Category Archives: Eat the Rich

What’s wrong With the Rich

The rich are the least understood minority.  That fact lends them to be vilified by the very politicians at the root of our serious economic problems.

The facts are:

The rich take risks with their money.  When they invest their expendable income, they are risking the loss of that income.  Often the rich loose a great deal of money in failed businesses.  Most middle and lower income people would not take that kind of risk, even if they could.  Generally the greater the risk, the greater the potential reward as well as the potential loss.  There is nothing unfair about that equation.

The rich employ people.  They hire people to do a multitude of tasks for businesses.  This adds to the risk.  The wrong people can quickly destroy an investment.  They depend on effective employees and reward them accordingly.  Those who do not, suffer the consequences.  Basically, you get what you pay for.  As President Reagan pointed out, “nobody ever got a job from a poor man.”  Conversely the rich must not overcompensate.  Overcompensation easily leads to the demise of a business for the owner and eventual loss of employment.  Unions were originally designed to fairly compensate employees, and ensure unsafe working conditions.  However many unions have overstepped their principles and done harm to many businesses thus harming the very employees they supposedly intend to help.

The rich provide benefits, give to charities, and help employees save for retirement.  Monetary compensation alone has evolved to group insurance plans, 401K’s, other matching plans, and other perks and benefits.  The employer can provide group benefits far more efficiently than individuals can.  Choosing and managing these are another responsibility that the rich take on.  It is in their best interest to maximize what they can provide in order to draw and maintain effective workers.

The rich have to compete.  No business is without competitors who wish to capture a greater market share.  In order to do so, the business owner must run the business as efficiently and effectively as possible or risk reduced demand, thus a reduced workforce.  Basically the rich look out for their workers by looking out for the business.

The rich have headaches.  That’s a general expression for all that a business owner has to think about to make ends meet in his/her business.  These headaches come in the form of the economy, market fluctuations, suppliers, connected services, fashion or technical trends, political changes, taxes (many kinds), accounting, making changes, growth, retooling, human resources, discipline, establishing a corporate culture, advertising, etc, etc, to include balancing the priorities of all the above and more.  If the rich don’t address these carefully, they quickly suffer greater headaches.

The rich make large charitable contributions.  Often contributions provide tax breaks, but a tax break doesn’t exceed the contribution.

The rich hoard very little money, (percentage wise).  They understand that simply saving does not produce what investing can.  Therefore the money that the rich earn is recycled to do more of the same, employ more people, boost the economy, provide benefits, etc.  Most of their money creates more employment.  To blame the rich for having too much money is like blaming your heart for having more blood in it than any other organ.  The rich are the most effective stimulus to the economy.

When the rich stimulate the economy it is done effectively and efficiently for all the reasons above.  When the government attempts to stimulate the economy it is neither efficient nor effective because the government is not accountable.  Furthermore Government “stimulus money” is first removed from the economy through taxes, not earned by adding value to anything.  Government stimulation is like opening the refrigerator door in an attempt to cool a room.  The result is a net heating of the room because the heat expelled out the back of the refrigerator is always greater than the refrigeration it creates.

The rich spend their money.  Yes, they live extravagant lives; possess tremendous homes; and own luxurious yachts.  Consider all who are employed servicing those lives, building those homes, making and maintaining the yachts.  All that the rich spend is returned to the economy.

The rich pay taxes.  We hear of the huge tax shelters and deductions that “fat cats” get.  However it is their businesses that have such tax breaks not the individuals.  In fact due to our “graduated tax” system, the rich pay a much greater percentage of personal income.  Tax breaks are government incentives to influence how a business operates.  If there is any unfairness, it is the government (politicians) who are at fault, not the businesses who use such breaks wisely or else fail.

The rich sometimes fail.  With some wrongful exceptions of late, the rich run the risk of  “loosing everything.”   Safety nets such as the FDIC only insure losses up to a certain amount.  The rich do business that far exceeds those amounts; thus they often “work without a net.”  When a business fails, the rich often become devastated.  Interestingly enough, they often find their way back to wealth because once they have traveled the road to success they understand how to do it again, often with better results.  It is not money that creates money; it is knowing how to venture.

The rich are responsible.  When a poor man breaks something expensive, he walk away because he can not compensate the loss and there is no recourse.  When a person of means financially harms someone, they make restitution.  If not, they may find themselves paying court fees as well.

The rich are vulnerable.  No one files suit against a poor man.  However people take advantage of the rich in every way imaginable.  Because the rich have “deep pockets” they risk carrying the brunt of any conflict.  It is not uncommon for the rich to be found 1% at fault, yet assigned 99% of the financial burden for no other reason than the ability to pay.  So, do you still want to be rich?

How is a failing economy the fault of the rich not being taxed enough? First they are taxed more.  What they aren’t taxed, they reinvest, thus stimulating the economy more effectively than through the government.  What they don’t invest, they spend, which is also good for the economy.  There is almost nothing the rich can do with their money that isn’t good for everyone.  Even if they store it away in a bank, it provides liquidity for the bank to invest.

God bless the rich man because he carries the real burden of our economy.

Shock! Progressive College Students Only Believe in Redistributing OTHER People’s Earnings

Progressivism is a selfish, destructive ideology. It is counter-productive as it intends to take from the most productive and give to the least. When a few citizen journalists from the College Republicans at the University of California-Merced asked others to apply redistributive change to student’s earned grades, even the liberals didn’t think it was fair.

This video provides an important avenue for parents to explain to their less-experienced teens and college-age kids that asking the most productive, highest-earning Americans to fund those that don’t work as hard – just isn’t fair

Progressive Economics – An Oxymoron

The wealthy should pay a much larger share of taxes than the poor – the election year mantra for the extreme left.  Unfortunately for them .. it’s all they have.

Turning the most-successful members of our society into voodoo dolls is silly, but effective.  Certainly those that make more should pay more, but it should not be so ridiculously over-weighted against the top workers in our economy.

I’m not running for office, so I can say it straight – quit turning successful Americans into monsters – EVERYONE should pay their fair share.  That’s just common sense, but is it the right fight?

What really gets my goat (no I don’t actually have a goat) is that the right isn’t fighting the good fight.  Yes, fight the tax increases the left is proposing, but make a much stronger and publicly-visible statement on spending.  I don’t want to see another balanced-budget amendment – it’s far too late for that.  Now we need a positive cash-flow amendment.  Why aren’t the Republicans proposing that every budget approved by Congress MUST be 10%+ under projected revenues.  That forces the government to have a 10% savings rate.  That’s 10% that will go to pay back the debt or pay back Social Security (because these morons have already stolen every dollar that it managed to save up).

If the GOP can’t absolutely commit to ZERO earmarks and a positively-funded budget amendment, talking about tax cuts is of limited value.  If they can change the conversation to spending, it’s the spendocrats that will be on their heels – even more so than now.  Take the fight to them!

The reasons the extremist left focuses on tax cuts for the rich is to make it palatable to raise taxes on the smallest group of tax payers – the wealthy.  Once they’ve raised their taxes, the next wealthiest will find themselves in the cross-hairs of government revenue – then the next lowest group, and the next, and the next – until no one is left.  Each progressive tax hike takes one more group out of the fight.  “Don’t tax me and don’t tax thee, tax the man behind the tree” – Senator Russel Long had it right all along.

This is the progressive economic strategy – tax and spend.  It’s Keynesian, authoritarian and proving to fail at every turn.  Proggies know they can’t just raise taxes on everyone at once, so they do it one little bunch at a time.  If any one group in America tolerates a tax increase on any other .. they will soon find themselves having a tax levied upon them that everyone else tolerates.

The liberals idea is that somehow stealing from the top earners to have the government pay to clean some silly statue or pay for a cow fart study does more to help our economy  than just letting that earner hire people to do more work – or even the same work – yup, silly.

If Americans want to get mad, how about the nearly half of all citizens that pay NOTHING?  According to an AP article published on Yahoo! Finance

About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability. That’s according to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research organization.

Why isn’t anyone mad at them?  A family that makes as much as $50,000/year paid ZERO income tax in 2009.  Why?  Progressive economics.

While I totally agree that someone making $50,000 (not chump change) should pay less than someone that makes $150,000, I think they should absolutely pay something.  There is a major issue with someone voting for representatives when they have no skin in the game.

Sure, our founding fathers had an issue with taxation without representation, but shouldn’t we have an equal issue of representation of the untaxed?  Having a voting population that may elect an official that pours on the spending and votes to tax groups that are not in his/her district is unconscionable .. and it’s being done today.

Low income districts tend to vote in anyone that promises them more government programs and federal assistance.  Those same candidates would never consider taxing anyone making under $50,000 – something for nothing, and your votes for free.

Everyone must pay something if we ever want our government to return to responsibility.  Which means they would have to pull back spending on ridiculous programs, like a 2 year long unemployment benefit. Joblessness will then drop.  If joblessness drops, tax revenue will increase.

Redistribution of Wealth Through Taxation

Blame the rich, they’re responsible for everything wrong anyway right. That’s the media’s message. Meanwhile the politician’s sing, “Make them pay.” Here’s a few examples

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBPSrqMcmDM

Those evil rich people just have too much money, we need to tax them more and more. Nevermind that the current administration is intentionally throwing money away in the name of the  Cloward-Piven Strategy. If you don’t accept the Cloward-Piven strategy you surely see that the Obama Administration has nearly tripled the National Deficit and plans on running deficits for years with no slow down to spending in sight. The media has put the blame for almost everything on rich people.

The Politicians are moving in to capitalize on this blame by letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire, reinstating the Estate (Death) Tax, as well as Cap & Trade and a VAT still lurking around the corner, and the HealthCare taxes coming online. The top 1% of income earners already pay 40% of all taxes within the United States.

This is nothing more than Redistribution of Wealth through taxation. Forcing the rich to pay for continued Government Spending.

Here’s CNN in 2009 on the HealthCare Taxes debate

And Laura Ingraham sitting in for Bill O’reilly hosts a debate between Mark Levine & Stuart Varney.

In Obama’s quest to bankrupt America, he has to also bankrupt the rich. The media has helped paint a  target on the wealthy and the politicians are moving to exploit it. Economics 101 tells if you take more money from the people who create jobs, you will have fewer jobs. There will be layoffs if the Bush tax cuts expire. Obama knows this, and will use it too. The rich will be villianized and blamed for these layoffs and forced to pay even more, all the while the real villian was the Obama Administration.

Our politicians have become Michael Moore, the Communist.

Follow StopObama2012 -and- Conservative Daily News on twitter

Blame Capitalism?

You may have noticed a new theme within the mainstream media. Sometimes its subtle, somtiemes its blunt, but its there. “Blame the Rich”, blame the wealthy, blame capitalism, blame .. “God Damn America” as Rev. Wright would say.

It has emerged as the left’s rallying cry once again, just as it has throughout history. In my post on Cloward-Piven Strategy, I discussed how the creators of this strategy simply expected us to embrace Socialism because we would be told that Capitalism had failed and Socialism was needed to save us. They are laying that foundation now in order to get popular support against the rich, in the hopes that, when the economy fails, you will support Socialism in order to “Save America.”

Here are some examples:

From Newsbusters:

MSNBC: American Capitalism To Blame For Financial Crisis
By Mike Sargent

File this one under Liberal Guilt Syndrome.

In the second hour of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe”, correspondent Savannah Guthrie gave a live report on the upcoming G-20 summit from London. This was a fairly straightforward report, hitting on issues that the major parties were interested in hammering out – the French want more financial regulation, for example. And then, at the very end of the report, Mika Brzezinski threw a hanging curveball. Guthrie did not disappoint:

MIKA BRZEZINSKI,“Morning Joe” co-host: What are you hearing in terms of who the Europeans blame for this financial mess and is there any blame being put on the United States? SAVANNAH GUTHRIE, MSNBC correspondent: Absolutely. I don’t think there’s any question that here in Europe and in other places around the world, people place the blame squarely on the shoulders of the United States. And in ways, this G-20 summit which, in years past, was just kind of a meet and greet and a photo op has a lot of importance. In some ways, capitalism itself is on trial, people will really be looking at hard at some of the free market principles that have really governed the day up till now. I don’t think we’re going see some huge sea change but you know, people are taking a hard look at how we got here and a lot of people do blame this American-style capitalism, lax regulation and the pursuit of money above all things with moral responsibility sort of shoved to the side. And I think we’re going to hear a lot of those themes in the coming days.
BRZEZINSKI: All right. Savannah Guthrie, thank you very much. Great report.

For those of you keeping score at home, let’s break this down in slow motion. The economic collapse is the fault of capitalism as a system, and thus, not the fault of individuals who over-leveraged their capital – or, for that matter, individuals who overextended their financial capability by buying overpriced homes.

The normally-meaningless G-20 summit is now important because it has now become Nuremberg for capitalism itself. Scratch that. American-style capitalism – the European version is perfectly fine, because it pays attention to the moral responsibility of the successful to subsidize the unsuccessful individual’s lack of success.

Of course, although the real issue lies with the fault of the few who tarnished the success of many an honest businessman, We the Press will rouse a populist lynch mob to destroy the career of every American capitalist pig.

The Ronald Reagan quip rings all too true for the mainstream media: “We have so many people who can’t see a fat man standing beside a thin one without coming to the conclusion that the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one.”

How about the New York Times claiming the Rich are keeping us in the recession with the following article :” Wealthy Reduce Buying in a Blow to the Recovery“.

The economic recovery has been helped in large part by the spending of the most affluent. Now, even the rich appear to be tightening their belts.

Late last year, the highest-income households started spending more confidently, while other consumers held back. But their confidence has since ebbed, according to retail sales reports and some economic analysis.

“One of the reasons that the recovery has lost momentum is that high-end consumers have become more jittery and more cautious,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics.

How dare those rich people not spend in order to get us out of this recession. It’s all their fault. According once again to the New York Times, these “ruthless”  rich people don’t even pay their mortgages.

Biggest Defaulters on Mortgages Are the Rich

Whether it is their residence, a second home or a house bought as an investment, the rich have stopped paying the mortgage at a rate that greatly exceeds the rest of the population.

More than one in seven homeowners with loans in excess of a million dollars are seriously delinquent, according to data compiled for The New York Times by the real estate analytics firm CoreLogic.

By contrast, homeowners with less lavish housing are much more likely to keep writing checks to their lender. About one in 12 mortgages below the million-dollar mark is delinquent.

Though it is hard to prove, the CoreLogic data suggest that many of the well-to-do are purposely dumping their financially draining properties, just as they would any sour investment.

“The rich are different: they are more ruthless,” said Sam Khater, CoreLogic’s senior economist.

So now the evil wealthy don’t pay their mortages, are guilty of prolonging the recession, and caused the financial crisis. If that’s not enough for you lets blame them for Climate Change too.

From Tech Herald: “U.S. study pins blame for climate change on wealthy

In the context of the ever tricky debate of how to involve developing nations in the battle against global warming, a group of researchers at the U.S.’s Princeton University has said a fairer method of controlling carbon emissions would be to focus on the highest emitters in each country (ie the rich).

The new study, released at a time when the world looks to a new global compact for cutting carbon emissions at the Copenhagen climate talks in December, contends that a more practical way of combatting excessive emissions is to concentrate on those wealthier individuals in all countries who contribute most to increased greenhouse gases.

“Most of the world’s emissions come disproportionately from the wealthy citizens of the world, irrespective of their nationality,” explained physicist Shoibal Chakravarty, a lead author of the report and a research scholar at the Princeton Environmental Institute.

“We estimate that in 2008, half of the world’s emissions came from just 700 million people,” he said.

“We are not actually suggesting you go after the high using individuals. But we are using this approach to better capture the notions of equity and fairness in bettering national targets,” Chakravarty said in an interview with Scientific American. “So, if a country has a lot of high-emitting people, it must do more to reduce carbon emissions.”

The authors of the report say their system is a fairer way to apportion “blame” for global warming and may lead to a breakthrough in the impasse in climate negotiations.

Many developing nations, such as India and China, say because their contribution to greenhouse gases is far lower historically and per capita than those countries of the affluent West, they should be exempt from stringent emission cuts levels. However critics of this approach say that a global approach is required to combat the climate crisis.

I’m sure by now you are seeing the pattern, but I can’t resist throwing one more at you, the latest attack on the rich blames them for the ever shrinking middle class.

From Yahoo Finance: ” The Middle Class in America Is Radically Shrinking. Here Are the Stats to Prove it

The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer at a staggering rate. Once upon a time, the United States had the largest and most prosperous middle class in the history of the world, but now that is changing at a blinding pace.

So why are we witnessing such fundamental changes? Well, the globalism and “free trade” that our politicians and business leaders insisted would be so good for us have had some rather nasty side effects. It turns out that they didn’t tell us that the “global economy” would mean that middle class American workers would eventually have to directly compete for jobs with people on the other side of the world where there is no minimum wage and very few regulations. The big global corporations have greatly benefited by exploiting third world labor pools over the last several decades, but middle class American workers have increasingly found things to be very tough.

The reality is that no matter how smart, how strong, how educated or how hard working American workers are, they just cannot compete with people who are desperate to put in 10 to 12 hour days at less than a dollar an hour on the other side of the world. After all, what corporation in their right mind is going to pay an American worker 10 times more (plus benefits) to do the same job? The world is fundamentally changing. Wealth and power are rapidly becoming concentrated at the top and the big global corporations are making massive amounts of money. Meanwhile, the American middle class is being systematically wiped out of existence as U.S. workers are slowly being merged into the new “global” labor pool.

What do most Americans have to offer in the marketplace other than their labor? Not much. The truth is that most Americans are absolutely dependent on someone else giving them a job. But today, U.S. workers are “less attractive” than ever. Compared to the rest of the world, American workers are extremely expensive, and the government keeps passing more rules and regulations seemingly on a monthly basis that makes it even more difficult to conduct business in the United States.

So corporations are moving operations out of the U.S. at breathtaking speed. Since the U.S. government does not penalize them for doing so, there really is no incentive for them to stay.

What has developed is a situation where the people at the top are doing quite well, while most Americans are finding it increasingly difficult to make it. There are now about six unemployed Americans for every new job opening in the United States, and the number of “chronically unemployed” is absolutely soaring. There simply are not nearly enough jobs for everyone.

While the author mentions “Globalism” and that “the government keeps passing more rules and regulations seemingly on a monthly basis that makes it even more difficult to conduct business in the United States” he has settled on blaming the rich who surely must be responsible.

The government is already limiting executive pay where it can, taxing it where it can’t (expiration of Bush tax cuts, estate tax reinstatement – all to take from the evil rich.  Where does it go?  The intent appears to be Obama’s “re-distributive change”.  Taking from the wealthy and using it to fund programs or outright hand the money to the poor.  How long before the case is directly made that the middle class needs to be rebuilt using money from the wealthy to lift-up the poor?

The media is pushing the message that, “The rich” are responsible for all our problems. They are hoping you will hold to blaming them after an economic collapse and allow a Socialist Economic Revolution to replace “Failed Capitalism.” They are trying to make you angry enough to turn a blind eye to the Nationalization of each and every company, and the forced redistribution of wealth because those evil rich are responsible for all our problems.

Recent Entries »