“Under the way theyíre kind of writing it right now out of the Senate Finance Committee, some people could spend their entire five years—there’s a five-year work requirement—on welfare going to college. Now, thatís not my view of helping people become independent.” —George W. Bush, July 29, 2003 I did a right-wing talk show not long ago on Fox News. Whenever… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (63)Page 1 of 1 pagesAnd we’re surprised by the Bush administration’s economic policy/priorities?
Get real, this has always been and always will be a world of “them that got give to themselves and those like them.”
Why else would fraternities exist?
No big deal except of course for the fact they sell us this bill of goods every few years at election time. But most Americans are too lazy or uninformed to vote their interests.
I blame the mass media for that since their role is now twofold: first, reporters etc. clamber to acquire the ‘fame’ necassary to command high earnings; and second, to sell advertsing space not disseminate accurate information.
In this country we don’t vote issues, we vote feelings.
So a majority of ‘wanne-be-rich’ folks vote as if they are, or soon will be. Most are sure their riches are just around the corner.
I ask a simple question: how can anyone who earns less than $100,000 a year ever vote Republican?
Can it be those lower income voters actually believe the hype of values, etc. the Republicans so cleverly use advertising to spread?
Or do those voters actually believe the Rush Limbaughs and Sean Hannitys of the radio/television waves?
Posted by Chris Stevens on Oct 6, 2003 at 6:54 PM America for Americans! As an outsider it seems that what America wants is more domestic government. It sounds and can be boring, but in the big picture is more satisfying than tax dollars and large deficits for foriegn adventures. America is admirable, but it needs to carve up that sacred cow, the Pentagon’s budget, or you can expect more of the same.
Posted by Doug on Oct 6, 2003 at 8:29 PM What everyone seems to overlook in this egregious and wanton abuse of the least empowered among us, as they grow exponentially…is that, as the number of lower middle class income families that slip into the poverty zone increases, the greater becomes the probability that a critical mass of resentment, hatred, and intensity of reflexive, enraged retribution against all who are percieved as the, “haves”, will occur.
Despite those many who’ve been deluded into thinking that their paradise of wealth is within plucking distance, a greater number of folks live in a limbo of dread and anxiety, worry, and paranoia about their future financial solvency. When THES people become aware of the fact that, as the wealthiest few, somehow, despite all the talk of defecits and cut-backs for social programs become wealthier and wealthier at a break-neck rate of speed…THEIR brainwash-enduced confusion at the comparison between their own dread of insolvency and this lurid amassing of huge fortunes will, despite the brainwashing-reveal that they’re being fleeced, conned, flim-flammed, ripped-off, swindled, and suckered by those they’ve entrusted to use their forced tax contributions for traditional governmental purposes: That is, of improving their opportunities, protecting their environment, assuring their childrens’ education, maintaining our vast and now deteriorating infrastructure, ensuring the development of new programs for their assistance, and the improvement of the general standard of living…When THESE people begin to start drawing their own conclusions and cease heeding those of the bought and paid-for shills of propagandists of corrupt interests…then and only then will there be a purging and accounting for all the abuses those who THEY voted for perpetrated upon them. Until then, the roll call of the poor will increase.
For why should those without human hearts or souls, for one minute, say to themselves, “if not for the grace of God, I too would be homeless and standing in line for a bowl of soup”?
Posted by Dominick Mastroserio on Oct 7, 2003 at 1:03 AM “I ask a simple question: how can anyone who earns less than $100,000 a year ever vote Republican?”
This is a sentiment that comes from a lot of democrats and progessives. There are few reasons why:
1- The republican party’s ideas are much more affordable than the democrats ideas, from a tax point of view. Most working Americans (working can be defined a lot of ways, I define it by those who have a job) pay less to the government (the only ones who don’t are those who don’t pay fed income tax). So it is cheaper to be Republican.
2-A person agrees with their social issues, how Republicans approach education, abortion, war, etc. (by the way, bush is pro-choice, as he’s done nothing to stop abortions)
3-Here is the big one, I once argued that republicans look out for those that worked their way out of a bad situation and dems support those still in a bad situation. It’s all on your point of view.
Posted by brad on Oct 7, 2003 at 2:26 AM this is the central question….why do those at the low end of the income ladder vote Republican (and really, why do they vote democrat….there isnt much difference)? The political coma of the average american is a product of failed public education and marketing and an age of manic consumerism….and you end up with Bush and arnold and a waste economy built on militarizing everything….and colonial occupation. Its a quite sad situation.
Posted by John Steppling on Oct 7, 2003 at 12:07 PM I feel that this is an error free response of our misinformed society. Americans have clearly been duped into believing things that are not true. We have put a greater premium on property than we have on human rights. The worst part is that the property that I am speaking of is not the property of the many but the property of the priveleged few. I feel our policies are totally wrong, and inhumane. Shame on our government for misleading us and manipulating others to mislead us, namely the mass media. I don’t doubt that some people believe that wmd exist in Iraq but we had no proof and our unilateral action was immoral and illegal. I believe in America and its people. I am a high school history teacher. I also believe that we can change our policies and what we do about poverty and improving sustenance and not subsidy. We have the resources and the tools and we have the spirit to change our system and the wrongs it has perpetrated. We have the potential. With hope, perseverance and faith we can bring about and mantain a socially equal society of oppurtunity and shared prosperity.
Posted by Brett LeGrand on Oct 7, 2003 at 7:39 PM Sorry, but I work hard for a living. I made sacrifices for many years so that I could get a good education and thus a good job. Now, I simply don’t accept the premise that some “poor” person’s need for the fruits of my labor is a greater claim on them than my having earned them.
Liberals are constantly wringing their hands about the Bush tax cut benefiting the “wealthy”. Well, since the wealthy pay more in taxes, any across-the-board tax cut will have a greater impact (in raw $) on the “wealthy” than it will on the “poor”.
Finally, to call them child-tax “credits” when given to the “poor” is a misnomer—many of the poor pay no taxes, so they cannot possibly get a “credit”, only a handout.
Posted by Heywood Jablomie on Oct 7, 2003 at 10:02 PM Democrats dominat all 3 branches of the government of California. California has, PER CAPITA, the highest debt. That is how you create poverty, suffering, and a pathetic state.
What a record the Dem’s have!
Posted by Koppy on Oct 8, 2003 at 3:40 AM Haywood, you are a prime example of the direction Bush is wanting to take this country.
When it all collapses and you need help I hope for your sake someone doesn’t have the same lack of compassion and understanding you have.
Posted by neil on Oct 8, 2003 at 6:47 AM Oh and Heywood, your figures and way off. A tax cut, it’s been proven, only benefits the wealthy.
Posted by neil on Oct 8, 2003 at 6:51 AM Brett LeGrand, you’re right about property being more valuable than human life. The son-of-a-bitch who murdered my brother was sentenced to 25 years. Armed robbery gets you 50 years. WTF?
Things are worth more than life, war proves that.
Posted by neil on Oct 8, 2003 at 6:53 AM There seems to be a serious struggle between two fundamentally opposing visions of our world. One vision includes social responsibility while the other advocates self-interest. One seeks to correct the undeniable inequality in this world while the other advocates self-interest. One seeks to serve the “needs” of the whole while the other advocates self-interested “wants”. One recognizes that the failure to balance social justice and materialism will lead to instability, the other is in denial because it advocates self-interest. I realize my proposition is a sweeping simplification of the nature of current strife. But, it is food for thought nonetheless.
Posted by Just Me on Oct 8, 2003 at 4:25 PM A few responses to what appear to be the conservatives voices here: Koppy says the Democrats in control of California have caused their debt problem (an arguable point) and that is proof of their incompetance. Um….have you by chance noticed the record deficits of GWB and the Repub. Congress over the last few years, due in large part to tax cuts? And to the Republican cry of “cut spending” I would ask where, in the federal budget, do you propose to cut? The overwhelming majority of the money is spent on defense, social security/Medicare, and interest on the enormous debt.
To the attitude of “cut our taxes, it’s our money!” I would say simply, it’s not our money because the 80’s left us with huge bills to pay. When you get your paycheck every week, you don’t get to keep it, it has to go to rent, car payment, etc. The government is just another expense, and not a very good one. The American people, through their Congress, have racked up a huge national debt, and our priority should be paying it down before the interest payments bankrupt the nation.
As for the rich paying far more - YES! That’s how it works. Those who get more out of the system pay a lot more because that’s the only way it works. We have said, as a society, that if you priority is the accumulation of massive wealth, often through “gaming” the system, then we’re going to tax you more for getting more out of the system. We’re talking about people who have tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. The Right tries to paint these super-rich as hard-working and deserving, but lets remember their ranks also include executives who fudged accounting, stock analysts who lied to their clients (see NY’s record fines against brokerage houses) politicians who leave office and become lobbyists for the companies they’ve supposedly been watchdog over, executives who decide to hide the companies wealth in offshore shell corporations, etc etc
And no, I’m not advocating handouts for lazy people, but lets remember that for every dollar spent on “lazy welfare bums” we spend many more dollars subsidizing lazy industries - tax breaks, subsidizes, sweetheart deals (i.e. mining rights on public land practically given away)
They’re right, there is class warfare going on, but which side has all the weapons and power??
Posted by Mark Fradl on Oct 8, 2003 at 5:39 PM With all the bzillions of laws that control a wide-range of human behavior (including “free speech”), I wonder where are those laws which place reasonable limits upon one of the most abhorrent human behaviors of all,...greed?
Posted by Just Me on Oct 8, 2003 at 6:22 PM Mark- You can call me a lot of things - ugly (unfortunately true!), dumb, whatever- but NOT conservative! That’s below the belt man!
I’m (mostly) a liberal independent. My comments were about the Democratic Party and the professional politicians in that state- not liberalism. Guess I should have clarified.
These two parties are ruining this country. We need multiple parties to have our voices heard. Not 2 biggies that don’t listen to us!
Posted by Koppy on Oct 8, 2003 at 11:23 PM For more information on George W. Bush and the war on the poor please visit the following websites…www.isrp.org AND www.endtimesnetwork.com at first you may be blown away but please read the writings.
Posted by HARRY VEST on Oct 9, 2003 at 12:00 AM Koppy,
What do you think will happen to California now?
I can’t believe how stupid electing Arnold is. Arnold Ziffel would have been a better choice.
Once the cheering dies down and Arnold tries to get his Republican agenda through a Democratic lead house and senate, what will happen?
Those voters get what they deserve for voting him in.
Regardless, that state needs healing and I don’t see it coming from AS.
Posted by neil on Oct 9, 2003 at 1:12 AM Oh, and there are some good points about a two-party system running this nation into the ground.
For a 3rd party to succeed, it seems the candidate would have to sell his/her soul to big business or other political interests to have a shot—but that may defeat the whole purpose of running against the two parties in the first place.
Posted by neil on Oct 9, 2003 at 1:16 AM Neil-
The Green party is the obvious answer. Democrats beg at the trough just like the Republicans. Lawyers control the Democrats- not the average Joe’s like us.California obviously has to raise taxes (do Speilberg and Cruise really need a gazillion dollars? They don’t do anything anyway) AND cut some spending. Democrats will never end corporate subsidies or cut anything that will hurt them getting elected.
Posted by Koppy on Oct 9, 2003 at 3:46 PM What we have here are generations of people (and I use the term
very loosely) who have been raised to be spoiled brats. They
where given anything the wanted by “momy and daddy”, who also
pulled their sorry little asses out of the fire when they
screwed up. They now expect the world owes them a living.Their education, car and what not, were all provided for them
without having do anything to get these things but to whine
to their parrents. Now that they are are their own, they expect
this to continue. Worse than that, because of being raised
this way, they have absolutely no compassion for other people.
Especially those worse off than them. And so they go on beleaving
that their whole little superficial lives revolve totally arround
them only, not giving a wet slap about anyone else and completely
unaware of the consiquences of their actions or how they effect
others.
Posted by chris on Oct 9, 2003 at 4:41 PM Neil,
it looks like a two-party system but it is not. Whoever you vote for, the government always get in.
Posted by Owen on Oct 9, 2003 at 5:02 PM Koppy, Owen,
Yeah, the lesser of two evils? Of three?
I think many people who are fed up with the failings of both parties are in the same confusing situation. “A vote for Green takes votes away from Democrats” and in the presidential case, that’s far, far better than what’s in there now.
I remember when Anderson was running in 1980 and they said the same thing about taking votes away from Carter.
Fortunately, here in Idaho, the Green Party is getting stronger and in such a conservative state that’s amazing. The bottom fell out of the support for the war and it’s maker. I never thought that would happen, but it is.More power to all of us.
Posted by stan on Oct 10, 2003 at 12:55 AM Hello:
I found your article very insightful and timely. I was aware of many of the points you make but I’m always astonished at the rich’s capacity to keep piling on the rewards for themselves at the expense of the poorest members of our society. Don’t they feel any pangs of remorse? Their greed is beyond words. We are suffering the same fate here under an ostensibly “Liberal” government. The blueprint is exactly the same.
Huge tax cuts which only benefited a small, select section of the population at the expense of huge cuts in social spending. There is absolutely no vision or leadership here - the New Democratic Party and left-wing thinkers have been silenced by a rabidly hostile press.
Sometimes I despair of the world. How to topple those in power? It seems an insurmountable task. Are ordinary Americans not starting to ask questions and revolt against this unjust state of affairs? There is far too much passivity and acquiescence. We need to develop the tools which will enable people to reclaim their lives.
Josiane
Posted by Josiane on Oct 10, 2003 at 2:20 AM I’ve worked for the last 20 years as a social worker, mainly in the private not-for-profit sector. I’ve seen the deterioration of the system proceeding without cease. I was recently laid off from my position in the administration of a large (and rapidly shrinking) social service provider in Chicago. I do not expect to work in the profession again. I’ll be lucky to get a chain store sales position. I’ve continued social work as a volunteer working with substance abuse and mental illness issues. That’s the future of social work in this country. In the current political atmosphere, social work as a profession is dead, and, I believe, cannot be revived short of an actual armed revolution. Other nations have been able to maintain a sense of social responsibility, but that is an impossibility for the USA. No wonder I’ve heard so many physicians and social workers training in this country say that they can’t wait to go home to their own countries and civilization.
Posted by Chris Campbell on Oct 10, 2003 at 1:14 PM I’m one of those so-called “people” you (chris) describe. I was given everything. My parents did all of the work. My mom was the daughter of an Indiana factory worker who was laid off while she was still very young. She worked her way out and up and I simply soak up the benefits. This does not make either of us bad people. I didn’t pay for my first car or my education. I’m neither a rep or a dem. I’m still young enough that I’m trying to find out what I am. So far I’ve concluded that what I am is LUCKY. And this is why I HAVE compassion and why I’m doing something with that big fat free education of mine (working 70-80 hours a week and paying every cent of tax on time, every time and VOTING). I have compassion because I know that I could be one of those born to poverty and somehow I ended up here with my parents and my situation (Heywood how did you start out? read calmly as a true inquiry from an interested party - not a judgment). I did nothing to deserve what I have but I have it and I believe that I owe it to others less fortunate to do the best I can for the whole. Therefore I enjoy paying my taxes as I know what it CAN benefit - however I have to put a lot of faith in the government - that they will spend wisely and more faith that others who think like me will go VOTE along with me. I guess my point is that making blanket statements that attack any one group of people just diverts attention from the core problem - emotions fly and effective communication stops. The fact of the matter is - only part of this is our control. We are born into situations and it is up to the individual to take responsibility for what happens next. Are you selfish with your “toys” or would you like to share? Perhaps I’m still “too young” to understand but for me…Work hard, give back, absorb the anger and spread the love…perhaps we can ALL get a little lucky. I never asked my parents for the handouts…they did it because they simply wanted what was “best” for me - can you really blame them? Perhaps we can stop the name calling and focus on the problem and actually get closer to some solutions. Also another note - if you are an American consider referring to other Americans as “WE” rather than “THEY” think of the simple difference that would make in creating an atmosphere of untiy…just a thought.
Posted by Lucky Little Rich Girl on Oct 10, 2003 at 9:14 PM Chris -
“actual armed revolution”....there are so many things wrong with that it’s absolutely hysterical! Keep on keeping on.
Posted by Nat G. on Oct 10, 2003 at 10:16 PM That’ll teach you for bothering to go on FUAX News. Aside from that, there’s a technique all the media are collaborating to perfect…Sneaky Fridays. This poverty study was issued on Friday,notoriously the day that people are least attentive to news. Similar census reports always are issued on Tuesdays. The WH says give to the press on Friday, and the lapdogs release it when told.
I laughed at another comment by someone on FOX - who spoke in horror at the contrast between the opulent Saddam palaces (actualy municipal buildings, not residences) and the rundown housing for many Iraqis. Ha. I pictured the opulence of the White House and the housing of the poor in Washington. Of course, we won’t even discuss the homeless in this country….. not patriotic to do so.
Moral: don’t appear on Fox if you want to discuss news. The explanation of how Unfair and Unbalanced their news is….go to
Posted by Reg on Oct 11, 2003 at 3:37 AM I agree with the Bush Administration’s tax cuts. It is obvious that the well being of an entire class of society is not nearly as important as the well being of my tennis court. In case you could not tell, I am being sarcastic.
Posted by Mr. Higdon on Oct 12, 2003 at 6:23 AM I know the feeling Mr. Higdon, the irony escapes the micks digging my swimming pool with their bare hands too.
Posted by Owen on Oct 12, 2003 at 4:37 PM AMEN Mr. Higdon and Owen!
There is NO reason for anybody to make more than 100K a year (unless you support people buying earth ruining ferraris!). We’re all one people-human. Minimum wage 20 dollars. Maximum wage 30. Let’s pull together and make this world fair! stop the oil imperialistic US of Itself taking over nations (Iraq!) FOR ONLY OIL.
Bush’s stocks in the oil companies are so blindingly OBVIOUS to anybody we all know what’s going on. F him, F corporations, F wage disparity, F you against global insurance, welfare, and right to jobs!
Posted by Care for people on Oct 13, 2003 at 2:21 AM Haywood. Two tax cuts and were still losing 8500 jobs a day. So much for your trickle down economics. Reagan proved it didnt work and the country forgot already.
Posted by ksec on Oct 13, 2003 at 3:44 AM “There is NO reason for anybody to make more than 100K a year (unless you support people buying earth ruining ferraris!). We’re all one people-human. Minimum wage 20 dollars. Maximum wage 30. ”
-“Care for people”
Its amazing how crazy you are. 30 dollars maximum wage??? I’m sure the 30 dollar maximum wage will motivate our best and brightest to become doctors, engineers, inventors. These people have no incentive, as there is no money to be made, anymore. Would you rather do a bullshit job for more than its worth or real job for less than its worth? I can’t believe you think an open-heart surgeon should be paid 10 dollars an hour more than a gas station attendant. The people most important to our country deserve the 200-300 dollars an hour or whatever they get.
America is the land of opportunity, you want to take that oppurtunity away.The only thing your plan would do is take the best our country has to offer and make them want to move to a country that values them.
Posted by brad on Oct 13, 2003 at 4:47 AM Somehow in this above article the fact that trickle down economics work was not included. How many liberals will continue to cry class warfare? Above this writer admits that this is a class warfare discussion and yet doesn’t write that the true start of class warfare as an idea was from your beloved Karl Marx. According to liberals there should be no such thing as rich and poor. That everyone should have equal wealth and yet you deny the fact that your party’s position on this subject is communist. Let me give you a lesson in history, when there are no rich and poor there is no justice. There is no America. There is only the government. Capitalism is not here to give hand-outs unlike communism in a capitalist society you have to work for money. If you believe wealth should be equal then you are a communist and there is no denying it. Life is not fair. There will always be power in the hands of the few because it is the few that seek power. These rich people worked for their money and deserve every penny of it. If you despise this fact then you dispise America and the free market. I suggest all of you liberals read up on history and understand that power is in the hands of the few for a reason. There are only a few who deserve it. AMERICA IS CAPITALIST AND WILL FOREVER REMAIN CAPITALIST WHICH MEANS YOU WILL HAVE TO WORK FOR WHAT YOU DESIRE. GET OVER IT!!!
Posted by American on Oct 13, 2003 at 4:50 AM Dear American from America,
“trickle down economics work”
Can you support this statement?
Posted by Owen on Oct 13, 2003 at 11:05 AM Hi American from America again,
“YOU WILL HAVE TO WORK FOR WHAT YOU DESIRE”
I couldn’t agree more. Remind me, please, what jobs George W. took to warrant his political career? It can’t just be nepotism, it can’t. Maybe he was to busy bravely serving his country in Vietnam. Oh wait…
Posted by Owen on Oct 13, 2003 at 11:20 AM Does anyone know of someone living in poverty who is content to live so? The wealthy pay more in taxes because they earn more, but they also have access to many more write-offs and deductions than do the impoverished, so that when all is said and done what is their actual tax rate? Applying a tax rate of say 15% on all wage earners would end the whining on who is paying too much or too little. The wealthy CLAIM they worked hard for their money? Define hard, pushing a pencil or pushing a wheel-barrow? Doesn’t everyone regardless of income level feel the same way? Your occupation is as much a matter of choice as circumstance. If you choose a job requiring hard work or long hours then live with it or make a change. When the government makes available funds to be used for self-improvement (educational grants,job training etc.) the country as a whole benefits from this. Feeding the poor isn’t just morally right, but also benefits us by less crime, lower healthcare costs etc. A society is judged by how it takes care of it’s own, not on what it owns.
Posted by e sorensen on Oct 13, 2003 at 5:02 PM These people are poor only b/c of Republicrooks. If Democrats were in charge of this nation for the last 30 years we would have no poverty.
Support candidates that have compassion and lets end all poverty now. We have to empower the government to solve all alcoholism, mental illness, and homelessness. The cycle must end.
Posted by Chet on Oct 13, 2003 at 5:32 PM No Owen, I have not. aside from vacation. Why does that matter? I was talking about how a max-incmome of 30 dollars an hour would hurt this country.
Owen- I know GW ran the Texas Rangers very capably and made money each of his years with the team. He did a good enough job to warrant being elected governor. Then he did a good enough job as governor to be the Republican candidate for president. Whether or not he shoud have been elected is your own opinion.
Sorenson- The reason the rich often can write more things off is because the wealthy often have more expenses. For example, a business owner (any business owner) will be able to write off many of their expenses (salaries, materials, etc). If people could not write this off they would never go into business to beging with because it wouldn’t be profitable enough, as many business owners would operate in the red.
Posted by brad on Oct 13, 2003 at 5:35 PM Boy o’ boy, brad from ny,...you are in total denial if you believe that nepotism and cronyism didn’t get Dubya where is today. His grades and test scores would NOT have gotten him into an ivy league school. His charm would NOT have prevented him from being imprisoned for going AWOL. His talent would NOT have lead him to the career he has had. His leadership skills would have taken him to drunken wonders in some alley. He may have the same kind of qualities of a con artist leading him somewhere without the nepotism and cronyism that has sustained him. But, please, get real!!!!
Posted by Ms. Monica on Oct 13, 2003 at 8:15 PM Ms. Monica, well said to Brad. . .
From personal experience being raised around very wealthy people but personally clawing my way from the bottom up:1.Most “rich” people want to do the right thing and are not evil bastards. Many of them warked hard to get wealthy and ought to be able to keep that wealth.
2. Most “poor” people are not lazy or unmotivated. . . 30% of the homeless people in Silicon Valley actually work full time jobs. These are framily people, and if you are against families then you are un-American.
To American, who thinks that “...power is in the hands of the few for a reason. There are only a few who deserve it.”
—> Please go back to school: Since you are such an educated student of Capitalism, I’m sure you know that an approx an 8% unemployment rate is what is ideally needed to make our economy work [a ready pool of labor].What do we say to that 8%? That “they deserve it” is a selfish and ignorant answer. Read history yourself, and while you’re at it pick up an economics textbook or better yet get a job at a gas station. Trickle-down economics only “works” if you’re in the top 2 percent.
...Side note: A little less vitriol on both sides would help everyone win and get what we need. Lucky Little Rich Girl had it right on that count.
Posted by Ed Mellon on Oct 13, 2003 at 9:25 PM “1.Most “rich” people want to do the right thing and are not evil bastards. Many of them warked hard to get wealthy and ought to be able to keep that wealth.
2. Most “poor” people are not lazy or unmotivated. . . 30% of the homeless people in Silicon Valley actually work full time jobs. These are framily people, and if you are against families then you are un-American”
well said
Posted by brad on Oct 14, 2003 at 5:46 AM I am no expert on economics. However, in my humble view, our economic policies support something worse than a predatory practice which just seems inconsistent with our claims or goals of civility as a “superior” life form *laugh*.
We are not only enouraging the economic lion to prey on the proverbial lamb; we allow both gluttony/waste and what increasingly appears to be a form of economic slavery (makes me wonder sometimes if 50 or 100 years from now our history will reflect a break from another form of slavery everyone wanted to deny).
IF we are going to behave as a “civilized” society which values fairness/freedom/opportunity/LIFE; then we are going to have to: reexamine whether those economic theories we have adopted are best for our nation/people; confront the fact that those theories fail to incorporate concerns involving basic human rights and maximizing human potential (rather than merely ensuring maximun production of inanimate objects like gadgets and money); and take action to realize the changes which may better benefit everyone even in face of stubborn opposition by those few who are benefitting at the cost of the many.
In other words, we have to PROVE our values by striving to balance “needs” against “wants”.
Posted by Ms. Monica on Oct 14, 2003 at 2:50 PM Brad,
After you mentioned land of opportunity, I was just wondering why you felt it was more so than, say, the rest of the world?
Cheers,
Owen
Posted by Owen on Oct 14, 2003 at 3:21 PM Thank you brad!
Also to the group for providing an interesting discussion. . .
Posted by Ed Mellon on Oct 14, 2003 at 9:01 PM How long before we decide to use our people-power to destroy the two enemies of our very survival, namely over-wealth and its effect, over-poverty?
We know that tension-strife-violence is the effect of extreme wealth and poverty. We know that the rich get richer without
working proportionally harder, and that the poor get poorer while
working harder and harder to survive ñ so why not work out what is just, work out what exceeds justice and therefore causes disturbance of society and destruction of democracy, and limit wealth to the maximum that can be earned by work, or some multiple of it, so that poverty is also limited?There was a time when there was no law against murder ñ
humanity found such a law conducive to peace and happiness, so why not make a law against excessive wealth and poverty? The road on which all of us ride every day is extremely unpleasant because we daily passively choose a dystem of two things, humps and potholes. Why not awake to the sense of using the humps to fill in the potholes and make a smooth ride for our descendents, for the future in which we will all live?
Why are we so alert to the possibility of depriving the rich of
excess, and so asleep to depriving the majority of necessities? Justice is the price of peace and happiness. Why are we so leery of justice, whose fruit is happiness, the purpose of every action? How is it that we are quick to suspect fraud at our expense when a person is paid a fifth of the average pay for no work, and yet we have no capacity to suspect that a person being paid 50,000 times the average pay is being paid 250,000 doles at our expense? How much harder that the average can a person work?The American dream of freedom was based on limitation of overpay ñ why have we not exerted ourselves to preserve it? Why did we not respond
to Abraham Lincolnís warning against the corporation? Where is our boasted love of liberty? All history repeats the misery of overpay and underpay, the inefficiency of the slave economy, and the excellence of limitation of overpay and underpay. Would you support a law that proposed to take 90% of income off a randomly selected 80% of people and give it all to 0.1%? The global reality is worse than that. Why is it that you could see the sense of a law against murder, and you are not seeing the sense in making laws against overpay and underpay, which kill 100 times as many?
Posted by savvymom on Oct 15, 2003 at 2:19 PM Savvymom-
Oh my goodness, just couldn’t force myself to finish your rant.Have you ever taken an economics class? I’d suggest “Economics for Idiots” (real book by the way, not an insult) as a start.
Just 101- People only make economic transactions if it benefits BOTH of them - “Growth” is created. When you limit “wealth” you INCREASE poverty.
You should read about history too. Every society that did what you preach is in the doghouse. USSR ring a bell?
Posted by Ty on Oct 15, 2003 at 10:31 PM Geez, Ty,...I can see why the book is called, “Economics for Idiots” since that assumption you buy into
“People only make economic transactions if it benefits BOTH of them”
proves to be false when one side of the party holds economic superiority and squashes the other with its economic will.
Such an assumption is for an idiot because “reality” dictates otherwise.
Posted by Ms. Monica on Oct 16, 2003 at 1:20 AM Owen, Bush was busy turning the Texas Rangers into World Series winners…..wait a minute..
Posted by neil on Oct 16, 2003 at 8:46 AM I don¥t remember that. Was that before or after his phenomenally sucessful managing of one of Daddy¥s oil companies?
Posted by Owen on Oct 16, 2003 at 10:49 AM Brad - I thought your comment about dubya’s expert handling of the Texas Rangers HILARIOUS!
Laugh? I nearly shat!
George nearly went to jail over the Rangers, but old dad got him off.
But don’t take _my_ word for it…
Just type:“Texas Rangers” Bush fraud
into google and have a browse.
Cheers, Matt
Posted by Matt Quinn on Oct 16, 2003 at 12:00 PM I hear W and Ashcroft saying that they are followers of Christ. But I see them walking with the beast. Hypocrites and liars. Liars and thieves. There really is a place prepared for such as these. It ain’t Heaven.
Posted by Patrick on Oct 16, 2003 at 5:07 PM I don’t know when the Bush sold the rangers but I do know the Rangers won 95 games in 1999, 88 games in 1998 and 90 games in 1996, winning their division 3 times. Isn’t that successful?
Posted by brad on Oct 16, 2003 at 6:39 PM Oh, *giggle* neil from idaho,...it took me a second read to catch your “alter ego”!!! I’m rollin’ with laughter! Just wish something like that could happen in real time first time around.
Posted by Just Me on Oct 16, 2003 at 11:15 PM Brad, in today’s baseball terms it’s not successful. Even if they fill the stands and have record attendance, if they don’t win the big one, it doesn’t matter. Take Bobby Valentine for example. Takes the Mets to the series, gets swept by a very good Yankees team and next season loses his job. He is kind of a goof.
Often times, an owner needs to get a great GM like Brian Cashman for the Yanks, one of my former bosses. He put that team together from the minors up.
Texas has tried to buy talent and it hasn’t worked.Yeah, I’m all things anti-Bush, Brad. I won’t deny it. I even hated Jeb ruining the Marlins victory with his stupid remark about that fan.
Yeah, Just Me, I was using an alter-ego for some remarks on another thread. I’ve learned in all the months of posting messages here that conservatives are people too. I’ve learned to hold my tongue and think before posting—at least I do now. When I started I did not. People like Owen, Brad, this guy Carl Snodgrass, have been the victim of one of my flames and I hate myself for it.
We’ve stuck it out here and debated well, though I’m ashamed of the way I used to react early on. But I’ve learned and I like talking with all of you and that’s why I’m still here voicing my weird slant on things.
Posted by neil on Oct 17, 2003 at 3:11 AM Neil,
true, there are a lot of things to dislike about Bush but I¥d be more inclined to worry about the people who are making him talk (not to mention reading his nuclear briefs for him). I mean, he¥s hardly the brains of the operation…
Posted by Owen on Oct 17, 2003 at 11:56 AM Hmm. Conservatives are people too as are Liberals, but most people in here would probably be classified as Libertarian. After all, see what the NRA and Charlton Heston have to say about the Patriot Act. . . Probably tree-huggers and gun-lovers see eye to eye on this issue. What ever happened to “Get Big Gov’t Off Our Backs?!”
Here’s a rant: True patriots need to unite on some of these issues so we can look at the big picture. Possible alliances? Fishermen and environmentalists for clean rivers. NRA and ACLU to jettison the Patriot Act. If we got real creative, we just might be able to save this country.
It’s good to see that there are some active minds among us. Owen is 100% correct, Bush is a perfect patsy - his dad has warned him not to fall into the trap but he did anyways. Unfortunately for America, his MO is to leave before things come crashing down around him: Arbusto Energy/Spectrum 7 [bankrupt], Texas Rangers [stiffed the taxpayers with hundreds of millions in bond liabilites], and the State of Texas [whose environmental and fiscal problems could almost make Californians envious] are all examples of saving his ass at the expense of his former enterprise.
We don’t need to dwell on President AWOL’s military record either, but suffice to say there is a clear pattern here: abdication of responsibility. Let’s just hope he has broken his trend. After all, being able to live off your parents while you drink your life away until the tender age of 34 years old would renew almost anyone’s faith. Too bad 99.9% of Americans do not have the luxury to wait that long before deciding to grow up.
Posted by Ed Mellon on Oct 17, 2003 at 7:26 PM IT IS SO SAD TO SAY BUT IT IS THE TRUTH. THE RICH AND MIGHTY WILL BE OF NO SUCH WHEN THE ONLY ALL MIGHTY GOD COMES FOR HIS PEOPLE. WHERE WILL THESE PEOPLE BE. DON’T THESE PEOPLE GO TO CHUCH WHICH I KNOW SOME DO. SO WITH THAT SAID. GOD SAID THAT IT IS MORE LIKELY FOR A CAMEL TO ENTER THE EYE OF A NEEDLE, THAN FOR THE RICH TO ENTER THE HEAVENS. IN OTHER WORDS THE RICH AND THE MIGHTY OF THIS WORLD WILL NO LONGER BE, NOR WILL THEY EVER TAKE WHAT THEY HAVE MADE HERE IN THE WORLD. HOW SAD TO HAVE YOUR OWN PEOPLE FALL INTO THIS TRAP. DON’T THE SMART PEOPLE EVER STOP AND THINK. O I FORGOT THEY ARE SMART SO THEY DON’T HAVE TO THINK. I GUESS YOU CAN SAY THIS IS THE PROBLEM THEY ALL HAVE IN COMMON, THEY DON’T STOP TO THINK WHAT THEY ARE DOING. SO REMEMBER IT IS BETTER TO SUFFER IN THE NAME OF JESUS AND FOR GOD, BECAUSE EVERY ONE THAT FOLLOWS GOD HAS HIS WILL WRITTEN FOR THEM EVERYTHING WILL BECOME THEIR’S, AND THE RICH WILL BE POOR. SO SAD. THANK YOU ALL FOR READY THIS LITTLE MAN’S THOUGHTS ON THE WORLD. MAY GOD BLESS YOU ALL.
Posted by AG on Oct 17, 2003 at 9:50 PM IT WAS CALLED THE AMERICAN DREAM.
NOW IT IS CALLED THE AMERICAN NIGHMARE.
HOW DID THIS HAPPEN YOU ASK?
Posted by AG on Oct 17, 2003 at 10:47 PM Owen, Ed,
Yeah, I agree. I just point the finger at Bush as most people point the finger at him for “libbe-ratin’ us from dem towel head terror-izsts!”.
True, you couldn’t have picked a better person to get your plan accomplished, to appoint those who wanted these positions of power to abuse them. It is a mistake to think he’s the one responsible.
As far as all things anti-Bush, the old man is far more frightening. I have to think he’s working the strings on his puppet son.Ed, I have realized that we need to cooperate. I’ve had my run-ins with people here who I assumed were of one direction and after debating, all flaming aside, I’ve realized their goal is the common good. That has really given me some hope that this country isn’t sticking along party lines like it seemed to be as last as last March.
I’ve never had anything against the NRA except for their leadership. Most in the NRA are like Ducks Unlimited members, where they want to preserve their rights to carry but don’t want to abuse them. A few dumbasses aside. The problem I have is their inflexibility, whereas DU has to work with environmentalists to preserve their sport.
Hey, AG, you’re from Austin, what’s your take on your former governor?
Posted by neil on Oct 18, 2003 at 3:07 AM President Kennedy and Reagan cut taxes at a much larger percentage than the Bush cut. Revenues to the govt. doubled by the end of both decades. More money equals more services. Clinton cut capital gains rates in 1997 and this helped fuel the boom that followed. Low taxes helps everyone, so do some homework and good luck.
Posted by Brian Timm on Oct 20, 2003 at 11:18 PM In 1962, Kennedy sponsored legislation to cut income tax rates by 20% and corporate tax rates by 10% ” to increase incentives and the availability of investment capital. ” After these tax cuts became law the economic growth rate expanded from 4.3 to 6.6%, and the economy created more than 1 million jobs the following four years. Hey Clinton himself signed a bill reducing the capital gains tax roughly 25%. Why the economy silly.
Posted by Brian Timm on Nov 4, 2003 at 4:02 AM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Jim Wallis
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2003 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
