I'm kidding.
But there is some weird kind of leftist alignment all of a sudden, with the freaky radicals whining about how horrible the income gap has become recently.
See, for example:
* Huffington Post, "Income Gap Between Rich and Poor Is Highest in Decades, Data Show."And just in, at Crooks and Liars, "The Rich Got Rich And The Poor Got Poorer. But Ain't We Got Fun?" (At Memeorandum.)
* Robert Reich, "We're in a Recession Because the Rich Are Raking in an Absurd Portion of Wealth."
And I'll be honest here: I've always been a bit bothered by extremes in incomes and wealth, especially since I have spent a great deal of time around the very poor. But those concerns simply do not translate into the economic "solutions" that radical leftists propose, which is always wealth transfers from rich to poor by way of "tax fairness" and the expansion of social welfare entitlements as far as the eye can see. (And this more than anything is strangling our economy.)
A couple of days ago Darleen Click had an essay entitled, "The road to hell is cheerily paved ... by people like Matt Yglesias." Darleen points readers to an essay by Yglesias at The Nation, "A Great Time to Be Alive?" And rather than quote it, just be sure to read the whole thing (a classic statement of the collectivist/redistributionist policies of today's Democratic-Socialist establishment in the Age of Aquarius/Obama.) Darleen certainly picks up on the Aquarian vibes:
I hesitate to label Yglesias as evil, but he is much too intelligent to ignore the long history of failure of the anti-liberty, collectivist systems he is advocating. As with many Leftists, he is stuck in a kind of utopian loop believing that just once more, this time for sure! he and his like-minded brethren can drag humanity into an era of harmony where people will remain happily productive even as they give up any moral claim to their own labor and talents.It's a classic, and I can't resist including this line:
Civilization begins with the realization that if an individual is sovereign, the basic commandments against murder and theft must also be accompanied by the commandment against coveting.I'm also less hesitant to describe such collectivism --- by Yglesias or any of the others --- as evil. We know where collectivization leads, and we know that evil resides in the hearts of those who are ingracious and covetous, so I guess readers can make the implications as to where I'm headed ...
In any case, two more things: One is Doug Ross's awesome entry, "The Towering Financial Acumen of the Left -- Spittled-laced Balloon Juice insists Rich Must Get Poorer to Make Things Gooder."
And I'll close with something from the Daily Kos Kommissars that ties it all together. See, "WaPo: Don't Tax the Rich!":
Here is the supposed "liberal" Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus in today's edition:I'm all for a more progressive tax code. But consider: The Tax Policy Center examined what it would take to avoid raising taxes on families earning less than $250,000 a year while reducing the deficit to 3 percent of the economy by decade's end. The top two rates would have to rise to 72.4 and 76.8 percent, more than double the current level. You don't have to be anti-tax zealot Grover Norquist to think this would be insane.
Why is this insane? In the 1950's, a time of prosperity, the top rate was 90%. Were Eisenhower and Nixon insane? No Ms. Marcus, you do have to be a Grover Norquist to find 70+ rates insane. There is nothing insane about it at all. The government needs money. Rich people have plenty of it. Why rob banks? Because that's where the money is. This isn't insanity. In fact, it's sanity.
Not only does the government need the money, the collectivists will rob you to get it!
They need the money!
5 comments:
Great post.
Need to fix the Doug Ross link.
I remember David Horowitz's book, "Left Illusions," a description of his personal odyssey from the delusional dreams of the Matt Yglesias types to saner terrains. Collectivism never works. It removes both human freedom and human prosperity simultaneously.
Fools never learn, though. Every generation has to face up to the same stupid illusions. If the Left didn't own the university lock, stock and barrel, it would be an easier fight.
Doug Ross linked fixed, Stogie. Did you find that post anyway? Great post over there.
I'm thinking we need an "Entertainer Tax." Anyone who makes mega-millions in the Entertainment Industry should be taxed at a 90% rate. It would be kind of like a tax on cigarettes and liquor -- you know, what is referred to as a "sin tax." Oh, but that's how the Dem's fund their campaigns. Not likely.
I did go back and read Doug Ross's article and have now linked his blog.
Thanks again, Donald!
Once one begins to believe that other people's money is theirs then physically taking anything of economic value becomes easily justified. At some point the government has to restore some order, a point at which only government has the right to steal, and the very people who thought they were getting something for nothing become the enemies of the "state" for the good of the nation.
One might be forgiven the thought that the Obama administration and its adherents really are trying to create this situation. Almost all of the economic hardship that is happening is a direct result of administration policies or lack thereof. It should surprise no one that the two groups suffering higher unemployment are Blacks and the young worker just out of high school and college. Since they voted overwhelmingly for Obama one might think that Obama would attempt to rectify this situation, but alas that is not what I believe they have planned. These people are the "useful idiots" in the minds of those who want power.
Given that the young and many minorities are generally the easiest to fool and use they would be the ones to fall for the canard that it is the rich that are responsible for their problems instead off government policies. In other words the government thinks these people are not smart enough to figure out they are being used and not to their benefit. It is not like the history of many minorities and the young to be promised something and then it is not forth coming and they again vote for the very people who left them out of the American dream. They seem to have a love of words, but not an understanding of how results are obtained.
But I believe, from some of the reading I have done, that this may not be the case. You see it reflected in Obama's constantly falling poll numbers. You cannot use Wilsonian or FDR tactics in an environment where news and analysis can be obtained by other means than the MSM. One of the reasons why you see the administration trying to control the news by any means possible.
I believe that most of these young people and minorities are much smarter than they are given credit despite the rather poor education they received in public schools. They just need to be exposed to a "real" education that challenges them. That of course is where conservatives and others need to use their resources to put that education out there where these people can get ready access. One only has to look at the interest that a large number of people now have in their history and there is no reason why this could not be expanded to cover economic, finance and a host of other disciplines requisite for understanding and living successfully in modern America. NOTE: Science and what used to be called Social Studies, understanding our system of government, might be nice also.
Post a Comment