Liberals need to change their language

[Richard-H]

Every time I hear the phrases 'income inequality' or 'wealth redistribution' it makes me cringe.

These phrases play right into the hands of conservatives. They imply the worst communist economic reforms.

'Income inequality' implies that everyone's income should be equal. That's pure nonsense. No one in their right mind believes that everyone's income should be equal. The problem is not 'income inequality', the problem is 'EXCESSIVE income inequality'.

The inequality in incomes has become too drastic. It's getting to the point that the standard of living for working people is degenerating and the economy as a whole is being destroyed.
Some sort of government action to close the income gap a little, may be appropriate, but by no means should there be 'income equality'.

The same holds true for the phrase 'wealth redistribution'. This implies the government seizing people's asset and redistributing them, in a way that's a lot more drastic than increased taxation. Nobody wants that.This phrase also plays right into the hands of conservatives.

The solution should not be 'wealth redistribution', it should be 'FAIR wealth distribution' going forward. People getting paid on par with the value of their work.

These sort of rhetorical errors allow the conservatives to control the dialogue on these issues. They willingly misinterpret these phrases in the most drastic and negative way possible, build their straw men, then attack it.

Liberals need to make it clear that we by no means promote 'income equality' or 'wealth redistribution'. Make it clear that we want to end 'EXCESSIVE income inequality' and promote 'FAIR wealth distribution'.

 

[Truthseeker420]

They should call it income oppression.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Excessive and fair as qualified by whom?

 

[Richard-H]

Excessive and fair as qualified by whom?

Good question.

One metric for excessive income inequality of the ratio of executive compensation to employee wages and salaries. Employees do the bulk of the work and deserve a fair share of the profits. Stock holders should ultimately have the say. Companies would have to post this ratio publicly.

Private sector unions were probably the best mechanism for determining 'Fair wealth distribution'. No union wants to run employers out of business. They are also very well aware that a company has to be profitable in order to attract investors. Whatever formulas have been used by unions to determine their demands would be a good start at determining 'fair wealth distribution'.

 

[SmedlyButler]

However I think it's too late for subtle changes in language. People have to be made to understand (I've posted this before) that "wealth redistribution" has been going on forever. e.g. The Roman Empire was all about redistributing the wealth of the conquered back to Rome.

The concentration of wealth into the hands of the few is facilitated by the control of banking institutions and lobbying institutions etc. It's a self-perpetuating process.
All under the rallying cries of "free markets" and "the Gloriy of Capitalism".
It's time the 90% learned that they are not represented in this game. The same way colonials learned that they were disenfranchised.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QPKKQnijnsM"]Where is all the middle classe's missing wealth?[/ame]

 

[Truthmatters]

Im telling you the whole game would be over for the Rs if we just told everyone about their cheating in elections records.

The corporate media wont let it out

 

[1776]

Oh...you liberals want to cover up your true intentions....

 

[occupied]

Wealth redistribution is no more than the term conservatives use to describe the horror of trickle down being forced to work as advertised.

 

[SmedlyButler]

Excessive and fair as qualified by whom?

Good question.

One metric for excessive income inequality of the ratio of executive compensation to employee wages and salaries. Employees do the bulk of the work and deserve a fair share of the profits. Stock holders should ultimately have the say. Companies would have to post this ratio publicly.

Private sector unions were probably the best mechanism for determining 'Fair wealth distribution'. No union wants to run employers out of business. They are also very well aware that a company has to be profitable in order to attract investors. Whatever formulas have been used by unions to determine their demands would be a good start at determining 'fair wealth distribution'.

When blue collar and middle class America applauded Reagan's assault on the Unions
they reall shot themselves in the foot.

 

[Sherry]

You need to zip it. We should have a drinking party on Tuesday...see how many times Obama mentions it in the SOTU.

 

[Sherry]

Im telling you the whole game would be over for the Rs if we just told everyone about their cheating in elections records.

The corporate media wont let it out

Are you going to bring this immoral chicken poop into every thread??

 

[1776]

Unions that bankrupted the US auto industry then bankrupted Detroit....sure shitbag.

Unions are nothing but greedy and lazy people milking a company or taxpayers to death until the money runs out.

Right to work states are growing with new jobs while stupid ass liberal states are losing jobs and workers.

Excessive and fair as qualified by whom?

Good question.

One metric for excessive income inequality of the ratio of executive compensation to employee wages and salaries. Employees do the bulk of the work and deserve a fair share of the profits. Stock holders should ultimately have the say. Companies would have to post this ratio publicly.

Private sector unions were probably the best mechanism for determining 'Fair wealth distribution'. No union wants to run employers out of business. They are also very well aware that a company has to be profitable in order to attract investors. Whatever formulas have been used by unions to determine their demands would be a good start at determining 'fair wealth distribution'.

When blue collar and middle class America applauded Reagan's assault on the Unions
they reall shot themselves in the foot.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Excessive and fair as qualified by whom?

Good question.

One metric for excessive income inequality of the ratio of executive compensation to employee wages and salaries. Employees do the bulk of the work and deserve a fair share of the profits. Stock holders should ultimately have the say. Companies would have to post this ratio publicly.

Private sector unions were probably the best mechanism for determining 'Fair wealth distribution'. No union wants to run employers out of business. They are also very well aware that a company has to be profitable in order to attract investors. Whatever formulas have been used by unions to determine their demands would be a good start at determining 'fair wealth distribution'.

How do you suggest enforcing all this "fairness"?

 

[SmedlyButler]

I'll put you in the "opposed" column.
And in the "mindless parrot of Reaganomics jingoism" column.

SB

 

[velvtacheeze]

I agree that 'income inequality' sounds terrible. Liberals don't believe that everyone should earn the same amount of money. That's absurd. But 'income inequality' makes it sound like we do. I'm not so sure adding 'excessive' to the phrase is the answer either. I don't really know how to phrase it. I would just like incomes to be more fairly distributed. This requires state action. Reliance on the free market leads to those with power hogging as much of the created wealth for themselves. Higher taxes for the overpaid, and higher minimum wages always work, and liberals should always insist on both going UP.

 

[Richard-H]

Unions that bankrupted the US auto industry then bankrupted Detroit....sure shitbag.

Unions are nothing but greedy and lazy people milking a company or taxpayers to death until the money runs out.

Right to work states are growing with new jobs while stupid ass liberal states are losing jobs and workers.

Unions were prevalent in the U.S. economy and especially in the U.S. auto industry from the 1940s onward. They were there when the U.S. economy was at it's height.

If anyone is responsible for failures of the auto industry, it's the incompetent auto industry execs that refused to modernize for many many tears.

I have never been in a Union, but I have worked with many union members. Your stereo typing them as lazy is nonsense. They work hard. Most unions will not allow members that do not work.

Modern America was built by Unions. As Unions have declined, so has America!

 

[SmedlyButler]

You need to zip it. We should have a drinking party on Tuesday...see how many times Obama mentions it in the SOTU.

What does that even mean?

 

[Flopper]

However I think it's too late for subtle changes in language. People have to be made to understand (I've posted this before) that "wealth redistribution" has been going on forever. e.g. The Roman Empire was all about redistributing the wealth of the conquered back to Rome.

The concentration of wealth into the hands of the few is facilitated by the control of banking institutions and lobbying institutions etc. It's a self-perpetuating process.
All under the rallying cries of "free markets" and "the Gloriy of Capitalism".
It's time the 90% learned that they are not represented in this game. The same way colonials learned that they were disenfranchised.

Where is all the middle classe's missing wealth?

Government is always redistributing wealth through tax laws, corporate welfare, entitlements, and subsidies. Regardless of what the government does, it will be considered wealth redistribution. However, the facts speak for themselves. Wealth in the nation has been increasing faster for wealthy.

 

[occupied]

Call income inequality "trickle down failure".
Call wealth redistribution "compulsory trickle down".


How about that?

 

[Richard-H]

Excessive and fair as qualified by whom?

Good question.

One metric for excessive income inequality of the ratio of executive compensation to employee wages and salaries. Employees do the bulk of the work and deserve a fair share of the profits. Stock holders should ultimately have the say. Companies would have to post this ratio publicly.

Private sector unions were probably the best mechanism for determining 'Fair wealth distribution'. No union wants to run employers out of business. They are also very well aware that a company has to be profitable in order to attract investors. Whatever formulas have been used by unions to determine their demands would be a good start at determining 'fair wealth distribution'.

How do you suggest enforcing all this "fairness"?

I don't claim to have all the answers, but accurately stating the problem - in a way that doesn't give conservatives their straw man - is where to start.