I get what you are saying -- and by not responding to it doesn't mean that I don't believe it's not a problem. But I don't think clamping down on the wealthy will wholesale solve the problem ... however, for the sake of argument, let's do it ... aggressively ... tax the wealthy, redistribute, bring jobs back home etc. What do you expect to happen then? Are the people on benefits going to magically seek self-sustenance?
Well I do agree that it isn't just the wealthy who are going to have to change, after all we have created a culture of reliance on the government, and while I don't like that sort of thing (believe it or not) I firmly believe that right now it is an absolute necessity, unless you want to see millions starve and I'm you've already heard the usual Repub response (first started or at least publicized in the Summer of 1932, in the midst of the Great Depression) "there are plenty of jobs out there, people are just too lazy to go out and get one". Yes there are jobs out there now, some anyway, but minimum wage jobs mostly, can you live on one of them? And if Michelle Bachmann and others get their way that antichrist of a minimum wage will be struck down to hell where all opponents of the few having everything are sent.
Create the jobs first, then start phasing out the social programs and aggressively punish fraud for those who are cheating the system. As for punishing the poor rich people, and that being part of the solution, when one fairly small group of people have 90% of the wealth (and google it if you don't believe me) who in the hell else are you going to go after? I know weso for one thinks the economy will just "straighten out by itself" or something along those lines and I hope he's right, but I can't see that working. What will the wealthy do if we go after them to make changes??? That's easy, they'll bitch and moan like little girls, just like they do now, nothing will change except maybe the volume of it and maybe Rupert Murdoch or that Adelson ahole, oooh and hopefully the Koch brothers will implode or spontaneously combust, now THAT'S quality entertainment.
You ask about the consequences of going after the wealthy, and many agree with you, there are some here who really believe that taxing the top 5% or so at a higher rate than everybody else is a moral issue. You think that was just a randomly arrived at philosophy and that there was no Goebbels-esque work behind it??? What happens if we don't go after them? Well nothing good, after all whether you people will see it or not we ARE France in about 1786. We have a short time to start making things right or this whole country will start falling apart. I guess the private security business would be a good one to go into because the uber wealthy will have to hire people other than the pisspoorly paid police to guard them and their families when this happens.
Repubs (whether you are one or not) make themselves believe that the system and wealth distribution are so skewed because one group of people simply work harder than another, they cannot and/or will not realize or admit that the system is rigged, and has been rigged since the 1980's to favor those who have the most to get even more. If you don't believe me ask yourself this, how many people who rob a convenience store of $500 or carry two or three joints around with them (that the police know about) go to jail, percentages wise? Now how many people who knowingly bilked the American people out of millions, even billions of dollars (and they definitely know who they were) went to jail? We had to bail out most of Wall Street because of Fraud, how many Fraud perps went to prison?? I see left leaning memes all the time, some of them cute and true, others just silly to stupid, but one that I absolutely believe went like this, "Bernie Madeoff went to prison, not because he robbed the 99% but because he robbed the 1%".
You assume that I am conservative because I disagree with you. Fact of the matter is that I align with whatever works. It's a happy place. OK fair enough, but it sounds like you assume I'm a liberal because I disagree with you? What's the difference. The fact of the matter is, I'm somewhere in the middle, I'm fairly liberal on some issues and I'm very conservative on others, sort of like my fraternal twin AA. He and I have lots of common ground though we also disagree sometimes. Where is our (yours and mine) common ground?? I do agree with you on this point for sure, the whatever works area is pretty good, it allows me to criticize both sides which is pretty cool. The biggest problem I see with this though is that what we're doing right now AIN'T working and no matter how much Faux, far right websites, or talk radio whine, bitch, moan, and complain about the "takers" ruining this country it isn't going to get any better, because quite frankly they're attacking the wrong bunch of takers!!!
Oh and I especially love the REDISTRIBUTE word, that's rich (no pun intended) because the wealthy have been doing that for like forever, but especially since the 80s. The sorry SOBs know its wrong and distasteful so that's why they use it as a talking point because then those who are getting taken don't notice they're doing it, they only notice those who the real villains in this story point out to them" More slight of hand stuff.
