Just heard on the Levin show that a recent poll shows that 78% of Americans support Obama's effort to impose federal limits on executive pay.
Think about this for a moment, the latest in many examples of Obama's Marxist ideology. This one is actually two-fold. For one, limiting someone's pay is inherently Marxist. No matter how hard you work, how many hours you put in, how successful your efforts are, there is a ceiling to what you can bring in. The flaw in this thinking is obvious, which is precisely why Marxism in reality has never actually succeeded without tyrannical brutality enforcing it.
But there is another aspect of this poll, one that is also inherently Marxist...that of class warfare. Barack Obama - more than any other political leader in US history - has made amazing progress at fanning the fires of envy and hatred between our social classes. Look at those executives, look at how much money they make, so much more than any of you, this is not fair, we should stop it, we should impose a limit to what they can make, let's get them.
If this poll is to be trusted, then his efforts are succeeding. Ultimately, the collectivist desires equal outcomes for all citizens, which is why they favor mandatory minimum wages for the least-skilled workers and now mandatory maximum wages for the most-skilled. They achieve this by gaining support amongst the populous, in large part by inducing social class envy, bitterness, and hatred towards those who have achieved success in a free-market capitalist system. Their argument is that capitalism is unfair because such a small percentage of citizens become super-wealthy in such a system - of course failing to acknowledge that the same system results in great wealth for the collective compared to similar social classes in other nations and other systems.
The collectivist specializes in divisiveness, fueling the fires of greed and envy so that the populous feels cheated and eventually supports action against the super-wealthy, much like that reflected in this poll. However, the great trap is that those who support salary caps don't realize that their support effectively grants the state the power to cap EVERYONE's salary should the collective need arise...and that is the great trap that the collectivist has set.
The poll reads that 78% of Americans desire caps on executive pay. And this means that 78% of Americans are unwittingly willing to grant the government the power to set pay limits whenever the government deems it necessary. Mr. Alinsky is smiling about this one.
3 comments:
John,
You said, "The collectivist specializes in divisiveness, fueling the fires of greed and envy so that the populous feels cheated and eventually supports action against the super-wealthy, much like that reflected in this poll".
Who is the brother of the collectivist that specializes in divisiveness, flaming the fires of fear and prejudice, so that certain segments of the populace feel cheated out of their birthright, feel that "those people" are taking over, changing things so that "real Americans" (white, A-S Protestant) will get the shaft?
I think the opinion poll reflects the fear of not capitalism, but of out of control corporatism and an oligarchy of the few rich over the struggling working poor.
Nothing has happened yet under Obama that those people fear. We already have social programs like Medicare and SS that even the haters of Obama would never give up now that those things have become entitlements.
We have been paying for those social programs since 1936 for SS, and 1965 for Medicare, and those that say that they are worried about the debts left to their children and grandchildren won't send back their SS checks and stop their Medicare premiums. They don't seem to care what their SS & Medicare is costing the kids now.
Emilie
Port Orchard, WA
"oligarchy of the few rich over the struggling working poor."
This is Marxist thinking. The working poor are not entitled to anything but life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Both the rich and the poor are in those positions because of choice, not circumstance. There isn't a single American who doesn't have the opportunity to become wealthy. When babies are born, we don't assign them to a social class. There are many born in wealth who squander it, and many born in poverty who become succesful. No other nation provides that opportunity.
So I don't want to hear from people who squander their opportunities that they are entitled to the fruits of my labor. I worked my can off. I made MANY sacrifices at a time when others were attending frat parties and getting bombed on alcohol. Now those people feel they are entitled to a portion of my sacrifice? And this is fair in your eyes?
I believe in helping those who can't help themselves. We are very generouse towards charity. But I don't believe in giving to people who feel entitled to my success.
If a Wall Street executive makes a $30 million bonus, good for him. That's between him, his board of directors and the stockholders. If we don't own stock in that company we have NO SAY in the matter. Just because our gov't squandered our taxes by loaning to these companies doesn't give us the right to dictate their pay scale. Shame on us for loaning them money.
I've had enough of this socialist nonsense, of people who hate the wealthy just because they made the right decisions in life and EARNED their wealth. The people who hate should focus that emotion on earning their own wealth instead of seizing mine. If it were up to me all people would work hard and earn more wealth. That's exactly how America became so powerful. That's the capitalist way. The poor are raised to a higher level. In America, poverty level is $20,000 a year income. Do you know how that compares to poverty worldwide?
However, the collectivist, the socialist, believes in pulling the wealthy down to the poor's level. Society can't advance itself that way.
You can't make a poor man rich by making a rich man poor. It's a contradiction of common sense.
John,
I was talking about what the poll reflects.
I have heard people say they are afraid this country will become a third world country. Third world countries have oligarchies at the top that keep the general populace down; they raid their countries' treasuries, use the power of their money to control everything that might challenge their position. They live like European lords, while the populace doesn't have the basics.
Shouldn't the populace have revolted against the oppressive French monarchy? Shouldn't the Russian populace have revolted against the czarist regime? Look what happened in Cuba, in South America.
I am not against people getting rich as long as they truly earned it legitimately, if they didn't rob, steal, cheat like many have, if they don't ask the government to bail them out, then use our tax money to live like European lords.
Emilie
Port Orchard, WA
Post a Comment