Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
The New York Times tells us what is wrong with what some of us are planning to do —
WANT to give affluent households a present worth $700 billion over the next decade? In a period of high unemployment and fiscal austerity, this idea may seem laughable. Amazingly, though, it is getting traction in Washington.
Stopped reading at this point. Why go on?
Out where people work for a living, this is not so laughable and not so amazing. Someone didn’t take the time to step outside the offices of the New York Times, where apparently it is considered wrong to make a profit at something, into the fresh air of the real world where people like to make money.
I saw a headline in the newspaper yesterday where democratic gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown laid a charge down that opponent Meg Whitman has plans that would “help the rich.”
Another big-fat-DUH moment. We all want a better and stronger economy, right? What is an economy, but the opportunity to make money. And keep the money you make.
Jerry Brown is against this? Someone has some explaining to do, and I don’t think it’s Meg Whitman.
All in all, I think blogger friend Phil is right on track with that latest awesome quote he found from Ohio’s former Secretary of State Ken Blackwell:
We have become a culture where making money doesn’t entitle you to it, but wanting money does.
Reverse course on that, and I say the economy will do just fine. Make it okay to create business activity and realize a personal profit from it, and it’ll be good.
Make it possible for people to get rich, and people will do it.
Prove me wrong.
Man…there’s really no limit to how stupid the smartest-guy-in-the-room can be, is there?
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Well, its really all the government’s money in the first place. You wouldn’t want the government to be giving its money to those selfish greedy rich people who have earned enough, would you?
- David Hoffman | 09/26/2010 @ 16:50The entire net worth of the wealthy and super-wealthy together would pay for this government to run for less than six months before they would be busted.
The last honest statement made by a politician on this matter was by Calvin Coolidge–no matter what anybody may say about making the rich and the corporations paying taxes, in the end they come out of the people who toil.
The rich are not capable of paying taxes, only in collecting them from their customers and their employees. High taxes on the rich are not unfair, they are dishonest and stupid.
Since the top 5% of earners already “pay” a majority of income taxes, it is a simple step to end this delusion and slap them with 100%, or stop taxing them at all and mark it down where it is really being paid. But that would end the shell game.
- jamzw | 09/26/2010 @ 22:07They don’t get it, and they probably never will.
What you have here is a classic case of not merely two different opinions, but in fact two completely irreconcilably different world views.
One believes in no taxation without representation, deriving from the just consent of the governed.
The other believes in the greatest good for the greatest number. Either it doesn’t understand the long-term ramifications of that concept, or it does not care.
We have become a culture where making money doesn’t entitle you to it, but wanting money does.
Yes. I’ve also noticed that “greed” is now defined as the desire to keep your own money, but not as the desire to take someone else’s.
- cylarz | 09/26/2010 @ 23:00I had a little more to say on the subject of that $700 billion over the next 10 years to be “borrowed” to “give” to “the rich” after that post.
This time it was Axelrod that set me off.
- philmon | 09/27/2010 @ 20:21