Barack Obama

SOTU Preview: Obama Will Conflate Inequality with Mobility and Push Failed Fixes

|

I've got a new column up at The Daily Beast, which previews tonight's State of the Union address and President Obama's insistence on conflating increasing income inequality with supposedly weak economic mobility.

From the article:

Tonight, don't expect President Obama to cite any research showing that mobility has remained constant. Instead, expect him to echo his December speech, which was filled with lines about "a dangerous and growing inequality and lack of upward mobility that has jeopardized middle-class America's basic bargain—that if you work hard, you have a chance to get ahead."

From a political perspective, the erroneous but strategic conflation of inequality and mobility makes obvious sense. After all, if mobility is as alive and well as it has been in the post-war era, then the sense of urgency the president needs to sell any legislation is largely undercut. As important, constant mobility rates also make a mockery of the president's long-preferred strategy of redistributing income from the top of the income ladder down to the lower rungs….

Instead, get ready for a long list of calls to maintain and increase many programs that have been in place since before Obama took office: extending unemploymentbenefits (without paying for them by, say, cutting defense spending), making it easier for people to buy or stay in homes whose prices are inflated by government policies, and increasing access to higher education in ways that continue to increase prices far higher than the rate of inflation. Pump more money into a broken K-12 education system whose per-pupils costs rise as results stay flat (certainly the president won't call for giving parents and children the right to choose their own schools).

In short, expect Obama to invoke income inequality and supposed declines in upward mobility as a way of maintaining a status quo that has managed to increase inequality without affecting mobility rates.

Read the article, which documents research showing that economic mobility in the United States has remained constant since the 1950s.

NEXT: Obama Approval Rating Highest in Hawaii and DC

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I want to know what Obama plans to do about us poor Southerners suffering under the terror of Winter Storm Leon?

    1. Government Cheese for everyone!

    2. Your willingness to submit to the Weather Channel’s bullshit snowstorm naming scheme sickens me. SNOW DOESN’T GET A NAME

      1. I agree, it’s beyond retarded. The entire county was basically scared into shutting down today.

      2. Your willingness to submit to the Weather Channel’s bullshit snowstorm naming scheme sickens me. SNOW DOESN’T GET A NAME

        But EXTREME WEATHER!!!

  2. We’re losing. It’s time for a surge in the Great Class War.

    1. I’ve been training an orphan army to protect my estate so if I get attacked I will have video of Occupy Wallstreeters attacking orphans. Your move, commies!

      1. They’ll be greeted as liberators.

      2. Has Sloopy recovered from the Orange Bowl yet?

        1. Well, he stopped crying but the night terrors still remain.

          1. Three sets of diapers must be a real pain to keep fresh.

              1. Is sloopy finally in pull-ups?

  3. “Let me be clear about this. More punishment for those who achieve.”

    1. Who achieve outside of government, that is. I’ve been assured by my progressive acquaintances that GS-15’s deserve every penny they’re paid.

  4. BULL SHIT! BULL SHIT! BULL SHIT! BULL SHIT! BULL SHIT! BULL SHIT! BULL SHIT!

  5. Not many comments yet, but there are some good hurt feelings so far.

    LeastCommonDenominator 23 minutes ago
    Gillespie is always good for a really dim witted take on the issues of the day.

    Nobody in their right mind thinks Obama can solve inequality. No President could. It is an endemic problem rooted in a lot of factors beyond anyone’s control: globalization, competition based in offshore sweat shop factories, a tax code that allows wealthy people to legally shelter unearned income from taxes or be taxed at a lower rate than struggling middle class wage earners.

    A fairer progressive tax code would help and explaining to employers that workers who make a decent wage turn into consumers and become stakeholders in a good economy. The GOP loves to talk about the Democratic Plantation where poor people depend on Government to survive. One could argue that if there is such a Plantation of dependent citizens it is because they have to overcome a lot of obstacles that people like Nick Gillespie, or Sean Hannity, or any of the right wing talking heads could never fathom if their lives depended on it.

    Just talking about it is important unless we want it to continue to worsen to the point where there are riots in the street.Nick

    1. …”A fairer progressive tax code”…
      IOWs, the rich still have some money that hasn’t been stolen.

      1. Everyone knows that the rich haven’t paid their fair share! How could they have? They’re still rich!

    2. Riots in the street! Fairer tax code! Right wing talking heads!

      Do these people ever step back and look at the shit they endlessly regurgitate? Do they have even that tiny smidgen of self-awareness?

      1. These peoples’ thoughts are exactly like your penis: small and seldom examined.

        1. You could change that for me, you know. Just sayin’.

        2. His mom told him that.

      2. Someone needs to write a mad libs liberal rant, but instead of “insert noun” or “insert adjective” it will be “insert right wing talking head”.

        1. You sound just like…*rolls d20, consults chart* …Neal Boortz.

          1. +1 saving throw vs talking points

      3. And if the government would just explain to your employer the value of paying you more, they would do it.

        What we have here is a failure to communicate.

    3. LeastCommonDenominator

      No fucking kidding.

      1. *er, read Least as Lowest. Maybe I should comment at HuffPo more.

      2. After the third line I started to imagine it in Boris Badunov’s voice. I’m really surprised the term “class traitor” or “running dog” didn’t get used.

    4. people like Nick Gillespie, or Sean Hannity

      Low blow to Nick. Personal foul and ejection.

    5. [Inequality] is an endemic problem rooted in a lot of factors beyond anyone’s control: globalization, competition based in offshore sweat shop factories, a tax code that allows wealthy people to legally shelter unearned income from taxes or be taxed at a lower rate than struggling middle class wage earners.

      Another factor might be that not all people bring equal skill to bear.

      What this brain-dead fuck also fails to comprehend is that he is one of the “wealthy people” trying to shelter his livelihood from the competition from globalization. Well, he also misses that offshore sweatshops often provide a better income for those workers than do the alternatives, but he wants to keep them poorer because he doesn’t like their situation.

      What an ignorant, paternalistic, non-self-examining fuck.

    6. it’s bad faith all around and a reason why I swore off TDB. It’s just such a cauldron of stupid that it makes HuffPo look like a think tank. For every one liberal/prog with whom a sane debate can be had, there are dozens of shit-flingers for whom anyone not in line with Obama is a heretic. And anyone who did vote for him but now has questions is an apostate.

      1. You cannot handle a sane debate with me, wareagle. Why do you practice there?

        1. It is pretty hard to win an argument with someone who is profoundly retarded and mentally ill, especially when they forget to take their meds, which is most of the time.

          Shreek, you are so pathetic even Tony laughs at you. At this point I am pretty sure your handlers sent Bo over so that someone could finally do some proper concern trolling. You just didn’t get the message they had reassigned you to Red State.

          1. Red Tony is all mopey again.

            1. The ‘Red Tony’ moniker is reserved for when John goes all TEAM and starts using fallacies like Tony.

              1. That or when I make an argument you don’t but don’t know how to respond too. But whatever you tell yourself is your business.

                1. Uh, no. And it’s “to” not “too” you grammatically-challenged government drone.

          2. I’d take Shreek over Tony. It’s like the choice of strychnine or a punch bowl spiked by Hunter Thomas. He at least doesn’t bore the fuck out of me like Tony does.

            1. Tony is a progressive. I am a radical liberal.

              Progressives are as dangerous as conservatives are. I seldom argue with Tony because others fill in nicely (except John who just calls him names).

              1. Tony is a progressive. I am a radical liberal.

                Moron. Idiot. Two sides of the same retarded coin.

              2. Palin’s Buttplug|1.28.14 @ 2:34PM|#
                “Tony is a progressive. I am a radical liberal.”

                Your a lying piece of shit.

            2. In order of hatred.

              1. Meriken (but that’s a given)
              2. Tony
              3. Mary
              4. Bo
              5. Shitstopper
              6. Tulpa

              I pretty much like everyone else.

              1. Thanks for sharing your feelings with the group 🙂

                  1. No problem, Number Four.

                    Not only is he Number Four, but he’s a number two too!

              2. I pretty much like everyone else.

                I am totally going to be holding up a boombox outside your house this weekend.

                1. Oh, you’ll just say anything.

                  1. How bout a cut out of Stossel? Will that get your attention?

        2. try debating instead of whatever it is you usually do and find out.

        3. Palin’s Buttplug|1.28.14 @ 2:05PM|#
          “You cannot handle a sane debate with me, wareagle.”

          Dipshit, you’ve NEVER argued in good faith. If it weren’t for lies, half-truths and cherry-picked data, you wouldn’t have anything to post.
          Go fuck your daddy.

    7. Nobody in their right mind thinks Obama can solve inequality. No President could. It is an endemic problem rooted in a lot of factors beyond anyone’s control: globalization, competition based in offshore sweat shop factories, a tax code that allows wealthy people to legally shelter unearned income from taxes or be taxed at a lower rate than struggling middle class wage earners.

      Apparently, the natural dynamics of life are not one of the factors. Equality is achievable, if it just weren’t for the damn wreckers and their bad politics.

    8. “We need to keep trying the things that haven’t worked, over and over.”

      1. But, you don’t understand, comrade, THIS TIME IT’S DIFFERENT! New Top Men are in charge!

  6. The free shit party will promise more free shit, and King Obo 1st will ignore congress to do so.
    Congress will shrug.

  7. I want to know what Obama plans to do about us poor Southerners suffering under the terror of Winter Storm Leon?

    “Leon”?

    Did I sleep through Kodos?

    1. Don’t blame me. I voted for (Winter Storm) Kodos.

    2. Wool socks and a thermal two piece, I’m good.

      1. My malted pear cider is ready for consumption now, too. It was absolutely delicious when I racked it last night. Can’t wait to have it chilled later on.

  8. Someone has never heard the saying “shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations”.

    Hubris4All 5 minutes ago
    Why is this hard to understand? Inequality makes upward mobility that much more difficult. The research wasn’t about that, it was about the percentage of upward mobility which hasn’t changed.

    If they took a look at young adults born of wealthy parents, I’m sure their percentage of upward mobility is 90% or more. They have a safe and secure and confident headstart.

    If they look at the percentage of young adults born in poverty, then that upward mobility is probably lower than 10%.

    Thus, poor equals lopsided difficulties, and rich equals lopsided advantages. That’s where the debate should be, as it has always been from the left.

    FlagShareLikeReply

    1. “I’m sure.” “Probably.” Having emoted some premises, “thus” the conclusion.

    2. “Don’t confuse me with your objective reality!”

      Someone please explain to me why good news is usually greeted with sneers and smug denials.

      1. Because good news doesn’t require Top Men to step in and correct things. If you’re bound to be a serf or imagine yourself one of the elect, that’s just not acceptable.

    3. If they took a look at young adults born of wealthy parents, I’m sure their percentage of upward mobility is 90% or more. They have a safe and secure and confident headstart.

      …Wha?

    4. Ummmm….how in God’s creation do you get upward mobility from already rich?

      1. rich to evil 1%er

        1. So, 90% of the children of wealthy parents move on to the top 1%? I still don’t think the math works out…

  9. A fairer progressive tax code would help

    “You don’t think I want to pay for this shit, do you?”

  10. I’m sure their percentage of upward mobility is 90% or more

    This counts as citing a fact, right?

  11. You spelled STFU wrong.

  12. Twenty years ago I was a sofa-surfing cook with a high school education. Now I am a college educated professional who owns his own home.

    No income mobility my ass.

    1. White male privilege, no doubt.

      1. Yeah, I had the privilege of learning how to program. The code definitely executed better when a white male wrote it.

        1. The code definitely executed better when a white male wrote it.

          After debugging code that was outsourced to India, I’d argue that that statement is correct.

          1. And by debugging I mean rewriting.

          2. After debugging code that was and some that wasn’t outsourced to India, I’d argue that the coder’s skill is somewhat more determinative of quality than the coder’s gender or location.

            1. Yes and no, there are cultural norms in Bangalore that don’t exist in Silicon Valley. All the best coders from India are stateside. All the decent coders are hopping jobs every 6 months to make more money.

              That means in India you can’t retain talent like you can in the US, which turns out to have a negative effect on code quality. It’s not that they’re brown that’s the issue, it’s that the good ones hop jobs like none other.

              1. No, it’s yes and yes. If two people type in the same code, it will execute the same. Period. It doesn’t matter who types it.

                Whether two people are capable of typing the same code is a completely different issue.

                1. To completely ignore the fact that being a developer in Bangalore is different than being a developer in Mountainview is to miss the issue. Yes, Indian developers can be and are very good. I work with many of the best, and they are amazing. However, I know for a fact that we struggle with retaining engineers in India long enough to get past the learning curve of our product, let alone getting them to write decent code.

                  That doesn’t seem to be a problem for our US based engineers. Many of them are Indian and Chinese, and they have been with the company for decades. In fact, it’s the Indians who complain the most about the talent retention issues in India.

              2. It’s not that they’re brown that’s the issue,

                It’s that damn dot!

    2. OK, but if you didn’t do that by taking free shit from the free shit party, it doesn’t count!

    3. Exactly. My grandfather dropped out of 8th grade to hunt full time to feed his siblings and I have a masters and own two houses free and clear.

      I am trapped in the insidious web of generational poverty.

      1. Uh, your wife owns two houses free and clear. Just admit that you’re a trophy husband, and forget the trophy part. I know I do.

        1. I own one, we own the other, you pedantic puke.

          I have a job. My job is to be pretty.

          1. I thought it involved something to do with salad and tossing.

            1. And I cook.

              1. So that is what the kids are calling it these days.

    4. Bah, sarcasmic, you’re just a myth cooked up by the Koch brothers.

    5. “Twenty years ago I was a sofa-surfing cook with a high school education. Now I am a college educated professional who owns his own home.”

      Not everyone has sofas to surf on you over privileged basterd.

  13. making it easier for people to buy or stay in homes

    That has been done for 3.5 million homeowners who are saving over $2000 each per annum. (see HARP)

    But all good suggestions.

    1. Paying off your mortgage at a slower rate doesn’t improve your economic mobility.

      What would help is if the average principle on a mortgage was lower (i.e. lower housing prices). So people would be psending less money on interest and accumulating equity faster.

      1. Artificially lowering mortgage rates helps people who own homes and can refinance. But it does nothing to help people who are just getting into the market. If you lower the interest rates, that just allows people to afford larger loans and pay more for houses further inflating housing prices.

        1. Au contraire. It’s great for first time buyers like me. I can afford the same house at 4% that I could at 7%, but now I can pay the loan down in 12 years instead of 30.

          It just so happens that 99% of people would use that leverage to buy a bigger house. Not my fault they’re morons.

          1. TARP took my rate from 6.25% to 4.25%. Going to allow me to pay off sooner (even though I refinanced 4 years into my original loan) and save several hundred thousand dollars in the end.

            (Though I still laugh at what the bank was willing to lend me when I originally bought that house. Doubt I could’ve afforded it in the long run)

          2. John’s point is that the house you want to buy is going to be 5%+ more expensive.

            Studies have shown that monthly payments are what drive the house price. By lowering interest rates, you increase the principal that the buyer can pay monthly, and so the price of houses goes up.

            Yes, it feels like you can afford “more house” but in fact the hidden cost is that all houses are more expensive.

            1. That depends upon when the individual entered the market. Early on, an individual can afford more house. In a mature market it means that the house costs more.

    2. bandaid on a bullet wound. The housing market is still waaaaaaay out of whack. Just look at the historical trend of median annual income to median home price. Since 1960, it’s gone from 1.5x income to 5x income.

      Easy credit is gonna end someday, and the housing market is gonna crash in such a way that makes 2008 look like a divot in the fairway.

      1. Easy credit ended in 2007.

        The old right-wing bullshit about banks being “forced” to make loans to black people ended then too because it was never true.

        1. You’re telling me that 4.5% interest rates on a 30 year mortgage isn’t easy credit? It may be marginally harder to qualify, but that’s irrelevant to whether people are incentivized to buy more than they can (legitimately) afford.

          1. Yes. Easy credit implies relaxed standards and not low rates.

            Microsoft floated some long term bonds at 1.8%. That would be very easy credit by your definition.

            Easy credit to us finance people is a 9% loan to a 540 FICO.

            1. I don’t know the quality of the source, but their definition of easy credit matches mine

              “Increased supply of money into the banking system making it easily available for public lending with lower interest rate. It is intended to encourage economic growth, thus leading to inflation. Also called easy money, opposite of tight money.”

              1. From a macro perspective – sure.

                Banks Keep Lending Standards Tight (2010)

                The credit crunch isn’t over for small businesses and consumers.

                Most U.S. banks kept credit tight in the first three months of the year, and some tightened lending terms further, according to the Federal Reserve’s latest senior loan officer survey.

                Some categories showed improvement after years of lending cutbacks. Banks reported easing terms on commercial and industrial loans to large and medium-size firms. While the easing took place only at large banks, it marked the first time since 2006 that banks reported easing standards in two straight quarters.

                http://online.wsj.com/news/art…..3579664310

                The Fed is trying to offset tight credit at the micro level.

                1. From a macro perspective – sure.

                  What part of “housing crash that makes 2008 look like afternoon tea and crumpets” isn’t from a macro perspective?

            2. Easy credit implies relaxed standards and not low rates.

              This is why you Monetarist clowns are continually blindsided.

            3. Easy credit implies relaxed standards and not low rates.

              An extended period of extraordinarily low rates (or a slow and steady decline in rates maintained by an extended period) TURNS INTO easy credit, automatically, because the weakest debtors can continually refinance their debts at lower rates.

              This suppresses default rates, and makes all debtors appear less risky.

              As credit standards are lowered to match the existing default rates and apparent borrower creditworthiness, you get progressively easier credit until the bubble bursts.

              1. Part of the credit cycle but you omit the many millions of foreclosures that have weeded out much of the weak debt.

                There could be a second round of foreclosures but it won’t be nearly as big an implosion as 2007-10.

        2. The old right-wing bullshit about banks being “forced” to make loans to black people ended then too because it was never true.

          Which has nothing to do with easy credit. The Fed held rates too low for too long, and the resulting bubble blew sky high.

          The only thing that has changed since then is that banks are more hesitant to lend. Even so, the bubble never fully deflated and house prices are still being propped up. A second round of debt deflation is coming.

        3. “The old right-wing bullshit about banks being “forced” to make loans to black people ended then too because it was never true.”

          They weren’t forced to lend to blacks but they were coerced to lend into certain “areas”. Been there, done that, Dipshit.

          Your “right wing bullshit” is a fallacy of your own creation.

          1. He’s just regurgitating talking points.

            You’re trying to reason with a recorded message.

      2. I must only be partially insane, since mine is ~2X.

  14. Step 1: Implement policies that create economic stagnation and prevent people from independently improving their own welfare.

    Step 2: Wait for people to become frustrated by their stagnant standard of living and lack of economic mobility.

    Step 3: Blame the declining standard of living on evil rich people.

    Step 4: Implement more policies that create economic stagnation and increase the marginal tax rates.

    Step 5: Repeat.

    1. Government is an entity that breaks your leg, hands you a crutch, and then says “See! Without us you wouldn’t be able to walk!”

      1. See the government shutdown for proof.

        You can’t even look at a statue with the government there to protect it.

        1. See the government shutdown for proof.

          This.

      2. I’m stealing that.

    2. There’s always the chance Obama could use this occasion to honestly acknowledge the problems with ObamaCare and propose the kinds of common sense, free market solutions necessary to remedy them.

  15. The next article is hilarious, by the way.

    So why the hell do we keep putting ourselves through this grueling ritual year after year? Shouldn’t we just go back to the days before Woodrow Wilson, where the State of the Union was conveyed in a simple letter to Congress?

    No, we shouldn’t. And here’s why:

    Along with a few championship games and award shows, the State of the Union is one of the few annual events that tens of millions of Americans still watch together, as a country.

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    For a brief moment, we get to witness our system of government as the proud, democratic institution it was meant to be, not the sad, partisan spectacle it has too often become. Elected officials of both parties gather in one chamber, and (minus Joe Wilson) treat each other with civility, respect, and even warmth.

    Oh my god, is this guy serious?

    Undoubtedly, the President and Cody are hard at work on another such ending for this year’s speech, and I can’t wait to hear it live. There will always be people who mock these stories as overly sappy and trite, but I think that our politics and the media give us enough reasons to be cynical every other day of the year. For one hour tonight, we get the chance to be inspired together. To me, that makes all the fuss worthwhile.

    Amazing. What a child. Come on, boys, let’s get inspired together!

    1. I cannot imagine anything more pathetic than being “inspired” by the sociopathic scum that inhabit DC.

      1. The country has always hated Washington and politicians. Washington was President for less a full term before he had to go put down a rebellion.

        One of the more pathetic lies these people tell themselves is how there once was this golden age where all Americans believed in government. If it wasn’t so dangerous and sad, it would be funny.

        1. One of the more pathetic lies these people tell themselves is how there once was this golden age where all Americans believed in government.

          Actually, nothing has changed in 238 years. The question was never resolved. Big government or little government? Hamilton or Jefferson?

          1. It may not have been resolved, but the goalposts have shifted so far in the direction of big government that we’re just bickering about how far they’re going to insert the scope up our ass.

            1. It’s not goalpost shifting, it’s winning.

          2. Actually, nothing has changed in 238 years. The question was never resolved. Big government or little government? Hamilton or Jefferson?

            Even nearly a million deaths couldn’t settle this question. I fear it will take another near million deaths, and another million after that before it’s settled.

          3. How bout none of the above. Just go Galt!

      2. I cannot imagine anything more pathetic than being “inspired” by the sociopathic scum that inhabit DC.

        Yeah, it’s the person who wrote this on Election Day 2012.

        It’s easily the most pathetic thing I’ve ever read.

        1. I just had to stop myself from vomiting. Thanks, that was NutraSweet-level disgusting.

        2. Goddammit, I clicked your link, Serious. I don’t know who I hate most: you for providing the link, me for clicking it, or the infant who wrote that garbage.

          1. It must have been the emotion of the moment, all the pent-up turmoil over the worrying about the outcome of this election, the sleepless nights, the late-nite postings here, all of this welled up inside and I cried.

            I cried with pride for the privilege of casting my vote for a great President, Barack Obama. I knew when I saw his name this would be the last time I would have that privilege. So it was with both joy and sorrow I cast my ballot and walked away.

            1. I refuse to click on the link, so please tell me you made that up as a form of parody, and that nobody actually wrote that. Please. It’s the only way I’ll stay sane.

              1. Welcome to the asylum.

    2. Yes, how childish and forlorn to hope for some meaningful accomplishment from government (I am being serious).

      I vote for the guy who will do the least amount of damage.

      1. vote for the guy who will do the least amount of damage.

        So says the Obama voter.

        Shreek, concern trolling only works if anyone believes your concern. Sucking Obama’s cock on every single issue day after day makes your attempts at concern trolling less than effective to put it politely.

      2. I vote for the guy who will do the least amount of damage.

        The lesser of two evils is still evil.

      3. I vote for the guy who will do the least amount of damage.

        So you voted for Gary Johnson, right? I assume you voted for Ron Paul in the GA primaries?

        If not, shut the fuck up.

        1. I did vote for GJ in 2012 and Obama in 2008. I stand by both votes.

          1. Why did you vote for Gary Johnson?

    3. There’s nothing inspiring to me about a mendacious prick of a community organizer pitting group against group for the political benefit of the Total State. We’ll be playing Forza 5 instead, I think.

      1. You don’t think the wealthy actually fear Obama “seizing/taking” anything meaningful from them, do you?

        Let me straighten you out – Wealthy “OK, my assets appreciate 40% under Dems and my taxes rise 1%. I’ll vote Dem again.”

        Warren Buffett “Yes, there is class warfare. And my side is winning.”

        1. Wealthy “OK, my assets appreciate 40% under Dems and my taxes rise 1%. I’ll vote Dem again.”

          True. It is as true during this Fed-created bubble as it was during the heyday of the previous Fed-created bubble during the Bush years. Meanwhile…

          Poor person: “I can’t find a job and any wealth I manage to acquire is immediately inflated away.”

          Fed policy in a nutshell.

    4. Amazing. What a child. Come on, boys, let’s get inspired together!

      What else do you expect from the schmuck who used to write Captain Zero’s speeches?

  16. Twenty years ago I was a sofa-surfing cook with a high school education. Now I am a college educated professional who owns his own home.

    You don’t count. If a high school dropout can’t stumble directly into a union job at GM performing menial tasks for 70k per year, the system has failed.

  17. “The GOP loves to talk about the Democratic Plantation where poor people depend on Government to survive. ”

    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/0…..taxpayers/

  18. my assets appreciate 40% under Dems and my taxes rise 1%. I’ll vote Dem again.

    “Watch this. I tear this twenty dollar bill in half, and now I have forty dollars!”

  19. Here is what is wrong with our polity in a nutshell: while eating a late lunch the television had Lamar Alexander on the floor of Congress challenging President Obama to approve his bill which would allow federal vouchers for school choice. He pointed out that the Democrats support a similar school choice program for colleges, that is, student loans and grants act as a voucher which students and their families can then use go to the school of their choosing.

    So the options are a party which will take my money and give it to my neighbor for his child’s schooling at a school of his choice and another which will take my money and use it to open a school in the neighborhood which my neighbor’s child can (must) attend for free. Every year I get to vote to decide which one of these forms of theft I will submit to.

    Sheesh.

    1. Every year I get to vote to decide which one of these forms of theft I will submit to.

      Here is what is wrong with our polity in a nutshell: people think they must vote for one of the two major parties.

    2. Yeah, sort of the difference between getting robbed and getting robbed and beaten.

  20. Man you guys like to fuck this chicken. Yes, mobility has remained relatively constant. But life is a lot harder or has been stagnant for those who don’t make it, which is most people.

    1. Yet you keep thinking the same miserable policies and dead hand of government will solve it this time for sure!

      IF WE ONLY TAKE MORE AWAY FROM OTHERS, RUN IT THROUGH A GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACY AND HAND IT OUT, ALL WILL BE WELL! OH, AND TELL PEOPLE HOW MUCH WATER THEIR TOILETS AND SHOWERS CAN USE, AND HOW THEY CAN LIGHT THEIR HOMES AND WHAT THEY CAN AND CANNOT DO WITH THEIR PROPERTY, THEN WE WILL BE FREE AT LAST!

    2. Tony|1.28.14 @ 4:01PM|#
      …”But life is a lot harder or has been stagnant for those who don’t make it, which is most people.”

      Aw poor widdle tonie! It’s just too hard, daddy! Can you give me free stuff so I don’t have to do the hard stuff!

    3. “Man you guys like to fuck this chicken.”

      What a vile troll you are, Tony.

      I mean, you’re an objectively racist anti-semite, as well, but underneath all of that, no one should ever forget that you’re also an under-bridge dwelling troll.

      1. And you’re a sad rube who believes nothing but falsehoods.

        1. Tell them again about how Rosa Parks didn’t have the right to sit in the front of a public bus, Tony.

          Tell them again about how Jews didn’t have a right to their lives during the holocaust.

          You’re a disgusting excuse for a human being, Tony. If you ever started thinking for yourself, the guilt would probably crush you.

          1. Tony isn’t really a racist.

            He’s just someone who goes around the internet trying to convince everybody that black people don’t have any rights unless the government says so.

          2. I’m racist because I don’t believe in magic?

            1. You’re racist because you’re racist. Kill yourself.

              1. He’s objectively racist becasue he goes around on the internet trying to convince people that black people don’t have any rights unless the government says so.

                Its shouldn’t be surprising.

                …it shouldn’t be surprising that someone who says that Rosa Parks didn’t have the right to sit in the front of a public bus becasue she was black–since the government said so–is actually racist. And that’s what Tony says.

                For goodness’ sake, Tony’s argument now is the same argument the Ku Klux Klan used back then.

    4. “But life is a lot harder or has been stagnant for those who don’t make it,”

      By what measure is their life harder? 50 years ago, the poor might not have even had running plumbing. They certainly worked in more laborious, more dangerous jobs. Their dollars definitely bought fewer luxuries and less quality staples. So by what measure do you say their life is harder?

      And their life hasn’t been stagnant. Even lefties like yourselves accept that their Holy Inequality Statistics show that the real income (benefits inclusive) of the poor has increased- it is just a smaller proportion of the whole net worth. So again, how is that stagnant?

      “…which is most people.”

      The mobility statistics I have seen do not support this…at all. Most people will go up at least one quintile in their life, which is to say that MOST PEOPLE will have better and growing incomes compared to their parents.

      1. Nothing provides the working poor with more opportunities to get ahead in life than siccing the IRS on them if they don’t shell out thousands of dollars a year for health insurance they can’t afford.

        1. or putting a lead smelter next to their house. hey man, its the free market… lets party and let megacorp fuck us in the ass while we talk about how free we are. Free minds and free markets!

          1. american socialist|1.28.14 @ 7:03PM|#
            “or putting a lead smelter next to their house.”

            Did you bring the strawman all the way from home, or pick it up on the way?
            Why is it that lefties NEVER engage in honest discussion? I guess “brain-dead” is literally true.

          2. There isn’t anything unlibertarian about suing the hell out of some company that’s harmed you or your property.

            Hell, Dow Corning ended up being owned by planiffs’ attorneys, and it isn’t entirely clear whether their breast implants ever really hurt anybody.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D…..ontroversy

      2. Overt|1.28.14 @ 4:40PM|#
        “But life is a lot harder or has been stagnant for those who don’t make it,”
        “By what measure is their life harder?”

        Poor Tony has to work for a living, and that’s not fair!

    5. Leverage seating inflected handset serif whereas chimney.

  21. Yes, right. College kid gets coffee house job to meet women, then gets job selling credit default swaps, presto, income mobility Nick Gillespie style. Is it too much to ask libertarians to examine the cultural trends that undermine the notion that this economically stratified oligarchy ain’t the Land of Opportunity it used to be. You are 3x more likely to move between income brackets in socialist Denmark as you are in the U.S. (and you can live with some dignity there if you simply wait on tables for a living).

    Quick question… even if economic mobility has been constant this means we can’t criticize this ahistorical concentration of wealth in the top 0.0001% of the population? why not?

    1. american socialist|1.28.14 @ 4:19PM|#
      …”Is it too much to ask libertarians to examine the cultural trends that undermine the notion that this economically stratified oligarchy ain’t the Land of Opportunity it used to be”…

      Not at all. We’ve been hollering about them for years.
      The free shit party has to die.

      1. Right, right… you are going to give up your social security benefits and medicare. its funny how all you libertarians become such moochers when you turn 65

        1. Yeah, it’s mooching to get a portion of your stolen money back.

          1. spoken like a libertarian getting a check from the government. If you are such a holier-than-thou miniarchist, what in the hell are you doing getting a government handout?

            1. american socialist|1.28.14 @ 7:50PM|#
              “spoken like a libertarian getting a check from the government.”

              Posted like a slimy thief taking money at gunpoint.

        2. american socialist|1.28.14 @ 7:00PM|#
          …”its funny how all you libertarians become such moochers when you turn 65″

          As opposed to socialists who are born hypocrites?
          Get screwed with a garden shovel, twit.

    2. Oh, and:
      “Quick question… even if economic mobility has been constant this means we can’t criticize this ahistorical concentration of wealth in the top 0.0001% of the population? why not?”

      Well, your envy in no way obligates me to ‘criticize’ something that doesn’t matter.
      I’d suggest professional help.

    3. “Quick question… even if economic mobility has been constant this means we can’t criticize this ahistorical concentration of wealth in the top 0.0001% of the population?”

      It isn’t wrong to criticize anything.

      Case in point, sometimes it’s okay to criticize people for responding to trolls.

      Are you trolling again?

    4. Why should we criticize it exactly?

      50 Years ago: Illiterate comes to America and earns a basic living. His kid is very likely to make twice that amount, and even has an 8% chance of earning over $80,000 a year.

      Today: Illiterate comes to America and earns a basic living. His kid is very likely to make twice that amount and even has an 8% chance of making over 300,000 per year.

      Personally, it is a great success story to me. *shrug*.

      Or are you saying that an illiterate coming to this country should automatically make the same as a Doctor?

  22. Barack Obama is a neo-maxi zoom dweeb, a-wipe jackhole.

    If more of us ignored him and his stupid speeches, the whole country would be a lot better off.

    The 1%, the 99%, the LGBT, the gun owners, the capitalists, the occupy people…

    We’d all be better off if we’d just stop paying attention to this idiot every time he gets in front of a camera.

  23. I’m constantly told that you guys care JUST AS MUCH about the rich skimming from society via evil government. But it seems as if nobody can ever talk about the results of that looting. Once the money is in their pockets, it’s sacrosanct and belongs not only to them completely but to their descendants for all time. Tell me again why libertarianism isn’t nothing but flimsy philosophical apologetics for plutocracy?

    1. Blah, blah, blah…

      Do you get this stuff from a mailing list somewhere?

      1. I am sure there was supposed to be a coherent argument there but he deleted the wrong sentences.

      2. OFA 3×5’s.

    2. Tony|1.28.14 @ 4:49PM|#
      …”Tell me again why libertarianism isn’t nothing but flimsy philosophical apologetics for plutocracy?”

      Why should anyone here care what some infantile excuse for a moral agent lies about?

    3. Once the money is in their pockets

      Money is not wealth and wealth is not money.

      Money is not wealth and wealth is not money.

      Money is not wealth and wealth is not money.

      Money is not wealth and wealth is not money.

      Money is not wealth and wealth is not money.

      Money is not wealth and wealth is not money.

      Money is not wealth and wealth is not money.

      Money is not wealth and wealth is not money.

      Money is not wealth and wealth is not money.

      Money is not wealth and wealth is not money.

      1. What a rare privilege it must be to be one of the thoughts in your head.

        1. Now you’re just displaying your envy again, Tony.

          1. He wouldn’t know a thought if it kicked him in the face. All he understands is feelings like spite and envy. He is incapable of rational thought.

        2. I was repeating in hopes that you might understand. Alas I was wrong.

          In case someone with a functioning brain is reading, I will elaborate.

          The wealth that the wealthy have is not money. No, it consists of investments that make more wealth. It’s in the form of factories and machines and restaurants and hotels. It creates jobs and wealth for everyone.

          Wealth is not money and money is not wealth.

          What the Tonys of the world would do is destroy that wealth out of spite and envy, and in the process destroy jobs and machinery that create wealth for everyone.

          Tony would cut off his nose to spite his face because he’s too fucking much of an emotional ignoramus to engage his brain and understand that wealth is not money and money is not wealth.

          1. Sometimes it’s in the form of factories and other capital investments. Other times it’s spent on yachts and cocaine. Of course that’s none of my business, but you’re the one making the trickle-down social-good argument.

            I simply take the more evidenced view that more of an equitable distribution actually produces more social good, and the economics are easy to understand if you managed not to skip the econ 101 week in which they talked about the demand side of the picture.

            1. Tony|1.28.14 @ 6:42PM|#
              “Sometimes it’s in the form of factories and other capital investments. Other times it’s spent on yachts and cocaine. Of course that’s none of my business, but you’re the one making the trickle-down social-good argument.”
              Yes, and it’s correct.

              “I simply take the more evidenced view” Bullshit. You just made that up. Slimy liar.

            2. Baptistery henceforth self study impressment disinflation.

            3. Other times it’s spent on yachts and cocaine.

              Do you know what happens as a result of luxury taxes? Rich people don’t buy as many of those luxury items. That’s the whole point, right? Oh. You mean you thought they would buy the luxury items anyway, despite the higher prices? Yeah, I suppose you are that stupid.

              Near where I live a few companies that made yachts were recently put out of business by a luxury tax aimed at hurting the rich.

              I suppose it hurt some rich people by discouraging them from buying some yachts, so it’s good, right?

              Tell that to the families of the craftsmen who now have to find a new means of providing for them because their yacht building employer had to shut his doors.

              You call me small minded, yet your small mind is limited to the seen. You can not see the unseen.

              The fewer yachts being purchased by the rich was seen, and all you saw.

              The families of the craftsmen are unseen. And hungry. Thanks to policies that cater to your envy and spite.

    4. Scannable intermediate excavator geographical anagoge cycler glengarry deleterious.

  24. Obama ain’t nuthin’…deBlasio AFAICT would be just as happy to tax the rich & burn the money.

  25. “The State of the Union is strong. . .”

    We have an unrecoverable debt of 17 trillion dollars.

    The stock market is not recovering. The stock market is overinflated. It is an illusion.

    The education system is no longer competitive with other nations. We cannot produce an engineer. Or a doctor. We have no motivation in our youth to achieve and a society that doesn’t require them to. Eminem is now our parent.

    We no longer have a set of any values in this country. The DNA unit for a nation to survive is a stable family. We not only have a fifty percent divorce rate but wish to replace the family with gay marriage,
    transgender marriage, plural marriages and any and all deviant behavior. You don’t simply accept deviant behavior–you celebrate it–an evolution of thought. We don’t parent, we pass out the meds and
    alleviate all responsibility for behavior. And the overall result of
    this wonderful Progressive thought? A fourteen year old girl stabbed her sister forty times and there were three shootings from the young last week.

    I have written via extensive research in fiction what
    happens in the end when the attributes of a nation are comprised of the above. And it will be a reality as history shows it must. The State of the Union will not be strong. The State of the Union will be one that will collapse or plummet into Civil War.

    Charles Hurst. Author of THE SECOND FALL. An offbeat story of Armageddon. And creator of THE RUNNINGWOLF EZINE

    1. Cool story bro.

    2. Even if you are right. My wealth will be concentrated in weapons, ammo, durable goods, precious metals etc. Those who have the will, will survive

      1. What makes you people think that shiny metal is going to be valuable in the apocalypse?

        1. intrinsic value dip shit

        2. Brass will be very valuable.

        3. Tony is not ashamed of the stupid shit he says.

  26. what Steven said I’m shocked that a mother able to profit $9317 in 4 weeks on the internet. official website W? o? r? k? s? 7? 7? .? ?? ?? ??

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.