It is Tuesday. You already know that.
I am just stalling here, trying to come up with a post.
I have plenty to say, but no desire to spend the time getting it down on electronic paper, as it were. I am pretty much preaching to the choir most of the time. Most of you understand that taxing a business results in higher prices for the end user. Higher prices result in fewer jobs and a slower growth of the economy.
For any of you who disagree with the above paragraph, I offer a challenge. Name one single instance where socialism/communism created a society where the average person's lot in life improved. Name a single time where the result was not rationing, long lines and a reduced standard of living. What communist paradise provides a standard of living even equal to that suffered by the poorest Americans?
Sure, when you are poor it sounds great to take the hard-earned wages of more successful Americans. What happens when your lot in life improves and they come for your money?
Leveling the socio-economic playing field does not mean filling in the low spots. It means grading off the top so we are all at a lower level. That is how Obama and his ilk want to fix the road to prosperity -- grading of the top. He does not believe in building up, He wants to fill the potholes by knocking down the highest points in the roadway.
4 comments:
Like has been said before, loosely quoted, 'Socialism is conforming to the lowest common denominator'.
see, Mudge, you just said in one sentence what it took me to say in an entire post.
Well said, Cat
Almost as ludicrous is the sentiment popular in Washington, that borrowing money and giving it to the Old-Money Filthy-Rich to reimburse them for the consequences of piss-poor investments equals "economic stimulus".
Welfare doesn't work for the poor; it can't possibly work for the ethically poor/"ten-cent millionaires"!
Post a Comment