On Sep 30, 3:29 pm, Bruce Majors <majors.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> really?
>
> how come then all the wealthiest countries with the highest average
> income and the lowest unemployment are in and around DC
>
> how come all the black working class people are leaving DC and being
> replaced with mainly white lawyers?
>
> the government sure appears to be redistributing from you to them
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Stephen Stink <not4ud...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Saturday, September 25, 2010
>
> > The Monopolization of Wealth
>
> > I was more annoyed than a Libertarian who doesn't have enough money
> > to pay for parking in a private lot. It bugs me to no end when the
> > right wing media uses a catch phrase that is erroneous and just plain
> > wrong. For example: "The Redistribution of Wealth." The couch potato
> > dolt that watches Fox News and hears one of their pseudo-pundits utter
> > that phrase automatically assumes it to be true. They think that Karl
> > Marx authored the phrase. No sir re, bob! Actually, the origins of
> > the phrase are unknown. A lot of early 20th Century economists, like
> > the archconservative Henry C. Carey, used it. Originally the phrase
> > was, "Distribution of wealth." Right wing commentators changed it to
> > make it more dramatic. Marx wanted the abolition of wealth. The more
> > moderate liberals wanted "The Equal Distribution of Wealth" by
> > Progressive Income Redistribution. The term, "Retribution of wealth"
> > is just redundant. It grammatically does not make uncommon sense. Does
> > the term imply that you blundered in distribution of wealth, so you
> > have to do it over again? What? Maybe the right wing is implying Robin
> > Hood. Taking from the rich to give to the poor? If they are, they
> > better find a better phrase. There is the phrase, "Regressive
> > redistribution Wealth" That implies, the monopolization of Wealth.
> > Those righties! They so busy imitating the left that they forget about
> > their elementary school education.
> > We are talking 20th Century here. Do you think it was free market
> > advocates who created the philosophy that the fruits of profits are to
> > be hoarded by Capitalists as a reward for their efforts? Do you think
> > it was the works of Rudolf Rocker or Ayn Rand based on their secular
> > economic theories? Ayn Rand was an atheist and so was Rocker. So
> > where did the concept of capitalism came from?
> > Actually, it was a religious concept. It was the Protestant sect,
> > the Calvinists, who believed that salvation is found through work.
> > God blesses those who become wealthy. Another Protestant sect, the
> > Unitarians, was the antithesis of the Calvinists. These were people
> > who were getting sick of Calvinists' rigidity; they were more
> > liberal. Matter of fact, the Unitarians was the first to ordain a
> > female priest. Ironically, in the 19th Century, they'd had in their
> > midst, a pied piper for the Prosperity Gospel. Prosperity Gospel
> > meant that God wanted you to be rich. He was the son of a Unitarian
> > Minister, Horatio Alger. He studied at the Harvard Divinity School.
> > He took a job at Unitarian church in 1864 then he had to resign due to
> > having inappropriate relationship with teenage boys. (What is up with
> > this right wing fixation with homosexuality? Even way back then, they
> > were fooling around!) Well, Mr. Alger would write fictional stories
> > about (sic) boys who would go from rags to riches. That was the
> > leitmotif of most his stories. It was thus that the phrase, "Rugged
> > Individual" was coined.
> > The only person who came close to using the phrase, "Redistribution
> > of Wealth" was the British philosopher, Francis Bacon. He was quoted
> > as saying, in the 19th century, "Above all things, good policy is to
> > be used to that treasures and monies is a state. Be not gathering in a
> > few hands. Money is muck! Not good except when it's spread around."
> > Here we are in 21st Century USA. The political right is trying to
> > unite the religious Right, Neo-Conservatives, Paleo-conservatives, and
> > Libertarians, the Militia movement, nationalists and States Rights
> > advocates. This is not syncretism! This is muddied muck! When muck
> > is wet, it's useless! The institutional racism of the ruling class
> > pays billions to political researchers for social engineering the
> > masses. They created a fake populace movement called the "Tea Party"
> > and pump phrases like, "Redistribution of Wealth" or "Common Sense"
> > into their stupid heads. The difference between the Right and Left is
> > that the Left tells the masses they are stupid, and the Right
> > ingratiates and manipulates them. Let's say they: Patronize the
> > patriots. In private, the Right wing elitist laughs at the masses
> > because he knows they are stupid. Consider what Karl Rove said about
> > the Religious right.
> > The real issue is not the "Redistribution of Wealth." That would be
> > literally impossible. The rich hide their money. They yearn for the
> > "Monopolization of Wealth." There is no progressive conspiracy to
> > enslave the Aryan ruling class! Obama isn't a Socialist! Really!!!
> > What is so contradictory is that patriotism is based on collective
> > action sacrifice, loyalty to the state, and volunteerism.
> > Libertarianism, on the other hand, believes in the sovereignty of the
> > individual and is opposed to any collective action, unless that action
> > is brain surgery that would significantly enhance a Libertarian's IQ.
> > What does this mean? Rather than the act of a patriot serving his
> > country, Right-wingers believe that the country must serve the rich!
> > I don't know…call me old fashioned! But, paying taxes for social
> > programs doesn't bug me at all. Out of every dollar I am taxed, a
> > penny and a half goes to social programs. Hmmm…No problem. However,
> > my money going to Halliburton, or to mercenaries like, "Black water,"--
> > yeah I have a big problem with that!
> > What the top 2% should realize is that the "Hoarding of Wealth" will
> > only hurt them in the end. What liberal billionaires know is that
> > public relations are vital to their well-being. If they act like
> > reclusive tycoons in their ivory towers, they alienate the middle
> > class and the poor. Conversely, when they make donations to schools
> > and show up to soup kitchens occasionally, they are protected. Right
> > wing billionaires are paranoid and vindictive. They are also latent
> > racists. They have no social intercourse with the public outside
> > their gates. Sound familiar? The only thing they lack is a moat
> > filled with crocodiles. Why don't they just pay their God damn taxes
> > instead of investing billions into Right think tanks! Perhaps they
> > need psychiatric help. They are obviously suffering from obsessive/
> > compulsive disorder. They have a money addiction: They want more,
> > more, MORE!! They have pills for those…don't they??
>
> > How about some music?
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment