In response to:

Are the "Less Fortunate" Less Fortunate?

kenle2 Wrote: Apr 06, 2012 10:12 PM
What facile tripe. You are misusing the word "own". What other, more accurate, but still delusional , lefties say is that a given small percentage of people "control" 90 or more percent of the wealth in America. That's as dumb as saying the president, members of congress and the supreme court "rule" 100% of America. Controlling stock in publically traded companies, or having an executive position at a company doesn't mean you "own" the company. Nor does it mean you can sell off your stock or liquidate the company's assets and either buy a yacht or give it to Obama's PACs to buy him a better shot at re-election by ignorant independent voters. Acts like that would throw lots of those "laborers" you mention out of their jobs, with no capital.

In his front-page-of-the-business-section "Economic Scene" column in The New York Times last week, Eduardo Porter wrote, "The United States does less than other rich countries to transfer income from the affluent to the less fortunate."

Think about that sentence for a moment. It ends oddly. Logic dictates that it should have said, "transfer income from the affluent to the less affluent," not the less fortunate.

But for Porter, as for the left generally, those who are not affluent are not merely "less affluent," they are "less fortunate."

Why is this? Why is the leftist division almost always between the "affluent" and...