Well screw the middle class.

Post Reply New Topic

Why do pigs do anything?

If we do want to get a bit literal, it's not so much screw as the middle class being double-penetrated by the rich and the poor.

Well then you have a conscience but the people I am talking about are all either sociopaths that can not be reached or their conscience is compromised because it is just easy and comfortable to believe that you are where you are because you're so Great while all of the little people are just moochers. Hence, Romney hanging his campaign up by his own words to the people who paid $50,000 to come and have him tell their little hearts that the Other half are all just deadbeats.

There are people in the world who work their fingers to the bone, yet struggle to get by. How much you earn has little to do with how much you work.

Exactly, you need to have connections, secure some sweet government contracts or start a business then operate everything with the most profit being made and with the least possible risk of a downturn negatively impacting your standard of living. That's really pretty much apart of the formula to become a success and a real Randian Ubermensch who can come into the country club with the Boys as long as you don't display any of your old, vulgar working class/middle class habits. It would be like showing up to the NAACP in a Klan robe. It's almost as if conservatives did not read or did not understand the Great Gatsby.

Edison made his bucks without any government contracts.

Alexander Graham Bell created his telephone company without any government aid. He got capitalization from private banks.

Jobs and Wozniac made it big in the civilian market place. As did Edward Land. His instant camera made him a millionare.

Andrew Carnegie made his bucks in the civilian steel manufacturing business. He got rich because private firms wanted to build taller buildings made of steel.

James Hill built and ran the Great Northern Railway without a penny of government aid.



The Great Northern was the only privately funded, and successfully built, transcontinental railroad in United States history. No federal land grants were used during its construction, unlike every other transcontinental railroad; according to Hill, his railway was built "without any government aid, even the right of way, through hundreds of miles of public lands, being paid for in cash".[1] Consequently, it was one of the few transcontinental railroads to avoid receivership following the Panic of 1893.


So you see it is possible to "make it" without the government giving gifts.

ruveyn

It was a rush to get my thoughts down and out that I left out loans from a bank in the formula.

I know how Edison made his bucks. He let Tesla do everything then he just bought the rights.

What did James Hill do before his railroad to have all of that cash in order to pay for everything in his railroad out of pocket?

That doesn't make a lot of sense...I mean the rich screwing people over because they can and the poor needing help and accepting help from charity or government programs in existence to help them. Its not as though the poor are trying to screw over the middle class via needing help and receiving it.

Besides what happens when a middle class tax payer becomes poor, shouldn't they be able to receive help from that system they paid into via taxation?

+1

Edison was an early developer of motion pictures and recorded sound. Tesla had nothing to do with it.

When he screwed Tesla over, Tesla left and Edison continue pushing for direct current. Eventually Edison lost that battle.


Edison invented the multiplex telegraph, the ticker tape and sound recoding and the light bulb. Of course he had skilled people working for he and he paid them very, very well. No one does anything in technical market single handed.

You really ought to learn some business history.

ruveyn

In essence, the majority of the tax burden is placed on the middle class, so they are being screwed from the top by the rich and from the bottom by the poor. Intentions doesn't matter, outcomes do.

So I do something accidentally and it winds up killing a person should be treated the same as cold blooded first degree murder?

No No, I got one even better. Suppose that if the goal of lifting people out of poverty is in a dead heat between a public, government funded option and a privately funded program. The desirable outcome of less poverty in the country, in your city, in your neighborhood is the same. Which program do you prefer? Remember that the OUTCOME is equal.

Last edited by DancingDanny on 13 Oct 2012, 8:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

That's a legal issue, not a moral one. But yeah, the outcome is exactly the same, the way you did it could have an impact on the treatment though.

In the UK at least, focus on (and sympathy with) the present difficulties of the middle class are a tactic of class warfare. The middle class are more likely to get angry and do something about it - it is one thing to have never had anything, another to have had a good life and to see it fall away. So by extending sympathy to them, the ruling class encourage the middle class to let off steam by having at both the bankers and the proles.

No No, I got one even better. Suppose that if the goal of lifting people out of poverty is in a dead heat between a public, government funded option and a privately funded program. The desirable outcome of less poverty in the country, in your city, in your neighborhood is the same. Which program do you prefer? Remember that the OUTCOME is equal.

In my opinion screwing someone over is more of being in a position in which you gain from their loss more or less, I don't feel the poor get an advantage over the middle class at their expense by accepting help from the government. Even so I agree the outcome of such things is a bit more important than the intentions.

Anyways if things go on the way they are I think the outcome is fairly obvious. I mean the saving the middle class bandwagon the major politicians have all jumped on isn't going to do any good. I mean I suppose they could try just pumping money into the middle class like they do the super wealthy and hope what trickles down is enough to keep the poor or at least half of it one step above living like people in a 3rd world country do. I don't think it will work, since it will create more debt and there is already more debt than actual currency as far as I know.


Economically speaking fascism works great.... so I imagine the government and those who buy them will slowly move towards a fascist system I would say it already is going that direction or 'save the middle class' or both at the same time. But not so sure people should be ok with this.