13

This is what passes for enlightened thinking?

Posted by AmericanGreatness 9 years, 12 months ago to Politics
36 comments | Share | Flag

It's hard to know where to even start with this inane piece. At one point they cite a study stating that the wealth gap affects 10-15 generations out (I'm sure deadbeat kids of successful parents would be surprised at that assertion), but then uses Loretta Lynch as an example, because her great great grandfather was a slave... what??? From slave to attorney general of US in four generations nukes his own argument.

I reject the entire premise of this article. Income and wealth are NOT distributed. They are earned. Except for misery in state-run economies, what is ever evenly distributed?


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by philosophercat 9 years, 12 months ago
    I remember form the days of hearing "Burn Baby Burn" from the socialists and Marxists that we chanted back " Earn Baby Earn" It works today. Would be a good Gulch tee shirt.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 9 years, 12 months ago
    Interesting that the Asian minority is so conspicuously absent from the statistics. Why? because they are the highest earning ethnic group in the US. Hard work, discipline and education paid off for the, and it will pay off for blacks and hispanics (and american indians for that matter). Some of them need to stop blaming their position on the system, and all of us need to just stop talking about race altogether, and it will soon be forgotten.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by RonC 9 years, 12 months ago
    the whole argument of wealth gap is bogus. Before the robber barons and reconstruction most of the nation was agrarian. If you ate, you worked.

    Yes, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Scranton, Ford, J.P. Morgan, and Rockefeller all got crazy rich. Additionally, the people that worked for them enjoyed improved lives. I would argue most of America, maybe the world, enjoy improved lives because of these people.

    To believe government would have eventually figured it out is naïve and biased. In my experience the only thing government can figure out is how to take from it's citizens. If we count gov't salaries as an expense, rather than giving back, what percentage is redistributed? My guess is not much, because in any business, labor and the associated taxes and compliance costs are the greatest expense.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by evlwhtguy 9 years, 12 months ago
    Ok, so its on the Huffington Post....what did you expect!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Technocracy 9 years, 12 months ago
    This is the argument they will use for the next stage of "social justice" looting.

    An inverted reality argument, but the one they will use.

    The housing bubble came about through "equal opportunity lending". When you lend money without regard to ability to repay, default rates go up. Then they had to repackage and spread out that bad debt as "mortgage backed securities"...effectively wastepaper.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by MinorLiberator 9 years, 12 months ago in reply to this comment.
    C'mon Salty, all those failures were one-offs (ok, maybe 1000-offs). These guys are so much smarter, this "study" so much more perfect, they'll get it right THIS time, really.

    Did they mention housing? Hey, why don't we force banks to lend to under-qualified minority people at sub-prime rates and...what? Tried that? Didn't work out too well? Darn.

    And I have to say that one "fact" in particular jumped out at me as, well, highly questionable: "Consider also that most people on Social Security today went to segregated schools." Seriously? OK, I lived in the Midwest, no segregated schools. Northeast, anyone? The West? I just can't accept that statistic UNLESS, and here's my theory: they define "segregated" as "effectively segregated"...not legally by the State mind you, it's just where blacks happened to live made their schools segregated. You see, after awhile you can see how these people "think", and no it's not enlightened.

    And I always wondered, but was pretty sure. so I looked it up: The HuffPo was found by Arianna Huffington. As I recall, in her early days of grabbing the spotlight, she was conservative. Does that make her the female David Brock? Or maybe he's done a Bruce Jenner, and she IS David Brock.

    What...utter...trash.

    PS: Sorry, Salty. You had one fact wrong: Marxism's failure was not in ALL the papers: it failed to make Pravda, and probably the NYT...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 12 months ago
    The plan is to equalize home ownership by stealing the homes of all those with lighter skin.
    Drag everyone down to an inferior standard of living.
    The perfect example is what has happened in public schools since 1970.
    Mustn't spend any more on advanced classes because that will only expand the gap between the intelligent and the less than average.
    Now they are doing it with property.
    It is the opposite of the American way.
    What this country has become is disgusting.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by SaltyDog 9 years, 12 months ago
    Ivory tower academia at its finest! In the immortal word of Ren Hoek, "But what does it mean, man?" How is all of this my fault and why does it fall to me to do something about it?

    Marxism didn't work in the Soviet Union; it was in all the papers. And it won't work this time either.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo