Equality or Equity? This really is THE defining moment and point of the day. Normal Americans believe in the real history of how this Country was birthed and the Principles upon which we stand.
Or, at least what used to be thought of as our Principles. They are under attack by Progressives and Race-Baiting Marxists who know that if those underpinnings are cut off at the knees this Country falls and can be turned into yet another hellhole with respect to Liberty and Freedom.
Those latter two things are are impediments to what they believe is most important: Power, and their wielding of it.
Shall we be free to choose for ourselves in our own Pursuit of Happiness? Or are we to be subjected to the overbearing and soul-sucking idea of Equity?
The former yields different outcomes for different people based on their motivations, their knowledge and talents, and needs/wants. The latter means that Government decides what will make you happy, and you’ll be happy that Government will make all outcomes equal for everyone despite their motivations, knowledge, and talents, needs or wants.
Except, of course, those running things.
As Animal Farm taught us, some are more equal than others. A great example is that of Union Leaders atop their members – take a gander at what THEIR compensation is relative to the guys on the assembly lines and such.
Pigs, Union Leaders – I’ll leave it to you to make the comparisons.
Anyways, back to Lloyd’s This is a Test: What Matters More, Personal Responsibility or Collective Action? post to fill in a bit more.
Again, I URGE you to read it and the comments if than for nothing more to see how Arguments are framed by the other side – and how to poke holes in them. My last retort, here, was this:
Yet, how has Bezos gotten his wealth? People perceiving value in the offerings and voluntarily buying his offerings. LOTS of times. So, is Bezos at fault or all those folks buying all that stuff and believing they got what they needed / wanted and did so at a value price (all attributes all in)? Ditto Walmart. Remember, BOTH companies started really, REALLY small – but grew by giving consumers what they were looking for.
Remember, if no one bought what someone is offering, that someone just goes bankrupt. But no, even the Eco-Socialists (Progressives hiding behind a green leaf) carry on that any worker is always getting the shaft in order for those rapacious capitalists to steal their money:
Voidhawk “Yet, how has Bezos gotten his wealth?” by underpaying employees and taking advantage of his existing wealth to avoid paying taxes.
So there’s the Marxism for you – the class warfare canard. Tell me, unless one is in extremis, why would ANYONE stay at a position that doesn’t pay them what they are worth? True, there are those out there that have outsized egos and think more of their skillset (socially, technical, productivity, et al) than they should – these are the folks that believe they are always underpaid and believe the system is rigged against them (like Bernie Sanders who failed at everything he tried in the private sector – and even a commune kicked him out). And they almost always just look at their check stubs and don’t into account other factors.
The lesson is that Socialists believe that anyone’s Status Quo is forever – unless their kind ministrations are applied to those workers conditions and never having a thought to that old Soviet joke of “We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us”; the incentives are all screwed up when Government steps in.
SideNote: like the Democrats insistence that the Federal Government pad peoples’ unemployment checks ($600 earlier, $300 now) such that they make more sitting at home than in a job. The question is it about “helping people” or is it about Cloward-Piven-ing the entire system all at once by drowning the US in debt? Remember, this was done in NYC and almost succeeded – will they do so with the entire US in “not wasting a man-made crisis”?
Sorry to bust your Narrative, oh Socialist one:
Sorry, but those employees are not slaves nor chained to a desk – there are millions of jobs available (at least here in the US) and going begging. If those employees really think they are underpaid, there are plenty of opportunities for them elsewhere.
Too often I’ve heard that canard as a talking point – that folks are underpaid. When I felt I was in that state, I upskilled and went for another position.
Or, I stayed because of non-financial benefits to a position – like working from home for a couple of decades in between biz trips all over North America. The TOTAL compensation package is what counts and not just what’s in a paycheck.
And as far as taxes are concerned, yell at your CongressTwits (or your elected Representatives if you’re in another country) – THEY make the tax law. Make it clear that you will work to elect their opponents in the next race. Otherwise, Bezos is just using the laws as written.
You know, like Biden just avoided $500K in taxes – because he used the tax law to his advantage as well. Don’t like the Laws, get them changed.
The Socialists are always talking about people not paying their fair share but rarely talk specifics about what that “fair” share is? They truly believe that people should only be allowed to make so much and THEN the rest is the Government’s entitlement. Oh wait, I have that BACKWARDS – Government first, the earner gets the leftovers. And it is clear that we have the most progressive income tax (and progressive here means that as one earns more, Government takes more as a percentage and more much faster; it’s generally the Progressives that push this “progressive” outlook on whose money is it anyway – you know, the question that Bruce Currie always avoided answering). At least AOC said “fair” is 90% – that’s the Government’s take from your income. Is that really fair?
So, that’s enough for now but there are more parts coming.
My question to you are:
- Whose money is it first (like I wouldn’t know the answer already)?
- Do Progressives have a better outlook on this than I do?
- Should the government step in when someone “makes too much”?
Sidenote: Obama is now making millions but wanted much more from the Rich when he was President – is he now still in favor of his own words “I mean, I do think at a certain point you’ve made enough money.” Why aren’t the Progressives going after him?