In order to take the attention off the failures of this incompetent administration, President Obama has dragged out the "income inequality" subterfuge.
1. Can government do so??? David Mamet has written:
"The unspoken and unrecognized assumption is that there exists some mechanism that can distribute goods and services. The only such mechanism is, and must be, the totalitarian state. To believe this, one must accept that there exists some equation by which the state can fairly and honestly control human exchange. Here we go: increasing taxes to increase programs to increase happiness to allow equality all of which ends up in dictatorship."
And, in NYC, the Communist/Liberal/Democrat mayor Bill DeBlasio has proclaimed that his tactic will be to provide "universal pre-k" to battle "income inequality."
Anyone tell DeBlasio that "Head-Start" is an abysmal failure?
2. "Democrats are revving up for a huge national "conversation" on income inequality. This is in no small part because the Obama administration and congressional Democrats would rather talk about anything other than Obamacare.
3. ... different perspectives on the left and right when it comes to income inequality... liberals see income as a public good that is distributed, like crayons in a kindergarten class. If so-and-so didn't get his or her fair share of income, it's because someone or something government, the system didn't distribute income properly....
a. ....conservatives see income inequality ... as an indication of more concrete problems.
If the poor and middle class are falling behind the wealthy, it might be a sign of declining or stagnating wages or lackluster job creation. In other words, liberals tend to see income inequality as the disease, and conservatives tend to see it as a symptom.
4.... income inequality can be a benign symptom. For instance, if everyone is getting richer, who cares if the rich are getting richer faster? New York City's inequality, for instance, is partly a function of the fact that it is so attractive to poor immigrants who start at the bottom of the ladder but with the ambition to climb it rapidly.
5. New York City's new public advocate, Letitia James, delivered her inaugural address while holding hands with Dasani Coates, a 12-year-old girl who until recently lived in a grimy homeless shelter with her parents. She was profiled in a nearly 30,000-word New York Times series that aimed to highlight the Dickensian nature of the city and succeeded in anointing Dasani as the living symbol of income inequality in New York.
6. ...James missed the irony. According to liberals like James and The Times (to the extent that's a distinction with a difference), Dasani is a victim of a system that tolerates so much economic inequality. Dasani is certainly a victim, but is the system really to blame?
7. Dasani's biological father is utterly absent. Her mother, Chanel, a drug addict and daughter of a drug addict, has a long criminal record and has children from three men. It doesn't appear that she has ever had a job, and often ignores her parental chores because she's strung out on methadone.
8. .... The Times can't distinguish between the plight of hard-working New Yorkers like James' late parents and people like Dasani's parents. "The reason for this confusion is clear: In the progressive mind, there is only one kind of poverty. It is always an impersonal force wrought by capitalism, with no way out that doesn't involve massive government help."
9. Family structure and the values that go into successful child rearing have a stronger correlation with economic mobility than income inequality.
10 ... if Dasani were born to the same parents in a socialist country, she'd still be a victim of bad parents."
Jonah Goldberg: Define income inequality
1. Can government do so??? David Mamet has written:
"The unspoken and unrecognized assumption is that there exists some mechanism that can distribute goods and services. The only such mechanism is, and must be, the totalitarian state. To believe this, one must accept that there exists some equation by which the state can fairly and honestly control human exchange. Here we go: increasing taxes to increase programs to increase happiness to allow equality all of which ends up in dictatorship."
And, in NYC, the Communist/Liberal/Democrat mayor Bill DeBlasio has proclaimed that his tactic will be to provide "universal pre-k" to battle "income inequality."
Anyone tell DeBlasio that "Head-Start" is an abysmal failure?
2. "Democrats are revving up for a huge national "conversation" on income inequality. This is in no small part because the Obama administration and congressional Democrats would rather talk about anything other than Obamacare.
3. ... different perspectives on the left and right when it comes to income inequality... liberals see income as a public good that is distributed, like crayons in a kindergarten class. If so-and-so didn't get his or her fair share of income, it's because someone or something government, the system didn't distribute income properly....
a. ....conservatives see income inequality ... as an indication of more concrete problems.
If the poor and middle class are falling behind the wealthy, it might be a sign of declining or stagnating wages or lackluster job creation. In other words, liberals tend to see income inequality as the disease, and conservatives tend to see it as a symptom.
4.... income inequality can be a benign symptom. For instance, if everyone is getting richer, who cares if the rich are getting richer faster? New York City's inequality, for instance, is partly a function of the fact that it is so attractive to poor immigrants who start at the bottom of the ladder but with the ambition to climb it rapidly.
5. New York City's new public advocate, Letitia James, delivered her inaugural address while holding hands with Dasani Coates, a 12-year-old girl who until recently lived in a grimy homeless shelter with her parents. She was profiled in a nearly 30,000-word New York Times series that aimed to highlight the Dickensian nature of the city and succeeded in anointing Dasani as the living symbol of income inequality in New York.
6. ...James missed the irony. According to liberals like James and The Times (to the extent that's a distinction with a difference), Dasani is a victim of a system that tolerates so much economic inequality. Dasani is certainly a victim, but is the system really to blame?
7. Dasani's biological father is utterly absent. Her mother, Chanel, a drug addict and daughter of a drug addict, has a long criminal record and has children from three men. It doesn't appear that she has ever had a job, and often ignores her parental chores because she's strung out on methadone.
8. .... The Times can't distinguish between the plight of hard-working New Yorkers like James' late parents and people like Dasani's parents. "The reason for this confusion is clear: In the progressive mind, there is only one kind of poverty. It is always an impersonal force wrought by capitalism, with no way out that doesn't involve massive government help."
9. Family structure and the values that go into successful child rearing have a stronger correlation with economic mobility than income inequality.
10 ... if Dasani were born to the same parents in a socialist country, she'd still be a victim of bad parents."
Jonah Goldberg: Define income inequality
