Income equality bull shit.

[Redfish]

How to close the gap
-Free 4 years of college for all making less then 100,000/year
-Internship from college to corporations/businesses for fast college to work.
-Craft schools...Same as the 4 years of college.

End all welfare if they don't do it.

and who is going to pay for that Matt? Where does the money come from to provide a free 4 year education for every kid in the US?

 

[ScienceRocks]

The economic expansion we will get from it will be the payer.

 

[jasonnfree]

YEP!

TWO AMERICAS
by Bob Lonsberry

The Democrats are right, there are two Americas.

The America that works, and the America that doesn’t. The America that contributes, and the America that doesn’t.

It’s not the haves and the have nots, it’s the dos and the don’ts. Some people do their duty as Americans, to obey the law and support themselves and contribute to society, and others don’t.

That’s the divide in America.

It’s not about income inequality, it’s about civic irresponsibility. It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office. It’s about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country.

That’s not invective, that’s truth.

And it’s about time someone said it.

The politics of envy was on proud display last week as the president said he would pledge the rest of his term to fighting “income inequality.” He notes that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just.

It was the rationale of thievery.

The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you.

Vote Democrat.

It is the electoral philosophy that gave us Detroit. It is the electoral philosophy that is destroying America.

And it conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense. It ends up not being a benefit to the people who support it, but a betrayal. The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have enslaved them – in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victimhood and anger instead of ability and hope.

The president’s premise – that you reduce income inequality by debasing the successful – seeks to ignore and cheat the law of choices and consequences. It seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices.

Because, by and large, the variability in society is a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibility have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure.

And success and failure can manifest themselves in personal and family income.

You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education. You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course, you have them in wedlock and life is apt to take another course.

Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.

My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income inequality between us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome. But, our lives also have had an inequality of effort. Whereas my doctor went to college and then gave the flower of his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant. He made a choice, I made a choice. And our choices led us to different outcomes.

His outcome pays a lot better than mine.

Does that mean he cheated and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth?

No, it means we are both free men.

And in a free society, free choices will lead to different outcomes.

It is not inequality Barack Obama will take away, it is freedom.

The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail. And there is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure.

The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy.

Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing.

Even if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and shortsighted decisions.

Barack Obama and the Democrats preach equality of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring inequality of effort. The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get.”

The progressive movement would turn that upside down.

Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society. Entitlement has replaced effort as the key to upward mobility in American society.

Or at least it has if Barack Obama gets his way.

He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive and fosters equality through mediocrity.

He and his party speak of two Americas.

And their grip on power is based on using the votes of one to sap the productivity of the other.

America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts. And by the false philosophy that says one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization.

What the president offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, he pitted one set of Americans against another.

For his own political benefit.

That’s what progressives offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow.

Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the truth to Lincoln’s maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.

bob lonsberry dot com

So you can't tell us what you think, you have to post another's words. OK. This part here where he says: "It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office. It’s about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country."

What's comical about that statement is that it's usually the right wing side preaching hatred from the heart mixed with vulgarity. I said usually. There's some decent posters from the right of course. Then - "a political party that puts greed before country". This is ignoring the republican record of politicians scheming to short circuit Obama, making sure he's a failure even if the country fails with him. "Our #1 priority is making sure that Obama's a one term prez"

 

[jasonnfree]

How to close the gap
-Free 4 years of college for all making less then 100,000/year
-Internship from college to corporations/businesses for fast college to work.
-Craft schools...Same as the 4 years of college.

End all welfare if they don't do it.

and who is going to pay for that Matt? Where does the money come from to provide a free 4 year education for every kid in the US?

It used to be that states invested more in education. In California the UC system was free tuition, the thinking that the payback would come when graduates paid higher taxes. Reagan became governor and put a stop to that "nonsense."

 

[PredFan]

To me, the most amazing and telling thing about this whole "income inequality" scam from the DNC is that the sheeple aren't smart enough to realize that it is just "spreading the wealth around" repackaged. In obama's first five years the gap between the richest and the middle class has increased. He didn't do anything about the gap then and has no real plans to do anything about it now. He's rich as fuck and isn't about to give up any of his money. He will
Just keep leading the gullible around by the nose and they will keep putting his ilk in power.

To be a democrat is to be ignorant and gullible.

 

[1776]

The majority of people Obama and his fellow goons whine about not having this and that have at sometime in their lives fucked up their own lives dropping out of school, crime, doing drugs, having out of wedlock kids, etc....

 

[ScienceRocks]

The majority of people Obama and his fellow goons whine about not having this and that have at sometime in their lives fucked up their own lives dropping out of school, crime, doing drugs, having out of wedlock kids, etc....

Who's to say that they couldn't go back to school later in life? A large percentage of this country fucks up so you're condemning them to a endless cycle.

 

[1776]

This endless bullshit of creating "job training" programs for the fuck-ups as if they couldn't get their GED or attend a JUCO/Devry without more goobermint programs.

Also....shut the fuck up about life being unfair for them when they fucked up their own lives.

The majority of people Obama and his fellow goons whine about not having this and that have at sometime in their lives fucked up their own lives dropping out of school, crime, doing drugs, having out of wedlock kids, etc....

Who's to say that they couldn't go back to school later in life? A large percentage of this country fucks up so you're condemning them to a endless cycle.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The majority of people Obama and his fellow goons whine about not having this and that have at sometime in their lives fucked up their own lives dropping out of school, crime, doing drugs, having out of wedlock kids, etc....

Who's to say that they couldn't go back to school later in life? A large percentage of this country fucks up so you're condemning them to a endless cycle.

Who's condemning them?

Mathew, let me ask you, do you know the name of the person who is responsible for you? And how much have they paid you to recover from your mistakes?

 

[ClosedCaption]

How to close the gap
-Free 4 years of college for all making less then 100,000/year
-Internship from college to corporations/businesses for fast college to work.
-Craft schools...Same as the 4 years of college.

End all welfare if they don't do it.

and who is going to pay for that Matt? Where does the money come from to provide a free 4 year education for every kid in the US?

Its costing all of us right now..but heres the big question. What is the downside to Matthews plan?

 

[blackhawk]

To achieve income equality everyone in every field of work would have to have the exact same amount of skill need to preform said job and would all have to preform the job at the same level. Since we all know everyone does not have equal skill sets or preform their job at the same level to pay everyone at the same level would be grossly unfair and I highly doubt anyone who has worked hard to get to where they are in their chosen profession and preforms their job at a high level wants to see a lazy slacker who does just enough to get by being paid the same as them in the idiotic name of income equality.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The GOP argument is that those dirt poor Africans just need to start a bunch of tech companies in their dorm rooms.

Apparently, the Democrat argument is "Let's pretend third-world countries can be conflated with the United States so that we can avoid having to discuss anything real."

I could tell you what the conservative position on third world nations and what they need is, but I sincerely doubt you'd have any interest in substance over the thrill of pretending you just said something clever and witty. And I tend to agree with the Bible about casting pearls before swine.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I distinctly remember being a child in daycare playing with Tonka trucks and Lincoln Logs, getting mad because some kid had more toys than me. "It's not fair!" I thought to myself. But now that I look back on that, it's a shining example of what people who preach about "income inequality" sound like.

 

[protectionist]

How to close the gap
-Free 4 years of college for all making less then 100,000/year
-Internship from college to corporations/businesses for fast college to work.
-Craft schools...Same as the 4 years of college.

End all welfare if they don't do it.

Does the internship exclude affirmative action ?

 

[protectionist]

Funny that you cannot see how you are being manipulated.

The system has not sequestered the majority of money into the hands of a minority of people. The things that did that are complicated and involve both corporations and politicians, including Obama. Nothing in capitalism causes a gap in earnings like we are seeing. The opposite should be true.

And yes, income redistribution is exactly what they are talking about.

It matters little whether major income inequality is planned of just the result of chance and luck. It's simply good sense to put money where it can best be used. When the amount of money someone grosses, becomes so great that it's beyond even the level of need for luxuries, then that surplus is better used as a govt fund (if/whenever it's used properly for real societal needs), and often is much more beneficial, that way, to that business owner too.

One example could be the Wolf Creek Dam in southern Kentucky. This massive structure has been in a state of dangerous deterioration for quite some time, needing lots of repair. If breached, the entire state capital of Tennessee (Nashville) could find itself under 20 feet of water, with thousands of people killed and Billions$$$ in flooding damages. All the luxuries he could buy won't help the Nashville billionaire, when that broken dam surge comes gushing through.

That money belongs to him, no one else, and this isn't really revant to the thread topic.

In a democracy, it is the whole population who decides who money "belongs to", not you. If the people decide a certain % of some super rich guy's income should belong to them as a group, that is how it will be done. Don't like it ? Plenty of low tax countries to move to. Syria. Saudi Arabia. Bolivia. Bon voyage.

 

[ilia25]

It's an election year and we will be hearing a lot if bull shit. No bigger pile of crap than "income equality" or lack thereof.

While we should have equality of opportunity (and we do), no one has a right to equality of outcome. The outcome of your opportunity is entirely up to you.

Equality of opportunity is great, but it matters is what the opportunity are we talking about. You have an equal opportunity of winning a 100 millions lottery, but it does not do much good to most people, does it?

Rising income inequality makes the prospects of getting a decent pay ever more distant. Yes, everyone has the same shot at winning, but there are less and less winners and more and more losers.

This whole issue is nothing but "spreading the wealth around" rehashed. Obama and the democrats didn't do anything about income equality in the first 5 years, in fact the gap has gotten worse

That's a bit schizoid You should decide among themselves whether rising inequality is a good or bad thing, before blaming it on Obama.

Equality of outcome - oppressive socialist society

Reducing an excessive inequality does not make for oppression.

 

[ilia25]

Nothing in capitalism causes a gap in earnings like we are seeing. The opposite should be true.

"Should be"? And if it isn't?.. What makes you think that rising income inequality results form anything BUT free market "naturally" distributing incomes that way?

It is obvious that rising income inequality the way a free market economy adjusts to advances in computers and automaton. These developments destroy blue collar, and many white collar middle class jobs, leaving the economy with a few star positions (highly skilled professionals) and the rest are McJobs/Walmart variety.

 

[TooTall]

How to close the gap
-Free 4 years of college for all making less then 100,000/year
-Internship from college to corporations/businesses for fast college to work.
-Craft schools...Same as the 4 years of college.

End all welfare if they don't do it.

and who is going to pay for that Matt? Where does the money come from to provide a free 4 year education for every kid in the US?

It used to be that states invested more in education. In California the UC system was free tuition, the thinking that the payback would come when graduates paid higher taxes. Reagan became governor and put a stop to that "nonsense."

Reagan was in favor of tuition at UC, but was unable to get it passed by the Democrat legislature. The reasons are listed in the article.

CALIFORNIA WEIGHS END OF FREE COLLEGE EDUCATION
By ROBERT LINDSEY, Special to the New York Times
Published: December 28, 1982
•
LOS ANGELES, Dec. 27— California's public system of higher education, long the envy of many other states, is edging toward acceptance of something even Ronald Reagan, as Governor, could not force upon it: tuition.
The California Postsecondary Education Commission recommended earlier this month that the state abandon one of the cornerstones of its college and university system, a pledge that the state will pay instructional expenses for all residents.
The recommendation was the latest evidence of deep stresses bedeviling the long-admired California system of higher education. In hindsight, many educators say, the system was allowed to grow too large in the 1960's and is now having difficulty adapting to the falling birth rate, a state fiscal crisis and changing demands from students.

 

[PredFan]

To achieve income equality everyone in every field of work would have to have the exact same amount of skill need to preform said job and would all have to preform the job at the same level. Since we all know everyone does not have equal skill sets or preform their job at the same level to pay everyone at the same level would be grossly unfair and I highly doubt anyone who has worked hard to get to where they are in their chosen profession and preforms their job at a high level wants to see a lazy slacker who does just enough to get by being paid the same as them in the idiotic name of income equality.

Income equality is simply a rebranding of spreading the wealth around socialist dogma.

 

[PredFan]

It matters little whether major income inequality is planned of just the result of chance and luck. It's simply good sense to put money where it can best be used. When the amount of money someone grosses, becomes so great that it's beyond even the level of need for luxuries, then that surplus is better used as a govt fund (if/whenever it's used properly for real societal needs), and often is much more beneficial, that way, to that business owner too.

One example could be the Wolf Creek Dam in southern Kentucky. This massive structure has been in a state of dangerous deterioration for quite some time, needing lots of repair. If breached, the entire state capital of Tennessee (Nashville) could find itself under 20 feet of water, with thousands of people killed and Billions$$$ in flooding damages. All the luxuries he could buy won't help the Nashville billionaire, when that broken dam surge comes gushing through.

That money belongs to him, no one else, and this isn't really revant to the thread topic.

In a democracy, it is the whole population who decides who money "belongs to", not you. If the people decide a certain % of some super rich guy's income should belong to them as a group, that is how it will be done. Don't like it ? Plenty of low tax countries to move to. Syria. Saudi Arabia. Bolivia. Bon voyage.

That's why we are a republic and not a democracy. Democracy allows for tyranny if the majority. If we were a democracy, the voters could decide if gays are allowed to marry.

Democracy: Two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for dinner.