Until someone defines "rich" its not even a statistic but some ephemeral ghost cloud in the sky

They got the title wrong. I should have read...

Media see class conflict between rich and poor.

Capitalism- The system in which all wealth and power is held by a tiny group of billionaires and their state.

Socialism- An economic system where wealth of society belongs to those who produce it - the workers - and is used in a planned and sustainable way for the benefit of all.

Long live socialism!

the conflict is now between the very rich and the new poor (the middle class); wages have been flat for 30 years, inflation compounded over the 30 years is over 160%; the middle class has been out sourced, taxed out, and very little opportunity to dig itself out of a bottomless pit of a recession that will last for decades.

There is a growing rift between rich and poor, but it's primarily a product of an administration that is trying to deflect attention away from their own failed policies. This "rich vs poor" diatribe as been the basis for every socialist/communist power grab since time began. Get the masses on your side by convincing them you care about them and, if they just give you the power, you will take care of them. Russian revolution, China, Vietnam, French Revolution, Cuba, etc... It always starts out "for the benefit of the workers."

This article is so very self-serving. Conflict does not necessarily exist of its own accord. It takes emotion, even anger, to generate conflict, and it is in MSNBC's interest to help incite conflict. So, this article like so many others seems bent on exaggerating the reasons for anger, and then gain readership by reporting on the conflict resulting therefrom. This is a blatant case of abuse by the 4th estate of its influence and self-serving spin doctoring.

The conflict is about fairness. The wealthy influence changes in the rules to their own benefit through funding political campaigns, lobbying efforts and misinformation efforts (such as the Koch brothers and other energy money leading the global warming denial effort and Fox News). The frequent charge that the "99%ers" hate rich people because they are rich is baloney. The 99%ers merely want a system that is fair.

Conservatives that rail about government regulations are a large part of the problem. Many of those regulations are aimed at requiring businesses to tell the truth, "truth in lending" for example, or being required to sell food, toys and other products that are not dangerous to health. Sensible regulation is necessary and everyone agrees that only necessary regulations should be part of our business law system.

The real issue in "class warfare" is allowing businesses to relax worker safety rules in coal mines, for example, to increase profits. This is not socialism, it is fairness.

Capitalism IS the greatest equalizer in the world! Not the crony crap.

We need to allow it to work for the worker to balance things out! Let capitalism raise every workers wages and take money from the rich the proper way.

A BIGGER PAYCHECK!

Remove the artificial bottom that keeps capitalism from working. Arrest any business or person who hires an illegal!

Well, the only people who DO NOT see any problems are the rich and those people who have been convinced that they too could be rich...one day... if they hit the lottery... if they get an inheritance from some rich uncle they've never heard of... if they survive a plane crash... if they get to sue some large company for a rats foot in there can of peas... you get the picture.

Capitalism does not "take" from anyone. It rewards providing a product that others want at a price the market will bear.

There is no conflict as the 99% are unarmed with a couple very important distinctions; their voting power and their united collective ability to influence change. Key word here is: Collective.

While the wealthy can pour millions into an election, and lobbying, they only get one vote. Get a clue. The 'collective' advantage goes to the people ONLY if we stand united.

There is more and more realization that for the past 30 years the wealthy wholly own significant members of Congress (both sides of the isle), and they have been diligently going about ensuring they remain in power.

If you love this country give this President, or for that matter any President with the best interests of the country at heart, the tools they need to get beyond an increasingly dysfunctional Congress. That is 70+ seats in the Senate for Dems (cause they don't know how to get in line) and the control of the House.

marlen...and what belongs to those who will not work? Nothing? Socialism going to let them and their children rot in the streets?

No system is perfect, especially one that completely denies human nature.

The demonization of the poor by the right has only fueled the fire of hatred for the rich. They tell you about cracked out mothers selling food stamps to buy drugs but they don't want you to know about the guy who works his ass off for 40 or more hours a week and still struggles to feed his family, keep up the house, maintain the car, etc. Don't forget, they want to take his food stamps and assistance away as well. The demonization of the working poor is the most disgusting tactic our country has ever used.

And you know, most of us just want to earn a living wage and not have to ask the government for money but the lion's share of our living wage are going in the executives pockets. Don't tell me that the media or the president CREATED this attitude, the "job creators" created this attitude when they refused to pay Americans a living wage and then @!$%# on them because they're poor.

Not all of us are socialists...we just want a better wage for working our asses off. Many of us are tired of killing ourselves for $10 an hour while those in the same company who work half as hard drive BMW's and take two weeks of vacation on a beach somewhere. Envy? Class warfare? You're goddamn right and I don't think the wealthy has even begun to see just how pissed off most of us are!

Obama is the one pushing this class warfare.

The rich getting richer while the poor stay poor is an interesting statistic. But no one even tries to explain how the rich getting richer causes the poor to get poorer. Just because two things happen at the same time doesn't mean one caused the other.

People that listen to Obama need to use their own reasoning for a second, and try to link the two in their own minds before just believing Obama.

Theres no guarantee that life well be fair to you. You envy others for what they have? Covet.

Spencer-399802... you sound like you listened to Romney's speech last night...bahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

brendan

@ Don

Define fair! I bet you cannot, just like every other liberal that posts on these boards.

You can start with this thought. Democracy is one person - one vote. When some people because of their willingness to use their wealth to influence our political system get more say in the government than others, that is unfair. When corporations are allowed to spend unlimited money to influence our elections while remaining anonymous, that is unfair. When children in wealthy neighborhoods have higher quality public education because more money is spent per student, that is unfair.

OK, I know. I didn't define fair. I only gave examples of unfair. But I hope you get the picture.

The rich are working to lower wages & take away our benefits. while their wealth is increasing they work to get rid of unions and lower pay

Yes sir. Rick Cohen and C&S grocers, that's their strategy. Now they control much of the nation's food distribution network. They brag about it and laugh at the elderly who are eating cat food to survive.

Somehow, asking the ultra-wealthy to pay their fair share in keeping our great nation alive is class warfare, but demanding that we end food stamps isn't...

Well, the only people who DO NOT see any problems are the rich and those people who have been convinced that they too could be rich...one day... if they hit the lottery... if they get an inheritance from some rich uncle they've never heard of... if they survive a plane crash... if they get to sue some large company for a rats foot in there can of peas... you get the picture.

You see, 82AllAmericans, you have no understanding of conservatives at ALL. Your statement above is how LIBERALS view getting rich. To a liberal, being rich is about getting lucky, and they believe the rich are not deserving, but rather just lucky. Somehow fate plucked a few from obscurity and saw fit to give them wealth, which they see as patently unfair (since it was them and not ME).

Conservatives, on the other hand, believe they can get wealthy by coming up with a great idea or by solving a problem that no on else has figured out how to solve yet. It's not about getting lucky, but about creating your own luck! Conservatives don't want someone to give them money, but just want an opportunity to do it for themselves. While Americans sit on their butts and collect unemployment checks because there are no jobs, thousands of legal immigrants come here every year and CREATE jobs by starting small businesses and working hard. They understand that the American dream is not something you are given, but something you have the opportunity to GRASP.

What America needs is less ME and more US.

And that's where conservatives misunderstand the rest of us. Many of us aren't asking for a handout or asking to become as rich as they are; we're asking to be paid enough to live a comfortable life but we're being refused that as well, and for what? All we want is to be paid well enough not to have to live paycheck to paycheck. Is that too much to ask? But you don't want to force corporations to pay a better wage and you want to destroy the unions which (in it's ideal form) ensures a better wage. So we're left living paycheck to paycheck and most periods paycheck to a few days before the next paycheck. How is this fair when the ratio of pay is so unfair? You want to get rid of government programs? Get rid of welfare? Fine, pay us better for working hard.

Wealth is the result of a choice NOT to consume, and should belong to the people who make that choice. Workers are paid for their work, they should only own the wealth if they chose to set some of their income aside and not consume it. Wealth is ownership of the tools of production, and income does not become wealth until it is invested. It is wrong to steal the wealth from those who have chosen not to consume their income.

What we need is not higher income taxes, what we need is luxury taxes. We need a progressive sales tax that rewards what we want -- more production -- and punishes what we do not want -- more consumption. America consumes more than it produces, and that is why America is exporting market share for its industries.

I own my own business. My business is open 365 days 24/7 - a lodging business.

We can not find housekeeping help, because the government pays people more than we can afford, NOT TO WORK. We pay $15 an hour, for those of you interested.

Why should I work, pay taxes, to watch this government tax me, then give money/government aid to those that are lazy, drug addicts, drunks, smoke, refuse to better themselves, while the government entitles these low lifes, way to high a standard of living because of government aid!

If these types I described had to make REAL CHOICES, then $15 an hour for working (if you can get them to show up) would not seem so bad.

America, under Obama, has turned into a nation of gimmee, gimmee because I don't want to work for it!

RMJ, Winterland, Ky, there are lots of jobs that pay pretty well, but you have to have the skills and drive to do them. I know several kids right out of high school who have been able to go into apprenticeships for welding, electrical work, pipe fitting, etc and they make a pretty decent living. My son just graduated from college with a 4-year degree and started his first job making over $60k a year with full benefits. That's not too bad. He had no connections with anyone in the company that hired him, but got the job because he applied and then called them every 3-4 days to see if they would give him an interview. In the end, they figured anyone with that much initiative would be someone they would want to have working for them.

There are poor paying jobs out there, too, but in a society where every job pays a "living wage', the prices just go up proportionally.

Capitalism- The system in which all wealth and power is held by a tiny group of billionaires and their state.

Socialism- An economic system where wealth of society belongs to those who produce it - the workers - and is used in a planned and sustainable way for the benefit of all.

The workers can't produce if someone doesn't fund the businesses and create the facilities. And those who fund the businesses and facilities can't recover their investments if the workers don't produce.

So isn't the real question how much is the workers share of revenues and how much of a share of the revenues is those who fund the businesses? To date the ideology of capitalism is the workers receive a wage in exchange for their labor, but, since they take no financial risks and are not subject to financial loss, do not further share in the revenues with those who fund the businesses and take the financial risks and are subject to financial loss receiving the remainder of the revenues.

If this is now deemed unacceptable, then a new ideology should be offered, discussed and agreed upon.

This is funny to watch in real time. Conservatives are there to slap down the lower classes. That's been their agenda for more than 200 years. OWS flashed a huge spotlight on the problem, and you can see the ultra-radical conservative response. The more people notice that their economic future is being stymied by the rich, and the more noise they make about it, the farther to the right the conservatives will go.

The real question is simple: how far to the right causes them to fall of the political stage.

I don't think they have much farther to go, as all the votes for the obviously senile Ron Paul is proving. The problem with the Paul folks is that they think government is the problem, when money is the problem. If they were to step back a minute and really assess what's going on around them, they would see it. But, they are young, and easily lead. When they put on a few years working at whatever minimum wage becomes, they'll wise up too, and they are legion.

Bruce, you can't have a society of only people who are running around starving, hoping that they will "come up with" some great idea the next day. Such a society would immediately fail to riots by starving masses.

Rich people often did NOT work their way to millions; they simply are good at using other people to work for them or pour money into them. They are good talkers and have a way of getting people to trust them to "lead", when they themselves do little for society. They often steal someone's work and quickly market it under their name. They are good at getting people to gamble on them, and don't care if they lose other peoples' money in the process.

Rich have moved all good factory jobs that thousands of ordinary people worked hard at to China where they work for pennies, just because American middle class workers had unions who fought for a minimum wage. Talk about patriotism.

A country of ALL conservatives would be a third world; extreme Capitalism fails as badly as extreme Communism. Right and Left, conservative and liberal, must serve as a check and balance to each other in this country, each keeping the other from going overboard, for their to be a Middle Class and a continued American Dream.

Ever wonder how the German people could have swallowed Hitler's Propaganda?

Godwins law right out of the gate.

Backcountry

Your statement is incorrect ..... quality of life is not improving. Allowing for inflation, minimum wage is lower than a generation ago and the cost of rent is higher. The income of the wealthiest 1% has tripled during the past two decades while the income of the rest of the population remained flat, again adjusted for inflation. Meanwhile the costs of medical care and education have risen dramatically faster than the inflation rate. What country do you live in the back of?

We pay $15 an hour, for those of you interested.

I find that incredibly hard to believe. Where I live (Michigan), you would have people wrapped around the block three times to have one of those $15/hr jobs. Unless of course, these are part time jobs. You have to understand that it takes full time employment above minimum wage, with maybe a few benefits, to be able to feed, clothe and house a family. Most of you righties don't seem to care about that. You just can't stand people and love running down those who don't meet your standards.

Hey DP and backcountry, have you seen this graph?:

The rich got richer and, well, you know the rest

That's what WE'RE all sick of.

Backcountry-whatever.

Are you suffering from some sort of advanced senilty, or maybe lack of at least a log cabin education, or are you a paid GOP-shill??

Don97524 provided the ACCURATE stats, and they spell REBELLION in the making...

The entire GOP-congress needs to be charged with conspiracy to committ high treason, and the US Supreme court conservatives, with them.

There has been a widening of the rich vs poor rift, but the economy didn't cause it.....the Great Divider in the Whitehouse did. Disgusting!

Everyone is the culmination of their own "life choices".

If your not successful, look in the mirror to see why.

It's because you chose not to be.

America, under Obama, has turned into a nation of gimmee, gimmee because I don't want to work for it!

Right. This all started on Jan, 20 2009. Give me a break with the lame statement. Welfare has been around for close to 50 years. Why weren't you screaming about it when Reagan or the Bushes were in the White House? What's the real reason you have such a hatred for this president? And btw, I don't believe anything you've said about owning a business. Your only income probably comes from the check you get trolling for the Koch's.

you guys are a hoot!!! you really think we have poor people in this country? try living in any number of 3rd world crap-holes around the globe then come back and tell all us that we have such a huge poor problem. our poor are middle-class on a world scale, most of the world is freaking poor!!! compared to the US. the rich got richer cause duuuhhhhhh money makes money and the more money you have to more risks you can take, can no one figure that one out or is it wrong for the rich to make more money? so you want to determine how much someone makes based on some emotional feeling?

you want to complain about the rising cost of things why dont you look to the freaking government that adds burden (cost) to the very people that sell their product/service to you!!! life is not free and life and not fair so pull your panties up and be a human and stop being envious of other peoples wealth.

SAVE YOUR MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!! stop making decisions that cost you money, no one is to blame but yourself!! this is why man cannot rule himself, no discipline as a species and easily led by con-men.

@don97524

minimum wage is lower than a generation ago

That's what you're using as a bench mark? Seriously? A wage earned by less than 3% of working Americans is what you're going by? Give me a friggin' break. The Average wage a generation ago (1995) was $24,705 today it is $41,673. -http://www.ssa.gov/oact/COLA/AWI.html Are you trying to say we've had 68% inflation over that same time to nullify the 68% increase in average wage?

The only person in the back of something is you. In the back pocket of the politicians you allow to yank you around by the puppet strings. Minimum wage! LOL!

MtMike

So according to you, the government paying people only started under Obama? Wow, I was not aware that welfare programs were non-existent until Obama came into office.

And here I thought that the concept of welfare... or "paying those who don't work"... started in the colonies when the founding fathers adopted British Poor Laws. Or perhaps you can attribute it to Franklin D. Roosevelt, in 1935.

But no, you are correct. The government paying people did not start until Obama came into office. Thank you for educating all of us with your superior intellect.

Oh... and I'm sure it's ALL the government's fault (insert crying baby noise) that you can't find people to work in your lodge. I'm sure your charming personality and wonderful attitude, as a boss, has nothing to do with the decision your workers make. Nope, the personality of a boss, and how he treats his employees, has nothing to do with a workers decision process. It is all because of the big, mean government.

done97524...I'd give you a thousand thumbs up if I could. You hit the nail smack on the head.

@BuddyThisToo~~

Are you suffering from some sort of advanced senilty, or maybe lack of at least a log cabin education, or are you a paid GOP-shill??

I'm a libertarian and the only people with "log cabin educations" are you puppets, blindly following along behind whomever you have decided should run your lives for you.

Don97524 provided the ACCURATE stats, and they spell REBELLION in the making...

WTF are you talking about? What stats? Let me check again... nope, no stats; just the same drivel parroted by most liberals with no facts or figures to support them. I am the one who just provided verifiable stats from a reputable source maybe you should pull your head out long enough to look at them. Assuming you still have the ability to think for yourself anyway.

The "poor" don't generally take responsibility for their bad life choices, that's why they are poor. Playing class warfare makes them feel better about all those terrible life choices they made along they way..........they desperately want to deflect responsibility away from themselves.

It doesn't work.

gary

There are more people on food stamps than ever, who are you talking about? Go ahead tax the rich more, who cares? This will still not offset the deficit. You have no ideas just silly rants.

As opposed to the GOP and your ideas... getting rid of food stamps and letting people starve? Ya, great idea. That will fix everything.

I have an idea, find something you like and are good at and throw your life into it and you will improve your lot..Guaranteed!

Except for the fact that a recent study revealed there are 4 applicants for every 1 job. So if every available job in the country was suddenly filled, 75% of those looking for jobs would still be unemployed. But they are only poor people, so f*** 'em... isn't that right? No food stamps, no welfare, just tell them to go fight for the job and hope that they are among the 25% that will fill the positions... otherwise, they are f***ed.

http://www.businessinsider.com/middle-class-collapse-michael-snyder-2012-1

Harry Blank

actually "it" started about 75 years ago , that's when the liberal democrats began their 75 year control og Congress , as they have been in control of it for the majority of that time...ergo here we are

Actually... the concept of welfare, or "paying the poor", started in the original colonies when they adopted British Poor Laws. Throughout the 1800s various measures and changes took place, as the founding fathers tried to figure out a way to deal with the poor class that is present in every society.

Their idea was that a civilized society takes care of the whole... of course, the new Republican party hates this idea.

But hey, don't let historical facts get in your way of spreading lies. I know that education is difficult for you.

well , after your diatribe IndieParty , one would have to ask , what has YOUR party done to help with the job situation?...that's right , nothing...what ideas have they come up with?...again the answer is nothing...please post where any GOP candidate said "get rid of food stamps and let people starve"...again , you can't

the only person talking that kind of stuff IS?...that's right , the Independent (RINO) town idiot Ron Paul

"independent" = "liberal who is afraid to admit it"

Is a lie that socialist are for the poor . Russia already try and fail , big government and wealth distribution doesn't work. From the early days of the pilgrims, when everybody work the common land and share the fruits , some people work harder than other and then decide to divide the land giving equal part to every family, the people that work hard produce more and sold and trade the excess to the neighbors creating wealth, the ones that work less start buying to the other to supply their deficit in food, at the end one group create their own wealth and the other lose it. Under the socialist view the wealthy is the villain and the poor is the victim. This is what Obama and socialist friends are selling with his class warfare.

MtMike if you were close i would be there shortly to apply. $15/hr sounds great to me.

Is it an American phenomenon where we claim we are proud of our diversity, yet can't wait to throw a label on someone?

@skeeter

true that...and our current king and his jackleg party are masters at it...interesting

What class am I in, I have 7686.00 after I pay my rent for a year , and this I have to pay electric, water, car ins. and gas and food , not much to live on for a year.

IMHO there is not one CEO of any company that EARNS or should earn more than $1M per year. No exceptions. When shareholders and stakeholders understand the Fox has been guarding the hen house (sitting on each other's compensation boards) and take difinitive action to disrupt and correct this mistake, then and only then can we begin to return to solvency as a nation and resurrect the American Dream.

IndieParty - You missed the boat, my comment stated that there are more people on food stamps than ever before. I did not say eliminate the program, my point was to Toasty who cries about unfair treatment of the have-nots without actually stating who it is that is saying they want to eliminate foodstamps. Toasty is always blaming someone without actually offering any solutions, that's the stuff that gets old. If Toast's theories are correct then Obama should have fixed the economy by now, oh yea wait, can't undo eight years of Bush in four years, oh yea and the repubitards control congress and the corporations control the world. Well then we don't stand a china man's chance, oh wait the Chinese are taking over Americas universities...on and on and on.. I welcome someone with an actual plan..Bring it! How are you part of the solution IndieParty? Please enlighten us with how you give to the have-nots.

Isn't it interesting that our 'Post-Racial' President is using overt racism in his campaign? Guess who he's appealing to with his 'Class-Warfare' and 'Redistribution of Wealth' rhetoric – relatively poor minorities. And guess who he's demonizing – wealthy White people. And all the while he's complaining about his opposition being based on 'racism'.

Obama claimed in his 2008 campaign that he was going to 'transcend the politics of division', but he has turned out to be the most divisive President in history.

It may make for good politics by Obama, but it will cause nothing but divisions at a time when we need to come together.

Can we afford another 4 years of this?

Corporate profits rule under capitalism; socialism prioritizes meeting human needs.

Which economic system would Jesus choose?

Backcountry164, You seem willing to speak for EVERYONE. I will only speak for myself and my grandson.

My first full-time job (1968) as an adult was low end wages. $75. a week take home. You could rent a decent 2 bedroom house or nice 2 bedroom apt. for $60. a month. Utilities ran about half that amount. $300. a month wages minus $90. living expenses left $210 (roughly 2/3 of my pay). for food, clothing, transportation and entertainment. I had to be frugal and forgo big ticket items, but I lacked for nothing and was dependent on no one. I worked my way into a trade-school the next year and have done okay since then.

My 18 yr. old grandson just got his first full-time job as an adult(2011). He was very proud to get a job paying approx. $275. a week take home in this depressed economy. A decent 2 bedroom home or apt. starts at $900. a month. Modest utilities(without cable or telephone service) run $300. a month. That leaves him $100. a month in the hole every month. Needless to say, he must depend on a room-mate to share the cost and still struggles to survive. I am donating my old sleeper sofa so they can share with a 3rd person in their home, merely to survive. We all pray the land-lord has no objections. My grandson hopes to better himself in the near future just as I did, but his future looks very bleak.

Tell me, what's wrong with this picture? We can't pretend that everything is alright because we are still managing to do alright. We can't pretend that everybody is capable or can afford to go to college. Where would we find a tradesman or laborer when we needed one? Should they starve or live in communes only to serve their "betters"?

Not in the proud America where I live! It's time to stop pretending and take a good look around us before our way of life becomes nothing more than a distant memory. What once was will be lost forever if we continue to turn a blind eye to reality and continue to listen to liars. Don't talk to me about Presidents Obama or Bush. This started 30 years ago with the Voodoo economics of President Reagan during his single great role as an actor. I was there and very aware of the disastrous consequences to come.

Reposted:

marlen101917

Capitalism- The system in which all wealth and power is held by a tiny group of billionaires and their state.

Socialism- An economic system where wealth of society belongs to those who produce it - the workers - and is used in a planned and sustainable way for the benefit of all.

Long live socialism! 49!

#1.3 - Wed Jan 11, 2012 2:57 PM EST

socialism blows...fails everywhere it is tried...equal squalor and poverty for all...I am pretty sure that "Jesus" would opt for something a little better , but then Chavez has a hovel just your size Marlen , how about you take him up on it

Capitalism - an economic system where you are responsible for bettering yourself and providing for your own well being at the least amount of expense to others

Socialism - an economic system where you sit on your azz and let someone else slave for your well being at the most expense to others

Harry

Ahhhh... how cute. I prove how wrong your historical accuracy is, and you change the subject to what my party "has done". The problem here is that you missed the point.

The ONLY reason I responded to you was to prove how uneducated you are. Your hostile reaction, instead of admitting your mistake, further proves my point. So thank you.

BTW...

I would say that the"new Republican party" believes that a society is more "civilized" if it empowers the "poor" to lift themselves up and and move forward and then bask in the warm glow of self accomplishment.

This is the funniest thing I have read all day. Republicans are more "civilized"... hahahahahaha. So when Republicans are associating homosexuals with "pedophiles" and "beastiality"... that is civil behavior? When Republicans compare homosexual teenagers to "barbarians"... that is civil behavior? When Republicans talk about mass killings of illegal immigrants with electrified fences... that is civil behavior? When Republicans rise to a roaring applause over the mere mention of executions... that is civil behavior? When Republicans mock and "boo" a soldier who is fighting for your freedom, on national television... that is civil behavior? When Republicans say that we need to cut out welfare and food stamps, so millions of poor people starve... that is civil?

Well, if by "more civilized" you mean that you treat people like s***... then yes, you are more "civil".

Oh, and it's hard to "lift up" people and "empower" them to get jobs when it is a FACT that there are 4 applicants for every 1 available job. That means that if every currently available job is filled, there are still 75% of the unemployed population still not working. So how do you "empower" the 75% when there are no jobs available for them.

Then again, if your math is as good as your history, this simple calculation is over your head.

tonybeeerm

There are jobs open ALL OVER ALASKA. One has to pass a drug test, be willing to work, and show up!

Most can not do this and instead try to live off the government!

" My grandson hopes to better himself in the near future just as I did, but his future looks very bleak."

hahaha...don't let get to down, at the rate the neo-com liberals are going he will be able to have your new American dream of "occupying" and taking from others what he wants for himself , and the progressive (communists) that are the democrat party will provide him with all the ammunition an anarchist could hope for...see , it will be ok

Well geeeeeeeez, folks - if you quit school at fifteen, have three kids by twenty and smoke bong and do meth every night, guess what: LIFE'S GOING TO BE HARDER ON YOU DOWN THE ROAD.

Get a clue, will you????

OK, all you Democrats/Liberals/Progressives answer a few simple questions.

Define:

Fair. What is it? How will you attain it? Who is this omnipotent, benevolent, unbiased person that can decide what is fair? Is it you? Is it me? Is it Obama? The Government? The Pope?

A level playing field. Again, what is it? How will you attain it? Who will keep it level?

A fair/living wage. How much is it? Is it the same for a high school dropout and a PhD? Is it the same for a janitor and a neurosurgeon? If not, what is, once again, fair? Is a living wage based on a 1,000 sq. ft. apartment or a 3,000 sq. ft. home in the suburbs? Is it based on one car in the family or two or three cars? Is it based on preparing meals at home or going out to the Olive Garden every night? Is it based on an in-state college education or an Ivy League education.

What you social and economic justice junkies need to understand is that America was never and will never be the "Land of Fairness".

It's the "Land of Opportunity".

There is a dramatic difference. America offers you the opportunity to become whatever you want to be. This is based on the fact that you can attain some higher level education, employment or wages. Fairness assumes equality. This will never happen. None of us are equal. Some run faster, some think better, some have more courage than others, some hit a baseball farther than others. How will it be determined who is allowed to be a janitor vs. a doctor? Some clandestine government bureaucracy? Our government has intruded in every facet of our lives. Name one thing that isn't taxed, regulated or subsidized. Yet according to you, nothing is fair.

The socialist mentality has never been shown to be achievable in a nation our size. It always devolves into communism or other dictatorship. America didn't create everything we see used in the world today based on fairness. It was built on visionaries, risk-takers, investors and entrepreneurs who thought outside the box to create something marvelous. A mass produced car as a result of the assembly line. A light bulb after over 2,000 failures. A computer operating system dreamt of and developed while in college. An adopted child, who took an idea, slapped a fruit logo (Apple) on it and created a global sensation.

Governments purpose is defined in our Constitution. For 100 years it has escaped the confines of its Enumerated Powers under the guise of helping people. Look what it has given us back for our efforts and taxes. Massive debt, incredible power for 545 people and fear. This was never the intent of the Founder's and Framer's. Over the past century our nation has been turned on its head. At one time "We the People" ruled over the States and Federal governments. Today, the Federal government rules over everything. We fear our elected officials rather than them fearing us. We are forced to pay more and more taxes into the black-hole called government and get less and less in return. Not a very good return on our investment, is it?

So please, stop with your incessant and adolescent tirades about fairness, equal playing fields or mythical living wages. Use what our Founders and Framers envisioned 235 years ago. Less government and more American will power.

Marlene

Capitalism- The system in which all wealth and power is held by a tiny group of billionaires and their state.

your definition is definitely out of the Socialist or Marxist dictionaries.

This is Dictionary.com (arguably a liberal dictionary)

cap·i·tal·ism

 /ˈkæpɪtlˌɪzəm/ Show Spelled[kap-i-tl-iz-uhm] Show IPA

noun
an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.

The whole purpose of these two systems is to goad people into envy, to gain their undivided loyalty, to over thow capitalism. You should have learned that in grade school.

Socialism is a poor substitution for Christianity, that states "not I but Christ in me."

What happens is the "We" becomes either dictators or a bankrupt society.

Commonsense, I was with you until you had to bash Reagan to make your point. To blame one man for decades of "change" is wrongheaded as Obama so often says.

I would submit that the US was the chosen location after the wars when Japan and Europe were in ruins. As businesses were being created at a record pace and immigrants and US citizens being put to work doing just about everything, unions could at that point step in and demand better workplace environment and wages and benefits.

Unfortunately what nobody paid enough attention to was that eventually other locations looked better than the US to add jobs. Also markets were developed outside the US. So began outsourcing and the US consumer really began to consume everything China had to make because women went to work which fueled increase consumption and buying power. We lost manufacturing jobs that got replaced with construction and tech jobs that fueled the housing bubble. The housing bubble was fueled by government subsidies that included tax deductions, and lax borrowing rules.

Meanwhile subsides fueled an educational bubble again with tax credits and cheap student loan rates pushing college tuition sky high.

Meanwhile the US workforce became loaded with unskilled workers many that included a college degree. Once upon a time, just having ANY degree would suffice, but that ship has sailed. Our public school system should get an F. We keep lowering the bar, making up excuses and graduating kids that can barely count change. Many of those kids were raised with zero guidance because all with all these bubbles we have seen the American family fall apart. How many families even eat together anymore?

Blame this all on one person or one party is just utter nonsense? We all participated in this wreck and now all that is being done by many is to point fingers and blame each other and envy anybody not in the same boat.

I hardly recognize this country anymore. The boomers never measured up to the greatest generation that was frugal, patriotic, and had a strong sense of community. The boomers not wanting to be anything like their parents took the party route and did everything to excess. They raised their kids to expect others to take care of them and now that group, OWS, is demanding payment.

I do keep hearing John Kennedy's words " ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country"and I weep knowing how far we have fallen.

Socialism is an illusion impracticable by humans. Look good in word in theory but is a failure at the moment that every person born different than the other , we are not ants or insects that live in communities drive by their instincts , we all think , we all want freedom and the only way to have a socialist society is eliminating the freedom isolate from other groups and the Government take over the economy. Marxism did not work nor Maoism the communist model, they both turn to capitalism, because that is the system that drive the economy. Capitalism , free enterprise, freedom to create jobs, less government intervention is the way to go to create jobs , the best way to reduce the gap between rich and poor , increase the middle class , and increase the tax revenue is creating more jobs , not redistributing the wealth.

IndieParty

How many unemployment extensions need to be granted under the Obama Reign!

There is a reason under Obama, that the Federal Debt keeps growing at a rate of over One Trillion a year, and unemployment (U-6) is running between 15% and 17% - why should one go to work, when the government pays them not to.

How much Food Stamp Fraud, Welfare Fraud, Unemployment Fraud, Medicaid Fraud, Medicare Fraud under Obama!

The amount is staggering!

With the fraud in the food stamp program alone, people who use cash when purchasing groceries are a rarity!

You are showing your inability to look at reality, keep driniking the Obama Kool Aid and watch where this country ends up by entitling these thieves!

America is headed in the WRONG DIRECTION under Obama and where we end up, won't be pretty!

Ron in Seattle-2190928-2190938 #1.13,

If you believe that your vote for President/Vice President actually goes to them, you had better check out the U S Electoral College.

There are only two choices for humanity today: an increasingly destructive capitalism, or socialism. Workers of the world unite!

52, Wow! maybe there is hope for America after all...

RMJ said:

And that's where conservatives misunderstand the rest of us. Many of us aren't asking for a handout or asking to become as rich as they are; we're asking to be paid enough to live a comfortable life but we're being refused that as well, and for what? All we want is to be paid well enough not to have to live paycheck to paycheck. Is that too much to ask? But you don't want to force corporations to pay a better wage and you want to destroy the unions which (in it's ideal form) ensures a better wage. So we're left living paycheck to paycheck and most periods paycheck to a few days before the next paycheck. How is this fair when the ratio of pay is so unfair? You want to get rid of government programs? Get rid of welfare? Fine, pay us better for working hard.

This thought process never ceases to amaze me!

First, I'm one of your "rest of us" as I don't make anywhere near what even Obama would classify as "wealthy".

So . . . just asking enough to live a comfortable life? Well, what would that mean to you? Just how much does your employer "have to pay you", whether your work is worth it or not? It is a completely ridiculous statement! You want to live a comfortable life? Then do what you need to do to live your comfortable life! Is that too much to ask? And don't say your hard work equates to pay for your comfortable life. Again, another ridiculous statement. Most people that work would say they word hard - and burger flippers don't make the same as brain surgeons for a reason!

Force corporations to pay a better wage?! Fine, you make the financial investment to form and grow a corporation and you take the risk of that corporation failing. No, you just want to be the worker who gets a comfortable life, has no responsibility of the corporation, and when something better comes along, or you become a more valuable worker, you can move on - walk away.

You want to be paid well enough to live your "comfortable" life. Then do it for yourself - you are not owed your "comfortable" life! And live within your means. If your means aren't cutting it - work harder!!

The problem we have here is that the older/richer generation of people got first dibs in everything from jobs, property, benefits and such, and the younger generation is stuck paying for their lifestyles and then struggling to just make ends meet.

Most older people do not realize the little money they paid into SS back in their day has already been paid back in full, and now they are living off the backs of the younger generation, and then looked down upon by the older generation that thinks they earn every dime they are getting off the backs of the younger people.

The younger generation knows SS will not be there for them in 15 to 20 years, yet they are still paying into it.

Then we have people that own businesses and barely paying their employees enough to live on and breaking the government programs because the salaries the low wage earners are making isn't enough to keep a roof over one's head nowadays. The rich need to pay the people better salaries so they do not have to rely on or burden the system with welfare and food-stamps.

We need to make it so that businesses like Walmart and many others are allowed to force people o healthcare and welfare assistance to supplement their incomes. Walmart needs to pay their employees at least 20 per hr just like any other employee in the work place deserves the same, and II am including McD's and all other fast-food joints.

Everything in America has gone up from gay and utilities, rent and medical, but the incomes have remain stagnant, and the people are struggling and suffering here in America.

We need to make the playing field fair for all people and start putting and end to the elitist running our country and our lives.

REVOLUTION 2012: It's time for some real change in America.

To all of you defenders of the 1% - it is so obvious YOU REALLY DON'T GET IT! You ignore the fact that the trickle down policies of republicans are what is decimating the middle class. You spout the talking points of the plutocrats, who are using you for cover. You don't even know (or are purposefully misrepresenting) why we are pissed. Well you won't be misinformed for long. OWS and the rumblings of the 99% who are being @!$%#ed over will get louder and louder. At some point you won't be able to run from it.

Tonybeeerm said:

You have to understand that it takes full time employment above minimum wage, with maybe a few benefits, to be able to feed, clothe and house a family. Most of you righties don't seem to care about that. You just can't stand people and love running down those who don't meet your standards.

You probably shouldn't plan to have a family if you attain to work that pays the minimum wage. Having kids is expensive. Not doing it on $20,000 a year is probably the smart thing!

Leroy-483977

Rich people often did NOT work their way to millions; they simply are good at using other people to work for them or pour money into them. They are good talkers and have a way of getting people to trust them to "lead", when they themselves do little for society. They often steal someone's work and quickly market it under their name. They are good at getting people to gamble on them, and don't care if they lose other peoples' money in the process.

WOW!!!!!!

That has to be one of the most irrational, dysfunctional descriptions of how wealth is created I have ever heard. Of course when the elitists keep pounding these fairy-tales in your head I imagine it’s very difficult to think rationally. You may be interested in some “facts” about millionaires. (The following is not me, it’s an abstract from “The Millionaire Next Door”)

Most of us have never felt at a disadvantage because we did not receive any inheritance. About 80 percent of us are first-generation affluent.

I am a fifty-seven-year-old male, married with three children. About 70 percent of us earn 80 percent or more of our household's income.

About one in five of us is retired. About two-thirds of us who are working are self-employed. Interestingly, self-employed people make up less than 20 percent of the workers in America but account for two-thirds of the millionaires. Also, three out of four of us who are self-employed consider ourselves to be entrepreneurs. Most of the others are self-employed professionals, such as doctors and accountants.

Many of the types of businesses we are in could be classified as dullnormal. We are welding contractors, auctioneers, rice farmers, owners of mobile-home parks, pest controllers, coin and stamp dealers, and paving contractors.

We live well below our means. We wear inexpensive suits and drive American-made cars. Only a minority of us drive the current-model-year automobile. Only a minority ever lease our motor vehicles.

About two-thirds of us work between forty-five and fifty-five hours per week.

If you’re truly interested in the mean nasty millionaires who just happen to be sitting in the right place and all of a sudden a million dollars falls from the sky, Google “The Millionaire Next Door” and find the NYT’s link.

I think you’ll find it diametrically different from your delusional perception of wealth.

lib50 You don't get it. How rich is Obama. He is laughing at you and the rest of the OWS morons. He is getting millions for re-election meanwhile spending our tax dollars like it is his money. OPEN YOUR EYES. Obama is the 1%. You are defending him.

It seems marlen101917 (1.3) is an advocate for poverty and despair, and as long as marlen provides a definition of Socialism, I’ll provide one as well:

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, The creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.." — Winston Churchill

Conflict? Hmmmm.... Guess I missed the big fight. The real problem is the government. Libs like to think that "the government" is looking after them. The sad fact is that they aren't. As we've seen with the stimulus package, all it helped were wealthy political cronies. There were no jobs created as a result of it. When you spend more than the budget for the military you expect real job growth. It didn't happen. When government spends money on things that the people wouldn't spend their own money on, it is money thrown away. Politicians have created tax policies designed to accomplish social ends. That never works. So, we have GE making millions of dollars and paying no taxes. Why? Because our great politicians have created a tax system where it is better to for them to buy tax credits than spend money on hiring people to produce goods people want. You can't blame the company for that. The sooner everyone wakes up and realizes that the politicians are even more disingenuous than the corporate people blokes, things might start to turn around. Of course, when ever you see politicians trying to expand government you can rest assured that there are two reasons behind it. One, there is a business interest pursuing it. Second, there is a politician interest in obtaining perceived power and benefits. Obviously us peons have no pull with the politicians, but the rich do (after all they have the money). But, the other thing is that having money is equated with intelligence. Thus, when politicians push for more government, they are betting that we are too dumb to recognize what they are doing. And, as the old saying goes, if it sounds to good to be true, it usually is. Thus, promises of transfer wealth from the rich to the poor with no consequences is just an empty promise designed to buy votes, and with someone else's money, usually our own.

@Commonsense101

Backcountry164, You seem willing to speak for EVERYONE. I will only speak for myself and my grandson.

I don't speak FOR everyone, I speak OF everyone. If you can't see past the end of your own nose and think the entire country should take it's direction based on your singular experience then that's your problem.

And let's not play dumb shall we, the idea that your grandson is somehow worse off becuase he can't pay the rent is asinine. Where I live you can rent an entire house for 450 a month, utilities included and my 18 year old son just got a job for 360 a week. Your grandson doesn't even make min wage, if he chooses to live somewhere he can't afford to live he should move or make due like the rest of us. God forbid a kid right out of high school should have to live with a roommate, why on Earth won't the government step in and take care of that for him. <rollseyes>

lib50

To all of you defenders of the 1% - it is so obvious YOU REALLY DON'T GET IT! You ignore the fact that the trickle down policies of republicans are what is decimating the middle class.

Hmmmm, I think you mean the trickle-down policies of Obama, don't you?

I mean, he took an $863 BILLION Dollar $timulu$ and poured it into the government and then expected it to trickle-down to all those shovel-ready jobs. Right?

And wasn't he and his boy-toy Jeff Immelt the ones that laughed in your face and told you that, “Shovel-ready was not as … uh .. shovel-ready as we expected.”

This is the most criminal evidence that trickle-down doesn't work.

Myself, I'll take the 92 months of uninterrupted growth Reaganomics created. That’s almost 31 quarters.

Hmmmm, I think you mean the trickle-down policies of Obama, don't you?

No, I mean the old reaganomics/bushonomics/ teapubomics - you know, tax cuts for the rich, they'll trickle down on us bull@!$%#. Those failed policies that are still in place because republicans are delusional and want to keep the middle class down so they can protect the oligarchs. You know, the very same policies the teapub candidates are promoting. Even intelligent republicans can't deny the failure of those policies.

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/10/the-great-lie-o.html

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/07/bruce_bartlett_deficit_economy_and_vat

Oh, and Bikeboy, you REALLY don't get it at all. Come back when you understand what you are talking about.

lib50

Those failed policies that are still in place because republicans are delusional and want to keep the middle class down so they can protect the oligarchs.

LOL, your delusion is only surpassed by your simple-mindedness. Olderman, Madcow and Matthews would be proud of you.

Now, after glancing at your two opinion columns espousing the virtues of Keynesianism, I have a couple suggestions. Msr. Bartlett is about as constant as weather. If you’ve read any of his other prose you’d understand he panders to whatever partisan politic seems most popular, at the time. The other thing is, I never accept a discussion without sources for their arguments, the Economist is notorious for this. They are no more than an open-ended continuum of opinions without very much merit.

So having said that, lemme splain Reaganomics to you.

This is what Reagan “Inherited” from your boy toy Peanut Boy Carter.

One of the worst recessions in 1981-1982

Unemployment 10.8%

Inflation (CPI) of 13.5% (Carter tried to convince everyone inflation was now endemic in the economy)

Prime interest rate 21.5% in 1980

Poverty rate of 15.2 %

Decreased home values by 10% from 1978-1982

Family income decreased by 10%

From 1968-1982 the stock market lost 70% of its real value

Hmmmmm, looks a LOT WORSE than what Barrack Hussein inherited.

What did Reagan do? Did he whine like a child about what he “inherited”. Cry about some mythical car in the ditch? Blame everybody but himself?

Nope.

He got to work.

Decreased tax rates from 70% to 2 rates of 28% and 15% by 1986.

Decreased total Federal spending form a high of 23.5% of GDP in 1983 to 21.2% in 1989, a 10% decrease.

Created an anti-inflation monetary policy by reducing money supply growth compared to demand to stabilize the dollar.

Deregulation which saved an estimated $100 Billion. Eliminated the idiotic price controls Carter placed on oil and natural gas, the price of oil declined by more than 50%.

This precluded the longest peacetime expansion EVER!

Four simple steps created 92 months of uninterrupted growth. That’s almost 31 quarters.

During this time economic growth was 33%, the amount of West Germany’s entire economy (they were third in the world at the time). 1984 had an unequalled 6.8% of growth, the highest in 50 years.

Nearly 20 million new jobs were created, increasing employment by 20%

In 1989 unemployment was 5.3%. (Avg. 1948-2010 is 5.7%)

Inflation dropped to 6.2% by 1982 and 3.2% in 1983. Contraction (NOT EXPANSION) of the money supply created the recession of 1981 that he inherited from Jimmy Cahhtah.

Per-Capita disposable income increased by 18% between 1982 and 1989, a Standard of Living increase of nearly 20%.

Poverty levels decreased by 13%.

The stock market more than tripled from 1980-1990.

From 1982-2007 America experienced the greatest period of wealth creation in history. Adjusting for inflation more wealth was created in America in that 25 year period than in the previous 200 years. Debt increased simply because we were in the end-stages of the Cold-War. I’m sure you Liberals/Progressives just discount this as a minor inconvenience. You should ask your boy JFK what an “inconvenient truth” it really was.

I’d be happy to compare Reagan’s accomplishments against Barrack Hussein’s up until now if you’d like but I don’t think you want to go there do you?

He embarrasses himself enough alone, he doesn’t need me helping him.

Right?

It's like a Terry Pratchet Novel in here, there are so many (GOP) trolls. 2012 is the teapublican year of beat on the poor and most defenseless. These systems (SNAP, welfare, Medicaid ect.) have been in place for decades and now that they're strained because of the economy it must be time to throw the poor under the bus while crying about how burdened the rich are.

workingpoor-2370498

These systems (SNAP, welfare, Medicaid ect.) have been in place for decades

Right you are my good workingpoorfriend, but now it's time to step back into reality.

In 1960 the poverty rate was 14%. Today, after $12 Trillion dollars (estimates range betwee $12 trillion and $19 trillion dollars), guess what? The poverty rate is 14.3% (15.1% adjusted for our current recession).

So, just how much more should we waste on this endless "war"? How much more of everyone elses money do you limp Libbies feel we need to redistribute to fix this?

Ron,

I do not want to live in a collective action nation. I do not believe in it. I believe in individual action and legal protections for my INDIVIDUALITY. I do not want a country with equal incomes. I will not support such a country. In fact, I will do all I can to burden a collectivist nation. I will take from a collectivist nation, but I will not contribute. I will do all I can to bring down collectivism in America.

What cracks me up are poor Republicans without a pot to pisz in, getting all worked up about repealing the inheritance tax (which applies only to estates worth millions, not the junk pile they'll leave behind), and rooting for GOP rich-friendly policies whose personal impact on them will be to up their personal share of the national debt, reduce their expected social security and Medicaid benefits when they retire (while constantly pushing back retirement age), just to give some billionaires (who aren't even aware of their existence) a tax break :D

What cracks me up are poorRepublicans without a pot to pisz in, getting all worked up about repealing the inheritance tax...blah, blah, blah

Yeah, isn't it amazing how some people care about more than just themselves? What fools to believe the entire country shouldn't adjust to whatever fits their own personal goals and to hell with everyone and everything else. [end sarcasm]

What cracks me up is how many liberals don't realize how friggin self-centered they sound when they make such statements.

The strife between rich and poor people is now seen as a bigger issue than other social conflicts, including conflict between immigrants and native-born Americans and tension between black and white Americans, according to the Pew study.

Don't believe it? Just read some of the posts above mine - the amount of hatred and villification of the "other side" is horrendous!!!

I will not defend the behavior of "the rich," but let's think about this: NOBODY profits from a down economy. The "rich" billionaires WANT people to have money, so they will SPEND it on their products - that's how they got rich to begin with. The idea that they are deliberately holding down the poor, or trying to destroy the middle class, is insane, and certainly NOT in the wealthy's best interest. Are some of them greedy and self-serving? Hell yes!!! Should they pay more in taxes? Maybe, I don't know. But if you really want to close the gap between the rich and the poor, then improve the economy. I haven't had a raise in 3 years, but it's not because my boss is some greedy, mean 'ol rich basterd, it's because the economy is still down. It's recovering, slowly but surely. Taxing the rich may seem more "fair," but it won't do anything to improve the economy, and it could hurt it.

Government spending MUST come down - you can't continue to spend money you don't have, that's just reality. I'm benefitting from the payroll tax cut, sure, but it's going to hurt me in the long run. Less money for Social Security NOW means less money for me LATER when I do retire - and then Paul Ryan's frightening plan will become a reality because the gov't will have NO OTHER CHOICE. Pay it now or pay it later, that's reality. Another way to increase gov't revenues is to get more people WORKING so they can PAY those taxes! I feel very sorry for those people who've been out of work for over 2 years, and are about to lose what little gov't assistance they've been getting, I really do. But again, the gov't can't give out what it doesn't have. It would be so much better for the long-term unemployed to get a job SOMEWHERE doing SOMETHING, instead of waiting for a gov't handout. Put that money into retraining instead, at least the gov't would get a return on their investment. And if you think saying so makes me a heartless bitch, well, nothing I can do about that. Truth hurts sometimes.

Freedomrings:

Supply side economics have NOT worked.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/02/13/186670/-Tax-Cuts-Raise-Revenue-COMPLETELY-DEBUNKED

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/10/whos-laffering-.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GQecQ06xus

Not to mention that most economists on BOTH sides of the political aisle agree that this country needs both cuts AND revenue increases. Face it, trickle down economics is an abject failure that has led us to the greatest disparity in wealth since the robber barons of yesterday.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/15-charts-about-wealth-and-inequality-in-america-2010-4?op=1

Okay Tyler... I won't call anyone a turd again...

The so-called war between the wealthy and the new-found poor (middle class) is not so much sided by the people themselves. Many rich side with fair treatment and many poor vote against their best interests.

The war is more about government's role in our lives... let the rich have their way with us (a.k.a. Republican fair play) or support the unfortunate and have the rich help with their fair share of taxes (based on historical "norm" for fair). Obviously I'm biased in one direction here.

Nice try at spinning words LMarcT.

The arguement is one group, Group A, that has a large majority of people that want something for nothing. They believe others others need to take care of them or actually owe them something. (An important note is that nothing says those wealthy that support this idea can't give more to the IRS than they owe, but they don't!)

Then we have the other side, group B, that wants to decide how to spend what they have earned. They work to create personal wealth so they can afford all the luxary they want. They want to give their kids the best education so they don't have to work as hard as they did. Others want to leave something to their children, be it so they don't have to work at all or get a family run business.

Some how group A thinks group B is evil for this. Group A thinks those in group B that succeed somehow has become responsible for taking care of more people and should pay more taxes, even though they already pay 80% or more of this countries current taxes collected, so others can recieve government handouts. Group A wants the government to take care of it and wants Group B which has decided to take care of their own house to pay for it.

Then Group A fails to realize the wealth they actually have. Does anyone think the average home in other countries is 1500 Sq Ft? How many people in other countries don't live in homes or apartments? How many families in other countries that don't own a car and have no access to public transportation? People that think they are poor need to compare what they are calling poor in this country to what is poor to the rest of the world. In some countries they may find they live like the 1% of those countries.

Good post!!

For Gloryhound-848713 Let me frank, but I see that when God run out of brains, you were the next on line,

You claim that the majority, group A, "want something for nothing", and I never heard so much BS, so much propaganda since the Nazis, tea partiers came around.

You can have your opinion, but not your facts, truth. Or you have, which is quite possible, selective Alzhenimer's or you, a la tea partier, can't stand the truth. I haven't met one person from the group A that feels what you spew is right, quite the contrary, group B owns America and they always call, have called and will call the shots. I'll bet any amount of money that hadn't been for group A, group B couldn't exist. Have you seen any general w/o an army? Have you seen any corporations w/o buyers, users? Your stupidity, which I hope is not contagious, is as revelant as the sun being the center of our galaxy.

Who do you think has to pay for the broken dishes when Wall Street was up the creek w/o a paddle after giving America another great depression? It was Joe Q. Public. and to make your comment more stupid, the second great depression didn't happen because of group A, but B. Don't you know that Warren Buffett, one the richest men in the world, spoke of the paying, all things considered, more in taxes than his secretary. If getting it from the horse's mouth doesn't mean any thing to you, it doesn't mean that the rest of us, group A, will see it as you. But the truth is AWOL as most of your brain in this issue and possibly in all other issues, because if on something so simple, so easy for you is a Herculean effort, what can be said of more complex issues? For me, it indicates that you live in world of your own imagination.

Or it could also be that you are a paid "volunteer" called tea partier who are not only stupid, but also masochistic. Just imagine, 66% of tea partiers are in Medicare, getting social security and the Alzheimer's crowd wants to vote for billionaires that are the only reason America is in the dumps, both fiscally and morally and then "experts' like you trying to sell something that has been broken, proven stupid since Ronald Reagan and decades later trickle down economics hasn't worked all that time, what possibility is there that it could decades later? Isn't that what Einstein called madness? So, if it hasn't ever work, how can it work now just by playing semantics? No way Jose. Or let me put it like Perry Como used to croon: It's impossible! No use in looking for five legs to the cat when it only has four.

Hell No,

I see your arguement completely depends on personal inflamatory attacks, meaning you really have nothing.

If you research your little statement on Warren Buffet you will find he pays a lower percent because he gets the capital gains on investment rate, he still pays a lot more in dollars than his secretary. You know the same capital gains rate that allows a lot of people to retire by investing money that was already taxed. The money invested in companies that guarantee no actual return on the investment, but is used by companies to expand and hire more people. With the current system your origional investment has to make 15% just to break even when you take it out as a capital gain. Increasing that will only make people have to work longer to retire and make it so more never can retire. I guess you want everyone dependent on Social Security to retire though.

So if 47% of America pays no Federal taxes or actually gets money back from the government and the top 10% pays 70+% of taxes. Who uses more government services the bottom 47% or the top 10%. So who is getting something for nothing?

The banking crisis happened due to subprime morgages. These morgages became available due to laws passed by the Clinton administration mandating the loans to high risk groups. A primary example of not reading the bill before you pass it.

The problem with you and your kind is that you can't stand the truth or as a good tea partier changes more with the times or agendas than you care to admit. When you mention something, you have to cover both sides of the issue to have some credibility, since you never do that, then I have to guess what your real problem is and what else can a guy say but guess using comments that don't amount to a hill of beans. It's obvious to me that you are not in the 1%, ergo, it doesn't make any sense rooting for billionaires to have more millions while the rest of America burns. I knwo about the discrepacnies betwee what WB said and the supposed "reality" that other people want to see, you included. It's something like Christianity, everybody sees, reads The Bible to fit his/her agenda, but God's teachings are nowhere to be found. Some say that the secretary pays less, Warren says he pays less, but I see a problem with a missing item of the equation and it has to do with exceptions to income. I think his secretary makes something around the 50K, ergo, deductions for her are either non-existent or are tied up to a percentage of actual expenses. Rich people, billionaires have no such obstacles.

Let me cut and paste the following, of course that is not to mean that GE and BOA are the only ones that get such benefits from uncle Sam, no siree, I have read where big oil, on top of not paying any taxes, are getting billions in refunds from, yes Virginia, we the people. Here it goes: General Electric and Bank of America also managed to pay no income taxes to the federal government for 2009. That's right - not a single dime." You can have your opinion, but not your own facts. Just FYI, during the Clinton era that I hope you still remember, were boananza times for America and the rich, although didn't pay enough in taxes proportioned to their income-more loopholes, exceptions, etc-they payed a tad more and those were the best of times, financially speaking for America, both the rich and the middle class. When I went to college I was told always to check the source and then give credibility or not, ergo, what makes you think, that knowing what I know, I do my own taxes, I'm going to believe a nobody over the oracle of Omaha? I don't know if you still remember Tom Daschle the majoirty leader of the senate during Bill Clinton and he came out to talk to the media and he had a muffler in his hand, not the world and he said: Look what middle America will get: A muffler and the rich and powerful will get a Rolls Royce. Of course, people like you, with an obvious agenda, will rather believe in fairy godmothers than in reality, but please don't expect me to buy such nonsense as the snake oil that you are peddling. If you want people to believe what you are saying, please see or better yet, go to the fixnews network, they also can't stand the truth.

You see what you want to see, facts not included. Many experts way above your pay grade have blamed the second great depression on every administration from Ronald Reagan until now, but the main culprits, the ones at the top, are Ronald Reagan and the retard pervert from Texas. Bill Clinton was just another brick on the wall, but the foundation for the worst economical disaster since the 20s, were those two and BTW, since you are a one track mind that only sees what his agenda tells you to believe, Reagan rose taxes more times and greater than many others, including Bill Clinton. I hope, although I doub it, you would be more into telling the truth than on selling your stupid tea partier, republican propagandas.

Attacks against the messenger tend to signal you are on a sinking ship.

I doubt Warrens Corporate secretary makes $50,000 a year. I would put her in the top 10% of Corporate secretaries meaning she makes close to $300,000 dollars a year.

http://www1.salary.com/Corporate-Secretary-Salary.html

Yes, those corporations paid no taxes directly as they paid their share holders the profits meaning they made no profits. Then the share holders pay the taxes at a lower rate for taking the gamble and investing in those countries.

The subsidies that you talk about "Big Oil" taking was used for clean energy development programs and just a drop in the bucket in the amount that they have spent in the development of "Green Energy" technology. "Big Oil" has been the leading spender in the development of Green Energy technology and if you want to complain about their profits now, just wait till the Government starts to force fossil fuel powered sources out and mandate only new Green Energy sources, Big Oil is ready to beat previously set record profits.

You claim we need to increase taxes. You claim the second "Depression" all started with Reagan's policies yet say he raised taxes more than alot of other Presidents. It only stands to reason raising taxes would be a bad thing since the last "Recession" started with a president that raised taxes so much. (Note: We have not reached depression level this decade, only recession level and it only lasted a little more than a year according to Obama. We have been in recovery since 2009 according to him.)

Clinton created a surplus through creative accounting. He lumped SSN and medicaid into the overall assets column of his balance sheet. Prior to that they were kept as seperate and independent accounts.

So, according to your logic, you mean to know more than the oracle-I hope you know the meaning of the word-that is a billionaire, has been the richest man in the world? Well, that is stupidty to the nth degree. How do I know you are noth another Joe the plumber, a planted tea partier, that wasn't a plumber, at least he didn't have a license, owe taxes and had never seen 250K in his whole life.

Do you think I'm going to believe you that I'm 1000% you are not in the 1%, over a guy who claims that is not fair for him to pay less in taxes than her secretary. You can have your opinion, but again, not your own facts. When Clinton left office, he was one of the most popular presidents upon leaving office and even today. Bush, the retard pervert from Texas, had to go to fund raisers at night, so the media wouldn't show that even his most fervid admirers wouldn't want to be caught dead with him, not even at night.

As for his secretary making all that money, I wouldn't give that much credibility. The same people put Mel Gibson's whealth into the billions, other 600 millions and others 400, ergo, people with agendas, ahem you, can cherry pick data, info to fit your agenda a la fixnews network. Don't tell me you already forgot the controversy about Obama's, George W. Bush the third, trip to India and the fixnews network put his trip, at taxpayers expense, in the billions and guess what, nobody there dared to check the facts, ergo, I'm not buying what you are selling, you have no credibility.

If it's credibility that you want, why not listen what the real experts have to say, not your slogan peddling crowd. There are so many true experts that the list is too long, just let me mention another oracle and with Nobel Prize to his accolades: Mr. Paul Krugman of the NYT. There was a story about some celebrity having to pay his ex over 600 millions, when in another place his whealth was put at about 400 millions. I don't how you are in math, but she can't wipe out the guy and then the judge is going to say: You owe the rest of the money. Get to work (celebrity) until you pay in full her 600 millions.

Remember, in every controversy, there has to be two sides to it, ergo, if you don't want to throw your credibility to the dogs, you have to cover both sides of the issue. You are not doing yourself a favor by trying to become a Trojan horse of the truth, when you are not in the 1%. It's more, it's impossible to picture a billionaire with so much free time in his/her hands, having the time to make comments here. Maybe that is what you think, but don't expect me to be that stupid. Second of all, I don't claim any thing, I was not the one who said that his secretary paid more in taxes than him, I just used that information to debunk your masochistic rant. It's not I who claims any thing, I'm as blind to have knowledge of the truth, the real truth as you. I don't believe a damn thing you say, now or ever, what I'm saying is what others with obviously more knowledge than you will ever have, don't agree with your statement. Do you remember that retard from Wasilla, AK, when she came out and called living will counseling, which BTW it was expressed so in the GOP party platform, death panels? You are trying to do the same here, but if you think, again, that I'm going to believe you over other people who I know what they are talking about, you are barking up the wrong tree.

Let me give an example how misguided and lost you are. The mortgage meltdown was anticipated by some guys and the huff, puff and blow so hard, but not hard enough because the retard pervert from Texas wouldn't want to hear them, so he could help his crooked, corrupt friends to succeed. They succeed, he collects, a la mafia, his fair share. Do you remember Bernie Madoff? Again, some guys knew that he was robbing all his "friends" left and right, but then again, the government refused to do any thing about it, until the house of cards fell and do you know what he later said: He was seeing the final curtain falling circa 90s.

Another point, I already said before, that the fault for all this economical tsunami belongs to all presidents since RR. I didn't say or implied that BC was exempt from sin, because contrary to what you believe or say, I do cover both sides of the issue and give credit when credit is due. There is a word called priorities and punishment. Those who are most responsible for corpotate excess are the ones that hsould be blamed ther most. In the Nuremberg trials those at the top and most responsible for war crimes, were executed while others less guilty of war crimes were sent to jail. What I'm trying to say is that you can't put all the blame on Bill Clinton's shoulders, because as I put it before, he was just another brick on the wall, not the wall. The wall came down because, according to unbiased sources, the excesses of Ronald Reagan and the retard pervert from Texas. I know that your bias won't let you see clearly, but that is your problem, not mine. I'm not the stupid here. The more I read your stupid comment, the more stupid you become. Creative accounting is done by everybody, but the epitome of creative accounting rests with RR and the retard pervert. You can picture an ant as an elephant and the elephant as an ant. Before you ever peck again your keyboard, why not leave that masochistic bias at the door and maybe we could communicate better. Of course, something tells me that is an effort in futitlity, because your commentary alone says a lot about that bias that won't quit, but don't expect me to believe what you are selling.

More accusations about me and claims that I have mislead you into thinking I am of some percent in the economic structure of the country. I must really get your undies in a bunch for you to go on about me when you know nothing about me.

You can continue to have your nose ring pulled along by the corporate owned media experts as you see fit. I for one choose to look a little deeper than the expert says, more than likely the expert has his own agenda and it is probably not in my best interest.

You have failed to bring anything relevent to this thread in your last post other than pointing out your claim at seeing both sides really doesn't exist since when it comes to the opposite view your field of vision is covered in red rage.

Personally, I think that you are way off. First, you need to understand that the rich and corporations do contribute to the society, through taxes and job creation. Secondly, the tea party isn't out there because they want their tax burden eased. They are out there because they see the waste in government and know that there are better ways. Finally, the gap between rich and poor is growing because of policies promoted by democrats, not republicans. Why do all these companies pay little taxes, deductions put in place by democrats. All these regulations prevent the little guy from competing. That may not be their intention, but that is the result.

Well, you are correct that the rich are the only people who can consistently invest and create jobs. However, when it comes to tax deductions, the Democrats generally favor those deductions which middle class Americans, because they believe that the more people have, the more they will spend. Republicans favor corporation and business tax deductions because they believe that they will invest in the economy and create more jobs if they are less burdened by taxes. It is all in how you look at it. Tax deductions are used by both sides, but in different ways.

JJDCC!!!

You are 100% right in your statement!! The rich only care for themselves and try to screw anyone they can to make a few more bucks, all they do with that money is buy more toys and houses they don't use!!! The rich have an unfair advantage over the rest of America, they were either born into money and continued, or they know someone to milk enough money from to gain a wealthy status!! I think all government officials should have to have a requirement of less than one million dollars in order to hold a seat in government, no more rich people helping themselves to our system!!!

PutAmericaFirst,

The Supply-side economic policies of the last 30 yrs that have allowed for the exponential growth of wealth in the corporate and wealth class of America at the expense of the wealth disparity that now matches countries like Brazil and Mexico are the responsibility of both parties. We as a people have allowed government to convince us that it is more important to allow individuals of wealth who generate their income differently than an hourly wage or just wages, to keep more of their money. The perception is that these individuals will, if allowed, do more for the country than if a wage earner was able to keep and spend more of their money. There is of course no evidence that this is true, only the economic supply-side theory. Actual history seems to bear out that this policy of tax advantages for this group is very beneficial to that group, but not necessarily good for all America. When you look at the number of good paying jobs the "job creators" have moved overseas and replaced with minimum wage or nominal pay jobs it explains where the middle class of this country have gone and why wealth disparity in this country is on the rise. You do realize that big companies like regulations that keep little business from competing, right? That way they make more money, by which some will find its way into campaign contributions to both parties under the guise of promoting democracy and fairness...bu really to keep the status quo.

Taxes and job creation? You gotta be kidding. What taxes? What job creation? The jobs are created by small business that is fueled by consumer demand. Nobody has any money to spend so how do you create jobs and small business? Most corporations want tax cuts for job creation and then move overseas for that job creation. This Republican myth of wealthy creating jobs has been around since Ronald Reagan started the great trickle down on the heads of middleclass and the jobs flooded out of this country through outsourcing and free trade also ideas started at that time then Clinton caved in and helped start this process as well. The rich do not create jobs. Small businesses do in response to consumer demand.

No one wants to admit how an economy really works. I have used this story before but it illustrates the point well ...

What does a farmer do if he has nine skinny hogs and one fat hog that crowds the trough and dominates the other nine? Is that farmer going to eat the skinny hogs first? That farmer likes bacon, tasty pork chops, and smoked ham. That farmer wants a fat hog and encourages the fat one to get fatter. Nope, the fat hog always goes to the smokehouse first.

Our economy has 1 fat hog and 99 skinny ones. Like the farmer, the economy encourages the fat hog to become fatter. Because the economy likes smoked ham, too. The fat hog is always eaten first.

Is it fair? Maybe not. But the whole idea is to create a fat hog. The economy is hungry - and - the fat hogs will supply the feast ...

I think the main thing is to look at the bank accounts of the candidates running for President. Money runs everything, and the one with the most wins.

-S

Well, there are filthy rich Republicans and filthy rich Democrats.

So, tell me again which party it is that claims to care about the little guys...

Are you advocating, Nerm, that we kill off all big business - i.e. government should control exactly how big you can get?

In a free market economy (which we don't have because of rules and regulations), the skinny hog would see an opportunity for more food and take it from other places in the feed trough (market). Or, the other hogs would come into the feed trough because there is food to be eaten.

Unfortunately, there are too many barriers to entry in many markets because of artifical influences rather than true market reasons.

@Bookem' Danno -- The farmer watches all the hogs to see which one dominates the others. The farmer will favor that fat hog so it gets fatter - for only one reason. The 'successful' hog is always eaten first - that is the whole idea ...

The farmer only pampers that fat hog until the farmer gets hungry. When the fat hog is eaten - the other hogs have a chance to become fat.

An economy is like a farmer - favoring the 'successful' for only one reason. The 'successful' are always pampered and favored until the health of the economy declines. You think the 'rich' are given breaks simply because they keep the rest of the hogs skinny? The 'successful' are always eaten first. That is the whole idea ...

I guess my first thought is:

How many MILLIONS/BILLIONS, does one person need?

When I see an article that a "Rich" person pays $130,000 for a bottle of wine, or $12million for a home, he/she just tears down, then right below it is an article about some poor person dies because he has NO medical insurance, or a Verteran committs suicide because he is OUT in the streets starving, IT MAKES ME SICK!

Not saying they don't help at all, but in these tough times, they could better society and themselves, by helping those less fortunate! They would be paid back 10 fold.....

The farmer only pampers that fat hog until the farmer gets hungry. When the fat hog is eaten - the other hogs have a chance to become fat.

In your comedy of errors eventually all the hogs will get fat and subsequently eaten.

In reality the farmer(government) takes from the fat hog and gives to the skinny hogs, Unfortunately the skinny hogs get used to having the farmer take from the fat hog and give to them they get lazy and never fight for the food, Eventually the fat hog dies of starvation and the farmer has one less hog, Now the fatter of the skinny hogs is now seen as the fat hog and the cycle repeats itself.

@LostInThePineBarrens -- You are making your comment from the perspective of the fat hog - not from the perspective of the farmer.

That is the same mistake that Ronald Reagan, Arthur Laffer, and the rest of the Republican economic 'fat hogs' made. The economy does not exist to maintain the health of the 'fat hog' - that 'fat hog' exists to maintain the health of the economy.

The fat hog is always eaten first. That is the whole idea ...

Voted you up JJ. You should never have been collapsed. Apparently we have some self appointed thought police masquerading as part of the community on the vine today.

"The truth? You can't handle the truth!"

Class conflict indeed. This is class envy at its most virulent. The dregs of society have been misled by the radical left to believe they can get more free stuff by causing mischief. They are society’s losers who are incapable of or are simply too lazy to work for what they want. After all, it’s always easier to complain that someone or something is preventing them from achieving any measure of success.

As long as these occupy morons continue to embrace the mantra of: “it’s always somebody else’s fault”, they will never realize that their worst enemy is themselves.

No one, at least no one I know, begrudges the rich their fortunes. What we saw in quick succession, however, disturbed many Americans...

1) The greed and behavior of the banks and investment firms.

2) The greed and irresponsible behavior of Wall Street.

3) The greed and almost whimsical attitude by AIG.

4) The collapse of the economy and loss of jobs because of this greed.

5) The immediate bailout of the very firms that caused the collapse.

6) The immediate payment of millions in bonuses to these same greed mongering CEOs.

7) The "corporations are people" Supreme Court ruling and the subsequent $billions poured into our political "buy yourself a candidate" program.

8) The immediate push by Republicans to blame "entitlements" at the very time when support is most needed by Americans.

9) The immediate push to keep the ridiculous tax cuts for the rich.

10) The obvious and well documented disparity between the richer rich and the poorer middle class.

Should I go on? Any questions on perspective here?

Ron,

I appreciate your individual success. It is good for you and potentially good for the country. However you are aware that in a capitalist system not everyone can be rich or do well (that is socialist theory, which I assume is not your point.) There is not an infinite amount of wealth in our capitalist system, so, as some do well too extremely well it necessitates that some do poorly to extremely poor. The issue is that our government make choices that can lead to individuals being stagnated by the dependence on entitlements to valuing the earnings of one group over the earnings of another.

Ron

You are totally wrong. Where there is opportunity to improve one's life most people will accept that opportunity. I hope you didn't wrench your arm patting yourself on the back, but I think there is little hope for widening your very narrow mind.

Ron, Glad to hear that you have lived the American Dream. News Flash, that American Dream has disappeared for millions because the playing field is no longer level. Very few think entitlements are good, but you cannot totally screw those in need. Those policies need to be sensible and push people to work. Remember who last reformed welfare.............Hmmmm, yeah Bill Clinton. If you are not wealthy (multi millionaire) and you vote to GOP policies you are voting against your economic interests. Fox news has convinced you otherwise, but the GOP seem to think that plenty trickles down from the richest 1%, but now that we have 30 years of history that shows otherwise. Congrats on your success, but you are being taxed at a higher rate than a lot of billionaires so maybe you should not believe everything you hear on Fox! Think for yourself, you might be surprised.

I agree ron, lets get rid of corporate welfare!!!!!!!!

I do not have any problem at all with the 1%, they do get hit with higher tax brackets, pay higher real estate taxes on their homes, and a boat load more or sales tax when they spend...not to mention extra luxury taxes on certain items. They can't keep their wealth after they die...there are stiff estate taxes. So really everyone is griping about what an extra % of fed income tax on them? Big deal.

My bigger beef is with folks like teachers pulling down 2-3x what the avg citizen makes...and getting pension for like that goes up every year. Now $100k salary does not seem huge, but when you make $40k and see teachers getting raises every year, and know that 100k salary turns into a huge pension...and you multiple times the hundreds of teachers in your district, and the tens of thousands in your state...you see why states are going broke. Forget the millionaires...freeze pay for every teacher and cut their pensions! Pensions at $70k a year rising with inflation for 30-40 years while our pay stays the same and we fight for jobs is crazy. We cannot afford tens of thousands of pensions at these bloated wages.

Ron it is great that you are succesful. I also admire the Republican traight that everyone should pull thier own weight. What I don't admire is the black and white thinking that people either work or they don't. What about those americans who do look for work, but there are no jobs in the place they lived all their lives because of our economy? What about the guy who gets injured, and gets laid off, but doesn't have the ability to now work?

The world is not as black and white as you would like to make it out to be. I agree, that i can not stand the abusers of those entitlements, but you can't punish all those who really need them for those who abuse it.

So Ron, I am going to assume that you are a very weathly man. No? Then your arguement has no bearing. The descrepensy that is being discussed if more of the middle class vs. the ultra rich. I live a comfortable life, usually making good choices too but I am by no means wealthy. I do see many people that used to live comfortably but have lost their job and had to settle for a much lower paying one. Be very careful of boasting, you never know when they will move your industry to Mexico.

The top 10% of earners now control 80% of the Wealth in this Nation. That is the largest gap in the history of this country. The 15% Capital Gains Tax rate has brought us to this point. 15% is the lowest it's been since WW2. It doesn't take a genius to figure it out...............

I you think people stay poor in order to collect welfare, you clearly are not thinking. Welfare does not pay enough for it to be a motivation factor. Its simply not true.

T-Rex, If you really want a pension like the school teachers get, you'll have to join a Union. If you live in a right to work state, you will probably just have to move.

If you want to negotiate with the rich, you need to unite as a group. One lower middleclass worker is not going to improve his standard of living by taking on Boeing, Toshiba, Toyota, Chrysler, BP, etc. etc. etc.

Get a Union.

In a sense, you are correct, but I believe your overall tone is that of misguided derision. Both sides thrive on conflict. The left thrives on social conflict and has historically favored the working class. The right thrives on nationalistic conflict and has historically been more "hawk-like". It has also been said by political philosophers that, when a conflict arises, the left favors conversation, the center favors negotiation, and the right favors force. In conclusion, each side thrives on conflict. It is only the nature of the conflict and the methods they employ that differ.

Pueo, assuming you are not a millionaire 20 times over, you have been fooled into voting against your economic interest. Dems are weak at politics, but far better at managing the country. Why don't you go back and study 1980-1988 and you will see that Reagan raised taxes on the wealthy and cut taxes for the middle class, which is exactly what Obama has been trying to do. Instead, the GOP won't budge on taxing those that wipe their $ss with c notes and belly ache that at the economy cannot afford to give tax breaks to the middle class (payroll tax) the data that they use for their argument is weak and often false, so you can say what you want, but I think the joker will appear once you look in the mirror. Sheep.

Ive noticed lately how badly the military industrial machine has control of both partys. I never pictured as i grew up that we would be the worlds police and try to force our ways on others. Ron Paul is the way to go, the rest are bought n paid for.

hmmm... i seem to remember something about the Iraq war ...which republicans loved for all the billions it brought to Halliburton and other contractors so they could donate more to the republican party.... who thrives on REAL conflict?

Patrick, your liberal memory excludes the fact that Democrats joined Republicans in going into Iraq.

As the DUHbya said it's those darned "Weapons of Misdirection" we're after.......

Exactly correct, and with a stellar attitude. People seem to think we are the land of guaranteed jobs, union wages that feed a family of 6 while owning two houses and three cars when your job requires no skill because you turn a bolt to the right 6'' or are a state worker. We are the land of opportunity. People seem to comingle the two.

While this country boasts of its equality and the opportunity to get ahead, I recall a recent study posted on this site that ranked mobility in America pretty low. That aside, I applaud hard work and think that those who work hard should be rewarded. However, who decides what hard work is? I think that many manual labor jobs are hard work, but they are not paid as well as a CEO. Some people just want to make a decent living and provide for their family. I believe they should be able to do so and be protected from the rich who only desire more than what they have.

I'm all for rewarding hard work. I'm all for punishing sloppy work. So when a CEO screws over investors and tanks a company's stock by 40%, he ought to be punished, not given a multimillion dollar performance bonus. That is the perception problem that is going on right now. It isn't the small business owner who busts his butt 85 hours a week and pays himself 200K per year for his troubles. By most measures he is "rich" but he wouldn't be lumped in with the millionaire CEO's who play golf all day, completely mismanage their company, get a golden parachute, then leave the company to do it all over again at another company. The small business owner rightfully earns every stinking penny. The CEO just knows how to BS long enough to screw everybody over.

My hero Leo Apotheker tanked HP's stock in 8 months by 40%. They gave him 13 million bucks for it, which includes a 3 million dollar "performance bonus". Did he do a song and dance to get that 3 million bucks? How do you mess up so badly and wind up with an amount of money in 8 months that an average American family could live on for 260 years?

The "Land of Opportunity" is just a slogan, like all the other cliched slogans we use which sound really great, but in reality have zero substance to back them up.

If corporations are people, do they worship Christ, Budda, Muhammed, Bhrama? Or do they worship Mammon?

no reply necessary. I think I know.

I don't envy the ridiculous lifestyles, but I would like some of the money--big difference.

Me Too! - Rightly Concerned, if you like money then get off your butt and get some. I myself only have me to blame if I don't increase my income but then again I don't dwell on why I don't have what the next guy has.

JH I am beginning to want to vote republican so I can watch the upcoming suffering that you have been missing for the last 3 years! Yeah

It is a fact when the economy of the country is in bad condition the gap between the poor and rich increases because the rich have more resources and many time in better situations to create more wealth . Obama and democrats have done nothing to close this gap , actually it increase under their watch, there are more people below the poverty line. Instead to fighting the job creators and the wealthy he should work with them to create more jobs, but his ideology is first and the proffer maintain the class warfare to move our country to a failed socialist model of distribution of wealth.

You must be some paid troll because you don't write even like an illiterate American Republican, and that's bad enough. What country are you from that you sound like English is not your first language. Actually not your third, fourth, or fifth. Learn to write a grammatical sentence before you expose your total ignorance and simian-like mimickingn of the propaganda spouted from Fux News.

It is high time the 'Rich' started to pay for the infrastructure they so freely use and ingore untill it hurts their bottom line and pay the DC sycophantic bootlickers to legislate the cost to the people that either do not use it or cannot afford it.

With disasters like "Citizens United" passed by the conservative majority in the supreme court that allows the richest Americans with the deepest pockets to buy and sell their favorite politicians to skew the laws in their favor and koch brother funded entities like "ALEC" and the teabag party it's painfully obvious that the gop(greedy old party) has waged all out war on the American middle class and poor. Plus the teabags/gop are rushing through legislation to try to restrict the voter rights of the elderly and poorest americans and collective bargaining rights of middle class union workers. I got a news flash for you righties, the middle class drives the economy in America and when you finish destroying us, it won't matter how many millions of dollars you have......IT WILL BE GAME, SET AND MATCH FOR EVERYONE.

G Man Ssshhh: Don't tell them that, they won't be able to figure it out on their own. Also, don't tell them that it isn't going to matter who is or is not registered to vote because if Chinese isn't your first language, you won't be voting. Oh, even if it IS your first language, you won't be voting. U.S. hand delivered to China via your friendly congresspersons and senators and U.S. corporations.

Obama got elected because so many dumb white people voted for him , can you imagine reading in history books about a president named Barack Obama 20 years from now , that is if were still here ,which is very doubtful.

Maple12

And just who do you think buys School Bonds,Water Bonds,or any other Municipal Bonds?? Do you think it is poor people??

You just don't like the truth about your political party!! All for the rich and powerful screw the rest? And that is a better Strategy!!!!

Why don't you educate yourself, read a book, turn off fox news and maybe reality will slap you across the face. The country was very divided before and will be after Obama. If people would read their news rather than watching Fox, this country would be a far better place. read the Wall St Journal, maybe the Washington Times, good reputable publication, fox is turning conservatives that fail to think for themselves into radical minded idiots. Way to Rupert.

Obama has been the most devisie president during my 71 year lifetime. He has done more to incite class warfare than all other presidents combined.,

It started when nixon took us off gold,the government started printing money and the dept has risen since. Im truly worried about the future for my children and Obama is the worse yet,what people see in the man is hard to understand.

I don't think they saw much in Obama, just more than in McCain or Palin. the fact a black man was elected POTUS in a racist nation shows how weak the GOP has become. The wingnut Christians have taken over and that is why any educated conservative has shifted to Ron Paul in the last few years.

This nation is not a racist nation. If it were, we would not have successful people such as Oprah, Tiger Woods, George Lopez, etc. Are there racists in this country - Yes. But that does not make the nation a racist nation.

The left state that Islam is a religion of peace. Because there are terrorists in that religion, it must be a religion of terrorists, right?

The devisive nature of the GOTP only fans the flames of the newly poor and puts the 1% at risk by making it morally acceptable to steal from the very rich.

and it will harder for a rich man to enter heaven than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle.

A poor hungry and desperate man with a .45 will always trump a rich man with a fat wallet.

Ah, does the rich man worship Christ, Budda, Muhammed, Bhrama? Or does he worship Mammon?

Give it a rest Rushbo, er Dan G. The disparity between the rich and poor has exploded, caused by the party on the right, not the left.

Couldn't have said it better myself!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You got to be kidding.Obama plays the fair thing, class and race card all the time.

eric in bozoland. It is not the right or left. Obama has more money than god not to mention half of Congress. Obama is the problem. He spends our money like it is his by going to war, bailing out corps. and giving our money away to any tom, dick, or harry out there. He is arrogant and self righteous. HE NEEDS TO GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It didn't happen in just three years. Class warfare got serious with the institution of income tax, and Regan kicked it into overdrive 40 years ago.

Remember, it's only called class warfare when the poor fight back.

I think the real problem is one of perception.

In post 5.3 I told a story of a CEO who did a very poor job managing his company, lost 40% of the company stock's value, and got 13 million dollars in his 8 months on the job. 13 million dollars is enough for the average American family to live as they are for 260 years. (assuming no inflation or change in cost of living). In other words, a man worked for a company for 8 months, did a horrific job, and made more money than the average American family would see in 3 lifetimes.

Examples such as that make broad categories of people (the "rich") which will lump in the small business owner who spends every waking hour working to the bone and is paid a modest six figure salary. By the standards we use, six figure anything is rich. But the small business owner is more deserving of the cash they earn, whereas the CEO is more deserving of the vilification of every hard working American, "rich" or poor.

Well said peacebe, and the truth is the weak economy is just a part of the new world order. Obama, Bush, Romney etc. really have no control over that.

They have no control because they're all too busy licking the 1%'s boots for campaign funding. Maybe Obama will grow some balls his second term, when he no longer has to worry about getting reelected.

I think the real problem here is that people are losing their homes, not getting enough to eat, and have no hope for the future. This is happening while the 1% are getting richer and richer.

That's the real problem.

noah, maybe some people dream and believe bigger than you, that don't make 'em no bad guy. You could increase your connections, education, and so called luck, thereby increasing your wealth, three out of four ain't bad.

This is why higher education should be available to everyone, for free.

Oh, and Noah, you can talk to your congressman and you too could get a $2billion dollar handout like the oil companies, for all the risk you take. Maybe with our $2billion, you might be able to get a good job, or start a small business.

Ain't that right Gary?

Corporations are not rich or poor since all their assets are owned by shareholders, and those shareholders are likely rich, poor and inbetween.

How do you figure that the republicans and corporations are selling out the country? They are not making large short term profits in the US. They are actually doing much worse than they were in the 60's.

Oh really Peter? So the poor people own stock in corporations? You must be insane.

Peter17, don't you wish. How many poor people do you know that own stocks? None. Since most people's 401k's are gone, less that 15% of Americans own stock outright. Good thought though, Rush tell you that???

In fact, even those of us who do own shares don't really own the assets for all intents and purposes. Those are mostly held onto by the CEO's and controlled by them. In too many cases, your investment can decline in value while the corporation makes millions in profits and retains them. Stockholders can only profit when they sell their shares and the market prices them at more than they paid for them, which is not always linked to the profits . This is not an investment system; it's a gambling scheme.

PAF,

Yeah that is why businesses are posting record profits right? Because they are worse off then they were in the 60's...

In the game of monopoly, what happens when one player has all the money and property? Ah, I thought so.

Makes up for all those people who make the same as you but pay nothing because they are married or single parents with four kids or those who pay nothing in and get money back. Someone isn't paying but I don't think you can blame the rich for everything as Obama does.

I am married, wife in college, two kids.

We make ends meet but it is a struggle.

It wasn't Obama that set up that tax break for families. It was Bush.

If you had a wife and two kids, then you shouldn't have owed any federal taxes.

They don't, they make 10 of millions and pay about 15%. Its called a hedge fund and wait, they aren't even really regulated. Hmmmmm. Coporate tax revenues are down almost 1.5% of GDP since 2006. that means corporations (lots that send jobs over seas) in this country have been paying less and less taxes. 1.5% of GDP would be in the hundreds of billions, so clearly the rich continue to do well while the middle class in this country continues to evaporate.

Dan, explain why those who make a living off "unearned income" (dividends, capital gains, etc.) don't have to pay any payroll taxes (Social Security & Medicare).

BUT all of the poor working stiffs in this country who make a living off "EARNED" income (wages) get 7.65% lopped off every dollar they make?

Sounds like class warfare to me.

Oppie, me too! Exact income, exact tax rate, we are being robbed. So many posters here defend the rich, yet claim they are middle class. You are middle class. You are correct. I am trying to stop working for others and start my own business. It is impossible to get a loan. I have nothing to mortgage. I must start very small, but I have started. Had I been able to invest the $14,000 I paid in taxes, I would be on my way. Also, for all of these phonies posting this drivel to justify the rich. I am an employee who has started twom successful businesses for my employer to the tune of 2 mil a year in sales. Don't call me a loser or a liberal. I am out here competing with the Chinese and everyone else and i am winning. I just want fair tax rates so I can invest MY money in MY business. You go Oppie!!

They don't show it on the 'books' so they don't pay taxes unless they 'cash' out. They don't need the cash, that's sitting in offshore accounts that NAFTA made possible and they can get that tax free anytime. Take Jobs, he offshored the IPOD Patent to the Cayman Islands. Next, he offshored 80% of the IPOD profits to that company to 'pay' the royalty fee. Next, he filed his good ol' American Tax Return and wrote-off his 80% (profits made in US) royalty expense and took a 700 MILLION refund. Yeah, that guy had as much of a chance of getting to heaven as a camel has passing through the eye of a needle. Some might say, 'well, it's a big company and he did't set that up.' Bull@!$%#, he was well aware and that all for me and none for you greed matched his personality well, self-serving.

I too want a fair tax rate!!! But I'm one of those evil, no-good people Obama calls "rich". I currently pay 49% in income tax - yes, you read that right 49% of my income goes right out the door to Federal, State, and City income tax agencies. Clearly I am not paying "my fair share", so my tax rate is increasing next year to be 52% of my income (unless Obama passes his new "rich" tax, then it will be 57%). Did I mention that both my husband and I come from blue collar families, worked our way through public college and grad school, and have worked our fingers to the bone and sacrificed many things for the past 15 years to become as successful as we are now? Did I mention that we have created jobs for more than 25 people?

So, all of you out there who are demonizing the "rich" like us, and claiming that we don't pay taxes, and demanding that we pay our "fair share", please answer me this ... what exactly is a "fair" tax rate? Because if your answer is less than 50% we are in complete agreement!!

Coleslaw, you need a new tax accountant. Being as rich as you say you are, I would've thought you knew that. ROFLMAO

IMHO You are just another one of those people that think that wealthy people pay little or no federal income taxes because that is what the left tells you!! I have good accountants and anyone with the ability to go from nothing to wealthy will have good accountants. That doesn't mean that your tax burden goes away. Admit it. You know very little about wealthy people and their taxes!!

Obama has been the main cheerleader preaching class warfare since he started campaigning for office.

You need to expand your knowledge beyond MSNBC and the HP.

And your beyond Fox News.

The repubs have just tried to keep the insane spending in check.

The GOP doubled military spending between 2001 and 2008, not including the additional trillions for the two wars started by a Republican administration with a rubber stamp Republican Congress. They also added the prescription drug costs onto Medicare, without funding for it. If you add those and throw in the reduced taxes, you pretty well account for the deficit and the growth of the debt. Tell me again what insane spending they have kept in check.

During the 8 years of Bush the National debt was increased by over 6 Trillion Dollars. Bush Excluded the cost of War from the budget to make things look better. At a time when the country was Bleeding American Red in war and Red Ink at home Bush CUT the taxes of top earners in some cases by more than half. Investment income went from 35% to a max of 15%. The republican mantra is Tax Cuts Fix Everything! Not enough money to pay the government bills, cut taxes. Not enough work for Americans, tax breaks to corporations to send jobs over seas. Oil corporations profits not big enough, don't tax them and give them 5 Billion a year to help them. Final straw, corporations ARE PEOPLE the Right wing Activist Supreme Court says. ANY Corporation Foreign or Domestic can spend ANY AMOUNT they want on elections to Super Pacs and do it anonymously. This election cycle Super Pacs will spend 100s of millions on their canadate to their bidding not the peoples.

Welcom to the Corporate States of America, Of the Corporation, By the Corporation, For the Corporation!

Who listens to Rush? You must since you seem to know what he has to say, I did not know the guy is still relevant.

Hey JoetheLib-

Welcom to the Corporate States of America, Of the Corporation, By the Corporation, For the Corporation!

you know what that is, right..?

Its callled Fascism...

And it happened right under our noses.

Scary times we're living in, people...

Strange days indeed, Most peculiar...

Since corporations are people too, do they worship Christ, Budda, Muhammed, Bhrama? Or do they worship Mammon?

ROFL

Mitt or Obama, they are both the same when it comes to the bankers and Wall St.

EXACTLY

Yea right. Romney wants to Remove ALL Rules on Wall Street, Obama wants to Increase the rules, split Wall Street from the Banking business.

They are the same brothers from a different mother.

Ah Willard (like the insane guy with the rats) Romney thinks corporations are people too. I'll believe that when Texas executes one of them.

If corporations are people, who do you think they worship? Mammon?

Comparing Obama to your man Willard is the height of hypocrisy. Good luck getting Americans to follow that misdirection.

Actually, if you check out the real data, those in the top 1% have owned about 35% of the wealth in the country since at least the early 1920s with that percentage varrying only plus or minus a few percent over the past 90 years. There has been no significant change over all those years.

You 401K and home wasn't looted and income has gone up for the middle class. Not much, but it has increased about 25% above inflation.

PutAmericaFirst: My husband and I bought a house we could afford for 65,000.00 in 1991. Our house is now worth $17,000.00. (Of course we are still paying the $65,000.00) That is a discrepency of $48,000.00. Now SOMEBODY is getting that $48,000.00 and it sure isnt us. For the first time in 4 years we received a 2% raise- and Blue Cross Blue Shield raised their rates 2.5%. We use to be middle class but no longer. I'm so happy that these rich politicians can buy the presidency-I read that Romney is worth 250 million dollars-he understands the middle class about as much as I understand nuclear physics. And I'm sure that he is VERY concerned about what is happening to me and my family. (Just as much concern as the greedy fat cats on wall street) But thats o.k. because the dishonest rich have bled me dry-there is nothing left to steal.

So whats the problem?you signed to buy the house for that much and as long as you pay you have a home.

Peace-what caused your problem was a bubble in the housing market-What caused the bubble?? This bubble was started when politicians decided that everyone, including those that could not afford it should have a home. As demand increases the bubble grows bigger. Some politicians wanted to regulate this over reach of government getting its nose in the housing market but were stopped. The two guys that did the most to prevent regulation which would have stopped this buble were Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. It is sad that we all must suffer to prove that government should stay out of the market. When they get involved like they are starting to do with healthcare things only get worst for all of us

Ron let me try to clarify for you,since you cant clearly see the problem. People (thats us) are loosing value of their homes,groceries and fuel costs are up,consumer goods are up,wages are not going up,the value of the dollar is WAY down. This is the result of a burst housing bubble.(maybe you have read something about it?) when this happens people on fixed incomes(retirees and people on disability,retirement)suffer immensely as they have no means to supplement their income.unskilled workers must take on additional jobs to make ends meet.Big corporations AND banks PROFIT like no tomorrow and bung holes like you compound the problem with their ignorance.

Well Corporate America is having a feeding frenzie on Wall Street and all the bailouts our government gave them. Goldman Sachs speculated in oil and drove our gasoline prices up when their wasn't any reason now they're stockpiling aluminum in warehouses in Detroit manipulating that market so anything made out of recycled aluminum costs the consumer more. Then Corporate America is dismantling our factories or are selling them to foreign investors, the end result is they shut them down and lay the workers off move the machinery overseas to a third world market or China except keeping the few workers they send overseas to train the new owners of our machines employees on how to use them then they bring them back to the USA and lay them off!! Folks we all better wake up and realize our economy is not going to get better if we don't manufacture goods here in the USA to sell to other markets. If we all stand around long enough with our hands out or in our pockets, Corporate America will have us as a third world economy selling travel maps and souvenirs on the side of the road to all the visitors we have coming to see what happened to decadant America . Its a sad sad thing thats going on now and the only way to clear it up is to fire Congress(the House and Senate) Republicans and Democrats because they are all guilty so put them on term limits and let them only be elected 1 or 2 times and cut their salaries and benefits including their retirement because if they get the chance they are gonna take away all our so called entitlement programs cause they got alot of money out of it and have wasted billions and billions of dollars over the years for their pork projects. That is why Social Security and Medicare is getting insolvent you can't borrow from Peter to pay Paul it catches up to you eventually!!

THANK YOU dagocrazy! My husband is 62 and I am 58 and we were hoping to sell our house and downsize for retirement-since the recession we will be LUCKY if we can get out from under the mortgage-and forget about retiring. The PROBLEM Ron is that Blue Cross Blue Shield can raise their rates any time the CEO needs another vacation home, the PROBLEM Ron is we played by the rules-we have worked our whole lives and I'm tired of working and would like to enjoy some time off before I die and now I'm not sure I can afford it-the PROBLEM Ron is State Farm didnt pay for Katrina-WE THE PEOPLE paid for Katrina. The PROBLEM Ron is the drug companies charge an arm and a leg for medicine I need-and I dont care if you call it Blue Cross Blue Shield or OBAMACARE or PLAN 9 from Outer Space I NEED medical insurance because I can't afford to pay out of pocket for my medicine, the PROBLEM Ron is that my paycheck can no longer keep pace with the rising costs of food, medicine, insurance, gas etc. etc. etc. YOU GOTTA PROBLEM UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE PROBLEM IS RON??????"?"?

Let me put it in more simple terms.

In 2006 I got a 2% pay raise.

That year inflation increased 3.4%

In effect, I took a 1.4% pay cut.

What do they mean by conflict? I see that lately, there is an increasing sense of socio-economic stratification in the US. People get it that here are definitely haves and have-nots. What has changed is the growing suspicion that the system is rigged in favor of the haves, and the old-fashioned American ethos that you can make it if you just try is a sham. So, the USA is no longer the land of opportunity, unless one has chosen one's parents wisely. Also, it is now an inescapable fact that the political/financial/management "class" has been systematically looting the economy, with virtually no negative consequences to themselves, while less wealthy folks have been losing their livelihoods and homes. It's not "warfare" yet, but the OWS folks see the writing on the wall.

So what we gonna do about it? Keep whining how unfair things are? Do you want the "rich" to give up their wealth and distribute it among the masses? Level the playing field and most rich will become rich again and the poor will make bad decisions and be poor again, just the statistics (see lotto winners). Now with that being said, spell out a plan that will be beneficial to all and I for one will listen. The truth is the majority of the people in the world look out for themselves first and that is probably just a survival trait of humans. Please enlighten me on how you want to fix the world, because I know I do not have the answer other than to look in the mirror and be honest with myself.

Peace-3229398

If you bought a house for 65k it must have wheels, and my bet is you were never middle class. Double wides loose thier value very rapidily so 17,000.00 is understandable for a used trailer home.

Health insurance rates are going up because of Obama period end of subject. Health care companies are having to expend more effort for regulations and initiative put into place by Obama Care.

lahater: Health insurance rates were projected to be much higher and thanks to the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) the companies scaled down, and in some cases, didn't raise premiums yet. If your premium went up, check to see if you made any changes. It appears you have not read all the benefits in this health care reform, but listened to Fox. Check it out yourself, don't take my word or anyone else's. Insurance companies are under mandate to report revenue, expenditure, profit. For you too.

my parents health insurance, both are nearing retirement went up $280/month. they called both the company and the insurance company. they were told this was a direct result of Obamacare provisions.

Peace - just to put a little perspective out there for you. When you bought your house for $65K you had two choices - buy it cash for $65K and own it or borrow money from someone (a bank) to pay for it with the agreement you would pay that money back. No one forced you to choose the second option. Borrowing money from a bank is a financial risk decision, just as much as betting on poker is a risk. So when you chose to borrow money to buy your home you were "betting" that the value of your home would stay the same or go up. Now if the housing market went up and your $65K house was suddenly worth $365K, are you saying you would share the $300K you just made on the house with the party you borrowed the money from (the bank)? No, you are going to keep that because you took the risk and won. However, just like in poker, sometimes when you make a finacial risk decision you lose. Your house value went down, but that doesn't mean the party you borrowed the money from shouldn't get paid back. You took a risk and lost, but the money is still owed. (Caveat: I think in 2001-2005 certain banks were encouraging the overinflation of property values to get people to take out higher mortgages and that there should be some culpability by those banks and a reduction in principal in certain situations where grossly disproportionate home values were generated.)

The moral of my story is that people need to realize that home mortgages are just like any other risk investment and understand that you may win or you may lose with them. But either way it was your decision to make of your own free will and no one is responsible for that decision but you.

coleslaw1, buying a home with a mortgage is slightly a different game: It is a musical chairs game. Some of the borrowers are guaranteed to lose their homes when the music stops! Why? Google for "Housing bubble kondratieff wave" to understand the root cause of the problem.

lahater- our home does not have wheels -and it was what we could afford. The realitors kept encouraging us that we could afford to borrow more but we bought what we felt we could afford. I've worked my whole life and have never been on welfare-maybe to some people we are 'poor' but I have never felt poor-I've always been very grateful for my blessings. I understand financial risk-that is what Wall street is all about-but they got bailed out so they didnt really risk anything-right? Wall street has feasted and I feel like I got stuck with the bill. I have every intention of making my house payments-we have worked very hard to have a good financial rating and I intend to keep it. Besides at this point the mortgage is only one of many financial problems-cost of living goes up up up and my paycheck does not. I have always accepted responsiblity for the consequences of my actions and I always will.........

Coleslaw, I thought being the ultra rich business man you are, paying 49% of your income in taxes, that you would know all of what Peace and Mikesm are having to explain to you. But then, anyone paying 49% of their income in taxes can't be all that bright now, can they?