Saturday, January 14, 2012

Quiet Rooms

Is there no fair question about distribution of wealth without it being seen as envy, socialism, communism or whatever? Romney's answer "It needs to be talked about in quiet rooms. " I guess we the 99% are not worthy or smart enough to discuss with the great Romney.
Let's leave it to the upper class.

Class warfare by Obama or Romney you answer.

Exactly what does " It needs to be talked about in Quiet rooms" means, really?

Here is something Mr. Romney you need to learn Nobody in this country got rich "On Their Own"
Here is also a word to the wise release your income tax like every other candidate in this country has. Oh I forgot your special, only discussed in quiet rooms.

Casting every one at the bottom as lazy or jealous without acknowledging that accident of birth is just plain stupid.

I don't know what the policies were that created this disparity in wealth right now but I know we must learn from our mistakes if we are ever going to correct them.


Jim G. said...

It is not a mistake:

Most professional golfers who participate in PGA tournaments have never won a single tournament, but Arnold Palmer, Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods have each won dozens of tournaments.

Yet these and numerous other disparities in achievement are resolutely ignored by those whose shrill voices denounce disparities in rewards, as if these disparities are somehow suspicious at best and sinister at worst.

Higher achieving groups -- whether classes, races or whatever -- are often blamed for the failure of other groups to achieve. Politicians and intellectuals, especially, tend to conceive of social questions in terms that allow them to take on the role of being on the side of the angels against the forces of evil.

This can be a huge disservice to those individuals and groups who are lagging behind, for it leads them to focus on a sense of grievance and victimhood, rather than on how they can lift themselves up instead of trying to pull other people down.

Again, this is a worldwide phenomenon -- a sad commentary on the down side of the brotherhood of man.

terry said...

What??? I read your answer??? and I read it again, were you drinking when you wrote that? It doesn't make any sense! Let me repeat the question. Is there no FAIR QUESTION about distribution of wealth with out it being seen as envy, socialism ETC?? and the second question was What does it mean to talk about IT in quiet rooms? what is a quiet room? Like the republican debates dodge the question and answer with some blather about the pga tour and wins? angels and evil really?
"focus on a sense of grievance and victimhood, rather than on how they can lift themselves up instead of trying to pull other people down." Who said anything about pulling other people down Jim.
The question you fail to answer is Can there be any discussion about disparity of wealth with out being seen as envy?

Baxter said...

No one is trying to punish the successful in our society. When we have a massive deficit and relative revenues at 60-year lows, finding revenues is an obvious priority. When the super-rich pay a lesser percentage of their income in taxes than their secretaries, the obvious priority is matched with an obvious solution.

The reason that Mitt prefers quiet rooms is that the two-thirds of Americans agree with the Democratic position, which is characterized as class warfare by the GOP. To paraphrase Buffett, we are having a class war right now and the rich are kicking ass.