Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Larry Elder :: Townhall.com Columnist
Dems to tackle "income inequality"
by Larry Elder
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


You make too much money! And you make too little!

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., put it somewhat differently. But the new chairman of the House Financial Services Committee vowed to tackle the growing, festering problem of "income inequality." "Government doesn't have to interfere with the free enterprise system," says Frank, "but we can work along with it to reduce inequality."

Railing against Home Depot's $210 million severance package for its fired CEO, Frank called it "further confirmation of the need to deal with the pattern of CEO pay that appears to be out of control."

What does Frank propose to do about the "income inequality" in, say, baseball? New York Yankee Alex Rodriguez several years ago signed a contract for a quarter-billion dollars. That's "b" as in "bodacious." Pity the teammate who toils at the league minimum of $380,000 a year. Will Smith reportedly gets $20 million per picture. Most members of the Screen Actors Guild work at other non-acting jobs just to make ends meet.

What exactly is the appropriate gap? How wide should it be? Presumably Mr. Frank possesses the divine wisdom to know when the gap is jus-s-s-st right.

Understanding Frank requires understanding the deep recesses of the Democrats' psyche about wealth and its creation. Recall former House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt of Missouri, who once said people of wealth in America are "the people who have won the lottery of life." Obviously, Messrs. Frank and Gephardt consider the old hard-work formula dated and dysfunctional.

A friend told me a story of an executive, "Bob," who works with her at an insurance company. During a golf outing, Bob told her his life story. His dad abandoned him shortly after his mom gave birth. When he was 3, his mother, in a fit of anger, broke his arm. Social services investigated, but found no wrongdoing. Shortly after he turned 8, his ever-angry mother broke his jaw. This time, social services removed him from her custody, and he lived in a series of foster homes and group houses. In school he constantly caused trouble, made poor grades, and grew angrier and angrier as he found himself shuttled from one temporary custodial place to another.

One day, a priest visited the house where Bob, now a teenager, was staying with other "unwanted" kids. The priest gave a motivational speech, telling them about God's love, and that despite their circumstances, they should value their lives. The priest said that each of you possesses a special gift, a gift you must find and use. Bob's eyes rolled toward the ceiling as the priest spoke -- after all, he'd heard this before. "If I'm so special," he thought, "who values me? Please, what 'gift' do I have?"

The priest noticed Bob's indifference, and after his talk, approached Bob quietly and asked him why he appeared to pay no attention. Bob asked the priest the very questions he'd been thinking, including, "Where's my gift?" He told the priest about his absent father, and the abuse he suffered at the hands of his mother. The priest said, "Your gift is that you survived. What you endured requires strength, a strength that a lot of people do not have. That is your gift."

For whatever reason, the priest's words sunk in. Bob began to work harder, and his grades improved. He went to college, got a degree in business and joined a large corporation, where he began to work his way up. He is married and has two children. He now earns a high six-figure salary and loves his life.

To Messrs. Gephardt and Frank, Bob is merely a winner in "the lottery of life." To them, Bob occupies the wrong end of the "income inequality" scale. Never mind that America remains the most upwardly mobile country in history. Or, that most rich did not start out that way. Or that, of all the qualities that go into income success, hard work remains the most important.

A great man from humble circumstances once said, "[T]here is not, of necessity, any such thing as the free hired laborer being fixed to that condition for life. . . . The prudent, penniless beginner in the world labors for wages awhile, saves a surplus with which to buy tools or land for himself; then labors on his own account for awhile, and at length hires another new beginner to help him. This is . . . the just, and generous, and prosperous system, which opens the way for all -- gives hope to all, and . . . improvement of conditions to all. If any continue through life in the condition of the hired laborer, it is not the fault of the system, but because of either a dependent nature which prefers it, or improvidence, folly, or singular misfortune."

Barney Frank, meet Abraham Lincoln.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Larry Elder is a syndicated radio talk show host and best-selling author. His latest book, "What's Race Got to Do with It?" is available now.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Larry Elder's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Barney:
I'm still waiting for you to gripe about John Kerry and the Ketchup Queen. They likely earned more in interest and appreciation on their SEVEN mansions that this Home Depot clown earned over his tenure.

I guess since this guy has an Italian last name, he was obviously holding a gun to their heads, right?

When Frank and his queeer lib buddies start harping on Howard Stern, Kerry, Kennedy, and Babs, I'll pay attention. Until then, he's playing the old Marxist hand of pitting those who are well off against those who are better off.

Sigh
You know -- and I mean, you KNOW -- that none of this will make a whit of difference to liberals?

"You make too much money" is an insult applied to their political enemies, not to their friends.

Sigh.

Solution to financial ineqality
If you are a registered Democrat, you pay a mandatory 70-90% in taxes, depending on your earnings. Everyone else pays no more than 25%. Since those voting democrat are more likely to receive some sort of government assistance, we'll call it the "Pay as you go" tax.

Socialism Solves Financial Inequality
- - - it makes everyone equally poor - - -

the proper income inequality
"Everyone" may be equally poor under socialism, but the politicians still seem to drive the big cars and puff on the big cigars.

Solution
From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.

Equality is a big thing with the Democrats. The 'quality' of that 'equlaity' doesn't matter as long as everyone is at the level of the lowest common denominator or as UncAlby wrote "...everyone equally poor..".

Solution - misspelling
That should be 'equality' not 'equlaity'.

Socialism and equality
"All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." -- George Orwell, "Animal Farm"

The draw of communism and socialism isn't the equality of everyone, it's the higher degree of equality enjoyed by members of The Party. Everyone in the USSR wasn't a member of the Communist Party. Those who were could normally be found at the front of the block-long bread lines. Democrat politicians are the biggest recipients of "income inequality," or, more to the point "Asset inequality." They may not have a great income (like John Kerry or anyone named Kennedy), but they are obscenely wealthy, mostly from inheritance and old family wealth.

Rotten cabbage by any other name
To paraphrase the Bard, rotten cabbage by anyother name would still stink.

If the left follows the habits of the past then the income levels of corporate executives will be looked at as "inequal" but an athlete or actors salary will be off limits.

Years back they legislated that corporations could only use up to one milion dollars of executive salary as a tax write off. The full salaries of actors and athletes were exempted from this get the corporations legislation. Well, corporations, being smarter than elected dems, invented stock options and golden parachutes, both of which were deductable, as part of the compensation package to attract the best they could to head the corporations.

Franks loud lisping is just a typical dem trying to regulate producers to appease his highschool drop out base.

Come to Canada and see it in action
The primary National Emotion here in Eastern Canada is resentment. Having been told by the Powers that Wish To Be Re-Elected that they are "entitled" to food, clothing, shelter, transportation, education, entertainment, health care, and slaves to carry them in a sedan chair from diversion to diversion, and then not provided any of the above or explained how they are to be gotten, Eastern Canada is filled with crying babies Demanding their Entitlements.

If you think trying to deal with the necessity of paying 65% of your income for what would be called a decent middle-class apartment while being told that TheMostVulnerableAmongUs -- those who do nothing but breed--are "entitled" to own their own homes (a local newspaper columnist actually demanded that a man who could not promote a BATH for himself in a city that spends $286 million per year on TheHomeless should be 'given' his own home -- not to rent, but to OWN) and to be told a 3% raise is all you're worth because Others Are In Need ... is the way the world should operate ... well, it's all here waiting for you. No need to ruin America with these stupid theories. They're already in full operation just two hours north of you. Come up and live here and find out.

Barney & Income equality
This is simple. He and they are pandering for votes. Barney Frank can't be stupid enough to actually believe what he's saying can he? Why stop there? We need to obtain income parity with Afghanistan too.

An example
The folks in New Orleans 9th Ward are a great example of income equality.

We have a similar system here
it's called sec 8,a program that allows welfare folks to live in 100K homes for 25 bucks a month in some cases while we taxpayers pick up the tab.
Hillary and chuckie schumer think this is great and should be tripled.
The poor homeowner who gets trapped in a neighborhood that goes sec8 cannot sell and winds up being a landlord for the gov't, he cannot buy a new home commensurate with his hard work because he's stuck with the old mortgage. I believe this is by design, God forbid we let anyone get TOO far ahead just because they work hard while the others who vote for us dems sit on their butts.
I want to hear just one lib defend this miserable program, they never defend them though, they just dream up more.
It's time for another tea party.

A workman worthy of his hire?
When I'm confronted with the 'inequeties' of our class wealth, and told that I should have to pay more so others can have some of my wealth, I ask "What did you do to earn what part of my wealth?"

Income Inequity
According to Butt Buddy Barney & Friends (no, not the purple dinosaur) if you earn any money by working for it, it's too much. We'll confiscate it from you and if there's any left after our cut we'll give it to some poor slob in exchange for his vote. Don't you just love beltway generosity?

Mssrs. Frank and Gephardt
"Messrs. Frank and Gephardt consider the old hard-work formula dated and dysfunctional."

How could they do otherwise? Has either of these two gentlemen ever done anything but live off the people? Career politicians don't know from work. Even a freshman congress person has a staff. Compare the Founding Fathers who went home to plow their fields to today's politicians who go home to fleece their constituents.

Now that the Libs are in charge, get to know the phrase BOHICA.

Zazspo asks..
"Barney Frank can't be stupid enough to actually believe what he's saying can he?"

He can and is that stupid! Along with all the Liberals who favor socialism.

It's a known fact that the most perfect living example of Communism/Socialism on earth is an Ant Colony! No individual choice! All work to support the collective! That is what Liberals seek. Of course in their twisted minds, they visualize themselves as the Queens an Kings of the hill. With the common citizen their slaves.

One could liken the spread of Liberalism to that of the Fire-Ants in the South West. Deeply entrenched and taking over. They must be stopped at all costs!

How about Congressmen...
and senators? Guaranteed a FULL pension plus fringe benefits for life!! Even a one termer gets these benefits!! Imagine working two years and retiring on a full pension with fringe benefits? Just like the price of gas, where the government does nothing in the way of production, but takes 50+% in taxes ?! Almost all politicians are full of doo-doo!!

More taxes from the Slimy Socialists.
Here, again, we hear of 'equality' or the antonym thereof. The remedy for all things, including 'equality,' whatever that means, is more and more and more taxes.

The elite Demoncraps will determine who gets what and what is 'fair.'

b Sure.

All Demoncraps are Pigs, but some Demoncraps are more Piggish.

Does Ted Kennedy have too much money from his father's crimial dealings with the Mafia?? Kerry, a gigolo? Rockefeller? Pelosi?

The Demoncraps will use any excuse to hike taxes and give it to their political supporters.

rycK

Have you ever played Monopoly?
In the game Monopoly, everyone makes the same amount of money: $200 for passing Go. This is the communist ideal, isn't it? Yet, because people are buying and selling, it is thought of as capitalism. So which is it?

Actually, it is neither. Capitalism is just an economic theory. It is an attempt to describe the world. Socialism or Communism is actually a political theory. It is an attempt to fix the world (ie the economics of the world)

But what else do we observe in Monopoly? All of the money concentrates into the hands of one person, even though everyone is making the same amount of money! How is that possible?

The game Monopoly is based on the economic ideas of Henry George, and it is meant to show how "the system doesn't work." Like the real world, you eventually end up with a bunch of houses and hotels that nobody can afford. The wealth in society concentrates automatically, and charity and taxes and all the income redistributions that are attempted will all fail because "the system does not work."

In fact, Henry George's ideas are not complete enough to actually fix the problem, but the problem can be fixed. We could have a renaissance tomorrow if people were simply less partisan and less afraid of one another and the future. But as it is today, fear is the overriding characteristics of people's beliefs. Like Scrooges, they hoard wealth because they are afraid of "losing" the game, and because we play, and are too afraid to change the rules, then everyone MUST lose eventually. That is how the game is rigged.

It doesn't matter how hard you work in a broken system. The harder you work, the worse the system gets., If you don't work, then the system gets worse, too. The only solution is to change the system, but the rich want to stay rich, and the poor want the oppotunity to be rich. So neither really wants to change the system, they just want to change places within the existing system.

Money is just a piece of paper. Gold is just colored dirt. Paper currency has created an entirely new set of problems, it did not solve the old problems. Why? Because the economic theory of 240 years ago was as flawed as the economic theory of today, and that is when the modern system was created. Henry George was correct to focus on the value of land as an important element of the economy, but what he left out was the use of money as a commodity. Nor did he understand what created inflation. We think of inflation as "normal" when in fact there is nothing more absurd.

The politicians, the venture capitalists, business owners (myself), academics, the churches, etc., are all following the same flawed theory. It is the blind following the blind.

http://www.behappyandfree.com

Oh, c'mon now - there ARE limits
I'm all for capitalism and all that - work hard, earn money, get rich. But the key word there is "EARN" - do NOT tell me that some FIRED C.E.O. of Home Depot EARNED that much money! Give me a break here.

And Hollywood actors? Basketball players that probably can't even spell their own names? They're really WORTH millions of dollars?? Oh, puleeze.

There ARE some "salaries" out there that are truly obscene. There's got to be a balance somewhere, but I don't see it in this day and age.

Let Barney lead by example
The median income in the US is about $27,000/yr.

The average income is around $35,000/yr.

As a US Congressman Barney Frank makes $168,500/yr; nearly 5 times the average.

So if Barney is serious about this, let him start by sharing his pay with 4 unemployed people. Then they will all be making $33,700/yr. And we'll see how that works out. He can even get other Congressional nitwits like himself to do the same.

After they have tried this for a couple of years (one full term of office for a Congressman) they can report back to us on how well it worked out for them and be an inspiration to others to do the same.

I'm sure the sense of fulfillment this provides will overcome any resentment of being asked to share one's hard-earned wealth with people who did nothing to earn it and before long everyone in America will be earning exactly the same and we'll all be one big happy family.

Right after pigs fly.

Barney Frank is Right!
He makes far to much money in his part time job. An immediate ceiling of $40,000/year must be placed on all congressional pay. These people actually make more money than the vast majority of their employers. This whole system is out of whack.

When can I expect the legislation on that one, Barney?

Persnickety
Yes, there are limits: Everything is worth what people will pay for it, whether it is money, property, goods, or labor. Alex Rodriguez makes 25 million dollars a year because that's what the owner of the Texas Rangers decided he was worth, and George Steinbrenner agreed with him when the Yankees took Rodriguez in a trade and continued to pay him that salary. They wouldn't pay that much money to players if they weren't getting people to watch the games on TV and in the arena. Same is true for actors. If no one went to see Tom Cruise movies, he wouldn't make millions of dollars a picture. You don't hear about the obscene amount of money Dolph Lundgren makes per film, do you? Is it always fair? Of course not. Do people's salaries reflect their actual contribution to socitey? Not usually. On the other hand, you don't usually make CEO without having worked your tail off at the lower ranks. There aren't many 25-year-old CEOs just out of MBA school out there.

1040 Checkoff for Congressional Pay.....
OK Barnhold. Let's do a checkoff system for how congressmen are paid. Let us citizens 'pay based on how WE feel your performance'. We have a checkoff for political contributions, how about a checkoff box for congressional/senate pay? You want to regulate every aspect of our lives, how-abouts us regulating yours?

Taxpayers, (your employers) would check whether a buck each year be added to a pool, to be split, and that will be your pay. You did want 'shareholders' to have a vote on CEO pay, didn't you, old brothel in the basement keeper? We are as taxpayers shareholders, right?

Or don't you consider turn around as fair play, ol' gandered goose-ied one.

Think about it folks
If we apply the usual corporate verbiage to Government, we've got a top-heavy management structure with 535 mid-level managers earning almost as much as the CEO and far more than the average salary of their employers.

We've also got literally tens of thousands of additional lower-level managers and working stiffs, many of whom also make far more than the average salary of their employers.

Something IS completely out of whack here.

But rather than tackle the obvious mess that he is part of and which he has some actual control over (all it takes is a bill to lower Congressional salaries to a reasonable level and the political will to stand by what you claim you believe in Barney), Barney Frank instead wants to pick a fight with Home Depot.

If this is the "leadership" the Democrats are going to provide on economic matters and wage issues, we are all doomed.

the game of life
As a kid, I was really good at the game of Monopoly but as an adult much less proficient at seizing the Main Chance, amassing a fortune, etc. Maybe it's because I lack the jugular instinct or simply regard life, too, as a "game" and don't take monetary competition seriously enough. Nevertheless, I've always enjoyed life. I've probably squandered too much energy shaking my head in amazement at the irony and ingratitude of unfulfilled greed. Many people who always clamor for more -- not just more loot, but more equality, more fairness, more redress -- fail to count the blessings that they have. It's not just grabbing at things, but always wanting "more" that is the real disease.

One of the unsung advantages of living in a wealthy country is that you don't need to be at the top of the pyramid to live well. Obsessing over and resenting high achievers overlooks the fact that everybody can't be a winner, yet tens of millions of mediocrities do okay. The most inept schnooks still live where the lights go on. Why? Because someone else was a genius and popularized the use of electricity, among other wonders.

Personally, I feel that maintaining a sense of humor is more valuable than any amount of lucre, granite & convection-equipped kitchens, mammoth wardrobes, shiny metal devices parked in the garage and so on.

The real lesson of Monopoly (the game) is that Parker Brothers copyrighted it and made jillions selling the boxes to generations of players. Whoever wins or loses, the manufacturer's stockholders make out. Chalk it up to the wisdom of secure property rights -- intellectual as well as real estate.

Money is the most numerical, easiest-to-detect form of equality and therefore get yourself worked up about, but what about cheekbones, height, stuff like that? People who are taller and better-looking earn more money and get more attention than scags. Ordinary people tend to assume you're more able if you're more attractive. I've read that even schoolteachers who are trained to measure intellectual ability precisely tend to assume that the cute kids are smarter.

Even Karl Marx, the paragon of mean-spirited envy and revenge, didn't suggest scarring the beautiful so that average folks didn't have to feel toadish.

As for Marxist economic nostrums, how's this? From each according to his abilities, to each according to his ability to get a politician to steal it for you.

The Monopoly comparisons....
are somewhat flawed. Of course, when I play Monopoly with my wife, I clean her clock. But if you get several people that are good at it, you actually need to set a time limit because you never really end up with a large disparity. There is strategery involved, and luck since you can be broke on a single roll by landing on Park Place with a hotel on it.

Maximum wage
There oughtta be a MAXIMUM wage - for politicians! On an HOURLY basis. No pay for "trips" or "conferences" (those brain-dead seminars where you learn absolutely nothing that you didn't already know in kindergarten...).

Sounds good to me.

Remember when?
Remember back in the early 1990s when the idiotic Democrats (but I repeat myself) were whining about corporate executive salary? They were all crying about executives' guaranteed salaries regardless of how their company did. So, like idiotic always end up, they felt obligated to "do something".

In 1993, Bill Clinton signed into law a bill that effectively capped corporate executives' direct salary at $1 million. Basically, what the law did was change the corporate tax code so that executive salaries in excess of $1 million can no longer be deducted from corporate earnings for tax purposes (meaning that salaries exceeding $1 million are taxed two or more times).

The intention was to push executive compensation away from direct salaries and toward stuff that is more directly tied to the performance of the company. Namely stocks and stock options.

(What Democrats to this day will never admit is that this push was a contributing factor in the corporate scandals in the late '90s and early '00s, as executives felt obligated to distort the companies' earnings picture in order to artificially prop up their stock prices.)

It turns out that the Democrats' wish came true. Any time you hear that some executive raked in hundreds of millions of dollars, what you can guarantee happened is that this executive simply accumulated stocks and options over the years, and that they ended up being worth that much.

Now what are the idiotic Democrats (again, sorry for the redundancy) plan to do? Summarily execute any person who makes, in their opinion, too much? I mean, their idol, Joseph Stalin, set the precedent for doing just that. I wouldn't be surprised if they took after their master.

Radical Egalitarianism
Mr. Elder doesn't get the point: "Bob" won life's lottery in that he had the qualities necessary to "survive".. that he even met this priest. We are all in a lottery "winning" certain things in our physical make up and environment that creates the total of who we are.
Our founders understood the need for providence or luck in one's life. But, you can't win the lottery if you don't buy a ticket. We need people to work hard in order to create wealth.
So, if I understand the new direction in politics it is trick people into productivity, confiscate their "winnings" and distribute as appropriate. Mr. Frank is particularly interested in that last part. Good luck everyone.

Unfortunately
Basically, they will make the rich and middle-class both poor--and the poor even poorer. In other words, equalisation at ZERO or negative!

Dangerous Dave
The example in your first post does not go far enough. Neither John Kerry nor his wife earned a penny of their fortune, nor has either of them done an honest day's work in their life. Teresa INHERITED her husband's fortune and Kerry married into it (his first millionaire wife was too poor for him). Neither of them married for love; Kerry wanted the ultra rich lifestyle and Teresa wanted the prestige of being married to a U.S. Senator. Few people disgust me more than these two, and they are completely illustrative of the absolute moral corruption and ideological bankruptcy of today's Democrat Party.

stupid Monopoly analogy
Pretty absurd. The market in monopoly is limited and restrictive, not at all like a capitalist system. Property can only be purchased if one lands his token on it. The rules set property values. There is no "market," since spending on rents is compulsory based on the roll of a dice. There is hardly any flexibility for making business decisions, other than, do you want to purchase this piece of property or railroad, and do you want to build a house on it. If anything, Monopoly resembles a dumbed-down government-regulated market reminiscent of Communist China before the 1990s. So don't give me that crock of smarmy, self-righteous BS.

above grammatical error
Being anal retentive here - above should be "roll of a die" or "roll of the dice." Please resume normal procedures.

jcthomasva
All good points about the failed analogy of Monopoly games. Do you have any insights into my earlier comment that selling the copyrighted game to the public is the REAL capitalist victory?

Maybe that's what politicians are doing to us when they sell us the shell game of: "You send money to Washington and we'll send some of it back." They talk; we vote; they talk some more, with huge staffs to handle the tedium, plus perks and public adulation to bask in.

We pay.

In the meantime back in the hinterland, reg'lar folks plow the cornfields and turn it into food, dig up red dust and turn it into iron; turn sand into silicon chips, etc.

Tomgee
If memory serves me right, Monopoly was invented in the Great Depression, so it catered to destitute Americans' desires to be wealthy. I suppose if its inventor exercised wealth envy, he could have come up with Pooropoly, but that probably wouldn't have been as successful, considering poor Americans with just a little expendable cash wouldn't want to play a game when they lived the reality. I think Monopoly became popular in the 50s when millions of American families were becoming upwardly mobile.

I sometimes think we misinterpret "wealth envy." I see wealth, and I envy it because I want my own. Marxists see wealth, and embarrassed by their own supposedly base notion of envy (or "greed'), they believe no one should have wealth. Wealth envy drives the system. I would more accurately describe people like B Frank as wealth-resenters (self-loathing of course).

All about nothing.
Home Depot employs about 355,000 people. If you take that $210 million severence package, and divided it equally among all the HD employees, that would amount to a bonus of about $591.00 before taxes,or about $0.28/hr for that one year.

Or, to shareholders, with 2.2 billion shares outstanding, that amounts to 9.5 cents per share on a going price of around $40.00, or about 2/10th of a percent of share value. Not very much to write home about.

TIME

The poorest American lives better than many well-off people in other places around the world. We are so used to electricity and a (mostly) functional infrastructure, we forget. To say nothing of an over-abundance of inexpensive high quality food and water.

Time is our most precious resource -- more valuable than any other "possession" we will ever own. Each new day is a freely given gift, and is never dispensed again once it has been spent. Yet Americans waste much more of their time than they do their money. Hours parked in front of televisions, mindlessly blabbering on the telephone, or driving aimless circles around town. It never fails to amaze me that the Average Joe in the USA seems determined to believe that he/she will live forever. Or, at least, they have plenty of time to "kill".

This is the last taboo, the sacred grove we have forsaken. We came here naked and penniless, and we will all, each and every single one, leave here the same way. Whatever money or property we managed to earn while here will likely be fought over and wasted by someone else who will not assign to it nearly the same value as did we.

Something to ponder as you make out your will.

Top 1% and Redistribution
I've heard a data-point from somewhere -- I suppose I really should look it up before posting -- but I'm lazy and I'm hoping someone else has heard it and remembers it correctly, plus who first said it --

-- that if you were to tax the 1% wage earners at a confiscatory 100% tax rate --

-- it would finance the federal government for about a week --

-- and then that top 1%, now impoverished, would have to go on welfare --


Hey sdan --THANKS A LOT!
NOW I'm depressed!

On income disparity
IF wiseone is correct, that:
"The median income in the US is about $27,000/yr.
and
The average income is around $35,000/yr."

then indeed there is disparity, since in a truly free market, there should be a normal distribution of income, where the average and median incomes would be the same. However, there are two solutions to this problem, depending on the glass half-full half empty perception.

Do you lower the average income or raise the median income? Taxing only the highest income earners and giving it to the poor lowers net average income, but it will barely change the median income, since the numbers or extremely rich are far fewer than the number of poor and there is not enough wealth to go around.

The only other way to fix the situation is to increase the wages of those making under the average income by encouraging them to get off their duffs and better themselves. More importantly, force their children to become better educated than they are. You don't enourage people to improve themselves by paying them more for the minimum wage skills they have. You do it by lowering the minimum wage, not raising it.


How does this sound?
Years ago I worked 60+ hours a week and I made a lot of money. It got old, so I decided to get a different job which required less hours. I don't make as much as I did 15 years ago, but I'm a lot happier. It's all relative.
Want money? Get a job.
Want more money? Get a better job.

Barney simply lives in La La land and is totally out of the loop.

As Long As Welfare Recipients Vote
As long as welfare recipients vote we will have politicians promising them YOUR money.

That is a stranglehold on the nation.

The Democrat Party has become Communist in everything but name. Every program is take from the haves and give to the have nots. From each according to his ability.....

A Republic cannot long stand when the majority of the voting citizens are lazy or stupid or both.

buck
Hence the dhimmicrats need to dumb down the nation.

All the easier to point their finger at the evil rich and whine about it.

Funny that the richest politicians are Dims!

Fletch
Thanks for taking the time to shoot down Steve's asinine diatribe. I've read too much of his inconsequential and incomprehensible gobbledy-gook on these boards.

"Gee, if only Jimmy Carter could give everyone a hug, the world would be a better place..."

This is the kind of crap that free market proponents and true (lower-case) republicans have to put up with nowadays.

I think Steve is advocating a return to specie (precious metal) currencies, since we all know that metal coinage can't possibly lose value (ask any Roman Emperor). Ignore the fact that the US Penny is now worth more melted down for its component metals than minted. Walter Williams relates that paper money is simply a certificate of exchange for one's labor.

Secession
The more I see this kind of stuff, the more I think that it is time for revolution. We tried a peaceable one by trying to get Republicans elected but that didn't work as they did nothing. So what about dividing the country once again? After all, our country was founded on the principal of taxation without representation and taxation without consent. We have done everything possible short of armed conflict to try and stop this madness.

UncaAlby

Sorry. As I said -- the last taboo. If you are spending your time wisely, what I said should not at all depress you. I merely report on what I personally have observed for the past 57 years.

Why do we "need" all of these vapid, insipid distractions? Perhaps because we require a re-direction of our attention away from the self-evident and obvious.

Each new day requires a commitment to spent well the time placed before us, often without the expenditure of much money. This never changes, no matter where on the Monopoly board we happen to be at any given moment.

Democrat Party
"From each according to his means, to each according to his need". Redistribution of wealth. Tenets of Communism, spelled out in the "Communist Manifesto" by Karl Marx. The Democrat Party is the American Communist Party. Barney Franks is a Communist, he cannot deny the mantel he was raised under.

Warrior
Red Nancy Pelosiovich is the President of the Progressive Caucus. Freaking outright Socialists. She's just another "do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do" socialist elitist.

Orwell was right, just a few years too late.

David
The more I see the more I think you may have the best solution. It couldn't be any worse that the odds our Founding Fathers faced:

33% For 33% Against 33% No opinion

1% No freaking clue whatsoever.

I like justpaul's idea
Pay Congressmen and Senators only $40,000/year. Then we will find out who wants to be a public servant and who wants to be important.

Moving up in class
Barney Frank's mind is also stuck in an unrealistic caste system. He believes that people who have minimum wage jobs today will have them for the rest of their lives.

In reality most people start working at a low or minimum wage job and, as they get more experience, get raises or get better jobs as they get older.

Several studies done by conservative think tanks have shown that people are continuously moving from the lowest fifth of wage earners to the 2nd lowest, from the 2nd lowest to the middle, from the middle to the 2nd highest, and from the 2nd highest to the highest fifth of income earners. New entrants to the work force increase empoyment and/or growth and retirees decrease employment or growth.

Frank can't comprehend this because he is not going anywhere in his career and many of the welfare recipients in his loyal constitutency have never been in the work force and don't want to start now.

Barney Frank
Not familiar with the demographics in MA, but how many people in Barney Frank's district are actually poor? Wikipedia shows that the median income in the poorest county in his district (Bristol) is over $43k. The other counties in his district are above $55k in median income. Bristol Co. has a rate of around 7% below the federal poverty line.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts%27s_4th_congressional_district

Middlesex Co. is the 10th richest county in the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middlesex_County%2C_Massachusetts

Hypocrites.

wiseone
Go ya one better.

Reimbursements for expenses ONLY and that is expenses PROVEN and JUSTIFIED to support the mission. Just like DoD has to do.

Why does Hanoi John (500mil) need 165K a year for missing 70% of the votes over 20 years?

Why does Red Nancy (55mil+) need 165K a year? Maybe it pays the tuition for her grandkids to attend the finest prep schools in America, who knows.

Who will pay the taxes?
After Barney eliminates income disparity who will finance the governement?

Right now the top 5% pay something like 37% of all income taxes. The top 10% pay 59%.

After everyone's income is reduced to $35,000 to $40,000 by law tax revenues will be about 30% of what they are now. What will Barney say when we break this news to him?

persnickety
Hourly maximum wage for elected officials. Best idea I've heard!

to "the flash"
You said:

"Home Depot employs about 355,000 people. If you take that $210 million severence package, and divided it equally among all the HD employees, that would amount to a bonus of about $591.00 before taxes,or about $0.28/hr for that one year."

Well, how about turning that around 180º?

Ask all 355,000 employees of Home Depot to donate $591 to a fund to be used as severance pay for their FIRED C.E.O. - how do you think THAT would go over?? You'd hear screaming from one coast to the other. Not much to write home about? *hmpf*

Wiseone...
Actually, we need to go further. SInce Barney wants the median income of everyone to be $35000/year, his salary has to be cut to $25000/year. There's no sense in having the employees make more than the employers after all.

Or better yet, let's pay them all minimum wage. Given their job performance (total inability to pass a budget on time, failure to meet their own specified goals, etc...) they don't deserve anymore than that.

Seriously think about it. If you hired someone to formulate a budget document and gave them a year to do so, would you continue to pay them a salary well into six figures when they failed to complete their work on time? How about the next year? Or the next? Or the next?

Congress has proven itself utterly incapable of meeting one of the few responsibilities it has which is actually mandated by law. Why are we paying these people 4-5 times the average salary of a person who actually does their job effectively day in and day out?

Seawolf, Sec. 8 only
applies to neighborhoods in which Hillary and the like do NOT reside. Pretty convenient, huh?
I have never heard of this program, so I am not familiar with it at all. I imagine from your post that you are saying the 100+k homes deteriorate given how they are cared for by the homeowners in question? And then the people who actually purchased their home fair and square cannot sell for a fair market price because the surrounding homes and neighborhood look awful (or crack houses abound?) Along the same lines, a judge in some California city (Fresno?) ruled that the homeless should be allowed to have their "camps" in public areas regardless of how they looked, etc. I emailed the mayor and suggested every homeless person be given a map to that judge's home and be encouraged to set up camp nearby, especially since this judge really cared about the homeless. Wonder how long that ruling would last then? The sheer stupidity of it all.

If I hired someone...
... and he didn't do any better job than Barney and his friends I would have to cut their pay enough to hire someone else to do the work they left undone.

Before long I'd realize that if I have someone else on the payroll doing what Barney was supposed to do but didn't, I wouldn't need Barney at all.

How much would Barney make on Unemployment? And what would that do to national average?

Persnickety:
Actually, if you break it down to full time people that have been with HD for a year or more, and what they could have had as a bonus, you would likely end up with around $800 per person.

Yes, it would be nice of HD to give that to every full timer as a Christmas bonus instead of paying this goofball to leave, and they would definately get more of my business if they did.

Do I think it's fair that this guy runs with all that money? Heck no. Do I think it's obscene? You bet.

However, it's not up to Barney Frank to decide what HD should do with their cash. The day that the government puts itself in the business of legislating fairness, the country is screwed.




Very moving...
...what a crock.

"Or that, of all the qualities that go into income success, hard work remains the most important."

Bull. The quickest, easist, and most-often used path to wealth and success is to cheat and get others to do your work, while taking credit for theirs.

Let me tell you another sob-story about another great man from humble circumstances...

Born just before the Great Depression, he was a child of divorced parents when that just wasn't done. He was left to his own devices, by a hypocritical religious mother and step mother, both of whom thought boys existed to server females (like most males think today.) Most of his childhood memories involve looking into *other* peoples windows during holidays and other times, and long days of hard work under the watchful eye of the cruel farmer his parents sent him to.

When the War came along, he enlisted in the Army Air Corps. He gained a bit of self-respect, realising he out-tested the school's athletes and brains. His depth perception was such that they had to keep resetting the testing machine. But he couldn't distinguish between two shades of red, so he could not be a Hot Pilot as he'd dreamed. He became a courier.

When he got off the troopship in Europe, the USO was there waiting with doughnuts and coffee. He saw an old man picking up the crumbs and discarded bits of doughnut from the ground and putting them in a bag. He took the bag away from the man, and dumped its contents on the ground. He then began filling it with fresh doughnuts, much to the consternation of the USO harpies.
He was placed on guard duty once, as a punishment, guarding a mountain of coal with a sawed-off shotgun (1934 supreme court decision not withstanding). He detected an intruder, and left the warmth of the small stove in the railcar he was posted to, to go and hold open the sack for the woman and her two children who'd come to rob the U.S.

He returned home, his respect for women dashed by the European women he'd encountered. He met a woman he could respect, and in 3 weeks they were married. Two months after their 50th wedding anniversary, he died.


He followed a hard-working trade, masonry, as had his forebears. At one point, when he was still single, he built the top floor of the Veteran's Hospital in Iowa City literally hanging by his heels, held by another mason. At one time, he held the employer to the union rules, and was thereafter persecuted by the union for screwing up their crooked deal. They even made an attempt on his life, burning a van he'd kept on a construction site.

He worked hard all his life, only occassionally indulging in a (semi) new car. He had 4 only-children, and his 3 sons he taught his trade. He worked harder all his life than most of you could imagine. His hands became gnarled stumps, so calloused they could hold an old-fashioned boilling pot of coffee in his palm, so worn that he literally had no fingerprints left.

The Carter depression came, and in his 50s, he once again found himself penniless, homeless, living off a loaf of bread and a package of baloney, out of the back seat of his broken down car, almost a thousand miles from his dispersed family. He started over.

He brought two of his sons down to the land of opportunity, and they worked, dawn to dark, living on eggsalad and potatoe salad. Up to their knees in mud, piecing together dangerous and worn-out tools. And these are Welshmen, not Mexicans, so they *worked*. In a few years, he had become one of the pre-eminent masonry contractors of the city, building shopping centers, renovating schools, brick-vaneering entire neighborhoods, even building mansions for the ultra-wealthy.

The men he hired he expected to work, but he never missed a payday. He made sure they had clean water and time for lunch, tools that could be relied upon and decent wages, the things he'd always been denied when he was a younger worker. He hired men on work-release, offering them a chance to rebuild their lives. They worked hard, appreciated his decent treatment.

While building a multi-million dollar shopping center, the profit from which was going to allow him to retire, the contractor complained that his crew was "too dark". They accused his eldest son of a minor construction, one which had been immediately corrected by him when he descovered it, and cheated him out of nearly a quarter million dollars. He paid his workers out of his own pocket, rather than let them chase the contractor, and was once again ruined.

He spent the last years of his life, in his 70s, working with his youngest son, doing repair work to historical homes, mailboxes, and whatever else would put bread on the table. At 74, his doctor diagnosed him with colon cancer, which he hid from his family, because he couldn't afford to pay for an operation or to be laid up.
He dealt with the increasing pain in his stomach by taking Baer aspirin, smoking ciagrettes, and drinking Coca-cola. One cold November morning, he hurt too bad to go to work. The next day his wife found blood in his pants. Two weeks later, he died having worked hard, physical labor from the time he was a boy until his 75th year.

Anyone who says "hard work" is the most important thing for success is full of feces. Nobody worked harder than my father.



sdan
I hope you're still on this thread. Thanks muchly for pointing out the difference of time vs. money. It's often said that time = money, which is true in limited situations. A key difference that you stated well, is that money is fungible and replaceable but time is not. When it comes to the gift of life nothing is so badly squandered as time unappreciated.

It's good to see someone home in on a basic truth that cuts through a lot of quibbling.

David:
Better than secession, we need to dilute the power of the federal government and hand the rights back to the states. That way, idiots such as Pelosi, Frank, Kennedy, Schumer, Rangel, and Byrd don't have the power to make every decision for us.

It's not only constitutional for the power to be handed to the states, it's common sense.

Hurricane Katrina showed us that looking to a guy that lives in a house 1200 miles away to bail you out is not only foolhardy, but dangerous.

correction
"...accused his son of a minor construction ERROR"

The People's Republics of USA
The People's Republics of USA. That has a nice communist ring to it, doesn't it?

I was going to ask, why are the Republicans going to call the Dems on their obvious policy positions that would help move the US into more of a socialist/communist country. But I realize that the current Republicans are just as socialist as the Dems!!!

What we need are some real conservative ideas:

1. Change our money system back to the gold standard.

2. No min wage

3. No income tax

4. No corp tax

5. Remove all un-Constitutional spending from the federal budget - pretty much everything except the military

6. Require federal tax revenue to stay below a pre-set, unchangable percentage of GPD

7. Require the federal budget to balance, except for during a time of war. (You cannot have a true balance budget amendment without repealing the income tax amendment and begging the tax percentage to the national GPD!)

8. Tort Reform

9. Build a wall along the entire Mexico border. Then force Mexico to pay us for all their citizens in our prison. When they refuse, start dropping Mexican prisoner with parachutes from airplanes back into Mexico. With a wall in place, they cannot get back!

10. Exit the UN and kick them out of our country

That would be a nice start!

Missing a big point
What many of you arguing that for "balanced" wages are missing an important point. Just because I pay one peron less, doesn't mean I will automatically pay another person more. Lets say I pay person A a certain amount to clean my house, and I pay person B a different amount to mow my lawn. If I value a clean house more than a nice lawn I would probably pay person A more. If person A gives me a discount coupon for $10 off their service, I am not going to just hand over that $10 to person B. If I decide to clean my own home from now on and no longer need the services of person A, again - that has nothing to do with how much I will pay person B.

So, who cares if a CEO gets 1 million or 10 million, that doesn't mean they are affecting the salary of anyone else. As for someone making "too much" money - there is no such thing. As long as they are not robbing banks but getting agreed upon wages, too much doesn't exist.

Lastly, what about your income. Do you think folks in some third world country think you make "too much"? Maybe they believe your house is "too big" or that your plate has "too much" food. What you have is your business and what the CEO of Home Depot got is his business. If you don't like the payout, sell your HD stock or don't shop their anymore. Other than that, you really don't get much more of a vote.

Jander:
Run for Prez.. you got my vote.

Persnickity:
If you are going to turn it around, turn it all the way around, and ask the 355,000 employees to give back the extra 591.00 bonus they never earned to the CEO that kept them employed rather than laying them off to get his severence pay.

This is all about envy. But, companies have one CEO, not 355,000 to complain if things don't go their way. If the HD employees don't like it, they are not shackled to the shop floor, and are free to get a similar no skilled job at another big box store,...like Wal Mart!

The skill needed to pass UPC codes across a laser scanner or a charge card through a reader is far less than the old days when a cashier had to add, read numbers, type them accuractely on a keypad, and make change. Yet, they are paid as much if not more adjusted for inflation than the higher skilled predecessors. They should be thankful they have a job at all.

The Truth
The Communist Democrat Party does not care about poor people, homosexuals, minorities or any other defined wedge group. They just want to convince the wedge groups they, the Democrats, want to help them so they will vote Communist which will lead to Democrat power. Once in power the Democrats will show their true Communism and abandon all deviates as unfit. Communist have a history of mass exterminations after attaining power. Over 60,000,000 in Russia alone and not one of those deaths are attributable to WW2. This Barney Franks rhetoric is only heard now because he and the Communist Democrats can smell power. Franks could have introduced this type legislation when the Republicans were in control but he did not. Franks was waiting until the power structure was more favorable. The Communist Bolsheviks urged Russia to pull out of WW1 and extolled the proletariat soldiers to kill their officers. The soldiers did kill many. The only reason the Communist Democrats have not attempted a take over in this country is because of our military, who are for the most part conservative patriots.

CEO Pay Need to Be Linked To Performance
Larry,

I consider your radio show my top choice to listen to of any radio show on the airwaves today. Needless to say, I listen regularly.

And I thoroughly agree with your sentiments regarding the Democrats attempted sabotage of the American economy.

But why oh why would you use an obscenity like the Nardeli fiasco at Home Depot to buttress your argument?

The man should not have walked away with a red cent from Home Depot!

I bought a large amount of the stock early on and it treated me extraordinarily kindly. It did so because Home Depot did a fine job. But with Nardeli at the helm that was no longer true. I was concerned but didn’t want to pay the capital gains. I felt comfortable that they dominated the market and would bounce back after digesting some of their conquests.

Then I was working a job in an area where a Lowes had just opened. So I went in to see what they were like. I was blown out of the water and out of my complacency. The fact of the matter was that a lobotomized hamster, or higher IQ Democrat, could have seen that the future was no longer with Home Depot. Within 24 hours I had dumped enough stock that the taxes incurred exceeded my younger-self’s yearly salary. If 1031 applied to stocks, as it should, I’d have sold every share that day and I regret now that I did not.

I would have zero problem if Nardeli had a reasonable severance deal that was pegged to the performance of the stock compared to other stocks in the sector. If Home Depot outperforms other companies in the sector, he gets a nice severance, if they out-perform, he gets a very handsome severance.

Nardeli likely got paid the obscene amount of money, based on his lackluster performance, based on one of two reasons:

1. Unwilling Conspirators - Nardeli’s lawyers made it clear they would sue unless he received the big bucks. “So let him sue” you may say. “If he’s not worth the money, no jury will award it.” Too true. But that’s not the concern. The concern is how well will the company be run if the top executives have to spend tens of thousands of hours over the next few years with their lawyers defending a bogus suit. Maybe as badly as Nardeli did – and Nardeli’s attorneys are well aware that it is more than worth it to payout blackmail money to avoid such a calamity.

2. Willing Conspirators - There existed the corruption of a “gold old boys club” in which the directors look at the companies the work for not as fiduciaries but as pillagers with each conspiratorially waiting his (or her) turn to climb to the top for their shot at looting.

In either case corporate America needs to rein this nonsense in or it will be reigned-in in a destructive and non-productive way by the Loony Left. A lot of reasonable folk who are more than willing to pay extremely generously for extreme competency will unsympathetically look the other way while corporate America gets reamed if they view the reamed as scoundrels.

None of us will be better off for it!

Tomgee

Yes, I think it is fruitless to debate who earns what and how. Not that these ideas are without merit, just that I think Mr. Elder misses the bigger picture. CEO's -- like movie stars and soccer players -- are compensated based on what someone else thinks they are worth. Just exactly the same as the value of your house. We are all free to move, not go to movies, not shop at Home Depot, and to divest ourselves of our stocks and bonds.

All Americans benefit from the hard work and ingenuity of others. A friend squandered his time, his wealth (inherited), his health, and ultimately his life. And for what? This weekend his closest friends will gather at his favorite watering hole to eulogize him, and I honestly don't have any words of wisdom to add to the festivities. He died as he lived -- a ward of Barney Frank's state. For most of his adult life this scion of a publishing family camped out in front of his television set. He was assisted in this endeavor both by his family and the state of Massachusetts. He saw life as a game, and money was no object.

Our values are backward, as if reflected in a mirror. Hard work can place a roof over one's head, food in one's stomach, and clothing on one's back. Beyond that, Bob Dylan wrote about "serving somebody". My friend served only himself. He freely worked the "system", and benefited from the labor and kindness of others. He lived in a culture of dependency. Eyes wide open. That's not the tragedy. He robbed himself of the opportunity to serve someone else.....to find the value and meaning in a job well done, thereby adding richness to someone else's life, and perhaps more time to his own. Wealth of this type surpasses money, by far.

I don't see much evidence that this is understood by the masses, their eyes focused only on the bling.

Guess what an entry level gov't employee
makes annually (before taxes) in the DC area? Exactly $19,214/year. Does that sound like a living wage in DC??? Come on Rep. Frank, raise the minimum wage for YOUR OWN STINKIN EMPLOYEES before you come after those of us who actually contribute to the GDP.

Source: Office of Personnel Management website. Salary table for GS-1, Step 1 employee. See for yourself if you don't believe me. http://www.opm.gov/oca/06tables/html/dcb.asp

p.s. The salary is lower in other (less expensive) parts of the country.

sdan
In the example of the friend who frittered away his inheritance, you've made another good point that few people notice -- the significant number of people whose income falls below zero. The five conventional income quintiles measure earnings in 20% blocs of positive numbers, but don't recognize there are categories of income and wealth that range into negative numbers.

There are people, often heirs, who start with something and end with nothing or less than nothing. There's no need to feel sorry for them; it makes more sense to feel the loss of what such people might have contributed, as you did.

There are plenty of others who start low, rise and then fall -- moving up from income quintile to quintile and down again as chance or flaws of character lead from success to ruin. Wastrels even have a spokesman in Errol Flynn, the alcoholic, womanizing, swashbuckling actor who said, "Any man who still has ten grand left when he dies has been a failure."

It is dazzling yet mysterious to discern the inner drive of the Franklins, Edisons and Einsteins that lead to breakthrough contributions that benefit the many. It can be perplexing, too, why the flaws of the Flynns and other nameless losers result in tragedy. It seems we agree that, other than leaving incentives intact, it is futile for government to intervene in many varieties of fortune and fate that people bring upon themselves.

Lee Raymond got stiffed
Robert Nardelli made $210 million after just six years and for disappointing Home Depot shareholders. Lee Raymond was at the helm of Exxon for much longer and kept them on top only to receive a mere $400 million retirement. The Dems (and some RINOS) savaged him viciously last year. I agree with Tidfrd Tatt. Mr. Elder should have picked a more sympathetic CEO "victim" than Robert Nardelli, a guy who has the HD shareholders suing him. At least he didn't choose Denny Kozlowski or Ken Lay.
The take away lesson is to read your proxy statements and don't just vote what the board recommends. CEOs sometimes take on celebrity status that drives their compensation beyond their contribution. If the shareholders don't wise up soon, the socialists in congress may pass laws to "protect" them. But hey, the playoffs are on the TV. We gotta keep our priorities straight.

JP
"Let's do a checkoff system for how congressman are paid".

Great idea, IMO. Wishful thinking if it's not taken beyond your post.

It's high time we let these "deluded princes and princesses" on the Hill know exactly who put them there and why they are there.

Their bosses decide what their work is worth, and WE are those bosses.

JP, if you'd like to inform Congressional members of a "checkoff system" for what we think they are worth, I would be glad to participate and contribute financially.

EVERY one of them should get a letter with the names of all demand accountability from them.

Re: my last post, to JP
Does anyone else agree with JP's 1040 checkoff for congressional pay?

jdw
Ummm, nice story (and I think you described my grandfather), but what was the point? No one said hard work always equals income success. They said, if you want income success, the best way to get it is with hard work. Doesn't say you WILL get it, or are entitled to it, but that's the best shot. Funny, you also said "Bull. The quickest, easist, and most-often used path to wealth and success is to cheat and get others to do your work, while taking credit for theirs." Yet, you failed to provide us with a long list of these cheaters. And since you said "most often", I expect a pretty darn LONG list.

Thanks.

jdw
Hey, sorry for your dad, but life sucks sometimes. To paraphrase Ms Oz, sometimes you get the bear, sometimes the bear gets you.

I was born poor too. I went to school, got good grades, joined the military (I couldn't afford college) learned a trade and now I make well over the median income. I'm not rich, by any stretch, but I do ok.

There are some people that don't get a break, but ultimately, the life you end up with is one of your own choosing.

Lying & cheating
Cheating, getting others to do the work and managing to take the credit sound like a lot of effort, too. Keeping track of all your trickery without getting caught and staying a few steps ahead of your enemies sound like more trouble than it's worth. Who wants to bother with all that? Speaking only for myself, I'm too lazy to become a kleptocrat. Mark Twain said that nobody is smart enough to be a good liar. There's too many different stories to remember.

Not that nobody gets away with the aforementioned perfidies. Jay Gould comes to mind; also Dennis Kozlowski (sp?) in modern times, although Dennis only enjoyed a few parties in Sardinia before some snitch blew his cover. Third World kleptocrats like Rafael Trujillo, Anastasio Somoza and Saddam Hussein all had good runs that ended badly. Castro has made it to a ripe, old age, but I doubt his legacy will be illustrious.

Jay Gould died (young) in his bed. His favorite crony Jim Fisk did get caught up with by one of his enemies and was shot on a hotel stairway.

Tycoons in modern times seem to rely more on charm and creativity than in days of old. It's true that managing personal alliances (charm) has always been key -- "getting others to do the work for you" is one way to put it. "Being a leader" is another way to phrase that ability. If you read the Forbes 400 list of richest people, generally they've gotten ahead by creating new ways of giving people what they want -- marketing organizations like WalMart and Home Depot, entertainment behemoths like Viacom and Time Warner, or of course the gizmos and software barons whose devices we are utilizing on this medium. Manhattan real estate has been a lode of the richest people for centuries. John Jacob Astor, for example, made his first big money in the fur trade, but parlayed it into megariches by investing in New York real estate. He also supplied one of my favorite, post Ben Franklin aphorisms about the value of hard work. "If you want something done, hire somebody. If you want something done right, do it yourself."

NYC real estate is still one of the largest categories in the Forbes 400.

The key factor for those of us whose failures and achievements don't run to extremes is that in a society like ours where property rights are relatively secure and freedom is maximized, even average schnooks can do okay. The lights go on, the roads remain usable, the schools & libraries stay open and the barbarians remain outside the gates (mostly) so we can get on with our lives.

Life Is Not Fair
And you can NOT legislate fairness into life.

Any more than you can legislate stupidity out of life.


Life IS Fair
It's just not "fair" according to OUR wandering subjective definitions of "fair".

Example:

I drop a bowling ball on my foot. Now, instead of bouncing harmlessly away, the way the beach ball did, it causes me grief. My toes are broken, and I'm in EXTREME pain.

Now I ask you, IS THAT FAIR?

Of course it isn't!

Reality bites, man, it really does.

No problem at all
Conservatives, please go back and look at your default position on a free market economy. If you understand the economy from the free market model, there can be no such thing as "income equality," and certainly no such thing as a "problem" of income, or any other form of economic inequality.

Free market theory eliminates the very possibility of arguing about "fair" wages, just as it eliminate the possibility of talking about "just prices." The CEO's $200+ million has the same moral status as the hamburger-flipper's $5.15/hour; i.e., determined by the market.

So, if some tiny fraction of the population possesses some very high percentage of wealth, or enjoys a very high percentage of income, that's just the way the world works.


affordable housing
There are real problems with the way "affordable housing" works out in the real world. Section 8, the assisted rental housing program, puts major restrictions and hassles on the property owner, and isn't often available where appropriate tenants need them. The regulations requiring that a certain percentage of residential project units be "affordable" sometimes makes the whole project unfeasible and unaffordable for builders, and even when it is built it can ironically be difficult to sell. Most of the people who qualify as poor enough to need it don't qualify for even the lowered mortgage amounts, and the regulations require that the house cannot be resold at a profit. Ever. And many of these developments require cars to get anywhere or do anything, which makes it hard on families that can't afford several cars, or only clunkers that the neighbors are going to sneer at. How does a lower income family get along with higher income neighbors without feeling patronized? What about maintenance? The idea sounds good, but those units are difficult to sell. (My daughter works for a broker that sells new homes.)

reply to partsmom
The whole idea of "affordable" housing should be rejected by conservatives. A conservative needs to recognize that the free market solves this problem easily; people who can't afford to pay market prices don't get houses. What could be simpler than that?
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.