Support NeoGAF

[empty vessel]

But that's been a core talking point of the Democrats since Reagan was in office.

You crazy. Democrats since Reagan have been Republicans before Reagan.

 

[Plinko]

I had respect for Romney until his recent comment about how the income gap isn't real and it is just "envy." Screw him. Talk about completely out of touch.

It's that attitude that, if it keeps up, is going to destroy the GOP in the future. The gap between the rich and the poor keeps growing. Middle-class keeps getting pushed further down thanks to stagnant wages and higher fuel/food costs. To think it's "class warfare" and "envy" is infuriating.

 

[Kosmo]

I had respect for Romney until his recent comment about how the income gap isn't real and it is just "envy." Screw him. Talk about completely out of touch.

It's that attitude that, if it keeps up, is going to destroy the GOP in the future. The gap between the rich and the poor keeps growing. Middle-class keeps getting pushed further down thanks to stagnant wages and higher fuel/food costs. To think it's "class warfare" and "envy" is infuriating.

He didn't say it wasn't real - he just said it's driven mostly by envy, which it is.

 

[Krowley]

A new ARG poll has Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich both within striking distance in South Carolina. I'm not sure how reliable they are as a polling outfit, but that is a pretty big surge for Paul, who was only at 9% in their last poll.

Romney 29%
Gingrich 25%
Paul 20%
Perry 9%
Santorum 7%

http://www.fitsnews.com/2012/01/13/ron-paul-within-striking-distance-in-south-carolina/

If Paul is still doing this well when the Georgia primary comes along, I might take the trouble to go vote for him. I disagree with him massively on a lot of shit, but I like some of his stances. Romney is an absolute piece of shit, and Obama has been too weak, almost like he wants to lose on these tax issues with republicans. Paul seems like a nice choice if you want to protest against the entire system.

 

[Dude Abides]

He didn't say it wasn't real - he just said it's driven mostly by envy, which it is.

How does envy create an income gap?

 

[ReBurn]

I had respect for Romney until his recent comment about how the income gap isn't real and it is just "envy." Screw him. Talk about completely out of touch.

It's that attitude that, if it keeps up, is going to destroy the GOP in the future. The gap between the rich and the poor keeps growing. Middle-class keeps getting pushed further down thanks to stagnant wages and higher fuel/food costs. To think it's "class warfare" and "envy" is infuriating.

For sure the income gap is real. it's very well documented. I think it is fair to acknowledge that there is some envy involved when talking about the income gap, but envy isn't the only thing people are feeling. A lot of people are feeling desperation, especially those who are unemployed or underemployed and have been for a long time. Jealousy is probably way down on the list after fear and hopelessness for a good number of people.

There have always been, and there likely will always be, people who are jealous because some else has more than them. People who have enough to make ends meet get jealous because their neighbor has a nicer car or a fancier television. That's life. Romney isn't doing himself any favors by failing to acknowledge that there are people suffering economically through no fault of their own.

 

[ToxicAdam]

But he has said that Obama "Draws his inspiration from the socialist welfare of Europe" and that he "Wants to make us an entitlement society where government takes from one and gives to the other." He's said Obama wants to make this an entitlement society. He also said, in comparison to Obama, that "America needs a President that believes in freedom."

There's a huge line of distinction between calling Obama someone that wants to emulate European government and a straight upsocialist. I don't think there is anything incindiary or incorrect about that first assertion either.

So maybe the guy doesn't outright say it as much as some of the other candidates, but he's using a lot of fluff language that's meant to incite that sort of thing.

That's just conjecture on your part. The guy doesn't say it at ALL. Especially when you compare-contrast his rhetoric to someone like Perry.

 

[el retorno]

He didn't say it wasn't real - he just said it's driven mostly by envy, which it is.

It's not envy. Its driven by a sense of unfairness. They didn't earn their way there and other people work their tail off and get fired by these people so they can renovate their houses a 4th time.

 

[Cyan]

"Envy" is just a reframing of the income inequality problem as an attitude issue rather than a, you know, actual problem.

Probably pointless to engage anyone who uses that argument seriously.

 

[el retorno]

There's a huge line of distinction between calling Obama someone that wants to emulate European government and a straight upsocialist. I don't think there is anything incindiary or incorrect about that first assertion either.

Really? Where as he emulated them? I'm really sick of this "Obama wants us to be Europe". European governments are vastly different than the American. Much more centralized, much more government intervention. Maybe its because I read a lot about European politics but the differences are vast and are not getting any closer.

Social Welfare doesn't equal Europe. Japan, Australia, New Zealand, South America, and more have social welfare. People really should take comparative politics classes. I had no idea how different America really was. That's not a knock at the US since many, probably most (save for healthcare and maybe college), I prefer the US system.

 

[The Librarian]

He didn't say it wasn't real - he just said it's driven mostly by envy, which it is.

You have to be a joke character. You just have to be.

 

[ReBurn]

It's not envy. Its driven by a sense of unfairness. They didn't earn their way there and other people work their tail off and get fired by these people so they can renovate their houses a 4th time.

Who didn't earn their way?

 

[RDreamer]

There's a huge line of distinction between calling Obama someone that wants to emulate European government and a straight upsocialist. I don't think there is anything incindiary or incorrect about that first assertion either.

The first assertion isn't incendiary in and of itself, no. The rest of them kind of are, and that's just from quick searches to get more exact quotes.

That's just conjecture on your part. The guy doesn't say it at ALL. Especially when you compare-contrast his rhetoric to someone like Perry.

Yes, his rhetoric is better than Perry and a lot of the tea partiers (like DeMint and the conversation with Jon Stewart that was linked earlier). But I also think that Obama's rhetoric is pretty on par with Romney and not with something like the Tea Party. So I see it as Romney, who has a certain level of rhetoric telling Obama, who I see as also having a similar level of rhetoric if not even a lower level or rhetoric already to hush down on this one issue.

And that's not really conjecture on my part. Unless you know nothing about marketing and PR, and, obviously, politics, you'd know what he's getting at. Word choices are deliberate. Now, he's a smart man, and I think he's dancing around saying exactly that Obama IS a socialist because he knows he can be called on it, perhaps by Obama. But what he is saying is pretty close to dog whistle politics. He's using buzzwords that resonate with his base as negative. He doesn't actually have to say "Obama is a socialist," because he knows to the republican base especially and to a lot of people in general saying "Obama draws his inspiration from the socialist welfare of Europe" is saying exactly the same thing. And that's especially so when you pair it with his other quote where he says that Obama wants to make this into an entitlement society where the government takes from one and gives to the other.

 

[KtSlime]

Maybe your problem was that America rejected the squatters nonsense and 1% bogeyman, because they had no arguments of substance, cohesion, or respect for the law.

First off, let me start out by saying, that the existence of a law does not mean that one should respect it. This country is founded on the very breaking of law, because they felt the laws were unjust. While I do think that the OWS movement is perceived as meaningless mewings by many working US citizens, and that they have been terribly unorganized and unable to express their desires on how to go about fixing the inequity they are experiencing, that does not mean that this movement will go unrecognized. As the disparity between classes increases more movements such as this one will occur. Plus, I simply used the term 1% because it was a conveniently coined term.

'The system' doesn't pick anyone. People pick candidates. Wealthy people are more likely to be a candidate. There's a vast disparity in these two concepts.

Again, this is more 'the man' goobeldegook.

People inherently favor family, friends and colleagues. That's just what human beings do. You hope that those in public service do not fall into that trap, but they do and always have. This doesn't excuse it or make it right .. but it is what it is. 'The people' know it. The saying, 'It's not what you know, it's who you know' didn't just become fashionable overnight. That cuts across all socio-economic stratas.

I don't think 'behind the scenes talks' was what Romney was referring to. That's interjecting words that aren't there.

But you are right, it is your right to rally against it. In the same way it's people's right to calve off other segments of the population and affix blame to them for problems. It's called scapegoating and it's another common human foible. It seems to work.

Now you are just playing semantics. You know very well that there are rules used to vote, and mechanisms in place on swaying the way people vote. This is what I am referring to when I call it a system.

And yes, of course people naturally favor people they relate to, people with similar culture, their family, peers, people they will gain the most utility from when helping. That means we need to come up with rules to minimize this effect (democracy is an attempt at just that) - not just ignore it and say "well that's nature, herp derp". If we are going to leave it to "That's just what human beings do" we might as well go back to a theocracy were a king can appoint his son as a ruler so we don't have to waste the resources it takes to vote every four years.

I don't see how you say I am scapegoating the wealthy - I said that I think SOME of the wealthy were manipulating the system, and if left to their own devices they would continue to skew the system in their favor. It's not scapegoating when they really are the cause.

Who wants to take away their wealth? Did I put some communist poster on ignore and missed all that?

I never proposed a solution beyond "people need to be informed of what's going on, and something needs to be done before it is too late". Where TA got the idea I wanted to start taking away their wealth from, I don't have a clue.

Campaign finance reform is one way I can see at starting to solve the problem - however since the people that are wealthy are the ones that get to vote on it, and rely on their wealth to get their positions - I don't see such a reform as happening anytime soon.

 

[The Librarian]

BREAKING: Romney has now created "thousands of jobs."
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/updates/4046

 

[cartoon_soldier]

BREAKING: Romney has now created "thousands of jobs."
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/updates/4046

We still don't know whether that is a Net number or not

lol

In other news, Obama co-opting GOP Arguments

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...gop-arguments/2012/01/13/gIQA9b7GwP_blog.html

President Barack Obama will ask Congress on Friday for greater power to shrink the federal government, and his first idea is merging six sprawling trade and commerce agencies whose overlapping programs can be baffling to businesses, a senior administration official told The Associated Press.
Obama will call on Congress to give him a type of reorganizational power last held by a president when Ronald Reagan was in office. The Obama version would be a so-called consolidation authority allowing him to propose mergers that promise to save money and help consumers. The deal would entitle him to an up-or-down vote from Congress in 90 days.
It would be up to lawmakers, therefore, to first grant Obama this fast-track authority and then decide whether to approve any of his specific ideas.

Of course, Republicans are crying foul...

And more news out of Wisconsin, enough votes for State Senate leader recall

http://www.nbc15.com/home/headlines/Fitzgerald_Files_Complaint_Over_Recall_Timing_137208448.html

 

[ToxicAdam]

Really? Where as he emulated them? I'm really sick of this "Obama wants us to be Europe". European governments are vastly different than the American. Much more centralized, much more government intervention. Maybe its because I read a lot about European politics but the differences are vast and are not getting any closer.

Social Welfare doesn't equal Europe. Japan, Australia, New Zealand, South America, and more have social welfare. People really should take comparative politics classes. I had no idea how different America really was. That's not a knock at the US since many, probably most (save for healthcare and maybe college), I prefer the US system.

It's just opinion on my part, but I believe if Obama had his way, he would model the country more towards a style you find in European Democracies than the style we have today. Which means more taxes, more control over industry, more support to unionized labor and more programs for the poor. I don't think it's out of line to think such a way. Especially when you evaluate a piece of legislation like ARRA, which included many of those same themes.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Gallup Chart on issues affecting people by income

It's just opinion on my part, but I believe if Obama had his way, he would model the country more towards a style you find in European Democracies than the style we have today. Which means more taxes, more control over industry, more support to unionized labor and more programs for the poor. I don't think it's out of line to think such a way. Especially when you evaluate a piece of legislation like ARRA, which included many of those same themes.

You mean the Bill that was around 35% tax cuts? 18% for helping state and local government?

I mean, explain to me how ARRA was a step towards the stated goal that you beleive Obama wants? It has some of the same themes? Like that? It doesn't have more taxes. It has money for unemployment benefits for the poor, Medicard for state to help with budget shortfalls, money for states to prevent layoffs of public workers, instrastructure spend (did not have enough of this).

The LARGEST portion of ARRA was the tax cuts. Apparently that is so socialist of Obama.

 

[RoninChaos]

Enjoy it. Demint looked like he wanted to crawl into a little hole and hide during that entire interview.



Exactly.

The fact that we have senators like Demint and Paul saying how awful government is, yet happily lap up government paychecks and government benefits, should show you how absolutely full of shit they are.

Therein lies another one of the problems. It's fucking crazy these assholes can go on TV and spout this bullshit.

 

[Measley]

Who didn't earn their way?

Mitt Romney certainly didn't.

 

[el retorno]

It's just opinion on my part, but I believe if Obama had his way, he would model the country more towards a style you find in European Democracies than the style we have today. Which means more taxes, more control over industry, more support to unionized labor and more programs for the poor. I don't think it's out of line to think such a way. Especially when you evaluate a piece of legislation like ARRA, which included many of those same themes.

I just don't see that. I spent some time abroad and there is no way we ever become Europe. At least not for a few generations in which the world will be totally different anyway. The entire way of looking at government is different over there. Not even Obama would be cofortable with some europea style systems.

That's not to say he's not looking to europe for things that work. But I think he's looking anywhere to get ideas. Canada, Individual states, Asia, etc.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Mitt Romney certainly didn't.

That's his fault?

 

[daedalius]

Wow this DeMint interview.

Sheesh.

It seems like they are actually having a reasonable discussion, without shouting and too much hyperbole. If only everyone could do the same...

 

[ReBurn]

Mitt Romney certainly didn't.

Well, that's one out of the way.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

That's his fault?

No? But then when he says he was worried about getting pink slips...or that he is unepmployed too...

 

[Mardak]

Paul saying how awful government is, yet happily lap up government paychecks and government benefits, should show you how absolutely full of shit they are.

Rand Paul returned $500k from his Senate office budget to the Treasury:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-co...ns-k-in-office-budget-to-treasury-110637.html

Like father like son? Ron Paul returned $140k last year and has returned over $1 million in the last decade. (I believe in 2003 he returned $250k.)

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1841&Itemid=28

I'm not sure about Rand, but Ron Paul says he will not participate in the congressional pension program where he could be getting over $100k a year.

 

[Measley]

That's his fault?

If you're going to pretend you're a working class American, then yes.

Rand Paul returned $500k from his Senate office budget to the Treasury:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-co...ns-k-in-office-budget-to-treasury-110637.html

Like father like son? Ron Paul returned $140k last year and has returned over $1 million in the last decade. (I believe in 2003 he returned $250k.)

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1841&Itemid=28

I'm not sure about Rand, but Ron Paul says he will not participate in the congressional pension program where he could be getting over $100k a year.

And what about their congressional salaries? If you think government is the problem, work for free.

 

[el retorno]

Who didn't earn their way?

A lot of people who had their parents money. Born with a silver spoon in their mouth.

I don't think that they should have money taken away but I don't think they should have policies that just reinforce this extreme centralization of wealth. Eliminated the estate tax, capital gains tax being much lower than the income tax, etc.

There are a lot of people who did. Its just frustrating that these people get to that level and then seem to have a rich people's safety net and never seem to leave it. While others are having their safety net chiped away at.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Rand Paul returned $500k from his Senate office budget to the Treasury:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-co...ns-k-in-office-budget-to-treasury-110637.html

Like father like son? Ron Paul returned $140k last year and has returned over $1 million in the last decade. (I believe in 2003 he returned $250k.)

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1841&Itemid=28

I'm not sure about Rand, but Ron Paul says he will not participate in the congressional pension program where he could be getting over $100k a year.

Ron Paul will support the state's right to do anything it wants. And that is not a solution for America.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ted-sonograms/2012/01/11/gIQAcikYrP_blog.html

 

[Mardak]

And what about their congressional salaries? If you think government is the problem, work for free.

Are you complaining that Ron/Rand Paul could have returned more money from their congressional office budget by dropping their own salaries to $0? How many people in Congress are even returning their excess budget instead of just giving it to themselves or their friends?

It almost sounds like you would criticize Ron Paul for getting $201 in lobbyist money instead of refusing it.

 

[Measley]

Are you complaining that Ron/Rand Paul could have returned more money from their congressional office budget by dropping their own salaries to $0? How many people in Congress are even returning their excess budget instead of just giving it to themselves or their friends?

It almost sounds like you would criticize Ron Paul for getting $201 in lobbyist money instead of refusing it.

No, I'm criticizing Paul and others like him in congress who say that the government doesn't create jobs, yet take a government job with all its benefits.

 

[Plinko]

He didn't say it wasn't real - he just said it's driven mostly by envy, which it is.

He said that anyone who asks questions about it or shows concern is being driven by envy, which is absolutely ridiculous. The widening gap between the rich and the poor could literally cause our country to collapse. That's not "envy."

 

[ReBurn]

A lot of people who had their parents money. Born with a silver spoon in their mouth.

I don't think that they should have money taken away but I don't think they should have policies that just reinforce this extreme centralization of wealth. Eliminated the estate tax, capital gains tax being much lower than the income tax, etc.

There are a lot of people who inherited their parents' money. There are also a lot of people who have accumulated wealth of their own.

I think that to some degree "family money" should be reclaimed by government so that it can be reappropriated if necessary. Money that passes from one generation to another, at least in my opinion, should be taxable on the same scale as any other income.

It isn't about fairness and whether children of rich people deserve to be rich through no effort of their own. Making it about haves and have-nots isn't as productive as we would like to think. To me it's more about making sure that government effectively manages the money supply that it has created. The more unused money the government takes back the less it has to create and, hopefully, the more capable the government will be of managing things like inflation.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

No, I'm criticizing Paul and others like him in congress who say that the government doesn't create jobs, yet take a government job with all its benefits.

Same thing with Healthcare. Enjoying amazing government paid healthcare while criticizing efforts to make Healthcare available to all citizens.

 

[Arde5643]

No, I'm criticizing Paul and others like him in congress who say that the government doesn't create jobs, yet take a government job with all its benefits.

I agree your sentiments with the other representatives in congress, not so much with the Pauls since they're really principled as much as I revile their ideology.

 

[ToxicAdam]

You mean the Bill that was around 35% tax cuts? 18% for helping state and local government?

The LARGEST portion of ARRA was the tax cuts. Apparently that is so socialist of Obama.

Really? You don't think that the poor and working poor benefited greatly from the tax cuts in ARRA? Expanded EITC, increased Child Care credit? The Making Work Pay credit (which has since morphed into a payroll tax cut)? A 250 dollar payment to people with SSI? First time home buyers credit?

The average federal return for a family of four (making 25k) was nearly 8000 dollars last year.

Another huge chunk of those tax cuts went to small business. The very type of jobs that would most likely hire working poor people.

That money earmarked for state and local was to save union jobs. It helped alleviate budget shortfalls so they didn't have to make such drastic cuts.

 

[ReBurn]

No, I'm criticizing Paul and others like him in congress who say that the government doesn't create jobs, yet take a government job with all its benefits.

So they shouldn't run for public office because they think that the government doesn't create jobs?

 

[Measley]

Really? You don't think that the poor and working poor benefited greatly from the tax cuts in ARRA? Expanded EITC, increased Child Care credit? The Making Work Pay credit (which has since morphed into a payroll tax cut)? A 250 dollar payment to people with SSI? First time home buyers credit? The average federal return for a family of four (making 25k) was 8000 dollars last year.

That money earmarked for state and local was to save union jobs. It helped alleviate budget shortfalls so they didn't have to make such drastic cuts.

Police, firefighters, and teachers (aka union jobs) don't benefit the poor and working class?

 

[Mardak]

No, I'm criticizing Paul and others like him in congress who say that the government doesn't create jobs, yet take a government job with all its benefits.

But he doesn't take the job /because/ of the benefits.

That's like saying a vegetarian who opposes killing animals should never eat/use/buy products that were in any way associated with the killing of animals. That person should just starve and fail to get the message out. In reality, the vegetarian chooses to live and make use of what he can to spread the word of animal cruelty even if he has to directly/indirectly pay those who don't hear the message yet.

Ron Paul says that he ran for Congress to spread the message of Liberty and told his wife not to worry because he won't get elected. His wife said that people might like his message and that he'll get elected! Apparently people liked his message so much, he's serving his 12th term in Congress.

 

[empty vessel]

Apparently people liked his message so much, he's serving is 12th term in Congress.

That's not really how elections work.

 

[Measley]

So they shouldn't run for public office because they think that the government doesn't create jobs?

Why would they? Believing that government doesn't create jobs, and then taking a six-figure government job that's going to allow you to employ several other people is the epitome of hypocrisy...

Unless you don't really believe what you're saying.

 

[Dude Abides]

But he doesn't take the job /because/ of the benefits.

Why not give the money to charity?

 

[Tom_Cody]

I had respect for Romney until his recent comment about how the income gap isn't real and it is just "envy." Screw him. Talk about completely out of touch.

It's that attitude that, if it keeps up, is going to destroy the GOP in the future. The gap between the rich and the poor keeps growing. Middle-class keeps getting pushed further down thanks to stagnant wages and higher fuel/food costs. To think it's "class warfare" and "envy" is infuriating.

Eh, he was obviously trying to bait Gingrich. Politicians are always playing games with semantics.

 

[A27_StarWolf]

Eh, he was obviously trying to bait Gingrich. Politicians are always playing games with semantics.

I still think Newt can beat Romney.

 

[Measley]

But he doesn't take the job /because/ of the benefits.

Of course not.... He just has a six-figure job that he supposedly despises, yet he's been there for over 2 decades, happily pocketing tax payer money.

 

[Mardak]

Why not give the money to charity?

Perhaps he does?

When Ron Paul was practicing as an OB/GYN, he would take patients and refuse federal money (Medicare/Medicaid). Those patients got treatment for free.

Arguably, taking the money and giving it to charity might be better than paying down the national debt. Giving money to an actual cause to save lives is probably better than wasting half of the "donated to the federal government" going towards wars and killing people overseas.

 

[empty vessel]

Arguably, taking the money and giving it to charity might be better than paying down the national debt.

Everything is better than paying down the national debt.

 

[Krowley]

I'm pretty sure that the Pauls never advocated for shutting down all aspects of the government, just things that are beyond the scope of the constitution.

Things like congress and the military are constitutional requirements, and obviously, since we would want the best people in leadership positions, such as the congress, senate, and presidency, they would need to be well paid.

I don't see anything hypocritical there, regardless of how you feel about Paul.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Really? You don't think that the poor and working poor benefited greatly from the tax cuts in ARRA? Expanded EITC, increased Child Care credit? The Making Work Pay credit (which has since morphed into a payroll tax cut)? A 250 dollar payment to people with SSI? First time home buyers credit?

The average federal return for a family of four (making 25k) was nearly 8000 dollars last year.

Another huge chunk of those tax cuts went to small business. The very type of jobs that would most likely hire working poor people.

That money earmarked for state and local was to save union jobs. It helped alleviate budget shortfalls so they didn't have to make such drastic cuts.

Sounds Great stuff to me!

And I still don't know how that equates to becoming Europe?

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Lee Atwater was on MSNBC spouting nonsense like how she's supporting Gingrich in SC, because as a student in college, Newt has the record for creating 11 million jobs when he was speaker of the House. She couldn't back up her statement and was stuttering like you wouldn't believe.

She's the typical student I would've destroyed in a debate in class.