Zone1 "White privilege" does not exist, it is a lie.

[el midgetron]

Oh, we did. Seriously, most of those guys were clueless... You'd see them in the Zoom Meetings pointing to their graphs and lying to us about how things were going great a few weeks before they issued the mass layoffs because they ignored all the warnings we gave them our biggest customer was about to bail.

Sounds like you are up to your neck in white privilege.

 

[el midgetron]

“The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty. The communist nations were a classic example, but by no means the only example.

In theory, confiscating the wealth of the more successful people ought to make the rest of the society more prosperous. But when the Soviet Union confiscated the wealth of successful farmers, food became scarce. As many people died of starvation under Stalin in the 1930s as died in Hitler’s Holocaust in the 1940s.

How can that be? It is not complicated. You can only confiscate the wealth that exists at a given moment. You cannot confiscate future wealth — and that future wealth is less likely to be produced when people see that it is going to be confiscated. Farmers in the Soviet Union cut back on how much time and effort they invested in growing their crops, when they realized that the government was going to take a big part of the harvest. They slaughtered and ate young farm animals that they would normally keep tending and feeding while raising them to maturity.

We have all heard the old saying that giving a man a fish feeds him only for a day, while teaching him to fish feeds him for a lifetime. Redistributionists give him a fish and leave him dependent on the government for more fish in the future.

If the redistributionists were serious, what they would want to distribute is the ability to fish, or to be productive in other ways. Knowledge is one of the few things that can be distributed to people without reducing the amount held by others. That would better serve the interests of the poor, but it would not serve the interests of politicians who want to exercise power, and to get the votes of people who are dependent on them.”

Thomas Sowell on the Fallacy of Redistribution

While reviewing some old CD posts from 2012 (including the Milton Friedman lecture below), I came across a post with a great quotation from Thomas Sowell on the “fallacy of redistribution,” which generated nearly 400 comments below the original post (might be a CD record for comments?). So...

www.aei.org

 

[el midgetron]

And now a message from the people who brought you “white privilege”

 

[Hector12]

Exactly! What’s with all this resentment toward successful people?

I do not resent successful people, but I see little moral significance in their wealth. They won the IQ lottery at conception. That's all.

Beginning with Ronald Reagan, Republican tax cuts for the rich have led to the rise in the national debt that Republicans are using in efforts to cut popular domestic spending programs.

We need affluent people, but we do not need them to be as affluent as they are. It is in the interest of most Americans for them to pay higher taxes than they do.

Most Americans agree, and want higher taxes for the rich, and more domestic spending.

This is the issue Democrats should be working on, rather than unpopular stuff like trans gender “rights,“ reparations, and stuff like that.

I have documented each of these assertions, and I can do so again, but it gets tiresome to keep pushing facts into closed, and narrow minds.

 

[Hector12]

“The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.

President Franklin Roosevelt, of beloved memory, raised the top tax rate to 94%, and spread the wealth around. As a result he ended the Great Depression, won the Second World World War, created the largest and richest middle class the world ever knew, and was re elected three times.

 

[Lisa558]

I do not resent successful people, but I see little moral significance in their wealth. They won the IQ lottery at conception. That's all.

Beginning with Ronald Reagan, Republican tax cuts for the rich have led to the rise in the national debt that Republicans are using in efforts to cut popular domestic spending programs.

We need affluent people, but we do not need them to be as affluent as they are. It is in the interest of most Americans for them to pay higher taxes than they do.

Most Americans agree, and want higher taxes for the rich, and more domestic spending.

This is the issue Democrats should be working on, rather than unpopular stuff like trans gender “rights,“ reparations, and stuff like that.

I have documented each of these assertions, and I can do so again, but it gets tiresome to keep pushing facts into closed, and narrow minds.

Instead of collecting more money from successful people to redistribute to those who are irresponsible, let’s first tighten up the welfare state.

 

[Lisa558]

President Franklin Roosevelt, of beloved memory, raised the top tax rate to 94%, and spread the wealth around. As a result he ended the Great Depression, won the Second World World War, created the largest and richest middle class the world ever knew, and was re elected three times.

He was an antisemite who refused entry to European Jews who had escaped Hitler, and forced them right back into his waiting arms. He also instituted the “Jew quota” at Ivy colleges. Let’s not pretend he was totally wonderful.

And it’s interesting that you are opposed to welfare leeches, but are happy to take up to 94% of a person’s earnings to “spread the wealth around.”

Instead of promoting the idea that it’s a good deal to take almost all of a rich person’s top earnings to give to people who didn’t earn it, it would make for a better country if we promoted the idea that if you’re smart and willing to work hard, and choose your career wisely, you can work your way up to enjoying a very comfortable life.

IOW, the focus should be on acting responsibly and wisely rather than on getting more of rich people’s money:

ENVY IS THE THIEF OF JOY.

 

[JoeB131]

Envy
Thou shalt not covet

Leave it to the Jews to create a rule that makes Money-Grubbing a virtue.

I don't envy the rich. I have no desire to live in a mansion or own a dressage horse.

I want to live in a world where someone doesn't try to rob me because he doesn't have enough to eat and no one bothered to teach him how to read.

That means distributing the wealth fairly.

 

[JoeB131]

Instead of collecting more money from successful people to redistribute to those who are irresponsible, let’s first tighten up the welfare state.

Um, okay. Let's start with Social Security and Medicare. They are the two biggest welfare state items (Costing 2.5 TRILLION a year) for people who have already outlived their usefulness. If you want to keep Nana around in her 80s, you pay for her.

Meanwhile, most people on welfare have jobs. Some have jobs that don't pay enough, others are working under the table, but they are making a contribution.

 

[Hector12]

He was an antisemite who refused entry to European Jews who had escaped Hitler, and forced them right back into his waiting arms. He also instituted the “Jew quota” at Ivy colleges. Let’s not pretend he was totally wonderful.

And it’s interesting that you are opposed to welfare leeches, but are happy to take up to 94% of a person’s earnings to “spread the wealth around.”

Instead of promoting the idea that it’s a good deal to take almost all of a rich person’s top earnings to give to people who didn’t earn it, it would make for a better country if we promoted the idea that if you’re smart and willing to work hard, and choose your career wisely, you can work your way up to enjoying a very comfortable life.

IOW, the focus should be on acting responsibly and wisely rather than on getting more of rich people’s money:

ENVY IS THE THIEF OF JOY.

President Roosevel's main goal was getting the United States into World War II. Admitting Jewish refugees would have been unpopular, and would have interferred with that goal. Days before the attack on Pearl Harvor a Gallup Poll indicated that 80% of the American people wanted to stay out of the war. If the United States had avoided World War II, many more Jews would have been killed.

Also, when the MS St. Louis was denied entry into the United States Roosevelt went along with the decision. He did not make it. The full extend of the Hollocaust was not known until after the war.

From 1946 to 1980 the national debt as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) declined from 119% to 32%. During this time the top tax rate never got below 70% and was often much higher. When Reagan cut the top tax rage to 28% the natonal debt as a percentage of GDP rose to 50%.

U.S. National Debt by Year​

https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/02inpetr.pdf

The following charts demonstrate that most Americans did not benefit from Reagan's tax cuts for the rich.

Because Republicans have kept upper class taxes low, the national debt as a percentage of GDP rose to 129% in 2020, which during Trump's last full year in office.

This is not what most Americans want.

Fox News Poll: Voters favor taxing the wealthy, increasing domestic spending​

By Victoria Balara Fox News
Published January 24, 2019

Voters prefer increasing spending on domestic programs over cutting taxes and reducing spending, and their preferred way to finance that spending -- is tax the wealthy.​

That’s according to a Fox News Poll released Thursday.

Fifty-one percent of voters want to spend more on programs such as infrastructure, national defense, education, and health care. That includes 63 percent of Democrats, 50 percent of independents, and 39 percent of Republicans.

Forty percent prefer the federal government cut taxes, spending, and regulations.

At the same time, there is broad support for increasing taxes on the wealthiest families. Voters support tax increases on families making over $10 million annually by a 46-point margin (70 percent favor-24 percent oppose), and support a hike on those making over $1 million by 36 points (65-29 percent).

Fox News Poll: Voters favor taxing the wealthy, increasing domestic spending

Voters prefer increasing spending on domestic programs over cutting taxes and reducing spending, and their preferred way to finance that spending -- is tax the wealthy.

www.foxnews.com

The politics of envy and class war are the best issues the Democrats have. They are foolish not to exploit those issues.

 

[JoeB131]

President Roosevel's main goal was getting the United States into World War II. Admitting Jewish refugees would have been unpopular, and would have interferred with that goal. Days before the attack on Pearl Harvor a Gallup Poll indicated that 80% of the American people wanted to stay out of the war. If the United States had avoided World War II, many more Jews would have been killed.

Also, when the MS St. Louis was denied entry into the United States Roosevelt went along with the decision. He did not make it. The full extend of the Hollocaust was not known until after the war.

That and the passengers on the St. Louis hadn't legally applied for admission into the US.

They were trying to get to Cuba, but Cuba didn't want them, either.

They were not sent back to Germany, most of them resettled in the UK and France. Of course, the ones in France were out of luck when Hitler invaded and they were killed, anyway.

Of course, the whole war could have been avoided if the British hadn't written the Polish Colonels a blank check.

 

[AZrailwhale]

President Franklin Roosevelt, of beloved memory, raised the top tax rate to 94%, and spread the wealth around. As a result he ended the Great Depression, won the Second World World War, created the largest and richest middle class the world ever knew, and was re elected three times.

The problem is the FDR's 94% was an illusion. The rich had so many tax shelters that they paid far less than they do today.

 

[Hector12]

The problem is the FDR's 94% was an illusion. The rich had so many tax shelters that they paid far less than they do today.

Of course. Nevertheless, the rich still paid a much higher percentage of their income under Roosevelt than they have since Reagan began to cut their taxes. Also a high top tax rate gives the government considerable control over the economic behavior of rich people and corporations.

 

[el midgetron]

I want to live in a world where someone doesn't try to rob me because he doesn't have enough to eat and no one bothered to teach him how to read.

That means distributing the wealth fairly.

And yet robbing someone because other people doesn’t have enough is exactly what you are advocating for.

 

[el midgetron]

Leave it to the Jews to create a rule that makes Money-Grubbing a virtue.

That’s just your Third Reich ancestors speaking to you. Anti-semitism is in you DNA. Apparently so is being on the wrong side of history.

 

[el midgetron]

Um, okay. Let's start with Social Security and Medicare. They are the two biggest welfare state items (Costing 2.5 TRILLION a year) for people who have already outlived their usefulness. If you want to keep Nana around in her 80s, you pay for her.

This is another comment that really shows who Joe is. Apparently, Joe thinks our senior citizens should just be discarded after they are unable to pay income tax. As if it’s a matter of choice or “want”, not unlike abortion.

Joe could argue to cut spending by not providing illegal aliens free sex change operations. Or opposing the military industrial complex sending billions to Neo-Nazi groups in corrupt Ukraine to fight a proxy war with Russia. Or any of the bloated liberal economic policies we piss money away on. But No, Joe doesn’t want to pay for a senior citizen who worked and paid into the system their entire life.

 

[Hector12]

This is another comment that really shows who Joe is. Apparently, Joe thinks our senior citizens should just be discarded after they are unable to pay income tax. As if it’s a matter of choice or “want”, not unlike abortion.

Joe could argue to cut spending by not providing illegal aliens free sex change operations. Or opposing the military industrial complex sending billions to Neo-Nazi groups in corrupt Ukraine to fight a proxy war with Russia. Or any of the bloated liberal economic policies we piss money away on. But No, Joe doesn’t want to pay for a senior citizen who worked and paid into the system their entire life.

I agree with all of this, except this nonsense about "Neo-Nazi groups in corrupt Ukraine to fight a proxy war with Russia."

 

[el midgetron]

I agree with all of this, except this nonsense about "Neo-Nazi groups in corrupt Ukraine to fight a proxy war with Russia."

Sadly, it’s the truth Hector. The media coverage of Ukraine was much different prior to the invasion. Both Ukraine’s Nazi problem and the rampant corruption in Ukraine were subjects discussed in the media and by American politicians. It’s all still out there. After the invasion, the narrative shifted to maintain public support for sending significant military aid to Ukraine.

 

[Concerned American]

Asians earn more than whites.

Inequity is not a racial thing. It’s a cultural thing.

List of ethnic groups in the United States by household income - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I believe it boils down to ambition and perseverance--not race or privilege. There are many children of privilege that never amount to a hill of beans.

 

[Hector12]

Sadly, it’s the truth Hector. The media coverage of Ukraine was much different prior to the invasion. Both Ukraine’s Nazi problem and the rampant corruption in Ukraine were subjects discussed in the media and by American politicians. It’s all still out there. After the invasion, the narrative shifted to maintain public support for sending significant military aid to Ukraine.

Even if what you say is true, which I doubt, it would not justify the Russian invasion.