I make a decent amount of money using M$'s software.

And I will never envy BG's kids. They'll never be free of scrutiny or protection. They can never play in a creek, get lost in the woods or anything like that.

"Rather than looking at ways to slice money off the top of the income distribution and funnel it into government programs with spotty records of success, we should address the ways in which government is already stacking the deck against the younger and poorer among us."

Make no mistake - That's not going to stop. That government is doing what a financially irresponsible and illiterate people wants it to do: punish success.

In the process, making it harder and harder for anyone to succeed, in supreme irony all but invisible to those who would vote themselves money.

Did you hear about Steven Crowder being assaulted by the union thugs at the Michigan's Right-to-Work protest?

Apparently the OWS is on the side of the unions against the freedom to work without being a union member. So the OWS wants to be slaves to the union instead of the business?

There's something funny about human psychology...

I don't remember the precise figures, but there was a study a while back where people had to decide which they prefer:

- Earn $75,000, when all their friends earn $50,000

- Earn $100,000, when all their friends earn $150,000

The nearly universal choice was the first one. People want to be "better" than those they compare themselves with.

America's "poor" almost universally have enough to eat, have a roof over their heads, have television, mobile phones, and a car. Compared to the genuine poor elsewhere in the world, they are actually quite well off. However, they compare themselves to other Americans, not to starving people in Africa or Asia.

If they cannot improve their own circumstances, another approach is to tear down the people who are better off than they are. That also reduces the gap. As far as I can tell, this is the nhearly entire motivation behind the OWS movement.

Many times, once you accept government assistance, you have no way out without losing everything.

So you have a house and a wife when you're injured. She's making $30K compared to your $60K in construction. You have a brick fall on your back. You can no longer work because you're not quite wheelchair bound, but standing and carrying for 8+ hours isn't happening.

You file and have to fight for your worker's comp claim. That means a lawyer is going to take a third of the money after months of fighting. Meanwhile the wife's $30K.

Then the SSDI lawsuit starts. Meanwhile he's gone to college to move forward with his life. But college means you aren't disabled so the Medicaid disappears for the two children. Because he isn't officially disabled by SSDI, her $30K is over the food stamp limit.

The system is so byzantine only a twisted coil can understand it.

Oh, this is GOLDEN.

America's "poor" almost universally have enough to eat, have a roof over their heads, have television, mobile phones, and a car. Compared to the genuine poor elsewhere in the world, they are actually quite well off. However, they compare themselves to other Americans, not to starving people in Africa or Asia.

If they cannot improve their own circumstances, another approach is to tear down the people who are better off than they are. That also reduces the gap.
Posted by: a_random_guy at January 1, 2013 8:44 AM
__________________________

Remind me of why it's useless to tell children to count their blessings - to a child, the only blessings it makes SENSE to count are the ones that most of their neighbours - and/or classmates - DON'T have. Hence, their ceaseless demands and complaints, since parents can supposedly buy anything they want for themselves while kids can't. Of course, parents could stop all this by ordering kids to EARN whatever they claim to want - but this has become a very unfashionable way to parent. (I'd go so far as to say to a kid: "Whenever you open your mouth before being ASKED if you want something, YOU have to pay for it. However, I promise to ask you what you want for your birthday. All other no-strings gifts will be doled out on my whim only.")

Make no mistake - That's not going to stop. That government is doing what a financially irresponsible and illiterate people wants it to do: punish success.

In the process, making it harder and harder for anyone to succeed, in supreme irony all but invisible to those who would vote themselves money.

Well, here's a great start to the new year; Radioactive Man and I agree. Shit. *Now* what am I going to do?

If the goal is to increase savings and investment, which seems to me to be a good thing to do, we should stop taxing it. No income tax, no capital gains tax, no estate tax, etc.

Instead, we should tax spending, with allowances made for some minimum standard of living, allowances for food, clothing, medicine, maybe some other stuff. We'll get less spending, we'll *certainly* get less borrowing for spending, and the barriers to entry for people to produce would be lowered.

Whose with me?

Someone I know (a Canadian) seems to, on questioning, literally and honestly believe that anyone rich (I believe the example was a millionaire or over) "stole it".

The view is that somehow they really did take that wealth "from someone else"; that the reason other people are in need really is that someone else has wealth.

"Nobody can earn that much".

It led me to bafflement, and a refusal to attempt discussion of anything of import with that person - we share literally no common priors on matters of policy, economics, or ... hell, anything like that.

Does anyone believe Obama and his core supporters REALLY want equality, or anything approaching same? For a Harvard Law School graduate to have no more income or affluence than a Podunk Law School graduate? For a Hollywood celebrity to make no more than a nearly-starving actress in a dinner theater? For a tenured professor to make no more money than a high school teacher?

Obamaism isn't really about equality; it's about using to power of the government to give MORE money and power to favored constituencies at the expense of the unfavored. "Equality" is a smokescreen.

"Someone I know (a Canadian) seems to, on questioning, literally and honestly believe that anyone rich (I believe the example was a millionaire or over) 'stole it'."

I've run into that too. It's an expression of narcissism. And it's impossible to debate, reason, or negotiate with a narcissist. Leftism is the politics of narcissism.