Another view on the TEA Party

Simply speaking the myth of objectivity in news formats is rather threadbare any more. Thus objective becomes agree with my world view. IMHO most reporters are more liberal and their views that comes through in their reporting. Objective reporting is vilified by both sides, remember in Karate Kid, "Walk one side of road, safe. Walk other side of road safe. Walk down middle squish like grape."

Poker

Funny really that we actually agree on much more than we disagree on. I didn't think I defined redneck, just mentioned that our Bogans are viewed somewhat similarly. There have been several full sized books trying to define them and they contradict. One thing is for sure is that economics and brains have no place in the definition. Many of our leading citizens would fall under the general definition, and I too like home brew beer, casual clothing and some of the other pointers.
A personal bias of mine does skew my outlook on extreme wealth, in that like T2M I retired from highly paid work to do my own thing much to my employer's dismay, on a bit higher retirement income though. Regarding the super rich I personally can't see the benefit of accruing more $billions when you already have much more than you can spend. I also don't buy the argument that the super rich drive the economy so deserve admiration. Gates deserves admiration because he is now doing good with his wealth, but in the past his company has done some not so nice things in search of the dollar.
Each to their own regarding social strata or lack of it. I much prefer our system where a pensioner and a multimillionaire are fishing mates, than (from what you say) the millionaire has a station that the pensioner might hope to aspire to.
We certainly don't have "What is left is a rigid society where one's place in it is set at birth or the whim of the powerful.". For a start we don't have the powerful, with leading politicians and industrialists fully subject to the same laws as everyone else, possibly more so because our society is always on the look out for someone who is "up themselves". From my viewpoint our progressive society actually facilitates individual financial opportunity, as a kid from the poorest family (like our previous PM) can access free health care and an excellent education system just as the rich kid can.
To sum up we don't really believe in social mobility because each of us already regards themselves to be a social equal to anyone else. Our country is far from perfect, and we have discussions here that are far less polite than this forum, seeking to improve it.

Something else that is old yet relevant to the Taxed Enough Already people. Once again provided by someone over on the Bar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXBswFfh6AY

Listen to the numbers and the government programs.

I had typed up a bunch of other things. Just watch draw your own conclusions. I can't get my thoughts on the screen in a coherent fashion.

Enjoy the movie,
T2M

Daryl wrote:snip

A personal bias of mine does skew my outlook on extreme wealth, in that like T2M I retired from highly paid work to do my own thing much to my employer's dismay, on a bit higher retirement income though. Regarding the super rich I personally can't see the benefit of accruing more $billions when you already have much more than you can spend. I also don't buy the argument that the super rich drive the economy so deserve admiration. Gates deserves admiration because he is now doing good with his wealth, but in the past his company has done some not so nice things in search of the do

.

Dang, Daryl! Stop being so agreeable. You make it difficult to satisfy my closed minded, right wing, TEA Party loving bigotry.

Seriously, I agree that the super rich are no paragons of virtue. They are as subject to human failings as the next man. Yes, they are the social equal of anyone else and I would fault a wealthy man who wouldn't fish with a pensioner just because of their disparity of wealth.

That said, I do value innovation. Incentives to encourage innovation should be embraced. The best such incentives are found in property rights and a free market. Where innovators own their ideas and can sell to any who wish to buy at mutually agreed upon prices. If a new idea is successful enough to make him uber wealthy? Well good on him!

Edit: Spelling

Kind of a Libertarian bent but we went there already.

http://accordingtohoyt.com/2013/11/06/w ... o-a-moron/

More thought material. For some reason I a always seem to do better understanding print rather than video or audio.

Good thoughts,
T2M