I absolutely HATED that movie. In addition to being schmaltzy and sentimental, I had absolutely zero sympathy for Gardner. He made a stupid business decision and then made his family suffer for it. He put his pride above his family’s security. If that were my husband I’d have dumped him in a heartbeat.

Instead of cutting his losses and dumping the loser machine that he was trying to hawk that no one wanted to buy and getting a real job, he kept trying to flog a dead horse. Instead of trying to find financial security for the benefit of his young child, he was selfishly focused on his own success. What an ass.

I realize that the machine was supposed to be a metaphor for his “baggage” but how obvious can you get? Bad story, bad film.

And yes, I see why conservatives love it, since Gardner is supposedly oppressed by taxes and all other restraints on free trade and other ridiculous notions. But the way I see it, the only thing that held Gardner back was his own stupid, selfish pride.

In addition to being schmaltzy and sentimental

hmmm… I’ve got to see this movie.

SB, it’s really funny to read your reaction. When I first finished watching the movie, I felt such admiration for the man because he seemed like a such a good father. So different than you. Interesting.

Interesting, and predictable, Glen. To me a good father would put the needs and security of his child first. Not his own ambition.

Also interesting that conservatives continually disparage the poor and homeless as people who “won’t get a job.” This man gets your admiration because his story had a happy ending. What about all of those folks who didn’t get that Dean Whitter internship? Who did everything they were supposed to do but maybe didn’t make the cut? What about them?

SB, thats an important question. Since the thread is a kind of mix between the movie and conservative values, i feel justified in ignoring the movie part, (haven’t seen it) and chiming in on this notion that all individuals have greatness in them.

Yes, they do, IMO, in a spiritual sense. My belief is that all individuals are in the process of becoming god-like, so we all have the same potential, and indeed the same “chance” at spiritual success, which I define as becoming god. In fact, I don’t believe it is possible for a soul to not achieve it.

That said, I don’t believe every person has the same potential for success as we measure it in this country. My biggest complaint with unfettered capitalism is that it’s entire structure is dependent upon the belief that in order for one to gain, another must lose. Business isn’t about healthy competition anymore, its about annihilating one’s competitor. Its not about striking a balance between shareholders and workers, it is about maintaining growth and profitability levels at the expense of workers, and sometimes, customers.

There was a time when an average person could transcend whatever his or her handicaps might be to achieve real financial security. I believe we have seen the last of those days. If you are in a disadvantaged financial position, every turn is perilous, as the systems in place reward taking advantage rather than assisting in a way up, and eventually, out.

Our system has wonderful potential, but may never fully realize what it can do until more people are able to participate in it.

Good points, Mack.

Also, the playing field isn’t level. It’s just not. There is inequity everywhere you look, from cradle to grave. Schools are not the same for everyone, everywhere; healthcare is not the same, safety and security are not the same.

Spend 1 hour tutoring kids in the projects and that will become abundantly clear.

SB –

“He made a stupid business decision and then made his family suffer for it. He put his pride above his family’s security. If that were my husband I’d have dumped him in a heartbeat.”

I’ve never seen the movie and don’t know much about the guy. What, specifically, did he do that was so bad in your eyes?

So, shorter Glen Dean, he pulled himself up by his bootstraps?

What, specifically, did he do that was so bad in your eyes?

I’d like to know that too. It seems ungrateful, particularly after he saved the planet from those big-ass alien ships.

[…] A person of your stature should not dream, it only leads to disappointment. […]

Mack –

Yeah, no kidding. But frankly, I kind of question the bootstraps thing. I mean, yes, he did start out in West Philadelphia, where he was born and raised, but then didn’t he get into a little trouble and get shipped out to his auntie and uncle in Bel Air?

Seriously, if he hadn’t had those wealthy relatives, I don’t think he would have gotten as far as he eventually did.

I thought it was his good uncle Hitler?

Another of those movies that (conserv)atives like is the one about the horse - “seabisquick” The Cons say that that movie proves that if you work hard enough you’ll become the greatest. What the movie doesn’t show are all the other horse owners who had a horse they believed in, and risked it all, and still came up short.

BTW - I always thought that Conservatives were people who liked to conserve things - like the status quo. As in, the rich people should stay rich, and the poor should stay poor. And they aren’t too happy about a poor person making good and moving into their neighborhood.

Glen wrote that: “Conservatives believe that all men and women, when they are free, have unlimited potential.” Well, liberals believe that too. But liberals know that it is the conservatives who hold the keys to the jail that prevents people from being free enough to pursue their potential. Conservatives use economic and social strongholds to keep people down who might otherwise be a threat to their own wealth and social position.

BTW - I always thought that Conservatives were people who liked to conserve things - like the status quo. As in, the rich people should stay rich, and the poor should stay poor. And they aren’t too happy about a poor person making good and moving into their neighborhood.

Could you introduce me to this person? I run in pretty wide circles, but I’ve yet to meet him. I’m assured he exists, thought.

It is based on Gardner’s biography, btw. The business decision that Beale speaks of was this. He bought these machines that were supposed to take the place of the x-ray. Eventually, he ended up selling every one of them, but it took him a long time, and he lost a lot in the process. It was a bad business decision, no doubt. But bad business decisions are not a sin. He should be commended for taking a risk, rather than being content with whatever it was he was doing before then. He then saw this guy in a sports car as he was walking and asked the guy what he did for a living. When the guy said stock broker, he worked hard to become one and eventually took an unpaid internship. The mother of his child left him and the child, and he ended up losing his apartment. But he still hung on to his dreams, selling the medical devices on the weekends to pay for his son’s daycare and spending the night in either a church shelter or the subway bathroom floor. He studied all night long and created a system that allowed him to call on more potential clients than the others. After the internship was over, they gave him a position and within a few years he opened his own firm. Presently, he is a multimillionaire and a philanthropist. For all I know, he may vote Democrat. It doesn’t matter. Conservative is not about Republican and Democrat. It’s about the exceptionalism and potential of free individuals. And Gardner is certainly one of those individuals.

The funny thing is that the whole deal with the machine didn’t really happen in real life.

Frankly, I’m with SB, and even more so after reading his biography. I’m never in favour of men who shit on their children in order to follow their dreams.

By the way, what I just described is the movie, not the actual true story in his book. The movie, of course, took a lot of liberties with the true story.

Mack, people who think similarly have been saying that we have seen the last of “those days” for many years, not unlike people who constantly complain about the morality of the current times, always lamenting that things aren’t like they used to be. That has also been going on for years.

SB, those people who didn’t make the cut, either learned from their adversity and prospered, or they wallowed in their self-pity and lived a lifetime of failure. There is nothing sad or horrible about failing. Failure is the end result of most attempts. It is how one reacts to failure that matters. Chris Gardner had obviously been a failure in his prior business venture, and what did that adversity do for him? He could have blamed everybody else and demanded that the government bail him out, but no he reacted differently. He worked harder and much smarter.

When I had absolutely nothing to my name, no car, no home, little money, I constantly read the first chapter of James. I read it so often that I memorized it. It says to consider it pure joy when you face trials, because this testing develops perseverance. It is this perseverance that builds character. When I look back on my life, I thank God for the hell that I once went through. It is because of that experience that I am able to be a good husband and a good daddy.

Kevin, conservatism isn’t about money. It is about individual liberty. It is about faith in humankind. It’s a positive view of man, as opposed to a cynical view.

This winners and losers thing is only partly true. Yes, in a 40 yard dash, there is only one winner and the rest are defeated. But you all seem to believe that there is only a set amount of tokens and that if one person gets a lot, there aren’t any left for the other guy. The economy is not a fixed pie though. It continues to grow and grow. There is no need to envy your brother and demand that he give you some of his. The opportunity is there for you to get yours also.

America was made great because of the freedom of the individual. Every advance we have the pleasure of using today was created by the minds of men and women through capitalism, not government.

Conservatives believe that all men and women, when they are free, have unlimited potential. (my emphasis)

I’d say most liberals agree (at least I do). Unfortunately, there aren’t many people in this world who are “free” in every way, shape, and form. We’re all bound by various life circumstances, some under our control, others not.

Katherine and SB, that is pretty amazing. Especially considering the fact that Gardner made millions and provided his child with lots of material wealth.

I thank God that I didn’t marry a woman like either of you. When I told my wife that I wanted to take a chance, liquidate our savings, and go into the Real Estate business, without fear, she said “follow your dreams”. There were plenty of safe men, men content to work their butts off and complain about it everyday, available for a girl as pretty as her to marry, but she chose a man with a wild heart. In spite of coming close to bankruptcy in the last few months, she never wavered. She believed in me and was willing to do without a lot.

The greatest men in history aren’t the safe ones, they are the ones who took major chances and risked everything. There is no shame in punching a clock your whole life if that makes you happy. But if it doesn’t make you happy, there is great shame in it. There is great shame in being to afraid to follow your dreams, or so afraid that you discourage your spouse from following theirs.

Glen,

I’ve been married to, and supportive of, a man who has taken a lot of risks. Some have succeeded, others have not. Yet through 18 years of marriage I’ve fully supported him.

It’s not the financial risks I mind about Gardner. It’s things like leaving your wife to move in with a dental student, dumping your son with a series of friends instead of allowing the baby to live with his mother and doing illegal drugs to enhance sex with your mistress.

I’ve read several books about Gardner since seeing the movie and the overriding fact of his life seems to be that he cares more about money than he cares about any of the people he committed to.

I haven’t seen the movie, but gee, SB, lighten up. The movie (not the main character of the movie’s bio) is what is heralded as Conservative. It’s rich for a Liberal to be lambasting a Hollywood product (and its characters, and its inspiration, and moviegoers!!) for such a shortcoming. Aside, it kind of reminds me of the scene from “It’s a Wonderful Life” where George Bailey rejects Potter’s job offer and then chews out Potter and Potter’s butler and Potter’s secretary when she happens to walk through the door.

I hate to admit it, but you guys (”and you TOO Kat Coble!!”) are sounding kind of like ol’ Conservative me who can’t enjoy half the movies in Hollywood because of some asinine political statement once made by one of the cast members.

But thanks for raising this issue, Glen. One minor disagreement I have is with the assertion that every person has “unlimited potential” (ref. recent “elitist” argument). It is inspiring to watch movies like “Pursuit” and to be told kind things by your grandparent or first grade teacher, but not everyone can achieve “great” things or “great” wealth or exceptional whatever. That being said, everyone can make a respectable living (i.e., our vast middle class which is the envy of the world). Unfortunately, our system doesn’t deal with envy, or the possibility of failing (aka, freedom to take risks and perhaps enjoy the benefits from them), or “unfair” results. Socialism doesn’t work folks.

SB, I have spent one hour tutoring kids in the project . . . what’s your answer for the problems they face? The “War on Poverty”? How’s that working out for ya?

Katherine, this discussion is about the character in the movie.

Glen, ol’ buddy,

Perhaps you should spend more time reading dictionaries and less time watching movies:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conservative

Kevin, you are a smart guy. I know this because I have read your blog and your comments over the years. Your last comment though does not represent you very well.

A little personal history lesson:

My wife and I started out making minumum wage. At the time, it was $3.35, and according to MeasuringWorth.com, that had the purchasing power of $5.95 an hour in today’s dollars. We had a 750 sq.ft. apartment in Murfreesboro, and we lived on love and ramen noodles.

We were in the exact same situation many today call hopeless. We are told by many that we either could not have gotten to where we are today, or we got there due to some kind of privilege. I’d love to know what kind of privilege they are talking about; I would have skipped those 80 hour work weeks early in our marriage.

Good Lord, my grandfather was - I’m not kidding - a sharecropper. My father was a hard-working blue collar tradesman. I got caught in the financial aid crunch of the early 80’s, and Uncle Sam wouldn’t take me in his armed forces, so college just wasn’t meant to be for me.

Yet, here we are. I took a menial job with the state of TN because I lost my restaurant job, I worked my way up,year by year,position by position to manager, and then by happenstance saw a want ad for a job I had previously done for the state, working nightshift for Big Ole Healthcare Company.

They doubled my salary. I taught myself computer programming, moved from the night shift to a programming job with the same company, and my salary doubled again.

Lintilla’s path was diferent, but she’s doing what she loves and does it more as a calling than anything. She still makes about as much as one can in her field; she’s very good at it.

I know I’m fortunate, but privileged? MY kids, yes. But I got a pretty subpar education due to the chaos that surrounded the Metro school system in the late 70’s and early 80’s, so we can’t say I went to good schools. There was illness and bankruptcy right smack in the middle of my childhood. My “break” came from getting a government job, which,last time I looked, is a pretty non-discriminatory environment. And trust me, you don’t get more menial than the job I started with. I got promotions because I worked my butt off. Big Ole Healthcare Company took a chance on me because I was willing to work nights, and I had done that kind of work for many, many years. And this was 1996, not that long ago.

I do not tell you these things to boast, but to give you some understanding of why I cannot fathom this hopeless, unfair America everyone keeps descibing.

Privilege?

Now, tell me, what’s different from a couple in 1987 making minimum wage, and a couple in 2007 making minumum wage?

Wow. One whole hour. Way to go, Ned!

Glen, in all seriousness, good luck in Real Estate.

Sarcasstro,
Well, not that it bears on the discussion (Sarcastro? noooo), but it was much more than one hour–thanks for the encouragement anyway.

But that was SB’s challenge . . . I’ve done it and have reached vastly different conclusions than she.

Slarti, that is some inspiring stuff there. You’d think with all of this inspiration , I might eventually get some work done today. Seriously though, that story and the post in the trackback is pretty awesome.

Ned, being middle class is a great thing, don’t you think? Like you said, middle class in the USA is the envy of the world.

Sarcastro, thanks. This time last year, you and I and Kathy T. were talking about this at the blogger Christmas party. You said something about other Realtors that I remember and have found to be true. Gosh, some of them are such bitches. Damn, how time flies.

Damn. I must have been loaded, because I don’t remember that conversation. Although, it does strike a familiar chord.

Ned, or should I say “Nerd”, because that kind of humor never gets stale, if you spent more than one hour tutoring kids, then say so on the front end. Otherwise, it just makes you look like an ass.

>John doesn’t believe that most human beings have the same potential that Chris Gardner had.

Come talk to me when you solve a Rubix cube over the course of a cab ride.

Or when you’re ready to stop this silly “only conservatives believe people can accomplish things nonsense”.

Katherine, this discussion is about the character in the movie.

But then you said

I thank God that I didn’t marry a woman like either of you.

So I was explaining my objection to the “character in the movie”–who in my mind is based on a real character, so I call the real character into question.

>through capitalism, not government.

Ahh, false dichotomies, they do so make the blogoshpere go ’round.

Sarcastro, I think you were sober. I think. We need to ask Kathy.

Jon, if I made any false assumptions about what you believe, I apologize. Modern liberalism though does appear to be a much more cynical view of mankind. Liberalism, the modern definition, seems to thrive on the existence of victims. Movies like the one being discussed here seem to go against that view of mankind and America.

That’s rich. You, someone who goes by the name “Sarcastro,” telling me that I ought to be more forthright or transparent in my statements. I didn’t need to provide any other details to negate SB’s fallacious assertion.

But I do apologize for calling you sarcastro . . . namecalling doesn’t advance the discussion or the relationship.

Glen,
I’d say that modern Liberalism gives too much credit to gov’t to make things “fair” and too often ignores how (even inadvertant) state-imposed unfairness doesn’t make other unfairness right. And I think those who ascribe to Modern Liberalism are too quick (in fairness, often motivated by compassion or sympathy) to remove responsibility or accountability from individuals and blame “the system.”

What about Jim Crow, wasn’t that a “system”?

Without liberals, what would that be all about today?

Good point, Jim Crow Laws were wrong–and I don’t support them. Indeed, more Democrats than Democrats (numerically and proportionately) supported Jim Crow. But, I agree, they were wrong and I have never supported them.

That being said, there are exceptions to every rule, I’d say, and there are definitely things that should not be “conserved.”

I have no problem with name-calling.

Just unimaginative name-calling.

That should have read, “But I do apologize for misspelling your name . . .” or “calling you Sarcasstro.”

I have no problem with name-calling.

Just unimaginative name-calling.

Yeah, that is probably another way we’re different.

You people are so dumb. Rich uncle in Bel Aire? Fighting off aliens? Don’t you know that this is all just a scam to rip off Donald Sutherland and Stockard Channing?!

Now, tell me, what’s different from a couple in 1987 making minimum wage, and a couple in 2007 making minumum wage?

I don’t know. But without liberals you wouldn’t have even been making that.

Well, regardless of what he may have done to his wife and kids, surely he redeemed himself by giving his life to find the cure for the Crippen virus.

I can only do so much on public access computers.

Two people in love can overcome a lot - as long as they are also intelligent, educated, and healthy, both mentally and physically.

When the poor is surveyed, you find a lot of unintelligent, uneducated, unhealthy people.

Yet, the government/society CAN provide certain education and health benfits, if allowed to do so.

Many Red state enthusiates don’t want to provide the money for education and health to the poor.

I have spent one hour tutoring kids in the project . . . what’s your answer for the problems they face?

Bravo Ned. Way to give up an entire hour of your life to help those in need. Perhaps the church should declare you a saint.

TheBoyfriend™ taught those kids (actually the ones who were worse because they weren’t even allowed to go to school in the projects anymore) full time for over a year. I think he’ll be the first to tell you that the conservative “kick you out on your ass and tell you just work hard and try not to starve to death before you get a promotion” isn’t what can help those kids. Most of them are in the situation they are in because their parents did just that to them.

Well bravo (sort of) back at you, dolphin.

Perhaps I should have written “SB, I have spent one hour tutoring kids in the project . . .” But not even that was necessary to demonstrate that SB’s argument was fallacious.

And such a “debate” is a head-shakingly petty and immature type of johnson-comparing contest about charity or compassion (like you are wont to do about how “faithful” or not you are compared to others, frankly).

Too many outspoken Libs seem to think that they’ve got the market cornered on charity or compassion, and they point to vicarious, often NIMBYish (gov’t) policy positions (or to online, unverifiable, anonymous, self-aggrandizing assertions) as evidence of their moral superiority. But, nice argument.

Gee, Ned. You sound like a man who needs prove nothing.

.

SB, I have spent one hour tutoring kids in the project . . . what’s your answer for the problems they face?

Great, then you’ll understand why programs like No Child Left Behind that treat an affluent public school in Brentwood the same as an inner city school won’t work because the problems they face are entirely different.

There hasn’t been a real “war on poverty” in this country since the 1960s. You might disparage it (and I could just as easily disparage the ridiculous Reagan era “War On Drugs”), but the anti-poverty programs introduced in the 60s reduced poverty in this country to historic lows. Despite Republican policies that have tried to dismantle the progress of the 60s, poverty levels have remained below 15% ever since. Sadly, the past 20 years of GOP controlled government have led to a slow creep upward in poverty levels, and for the first time since the 60s we’re seeing a vanishing middle class. Hopefully a Democratic administration in 2008, coupled with a Democratic Congress, can reverse some of the Bush-era damage.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/histpov/hstpov2.html

As for what we can do to help those kids in the projects, I’d say it’s a complicated problem requiring a multifaceted solution. We need a plan that addresses the entire family, entire communities. Kids can’t learn if they are sick, hungry, or don’t feel safe and secure in their homes. The child I tutored was often tired and distracted, she said gunfire on her street the night before had made her unable to sleep. I wonder how many kids in Brentwood had the same problem?

Let’s get rid of this ridiculous notion that education can somehow be separated from everything else going on in a child’s life. Schools won’t get better until the communities around them are stronger, and until poor families feel safe and secure, economically and physically. And until Americans once again value ideas over things.

What’s more important: a high school diploma or new Nike tennis shoes? Being the first in your family to go to college or getting a new wide-screen TV? Our value system has been completely corrupted, and it’s not “liberalism” to blame–it’s consumerism. And both right and left are equally at fault. We haven’t just built our economy on consumption, we’ve built our entire culture on it. And what we see today is just the fruit of those seeds.

OK thanks for letting me rant. Happy New Year, everyone.

Well, I just posted a long answer to Ned’s “SB what would YOU do” comment and it seems to have been lost in the ether.

Maybe it was too long. Anyway, if someone can retrieve it, I’d appreciate it. In the meantime, Happy New Year kiddos.

And such a “debate” is a head-shakingly petty and immature type of johnson-comparing contest about charity or compassion

It was you Ned who suggested your hour of tutoring made you an authority. If you don’t want a johnson-comparing contest, then keep yours in your pants in the first place.

like you are wont to do about how “faithful” or not you are compared to others

You know you’re doing something right if you get attacked from both sides. serr8d thinks I’m a god-hating athiest because I don’t talk about my faith enough. You think I’m self-righteous because I apparently talk about my faith too much (and the irony of that coming from you is HUGE).

Conservatism means individualism

And self reliance. It’s a good thing.

[…] than those of lawyers and royal estate agents — so it is rather amusing to see one of each going on about the evils of government. But my appreciation of irony aside, the toxic stench of burning strawmen was far too thick over […]

Some wise man once said, “No man is an island.”

… but every man has a peninsula.
.

Some wise man once said, “No man is an island.”

Is there an allergy to self reliance?

Is there an allergy to self reliance?

I don’t think it’s that, as much as it is a healthy dose of realization that the “self reliance” heralded by our rightist friends is made in the context of living in the country with one of the the most advanced social infrastructures on the planet… without which, no steely, self-determined rugged individualist would have achieved anything close to the “self reliance” they think the presently enjoy.
.

Good point JP,
As people talk about how good the homeless have it in this country. And I, to an extent, agree with them.

Of the level of “support” a homeless person benefits from for being in the USA, so we can give credit to this country for all things enjoyed.

In America, many people are rich enough to purchase their own island. For which they still must obtain supplies from the mainland.

Have I ever borrowed money, time, or anything from you JP?

You seem like you want me to thank you for something. While others spent their energy trying to get something from the government my time has been spent contributing to the governments coffers. You may have it backwards on who should be thanking who.

I want the government off my back, so you will understand that the “free healthcare” types are just more load for me to carry. Try self reliance. You will feel better and so will my back.

Given the choice of Emerson or Marx, I choose Emerson.

http://www.emersoncentral.com/selfreliance.htm

You seem like you want me to thank you for something.

Not me, but all who came before you, who built much of what you take for granted. Being born on third base doesn’t mean you hit a triple.
.

Not me, but all who came before you, who built much of what you take for granted. Being born on third base doesn’t mean you hit a triple.

People paid taxes, those taxes built bridges. I travel across the bridge and you see that as being born on third base.

My generation pays more taxes than any generation before it. You see that as being born on third base.

I wonder if it will take a world wide depression to cure this virus of entitlement.

You make the case on why we must defend this Republic. Democracy, as seen by social democrats, would break the back on any nation. The majority would ride the back of the minority until the system collapses under its own weight.

My generation pays more taxes than any generation before it.

Dollar-wise, you mean — not as percentage of income.

Your kids and grandkids will pay even more, thanks to the credit card bill that’s been jacked to record levels the past seven years.
.

The poor have always ridden on the collective back of the wealthy, although it is the hard work of the poor that makes the wealthy, wealthy, (you never see the owner of the coal mine spending the day with a shovel). Yet today, as always, the wealthy can still buy themselves really big houses and exotic cars and million dollar paintings.

When the poor struggle financially, they have to delay paying the electric bill so to pay the rent. When the wealthy struggle financially, they have to forgo the 52 inch plazma screen and go with the 48 inch, instead.

Dollar-wise, you mean — not as percentage of income.

No, the middle and upper middle class pays more taxes today as a percentage of income. Apparently you have yet to be inflicted by the AMT. There are more tax laws today than any other time in history. The tax code has more than 7 million lines.

Yet, you are still unhappy. It is not enough.

No, the middle and upper middle class pays more taxes today as a percentage of income.

I think you’d only have to go back 40 years or so to disprove this. It’s online, though. The IRS website should have the historical rates.
.

The IRS website should have the historical rates.

The IRS is not the only taxing authority.

The IRS is not the only taxing authority.

Then you have a whole lot of websites to visit to back up your assertion, or surely AEI has a lie sheet you can provide.
.

I appreciate how dense you are trying to be. As the federal government cut programs and transferred those burdens to states and towns local property taxes and sales taxes have exploded.

Did I write only IRS taxes? No. Your disingenuous approach is why people don’t engage you.

The middle class and upper middle class pay more taxes as a percent of income than any time in American history.

And it is still not enough for some people. Carry your own weight. Atlas’s back hurts. So does mine.

Did I write only IRS taxes? No.

And since you TYPED it, it MUST be TRUE!

I’m havin’ you on, since I’m confident that you couldn’t back up your assertion with actual, meaningful data that came from anything resembling peer-reviewed analysis.
.

(you never see the owner of the coal mine spending the day with a shovel)

You also don’t see the owner going home when that whistle sounds at 5.

You also don’t see the owner going home when that whistle sounds at 5.

No one at the mine ever sees the owner. They won’t allow mining that close to the golf course.
.

Re: Coal miner and owner of coal mine.

How about all of the really smart people, the engineers, the businessmen, how about they all just go away and start their own society in the Colorado mountains, leaving this country to be run by bureaucrats. What do you think would happen to this country then? What would the moochers and looters do then? Heck, what would the hard working average guy do? He wouldn’t have a job. These people that you hate, men like Andrew Carnegie and Rockefeller, what would this country be if they hadn’t lived? Honestly, if the socialists have their way, I hope there comes a day when Atlas Shrugs and the evil wealthy people pack up and quit.

The flaw in your fiction, Glen, is that not that many smart people are as self-centered and selfish as you imagine them to be.
.

No, the flaw is in the fact that the ticks don’t want to kill the dog, so they’ll only bleed it enough to keep it alive.

No, the flaw is in the fact that the ticks don’t want to kill the dog, so they’ll only bleed it enough to keep it alive.

Since all the dogs in the victim role, here, are rugged individualists that are self-reliant, they will surely count on their copious resources, and relocate somewhere where the tick population is much, much lower. I can send brochures to those interested.
.

Since all the dogs in the victim role, here, are rugged individualists that are self-reliant, they will surely count on their copious resources, and relocate somewhere where the tick population is much, much lower. I can send brochures to those interested.

Pretty much my point. You could move the ball up the field, but you choose not to. You make a case for the timeout option.

Well, if you don’t want to pay these oppressive taxes to live in the Greatest Nation On Earth (Freedom Isn’t Free™), then why wouldn’t a self-sufficient person simply go where the taxes are lower? Is it just more fun to play the victim?
.

It really saddens me when I realize just how many flat out socialists there are in this country these days.

It really saddens me when I realize just how many flat out socialists there are in this country these days.

Would you like a brochure?
.

Nope, I just keep working, and trying to protect what is mine as best I can.

Nope, I just keep working, and trying to protect what is mine as best I can.

If you haven’t given the $2300 limit to the candidates of your choice, I strongly recommend you start there, since you’re staying.
.

I think it is a good that any given taxing or spending policy proposal be scrutinized and subject to skeptical review.

Broad-brush labeling and knee-jerk opposition, not so much.

I gotta admit, I’m a bit disillusioned recently. I used to be a Republican, until the Fundies took over and they forgot everything they ever knew about small government. Then I wandered over to Libertarian, even though I completely disagree on their foreign policy, they still looked like the best game in town. Then they put this Ron Paul loon on the national stage. As I said, I’m a bit disillusioned by the whole thing.

JP,

Get a new string for your harp, or at least learn to play a new note on the one you have.

Get a new string for your harp

Don’t need to — this one’s quite effective. It shows that these victims of oppressive taxation aren’t nearly as self-sufficient as they let on. It’s one thing to complain about a situation, and quite another to pretend you have no options.
.

Oh, I have plenty of options, they just don’t sit well with the ticks and their enablers. The tragedy of the commons is that the ticks get the same vote

Oh, I have plenty of options, they just don’t sit well with the ticks and their enablers. The tragedy of the commons is that the ticks get the same vote

What’s odd is no one discusses these options, nor the one I suggested. I mean, after years of using “Love It Or Leave It” as a slogan, I don’t see why that fails to apply to people who don’t like paying taxes.
.

That’s a two-way street, Jeff.

I doubt the hippies of the Vietnam era (aka liberal-Valhalla) could un-hypocritically approve of that being the mantra of the left today.
Then again, fear of hypocrisy was never a problem for them.

That’s a two-way street, Jeff.

Well, it hasn’t been until now, but most Democrats have a near-terminal case of Stockholm Syndrome. I don’t.
.

JP,
Good point about loving it or leaving it. But surely you’ll allow me to complain about high taxes during an election? How ’bout during a debate about tax legislation or reform? How ’bout leading up to a debate about tax legislation or reform? Especially if the person “complaining” about the tax is the one being targeted by it?

On that point, you’d be wise not to run off all the people pulling–as opposed to riding in, the wagon.

SB,
I got a notification of your response, though it isn’t showing up in the thread. In sum, you say (1) that NCLB doesn’t take into account that not all schools serve similarly-situated constituencies, and (2) that education success begins in the home/community.

Re. NCLB, it–properly in my opinion, evaluates individual schools and expects school districts to improve performance. Inter- and intra-district funding of schools is a state issue, no? Hopefully you’re not advocating for a MORE centralized system of running schools.

Re. the it takes a village/home to educate a child . . . I’m with you. The problems in schools are intractable, mainly because teachers are expected to be parents, by which I mean sole disciplinarians and loving providers. I’ve always resented that the NEA advocates social policies that contribute to social disintegration and reduced accountability/responsibility. Of course, there are different theories about how to collectively improve individual families, but at some point we’ve got to judge a philosophy’s fruit (wisdom is vindicated by her children) and at some point it’s fair (heck it is an obligation given that it is taxpayers’ money we’re talking about) to do a cost/benefit analysis concerning the money that is being shoveled at a problem.

But surely you’ll allow me to complain about high taxes

Sure… so long as you don’t try to say you’re not painting yourself as a victim.
.

So, for the record, are you swearing off claims of victimization, JP?

So, for the record, are you swearing off claims of victimization, JP?

I’d probably need to see the first claim to discuss future ones.
.

Upon further review, the above comment is reversed. I misread “don’t try to say you’re not painting yourself as a victim” to say “don’t paint yourself as a victim.”

That being said, this is semantic quicksand . . . how can there not be “victims” to alleged wrongs, even if only in the “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” since? And not all claims of “victimization” are created equal.

Yeah, we should be more concrete about injustice. Say, compare the 40+ million Americans who have no health insurance with, say, the poor family who only has $300,000/yr. after taxes instead of $329,000.

But poor people in America have it great — they have air conditioning and color TV!
.

Wow, JP. Tell us what they deserve. And I hope you’ll be available to serve as God for all future such determinations.

One doesn’t need claim to absolute authority in order to register one’s personal two cents regarding social justice.

On that point, you’d be wise not to run off all the people pulling–as opposed to riding in, the wagon.

I don’t think it’s reasonable to assert that working class people are “riding in the wagon”. If they stayed home the wheels would stop turning.

But, if you’re really concerned about the “unruly masses” spoiling the party by forcing their version of social justice I would suggest that those that are “pulling the wagon” might consider treating them like dignified human beings voluntarily. For example, when our nurses are working 12 hour shifts without a break, something ain’t right.

Wow, JP. Tell us what they deserve.

They deserve to live here until they decide their taxes are intolerably high. Then, they are free to leave.
.

No, tell us what “the poor” deserve.

RoR!,
How much of other people’s legally-acquired possessions do the poor “deserve.”

“Unruly masses” is your word; “working class” is your category, and I never said such people were “riding in the wagon.” Obviously, wagon-riding is somewhat of a continuum, but if the shoe fits . . .

No, tell us what “the poor” deserve.

They deserve to ridicule every asshat who whines about their taxes being too high, who, after taxes, has 10x the “poverty level” income or more.
.

Boy, is the right to ridicule all that you’re wanting to impose by law?

Ned,

If I botched the inference, I apologize. I guess I am not sure what you mean exactly.

Re: the poor, I guess they’ll let you know after the election.

Re: the

RoR!,
This discussion hinges on a fundamental difference between socialism and capitalism, I guess. Individual property rights. No matter how poor someone is, that person has no claim on anyone else’s assets, absent some legal justification. It isn’t enough to just want what someone else has, or to have been the victim of some misfortune or to have a majority of legislators willing to facilitate taking others’ assets.

Re. the the poor “let[ting] [us] know after the election,” this problem is somewhat mitigated by the fact that some of the same factors that keep people from acquiring material assets also keep them from voting. Although a lot of modern-day Robin Hoods (sans the totalitarian oppressor/tax-collector) are plenty motivated to vote . . .

Some people see $300,000 after taxes as the glass being more than half full. But if it means 40+ million Americans get health coverage, to some, it’s half empty compared to the $329,000 they would otherwise have.
.

JP, here is an idea. Let’s tie people’s health insurance premium to their BMI.

http://www.nhlbisupport.com/bmi/

Is that totalitarian enough for you?

It makes as much sense as the tax code you propose.

Think about how great this would be. My BMI is 22. Should I get the lowest rates since I am not a burden?

What about it JP? How would you fare under this plan? Does that seem fair to you?

Let’s take the Robin Hood concept to a ridiculous extreme.

9 — You forgot Sandy Berger!

.

9 — You forgot Sandy Berger!

If Sandy Berger is alive he has a BMI.

This is a great idea. We should tie taxation to BMI too.

You can never be too rich or too thin, right Comrade?

What about it JP? How would you fare under this plan? Does that seem fair to you?

Would it be fair? Probably — not that it matters. Life insurance policy issuers can charge higher prices for smokers, or those diagnosed with certain conditions. Auto insurers can charge more to people who drive expensive vehicles, or have bad driving records. If health insurers decided they wanted to qualify issuance of policies on the condition that the applicant be tested, measured, spindled or mutilated, I see nothing that prevents them from doing so… save for the fact that they’d be hastening their near-certain demise.

But your analogy of BMI -> progressive tax policy breaks down pretty quick. It’s not how much you have to pour out of the glass — it’s what’s left in the glass that either garners one sympathy, or not.
.

But your analogy of BMI -> progressive tax policy breaks down pretty quick. It’s not how much you have to pour out of the glass — it’s what’s left in the glass that either garners one sympathy, or not.

Sympathy should not be part of the tax code. The tax code is to raise revenue.

Period.

It is not for social engineering or a way to get even.

Ned:

Well, what is or is not perceived as “just” in a societal context doesn’t really hinge on principles or ideology. It’s basically a reflection of the cultural zeitgeist created as an aggregate emotional response to acts, events, and circumstances. This is civilization’s way of attempting to adapt to changes in order to survive. These adaptations can evolve into principles and ideologies, of course, as people seek to codify solutions to various happenings that they perceive to be a threat to their idea of the overall good.

Sometimes the adaptations work, sometimes they don’t.

It is not for social engineering or a way to get even.

As I said, the minute you feel you’re not getting your money’s worth, you’re free to pull yourself up by the bootstraps in any number of countries that will tax you at a lower rate.
.

It’s basically a reflection of the cultural zeitgeist created as an aggregate emotional response to acts, events, and circumstances.

You talking about the Constitution?

JP,
The key is that you adhere to all manner of subjective values to determine how much “rich” people should be allowed to keep of what they own.

As I said, the minute you feel you’re not getting your money’s worth, you’re free to pull yourself up by the bootstraps in any number of countries that will tax you at a lower rate.

Can’t do it. Got socialists to fight.

The key is that you adhere to all manner of subjective values to determine how much “rich” people should be allowed to keep of what they own.

I didn’t mean to be unclear. I think a return to the tax rates under which we retired the last humongous GOP debt load (and then managed a surplus) would work just fine. And make the stock fund folx pay income tax, rather than cap gains (After all, why should they pay less taxes than firefighters and webmasters?).
.

Ned:

That would be one example of the codification I mentioned. Of course, it’s over 200 years old. I’ll grant you I don’t have any better ideas off the top of my head.

Here’s the bottom line:

The love of money is the root of all evil. I don’t have to believe that to be the word of God to find evidence to support the assertion.

Now, I am not saying all rich people are guilty of this “sin”. I am not saying that only rich people are guilty. When all is laid to rest, there will be plenty of blame to go around.

As far as people adhering to subjective values, I’d plan on getting used to that, because they always have.

RoR!,
From the sound of things around here, there’s an awful lot of money-loving from non-Conservatives–even if they pretend that it is vicarious money-loving. But the right to own one’s property seems like an objective principle we all can agree on and one that is plainly expressed in our social contract: The Constitution.

JP,
Gee, Clinton spent less on Education, less on healthcare, less on Defense, less on everything (and targeted one segment of the population–the middle class) so I don’t see how you can credibly make that argument.

And the fallacy in your fireman/webmaster assertion is that the money in stock funds has already been taxed. But that sure was pithy.

Gee, Clinton spent less on Education, less on healthcare, less on Defense, less on everything (and targeted one segment of the population–the middle class) so I don’t see how you can credibly make that argument.

Clinton wasn’t sending $30B pallets of $100 bills into a rathole where not a single dime of it went on a ledger, either.

And the fallacy in your fireman/webmaster assertion is that the money in stock funds has already been taxed. But that sure was pithy.

SO, the 15% cap gains tax is two bites at the apple! OMFG!
.

Clinton was more than not trying to fight an unprecedented type of war, he was drastically cutting defense spending and leaving the problem of unpreparedness for future generations. And I guess you’re not going to address the other spending?

Re. cap. gains . . . can we assume that you’re fine with forking over 15% of your income? It’s_not_your_money_JP.

can we assume that you’re fine with forking over 15% of your income?

Rather than 28%, like the working stiff that I am?
.

No, 28%+15%=43%

It’s almost as if you think those webmasters and firemen will never have capital gains income? Ahh, we’ll worry about the goring of that ox later.