point of a gun? You idiot!

          • DinaRehn

            Again:
            I presented data to which you said

            Your statistics are meaningless

            Then I asked: When has been the ‘mercury news’ been an accredited source for economic data over the CBO?

            Let’s see some excerpts, links and data from real reference sources.

            What is the source of their facts?

            And you refused to answer with real data.

            You refused to back up your assertion that

            Your statistics are meaningless

            You have yet to do this.

            So what are we to conclude for this?

            Finally, please tell everyone how you can ‘spread the wealth’ around except by the point of a gun?

          • vietqn6789

            I was very pleased with what above. thank you very much
            http://hcm.giasusp.net
            http://trungtamgiasu.giasusp.net

          • tagalog

            And others have provided YOU with links. Why aren’t you acknowledging that fact?

          • DinaRehn

            Okay, I acknowledg that you utterly FAILED to provide excerpts with those bare links – satisfied now?

          • tagalog

            I don’t have any links to provide to my opinions. Sorry.

          • DinaRehn

            So you can’t back up anything with real excepts and facts – that should be clear by now.

          • tagalog

            Right; I just post my opinions, unless I feel like justifying them with links. Even then, just as with you, they’re still my opinions and can be freely disregarded by anyone who chooses to do so.

            In this instance, I don’t feel like finding any links; I’m getting what I’m looking for in this thread doing just what I’m doing.

            If you want links, find ‘em yourself; they’re all over the net.

          • DinaRehn

            No, his original post questioned what I posted.

            We’re talking facts here, not opinions.

            If you can’t find and post the excerpts detailing the facts that back up your assertions then the only conclusions is that they are worthless.

            Is you plan to simply argue minutia incessantly and bore the Hades’ out of everyone?

            Do you actually have some facts and excerpts to contribute?

  • MrUniteUs1

    Are you for against those Marxist farm subsidies? Some Congressmen and their famiies have received millions, in farm subsides from tax payers. Talk about redistribution of wealth.

    • EarlyBird

      But that doesn’t count as “welfare” or a “hand out” because … it doesn’t go to inner city minorities. Or so they say.

      • todd555

        Gaybird, do you have a poster of Obama over your bubble bath?

      • objectivefactsmatter

        The difference between a “handout” and some other tax rebate is whether or not the beneficiary is paying more taxes than the disbursement in question. If you are a net taker, you are getting handouts.

        Although some rebates are pointless, that doesn’t quite qualify in my mind for calling them handouts but go ahead if you want to.

    • fiddler

      Detering the focus – fine tactic. If this is your lame attempt at moral equivalence, it is falling on deaf ears. Check the polls. As Lincoln said: ” you can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.

  • MrUniteUs1

    Were you for against the TARP Bailout?

    • EarlyBird

      I was for it. As painful as it was, without it, we’d not have the electricity to debate it on the interwebs right now. It saved us from the brink.

      • todd555

        Gaybird, didn’t you get married to your boyfriend yet?

  • ThomPaineJr12

    Obama and Dems don’t want anything close to income equality.. they just want to narrow the gap.. have a less extreme disparity in the distribution of wealth.. to tax the rich as needed in order to err on the side of generosity in helping the needy.

  • Dallas25305

    Obama is doing what most Socialist do and that is destroy the middle class. It has been ever thus, since the days of Marx. In any form of Socialism the idea is to have a wealthy Leftist, Socialist elite at the top, ruling things and giving out orders to the peasants. Secondly a huge lower class is desired who are dependent on hand outs from the government run by the Leftist elites. To achieve this the middle class must be destroyed, because they are the independent thinkers and doers who don’t want to be run by the leftist elite and are not satisfied to have scraps thrown to them. Even Obama’s favorite radical Saul Alinsky once said the white middle class must be destroyed. Is this not what Obozo is doing???

    • cousinarlo

      Well said Dallas. Is there a John Galt, now that we really need one?

  • mcbee555

    If the American people ever again allow themselves to be lied to by a candidate who talks about “transforming America,” they’re bigger fools than Obama and his Socialist-Democrats believe they are.
    We don’t need transformation, which by that Obama meant equal pain for everybody, we need to return to the original constitutional process that brought our country to be the greatest nation in this world.
    We must decide that Socialists have no place in the American political process. We thrive when capitalism thrives, we needn’t follow Europe. The Euro experience doesn’t recommend its duplication here, this is the U.S.A. !

  • Ellman48

    Obama is ignorant, a hypocrite and a liar. What else do we need to know before we realize that all of his policies, his oratory, his lecturing, his ideology are insane and in complete dissonance with reality and human nature. This is why the Left NEED GOVERNMENT. To impose its will on everyone who disagrees with it. To take ‘from each according to his ability, and to redistribute it to each according to his needs.’ This socialist Marxist principle is a manifestation of a deranged and profligate mind that every sane person should reject with utter contempt.

  • v

    The question is why did it take that long to figure out this guy. To me, he was an open book. No hidden agenda “spread the wealth around” was his campaign slogan. Now that the wealth is being spread to his cronies everyone is angry and surprised. All I have to say is that ignorance and stupidity has a price, and it’s expensive. I just hope it’s not too late and by 2014 we can apply the brakes and begin to reverse the damage for our children’s sake. I am hoping, but I am not hopeful.

  • Donald J DaCosta

    A quote from Walter Williams in a Townhall column (http://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2013/10/30/is-there-a-way-out-n1732550)

    “If we are to be able to avoid ultimate collapse, it’s going to take a
    moral reawakening and renewed constitutional respect — not by
    politicians but by the American people. The prospect of that happening
    may be whistlin’ ‘Dixie.’”

    Ultimately, aside from the elderly, who spent their lives working their tails off and paying into the social security, Ponzi scheme, those who live on the dole are going to have to decide which is worse, reliance on government bureaucracies or on themselves. They will have to give up what they’ve been taught is the innate unfairness of income inequality, the notion that the Entrepreneur, physician, sports star, Rapper, etc. is worth no more than the burgher flipper at McDonalds. In other words they will have to become adults in a world where dependency is not only accepted but encouraged and actively promoted. In a world where that the mostly male influence is not present and that absence becoming more prevalent, what are the odds?

    America is in dire straights today because a majority of the electorate naively bought into the media sales pitch, the Madison Avenue marketing hype of a young, pleasant looking, charismatic, orally gifted “black” man with a very checkered and intentionally ignored past who proved in his 1st 4 year term that he was considerably less than advertised.

    So what would a reasonably intelligent, mature electorate do in 2012? Prove they were anything but intelligent or mature or well informed, the latter intentionally enforced by a dominant media cheering section, the politically motivated activities of an ideological IRS to suppress the political operations of groups with conservative leanings, the Tea Party, etc. and aid and abet the political cover up surrounding the tragedy of Benghazi. Further, these “sophisticated, well informed” voters seem devoid of any awareness regarding the dichotomy between the media treatment of George W. Bush and Barack Hussein Obama. “Bush lied People died” the lie repeated over and over again vs Benghazi? Who’s he? Fast & Furious? Yeah, “great movie.” Voter intimidation? What voter intimidation? Etc.

    There is little hope that the big government, massive regulation tilt in D.C. will change of its own accord. It is going to have to come from the electorate and that is Mr. William’s concern and mine.

  • popseal

    Just another DAVOS MAN.