A thought about presidents
Posted by exquisitetruth on October 22, 2008
A thought occurred to me today.
While some might find this fact revolutionary, I think it’s an interesting thought, and I am going to share it.
Over the past 20 years, we have had three republicans in the presidential race; two presidents, and one candidate. On the Democrat side, we have had one president and two candidates.
Of the three Republicans, all have been wealthy men. Furthermore, all three of them have become wealthy through inheritance. Not one of them has contributed to his own fortune in a significant way. As a matter of fact, in W’s case, he’s actually done more damage to his fortune than good.
For the Democrats, we have two self made men, and one that comes from money. One self made man was the president for eight years, and it’s looking like the other will do the same. Both of these men worked for everything they have ever owned.
The self made men are in favor of social justice. They support the idea of social responsibility, and contributing to the well being of their fellow men. They believe that we all have an obligation to invest back into the society that has given us so much. They understand that the more people we raise up out of poverty, they better we all will be.
The men who argue that you should be able to keep all of what you have earned have never actually earned a dime in their lives. Does it come as any surprise that all three men oppose an inheritance tax? They put themselves forth as the defenders of the working man while denying him health care, and giving his boss a tax cut. They look the lower middle class in the eye, while they pick its pockets. These trust fund babies and husbands of opportunity could never understand what it means to struggle for a living, they’ll never know how it feels to choose which bill to let go for the month. You couldn’t get much further away from a normal American life.
I wonder, does George W Bush relate with the common man because, from his bedroom window, he can see the servant quarters?
Why then, do the rural blue collar workers of the United States gravitate towards these blue blooded children of privilege, while vilifying the members of their own class who have proven to be exceptional men on their own merit?
How can anyone say, with a straight face, that Obama is an elitist, while McCain is for the common man? Why was Bush to common man’s president, when his blood runs bluer than Spock’s?
Jeff Stalnaker said
A great post with some real insight… I agree with you whole-heartedly. I’ve never understood the position of a working class or poor Republican. How can someone put their faith and loyalty in a party that ultimately works against their own best interest. I suppose it is due to stance on social issues that the GOP defends so rabidly, but even then, how can someone actively support a political platform that is in opposition to their financial well being?
JegBeg » Blog Archive » The ExquisiteTruth provides some exquisite truth said
[...] a while, however, I come across somethings that I must point out to the rest of the world. Today, a post came to me via a friend at The Exquisite Truth that I couldn’t stop myself from passing [...]
Taylor Walston said
How about a quote that explains the other side a little… For what it is worth, I do agree that inherited wealth impacts the above mentioned people. On the other hand, how many people in this nation have inherited a significant amount of wealth? Compare this with the amount of people willing to wait for social justice instead of doing anything different or significant in their lives to improve their lot..
From http://www.boortz.com:
———————————–
This man (that would be Barack Obama) thinks that it is the government’s job to decide who gets how much wealth? Maybe it’s just me, but I sort of had this idea that wealth was earned. You worked hard, you pursued an education, you developed job skills, you made good decisions, you took some chances … and if you held your mouth just right your hard work would lead to wealth! Well that’s just not the way it is done anymore. Can any of you cite an instance where Barack Obama has touted the benefits of hard work and said that a person is entitled to the fruits of his labors?
If ever there was a wealth envy, class warfare candidate, this would be the one. He actually laments the fact that the Supreme Court hasn’t come down with some ruling for what he calls “economic justice”; a ruling that would let bureaucrats in Washington use the police power of the state to seize wealth from the unfavored and give it to the favored. Well, since the Supreme Court hasn’t done it, it will just have to be up to him.
Come on, folks. Are you really ready for a president who believes that government has the power to tax not in order to raise revenue for its legitimate functions, but to bring about some bureaucratic idea of “fairness” in wealth distribution? Are you really ready for a president who talks in terms of how much of a person’s earnings they actually “need,” and the legitimacy of seizing the remainder?
——————————–
Would be interested in hearing your thoughts on the above…
exquisitetruth said
I’m not sure where to start here. What exactly would you like quotes on? Are you questioning whether the Bush’s and McCain have challenge the inheritance tax? Or is the fact that they all have gained their positions through nepotism?
John McCain’s tax position
George W’s Tax ideas
This argument that social justice means welfare is a simple absurdity cooked up by the GOP to push the fear button on Americans once again. Turns out that Joe Sixpack is sick of being scared by terrorists, so they’ve had to come up with something new.
The fact is that what Obama is talking about is creating an economy in which all Americans have a chance to improve their lives, not simple the top of the heap. 34.3% of America’s wealth belongs to 1% of Americans. That doesn’t sound like a system that encourages the bootstraping American dream. That sounds more like a system that benefits the economic elitists, who have a very vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Two thirds of the top 1% owe their wealth to inheritance. These are not self made men; they are the new American Aristocracy, and they very much want to maintain their position.
Real working Americans would not face any increase in their share of the tax burden under Obama’s plan. The claim that they would is nothing but a lie that McCain insists on repeating. He’s fond of saying that 50% of small business revenue would get a tax hike. That would be 50% of revenue, given the most generous estimates of what constitutes a small business, and even then, would mean that 1% of small businesses would experience a higher tax. The $250,000 mark is for net income. Meaning that only people with businesses that generate $250,000 in personal income would be affected. That is, if they pull down a quarter million a year, after they pay payroll (which Obama would give a credit for every job they create), Operational costs and other expenses.
For years, we have made a habit of rescuing corporations when they get in trouble; Chrysler, the Airlines, and now, the banks. It seems that America has been comfortable with corporate welfare for decades. When it comes to our wealthiest citizens, it seems we can’t afford to let them fail.
But talk about educating Americans, or providing health care, and people go into a panic, and start wailing about socialism. The fact is that we provide the worst health care, and some of the worst education in the industrialized world. It costs more to go to college hear than nearly anywhere else in the world. Is the land of opportunity we keep hearing about?
This is not 1960 any longer. It’s a new world, and we need a new game plan. The ignorant, isolationist xenophobia of an earlier generation will not work in the 21st century. The fact is that without a healthy, educated workforce, America will continue to slip globally. So long as we continue to think we can bully the rest of the world, we will continue to be vilified by more advanced countries.
I, for one, am fully capable of grasping the fact that the better off my neighbor is, the better off I will be as well. I find it hard to believe that Americans are really this selfish. They seem willing to cut off their own noses rather than help their communities. It’s odd to me that the most Christian nation is also the most selfish. I don’t know what you call that, but in my book it’s called hypocrisy.
I am proud to be an American, and I have served my country. But the fact is that the last 8 years have made me ashamed. The number one reason for our despicable position in the global community today, is the constant influence of the neo-aristocracy that has taken hold of the Republican Party, and continues to manipulate honest, hardworking Americans through fear, hate, and misinformation.
exquisitetruth said
Oh, I forgot to mention, The Obama comment about the tragedy of the court’s decision was actually about the redistribution of civil rights, not the economy.
JP said
So you feel that the manner in which one comes about his wealth should dictate how much the government should allow him to keep of it? Think about your statement. Applauding the government’s theft of another man’s private property – regardless of how deserving you think he is of it – would probably be seen as shameful in the eyes of this nation’s founding fathers.
Since I have seen the words truth, reason, and logic repeatedly on this website, lets check out a very basic truth – altruism doesn’t exist. Obama gives exactly as much of a damn about his fellow man as Bush, Mahatma Ghandi or you do. Everyone, whether he admits it or not, seeks to serve his own rational self-interest. If a man can gain power by appealing to the elite, he will. If a man can gain power by appealing to the huddled masses, he will.
Altruism doesn’t exist because always putting others before ones self isn’t conducive to survival. How quickly do you think the doors of the welfare office would shut if the government instituted a “put your money where your mouth is” tax, whereby one could choose whether or not (and how large of) a portion of his paycheck could be taken for social welfare?
Moreover, I have a feeling that McDonalds would find itself an eager pool of new applicants the very next week.
exquisitetruth said
I think the manner in which someone came about their wealth says a lot about how they view their wealth.
I am not talking about an imaginary ideal of altruism. I am talking about the fact that intelligent people are aware that social justice improves the standard of life, and survivability for all of us. Conservatives like to fall back to this utilitarian, naturalist interpretation of survival of the fittest when it is convenient (I find it pretty amusing, given how they disabuse natural selection in the scientific realm). But you, and other with such a libertarian attitude, ignore the fact that social evolution is a very real thing. We as a species have evolved under conditions that dictate a portion of our energies and resources be dedicated to the maintenance of our society. This is because no man is an island, and without a strong community, we are all vulnerable.
You simplify the question to one of simply welfare, knowing that the abuses of that system are well known, and engender an immediate response of disgust. But you ignore the greater issues of education, health care, infrastructure, and general research. I for one, am relieved that we no longer live in a country where these things are disparaged in favor of a fast buck at anyone’s expense.