Ahem! In case you didn't notice there has been a class war going on since God knows when in our country.

Consider this for example: think of all the perjorative descriptions of poor people in our society. That's a lot of moral rage directed at folks who may have foolishly picked parents who were African-American or Native American or three fries short of a Happy Meal IQ-wise or addicted.

That's class warfare! And it certainly serves the interests of those in the seats of financial power to have the working class direct its ire at those below it.

Or how about the widening and obscene divergence in income enjoyed by those at the upper reaches of our economy when compared to those who are slowly losing ground.

It's funny that the specter of class warfare is only raised when those who are struggling to make ends meet complain about inequities of rewards and not about the ordinary ways the rich get the rules made to make themselves richer still.

Revrick: It's funny that the specter of class warfare is only raised when those who are struggling to make ends meet complain about inequities of rewards and not about the ordinary ways the rich get the rules made to make themselves richer still.

I think it's also funny that the rich always term moves towards fiscal balance, such as Clinton's 1993 tax hike, as "class war". The rich apparently are to be left alone to prosper, while the middle class and below are to be left to their own devices, and their children to inherit the debt, the creditors of which are the rich themselves, plus increasingly, foreigners who have taken the jobs of the former middle and working class.

It is indeed a class war at home and a race/religious war abroad. The politicians we are saddled with are usually chosen, or at least financed, by the rich. They know how to work these dichotomies. Thus, Nixon was recognized even by the Man in the Street as 'Tricky Dick'--i.e., Mafia-like, but was perceived to be tough enough to win against the Soviets in the Cold War. Nixon might have been a bastard, but he was 'our bastard'. The people sacrificed their integrity for what was perceived as a greater need: security. Same goes for Reagan and the current occupant. As Frankin said, "A nation prepared to sacrifice its freedom for security deserves neither." A class prepared to dump on the less fortunate in the expectation of ultimate rewards from the wealthy itself deserves to be dumped on.

"That's a lot of moral rage directed at folks who may have foolishly picked parents who were African-American or Native American or three fries short of a Happy Meal IQ-wise or addicted."

Do you really think class warriors are THAT uncreative and unresourceful? Puh-lease. If anything, the new class warriors are even less "racist". White men would rather hire illegal immigrants over other white men if they detect an "unwarranted" sense of entitlement in the job-seeking white guy.

If you paint class warfare in terms of 1950's era racism, well, you might score some points with the idiots who have been hiding under rocks for fifty years, but the world has changed.

Meanwhile, while there's many rich people who just keep squirreling away cash, many rich people create jobs, and, the less they are taxed, the more jobs they can create.

It may feel good to tax some rich guy, but what if it means he decides to fire some of his employees, or stop hiring more employees? Or, what if the rich guy decides paying an extra 20% to the goverment on every employee isn't worth it and relocates to a nation with lower taxes?

Tax the rich sounds good... but only if the rich pay up.

"Do you really think class warriors are THAT uncreative and unresourceful? Puh-lease. If anything, the new class warriors are even less "racist". White men would rather hire illegal immigrants over other white men if they detect an "unwarranted" sense of entitlement in the job-seeking white guy.

If you paint class warfare in terms of 1950's era racism, well, you might score some points with the idiots who have been hiding under rocks for fifty years, but the world has changed."

Revrick is not stating that the "class warriors" are themselves racist, he's listing factors of birth that have a signficant impact on future earnings and then expressing his frustration with individuals who equate poverty with immorality and wealth with morality.

"Meanwhile, while there's many rich people who just keep squirreling away cash, many rich people create jobs, and, the less they are taxed, the more jobs they can create."

Wealthy people have the ability to more easily squirrel away money. Someone making 30k a year is going to have far more difficulty setting aside a decent sum than someone making 300k a year. The person making 300k a year could concievably set aside 200k a year and still live far more comfortably than the individual making 30k while they both consume the same amount of leisure time. Many rich people create jobs, and many workers create rich people.

"It may feel good to tax some rich guy, but what if it means he decides to fire some of his employees, or stop hiring more employees? Or, what if the rich guy decides paying an extra 20% to the goverment on every employee isn't worth it and relocates to a nation with lower taxes?"

Madai, the rich guy only pays income taxes on profits, not total revenues. If the employees' marginal product of labor is positive, why would any respectable businessman terminate him and lose the portion of the profits the government doesn't take? I agree that the individual could relocate to a country with lower taxes, but I guess that shows the contempt that this individual has for the US, does it not? Conversely, what if due to lower taxes the US is unable to maintain the infrastructure necessary to sustain the rich guy's business and he has no choice but to leave.

"Tax the rich sounds good... but only if the rich pay up."

Taxes are the money the rich man pays to support the national infrastructure and economy which supports his business and also the method by which he avoids angry peasants on his doorstep.

I see no disparity between the partners; the top dog is concerned that the host will tank (government is the host; central bankers are the parasite) leaving it to the number two in command to do enough dirty work to get the wealth shifting legislation drafted...

gotta give enough back to the government for them to stay current with their debts which are owed right back to the wealthy.

the mechanics of maintaining the system

"Consider this for example: think of all the perjorative descriptions of poor people in our society. That's a lot of moral rage directed at folks who may have foolishly picked parents who were African-American or Native American or three fries short of a Happy Meal IQ-wise or addicted."

FOOL....The Rich are not in a rage over anything !

They are sittin pretty, serene, plump & satisfied. Why would they disparage something which is to be ignored.

The Rage is all coming from the other end of the spectrum!

Meanwhile, while there's many rich people who just keep squirreling away cash, many rich people create jobs, and, the less they are taxed, the more jobs they can create

Right...however what kind of jobs are created? Are they living wage jobs or are they subservient and indentured servitude jobs?? There is no question that the elite class seeks to create more wealth but not to share that wealth. Of course most are smart enough to realize that even the most magnificent mansion needs a foundation. Mahogany furniture is no good in the middle of a dirt floor. The real question facing the working class is whether or not they are willing to settle for servitude, whether or not they are content to be foundation bricks; if not the battle they have ahead of them is huge because the wealthy control the law enforcement agencies as well as the political agencies and can easily make it illegal for a person to aspire to equality with them.

eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom eom

Madai:

It still lives in the separate but equal doctrine when once compares the resources Bloomfield Hills has in comparison to Detrot schools. In Bloomfield Hills we are ripping up Woodward Avenue so the Babbyboomers can experince one last rush of youth by driving on a smott 4 lane road with their fifties and sixties beaters. At the same time, the state threatenes to short schools by approximately $124/ student unless there are tax increases and budget cuts.

Who has their priorities awry? Those who wish smooth roads by robbing schools, especially those of cities or those who see the need to provide equal education for all and not just those who live in the Bloomfield Hills of the nation. Racism for mimorities and the poor is still alive and thriving, just in a more subtle form. The worl has not changed and neither have the racists.

Still the rich create jobs??? Sure they do create jobs, just not in this country. They go to China and create jobs in factories that pollute the country and pay less than nominal wages in less than safe conditions there by maximizing their profits. The same week 32 students were murdered at VT, 32 Chinese laborers were scalded to death in a steel mill when a ladle of molten steel accidently tipped. Arkady, Leroy, and myself have answered your senseless dialogues on job creation.

Don't be silly Madai

"Sure they do create jobs, just not in this country."

That line works well now, since you've had seven years to badmouth the economy. But, back in 2000, it would have sounded like a line of crap, mostly because it is. There are only 7 million unemployed in the US. In China, there's 30 million. The rich have to work THAT MUCH HARDER to create jobs in the US because they have 1/4 as many people to work with.

And, still, you've said *nothing* to assure me that higher taxes will not accelerate the outsourcing. Outsourcing is going to happen. After WWII, the US was the only intact intact industrial nation. But over time, other industrial nations rebuilt, and now, with the fall of USSR, we have a multitude of industrial workers available outside the US. But if you tax the rich more, will they STOP outsourcing, or do it more vigorously and turn US into the 3rd world shithole like you been saying "any minute now!" "any mintue now!" for the past few years?

"Arkady, Leroy, and myself have answered your senseless dialogues on job creation."

And answered wrongly. The economy is fine, and is soon as there's a likeable president in office, people will start admitting how great the economy is, and credit the new guy.

So, the rich have to work that much harder, huh? I guess that's why the golf club heads seem to be getting larger. Boy, if John Henry had one of them, he would have really gotten a lot more done! When are you going to get over this naive idea that the rich work? They don't and, because of the combination of the unused funds held by corporations, and the huge amount of money being poured into 401Ks and IRAs by the working middle class, their money is not needed by the private sector either. They live rich but, because they are relatively few in number, and shopped mostly offshore, the rich don't contribute to consumption within the US economy. Where their wealth can be put to good use is in the governmental part of the economy. Due to rash and unjustifyable tax cuts and give-backs, the federal budget is in bad shape, which bodes poorly for the future. Fortunately, a large pool of money lies useless in the hands of the pampered rich and transfering those funds to the national government will solve two problems: first, the chronic borrowing by the government, and second the outrageous and unjustifyable lifestyle engaged in by such a large proportion of the truly rich that they can be considered to all be in that group.

"When are you going to get over this naive idea that the rich work?"

When they no longer work? But right now, several people who I consider rich are still recieving money for services provides and goods produced. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett for example do work, and do create jobs.

There are of course some rich people that don't work or create jobs. But, money has a way shrinking from generation to generation. Watch the waltons-- they used to be in the top ten richest in the world. Now the richest Walton is in 23rd place.

This trend is sure to continue. Self-made, working billionaires will always overtake heirs.

The problem of Detroit's School System may not be fiscal.

Our press is ignoring the problems and lessons of Detroit.

I'd like to see a little more media curiosity !

"Tax the rich sounds good... but only if the rich pay up."

Some discussion as to why it is that taxes seem to be mandatory for the poor and optional for the rich and of course the corporations.

If the rich guy decides paying an extra 20% to the government on every employee isn't worth it and relocates to a nation with lower taxes, I'd be in favor of letting him try staying in business without access to our market.

When everyone works for MacDonalds, or Wal-Mart, nobody will be able to afford an automobile.

I don't think that qualifies as creative destruction; it's just plain old destructive.

I don't think the upper classes will enjoy living in the country they're deconstructing around us, but they'll discover that too late to stop a lot of misery.