Predictably, the GOP is against income disparity, too!
Now, sure, they’ve changed the name a bit (it’s now “income mobility”) — but once again, they’ve allowed the left to set the narrative, and now they find themselves on the defensive for having accepted it.
So here’s the question: why should conservatives, classical liberals, libertarians, and other free market capitalists back a party whose leadership accepts one of the fundamental planks of Marxism, and thinks it the role of government to “correct” wealth distribution?
I honestly don’t know. And yet I’m told constantly that a third party is a non-starter — despite the fact that the GOP no longer represents me.
wall street romney is deeply concerned about income mobility and he’s deeply committed to equitably arranging income in his first term is my understanding
Everything is a non-starter…until it’s started.
At The Corner, Kevin Williamson, author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Socialism, observes:
Predictably, one genius, Moe Coors, responds,
To which Williamson replies
I know that when I think of “mob” the Republican party jumps first to mind.
Stop rocking the boat! You’ll scare the
fishlow-info/moderate/independent voters!“Income Mobility” is pure marketing genius! Just like Compassionate Conservatism
Moe Coors: “Counting is arithmetic, and that’s jooooooooooooooo-ish!”
Beer tycoon?
T’hell with Coors: I say give us mo’e Yuengling!
It’ gonna take a third party, folks. One that kills off the GOP.
We’ll see, Jeff. I think the battle for the GOP isn’t quite lost.
Ask me again after the South Carolina primary.
The best way to promote income mobility is for the government to stop collecting quite so much of it.
Is that a geometrical certainty Jeff, or a sort of epiphany just dawning yet to be fleshed out, or something else altogether? I mean, it’s surely an interesting proposition to explore, while one fraught, as you well know, with all sorts of rigamarole and encrusted opinion expressed here already. Still, it seems like a worthy tacit hypothesis at the very least. Let’s hash it out.
I’m not reading this that way. Income mobility is not a new term, and it speaks to the ability to move between income levels, some of which we’ve long referred to as upward mobility. (Sowell touched on it a few years back.) That is inherently American. Cantor is referring to policies that are keeping capital on the sidelines instead of it working to grow the economy. He’s identifying a problem that the people sitting on it have long been complaining about: The uncertainty that is Obama.
We have a long history of recessions being followed by booms. We have no boom this time. We have Obamanomics and it’s killing us.
I had the sense that Cantor was simply trying to escape his own characterization of the Owwies as a mob Pablo, and this was the best he could come up with. Call the mob a mob and soon find out you’ve pissed them off, growing their ranks the while (sort of deal).
I didn’t say a third party was a non-starter; I maintain that it’s easier to wrest the machinery away from the establishment than it would to build a new machine from scratch.
I also look to an alternative future, where our fledgling new party is faced with attacks from the establishment GOP and the establishment Democrats, using their combined funding, message, organizational and media machinery to full effect against what they (correctly) see as an insurgency. How would an all-out simultaneous war on two fronts be easier than the current ground-up insurgency within the GOP?
I once put it in terms of cancer: America is our mother, and the ruling class is the cancer that’s been slowly killing her for years. We’re the responsible children, arguing over whether we should pursue chemotherapy or radiation as the most effective treatment. Meanwhile, we have a couple of dozen lazy siblings who complain that any treatment is expensive and would affect Mom’s ability to cook their dinner and do their laundry, and insist that Mom really isn’t that sick, and that she’s always gotten better in the past. I mean, I really want to do what’s best for Mom, but at a certain point I have to realize that our responsible voices might not prevail, and then position myself for the inevitable ugly fight over Mom’s estate.
Now if anyone needs me, I’ll be nursing a Xanax and some bourbon.
Pablo, Cantor talked about the rich money keeping their money on the side, the suggestion being they have an obligation to spend it and hire people.
Didn’t think about the possibility Cantor was playing on a pronunciation of “mob–ility” as opposed to “moe–bility” though. Because . . . . nah.
But from Debbie, we have: “Wasserman Schultz said Republican proposals to get the economy moving would ‘just allow corporate America to write their own rules again.’ ” But if we dig down into that idea of “writ[ing] their own rules”, don’t we find the very essence of the idea of democratic rule? That is, that of necessity, the people of a democracy have to have the sense of playing a role in writing their own rules, otherwise, they’re to be ruled by rules written by the god, or the tyrant, or whathaveyou.
I see it like Pablo, income mobility is like the opposite of class warfare, and the beauty of free enterprise.
I see it as Cantor talking about “encouraging”(by removing imposed artificial barriers)the rich to buy and hire. Not that they are failing at an obligation, but that they have no incentive.
Having said that, I do wish our side were more bold with their rhetoric. Republicans are like a guy realizing his wife is a shrew. Not completely broken, but always carefully walking on eggshells.
There is a lot of money on the sidelines and if there were a free market in which those holding it could invest with reasonable risk, they’d be doing it. That’s Economics 101. If they did that, there would be more jobs and there would be investment capital available for start ups. That money is sitting idle because of what this fucking Marxist has already done to the market and because people are scared to death of what he’s going to do to them next.
I’m not seeing a suggestion that they have an obligation to put their capital in play, but rather that they’d gladly do it if Uncle Sugar wasn’t up their ass. It could be because I believe the latter to be true.
So I guess the question is are we outlaws or pirates?
Almost every organization present at OWS is explicitly communist or socialist. Almost every piece of literature being handed out is explicitly communist or socialist. I don’t mean half, and I don’t mean the overwhelming majority — I mean almost all of it.
a guy tried to sell me his newrag at Occupy Detroit. I told him I wasn’t going to give my money for a communist paper. He argued it wasn’t communist, and I told him that with a name like “the Peope’s Tribune” is could be nothing but. He gave it to me for free.
and I’ve read it. It’s 100% communist. I liked the one piece, by the editors that stated the government needed to take over the “giant corporations” and run them in “our interest”. Also, there should be no profit on shit people need. Here it is, word for word:
corporations do not have the right to own and profit from the sale of things we need … we don’t need to sacrifice for the “betterment of the corporations … corporations must be substantially taxed. Fear not. Taxing the corporations will not prevent them from creating jobs. The corporations are not creating jobs because computers and robots create more profit than wage labor. The jobs are not coming back. We have to go forward to a new society.
This is from Occupy Providence. Was it wrong to laugh?
[…] GOP Leadership once again cedes ground to the leftJeff G.Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:08:48 GMT LD_AddCustomAttr("AdOpt", "1"); LD_AddCustomAttr("Origin", "other"); LD_AddCustomAttr("theme_bg", "ffffff"); LD_AddCustomAttr("theme_text", "333333"); LD_AddCustomAttr("theme_link", "0066cc"); LD_AddCustomAttr("theme_border", "5581C0"); LD_AddCustomAttr("theme_url", "114477"); LD_AddCustomAttr("LangId", "1"); LD_AddSlot("LD_ROS_300-WEB"); LD_GetBids(); Like this:LikeBe the first to like this post. […]
Aw. That little goth chick made a special shirt up to stick it to The Man, too. So sweet.
What if they gave a protest and no one showed up?
the goth chick is cute
Herman Cain from Feb. 2007.
more of that please Mr. herman
mmm yeah that’s the stuff
the folks who want “transformational change” don’t like change. they like big gov’t.