Wednesday, December 01, 2010

A Good Quote



"Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." ~ Albert Einstein

9 comments:

Joe said...

They (liberal/progressives) only have one idea: spend everybody else's money.

Jim said...

The conservatives/teaparty only have one idea: it's OK with me if 2% of Americans have all the money.

Mark said...

Jim, why is it NOT ok with you that 2% of Americans have all (most) of the money?

What do you have against wealthy people? Are you envious? Jealous?

George Soros is wealthy. Do you hate him? Warren Buffet is wealthy. Do you hate him? Your hero, Barack Obama is only in his position to acquire wealth and power. Do you hate him for that?

What about the people you work for? Do you realize that if they weren't at least partly wealthy they wouldn't have had the funds to hire you? Do you realize that poor people can't hire people to work for them? Do you realize that if everyone was as poor as you apparently think they should be that everyone would be unemployed?

Have you thought through the reasons for your class envy?

Jim said...

Mark, are you against income redistribution or are you for it?

Mark said...

I am for the Government keeping their hands off everybody's money, including the wealthy. Now, answer my questions.

Jim said...

"Now, answer my questions."

Yes, sir!

"What do you have against wealthy people? Are you envious? Jealous?"

I have nothing whatsoever against wealthy people. I'm quite comfortable with what I have and the opportunities I have. I'm neither envious nor jealous. This is a red herring.

"George Soros is wealthy. Do you hate him?" Nope.

"Warren Buffet is wealthy. Do you hate him?" Nope.

"Your hero, Barack Obama [not my hero] is only in his position to acquire wealth and power [This is totally out of right field, has no basis in fact, and you're the first person I've ever heard even hint at it]. Do you hate him for that?" Even if any of that s**t were true, I wouldn't hate him for that.

"What about the people you work for? Do you realize that if they weren't at least partly wealthy they wouldn't have had the funds to hire you?" I work for a corporation. The wealth of the board of directors has little to do with the company's desire or ability to provide the funds to hire me. They hired me because they provide a product that people want and can afford and therefore there is a demand for that product and the company needs people like me to be able to provide the product.

But the driver of economic prosperity is not the wealth of the of the owners of capital but the ability of the vast middle class consumers to purchase and therefore create demand for products.

There has been a massive transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthiest in this country since the beginning of the Reagan era. There is a massive amount of capital in the hands of the wealthiest today. And yet the economy is suffering and unemployment is at 9.8%.

Don't try to tell me that it's because the market doesn't know what their marginal tax rates are going to be next year. That's pure bulls**t. These people have had reduced marginal rates for the last seven years of the Bush administration and overall new jobs was 3 million. Under Clinton, 23 million.

You argue that small businesses are the generators of jobs, but only a very, very small amount of "small businesses" are among the top 2% of the wealthiest.

"if everyone was as poor as you apparently think they should be". Straw man fallacy. I don't think this and nobody else does either.

"Have you thought through the reasons for your class envy?" Nope. It doesn't exist.

Parklife said...

"Have you thought through the reasons for your class envy?"

Kind of sounds like.. When did you stop beating your wife?

Not only is the "dont tax the wealthy" argument poorly constructed.. but it ignores emerging markets. Why would a wealthy person "invest" in the US.

Marshall Art said...

Jim,

I am totally against the gov't redistributing wealth. I can handle wealth redistribution if the wealthy are doing in by their own volition. It's their money, so they're free, or should be, to do as they please with it.

The fact that a small percentage has "all the wealth" is not a problem if it was acquired ethically. There is an underlying attitude of covetousness by those who favor redistribution, coupled with one that implies something UNethical was done to acquire what they have. As it might be true of some, to suggest it is commonplace requires proof.

Jim said...

"There is an underlying attitude of covetousness by those who favor redistribution..."

No there isn't. That's your assumption, unsupported by any evidence.

"...coupled with one that implies something UNethical was done to acquire what they have."

No there isn't. That's your assumption, unsupported by any evidence.

"As it might be true of some, to suggest it is commonplace requires proof."

No one has suggested that it is. This is all your invented straw man.

The "underlying attitude" is that it is not good for society, security, the economy or anything else for wealth to be accumulated by a very few. It grants that few too much political power and squeezes the all-important middle class out of existence. Eliminate the middle class and you've eliminated the economic demand that generates a healthy, growing economy.