Skip to content

What’s in it for them…

August 12, 2011

Scott Adams does a brilliant piece in the WSJ today where he goes through “bad ideas” to inspire good ideas on how to encourage the rich to be willing to give more $ to society outside of demogoguery, guilt, and what amounts to “ethically challenged merchant seamen” holding them up

… fairness is not so much about the actual distribution of loot as it is about the psychology of how you feel about it. That’s important to understand because the rich won’t give up their cash unless they feel they are getting something in return

…If we accept that the rich can be taxed at a different rate than everyone else, we can also imagine that there could be other differences in how the rich are taxed. That’s the part we can tinker with, and that’s where the bad version comes in. In a minute, I’ll float some bad ideas about how the rich can feel good while the rest of society is rifling through their pockets.

That’s really what this class warfare stuff is about. “Having enough” really isn’t about meeting basic life needs for food, shelter and feeling good because you produce something. If you look at the London riots (link to our friend Level Head who has a comparison to Rome),   “fair”= “I can afford to live like Steve Jobs, and if I can’t, well then he shouldn’t be allowed to live that way either“.

Some examples:

WSJ: Mr. Obama has been no slouch in the vilification department, regularly demonizing, among others, “millionaires and billionaires,” insurance companies, “corporate jet owners” and Republicans, including Mr. Bush

What might set the rich apart from those who are not? Here’s one suggestion

Can we blame the state when parents have been allowed to abdicate responsibility for the behaviour of their children?….

… We watched the previous government talk up rights for young people but with no mention of responsibilities. We have allowed our welfare system to prop up immoral lifestyles. We have not taught all our young people that an entitlement culture is morally wrong. …. Now we need to collectively grow up and take responsibility for responsibility.

 What is the balance between personal responsibility and a good enough safety net from society to those who are truly weak and helpless?  Smashing windows, rifling through someone’s backback while they stand their bleeding, taking what you want from “the rich”  or finding ways to put the screws on ‘corporate jet owners’ is different only in the sophistication of the vocabulary and education level.

But hasn’t this been the history of the world? When rule of law breaks down, when work ethic and personal responsiblity take a backseat, what some call “pirate” others call “convenient tool in the form of an ethically challenged merchat seaman who happens to be fighting on my side today”

2 Comments leave one →
  1. August 14, 2011 7:37 pm

    great links – I am consistently amazed how the aristocratic class doesn’t seem to realize the brutal and violent can just as easliy turn on THEM as turn on those the aristocratic class tells them to go after….it is a very dangerous and risky propostion…

  2. August 13, 2011 3:13 pm

    Thank you.

    Isn’t it sad that the current mentality of the President and many in Congress can be meaningfully compared to “when the rule of law breaks down”? But indeed, class warfare is on the lips of many these days, all the way to President Obama.

    And many young people are told who to hate, and go right along with it. “Hate Governor Scott Walker,” the unions say, and noisy thousands pitch in with pitchforks and torches. “Hate Republicans” … “Hate ‘teabaggers'” … and of course, “Hate the rich!” is the perennial favorite.

    Of course, there is no tax on the rich in this country — so our friends on the left merely want to punish those who earn high incomes while creating jobs for others.

    Perhaps the actions triggered by the incessant “it’s not fair!” have resulted in the most unfair treatment of humans in all of human history. Certainly the deaths of tens of millions can be laid at the doorstep of communism, which has built a pervasive worldview using this mantra as its foundation.

    I completely agree with your suggestion that there is no difference in kind between the behaviors arising from looking in someone else’s pocket, just in degree. It unfortunately casts President Obama as “Chief Rioter” — which is not so far from his career as community organizer after all.

    This article, from your same source above, has a slightly different take. Sholto Byrnes lauds “conservatism” (Asian style) but blames the free market in part. Nevertheless, the early observations and contrasts (after returning to London from a long time in Asia) are interesting.

    ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: