I*****e
发帖数: 7085 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 LosAngeles 讨论区 】
发信人: rowena (最忆是江南), 信区: LosAngeles
标 题: response to 'income inequality' speech
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Feb 28 11:24:29 2014, 美东)
January 2014 - Bob Lonsberry, Rochester talk radio personality responds to
Obama's 'income inequality speech':
Two Americas, the America that works and the America that doesn't. The
America that contributes and the America that doesn't. It's not the haves
and the have not's, it's the dos and the don'ts. Some people do their duty
as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society and
others don't. That's the divide in America.
It’s not about income inequality, it’s about civic irresponsibility.
It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization
in order to win elective office. It’s about a political party that loves
power more than it loves its country. That’s not invective, that’s truth,
and it’s about time someone said it.
The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when
President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting 'income inequality.
' He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people
have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just.
That is the rationale of thievery. The other guy has it, you want it,
Obama will take it for you. Vote Democrat. That is the philosophy that
produced Detroit. It is the electoral philosophy that is destroying America.
It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common
sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a
betrayal. The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have
enslaved them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victimhood and
anger instead of ability and hope.
The president’s premise – that you reduce income inequality by
debasing the successful – seeks to deny the successful the consequences of
their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices.
Because, by and large, income variations in society is a result of
different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely
and responsibility have a far greater likelihood of success, while those
who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of
failure. Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and
family income.
You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college - and you are
apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes
on with purposeful education. You have your children out of wedlock and life
is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt
to take another course. Most often in life our destination is determined by
the course we take.
My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant
income inequality between us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome,
but, our lives also have had an inequality of effort. While my doctor went
to college and then devoted his young adulthood to medical school and
residency, I got a job in a restaurant.
He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different
outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine.
Does that mean he cheated and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth
? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices
lead to different outcomes.
It is not inequality Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom.
The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail. There is no true option for
success if there is no true option for failure.
The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the
punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than
the other guy. Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even
if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and shortsighted
decisions.
Barack Obama and the Democrats preach equality of outcome as a right,
while completely ignoring inequality of effort.
The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is
sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get." Obama would
turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of
society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society.
Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in
American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common
denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and
productive to foster equality through mediocrity.
He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on power is based
on using the votes of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is
not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the
differences in our efforts. It is a false philosophy to say one man’s
success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s
victimization.
What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented
division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own
political benefit. That’s what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare
wrapped up with a bow.
Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the truth to Lincoln’s
maxim that 'a house divided against itself cannot stand.' |
I*****e
发帖数: 7085 | 2 说得很好：“ Two Americas, the America that works and the America that doesn
't.”
The
duty
【在 I*****e 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 LosAngeles 讨论区 】
: 发信人: rowena (最忆是江南), 信区: LosAngeles
: 标 题: response to 'income inequality' speech
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Feb 28 11:24:29 2014, 美东)
: January 2014 - Bob Lonsberry, Rochester talk radio personality responds to
: Obama's 'income inequality speech':
: Two Americas, the America that works and the America that doesn't. The
: America that contributes and the America that doesn't. It's not the haves
: and the have not's, it's the dos and the don'ts. Some people do their duty
: as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society and
|
l******n
发帖数: 4276 | 3 特意去查了下作者，果然是conservative political commentator
doesn
【在 I*****e 的大作中提到】
: 说得很好：“ Two Americas, the America that works and the America that doesn
: 't.”
:
: The
: duty
|
a*****g
发帖数: 19398 | 4 大实话。
The
duty
【在 I*****e 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 LosAngeles 讨论区 】
: 发信人: rowena (最忆是江南), 信区: LosAngeles
: 标 题: response to 'income inequality' speech
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Feb 28 11:24:29 2014, 美东)
: January 2014 - Bob Lonsberry, Rochester talk radio personality responds to
: Obama's 'income inequality speech':
: Two Americas, the America that works and the America that doesn't. The
: America that contributes and the America that doesn't. It's not the haves
: and the have not's, it's the dos and the don'ts. Some people do their duty
: as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society and
|
n***p
发帖数: 7668 | 5 就事论事，作者的观点有什么问题？
【在 l******n 的大作中提到】
: 特意去查了下作者，果然是conservative political commentator
:
: doesn
|
l******r
发帖数: 4021 | 6 一针见血
The
duty
【在 I*****e 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 LosAngeles 讨论区 】
: 发信人: rowena (最忆是江南), 信区: LosAngeles
: 标 题: response to 'income inequality' speech
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Feb 28 11:24:29 2014, 美东)
: January 2014 - Bob Lonsberry, Rochester talk radio personality responds to
: Obama's 'income inequality speech':
: Two Americas, the America that works and the America that doesn't. The
: America that contributes and the America that doesn't. It's not the haves
: and the have not's, it's the dos and the don'ts. Some people do their duty
: as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society and
|
l******n
发帖数: 4276 | 7 能够说出这种话的，是保守的共和党人的可能性更大。
民主党跟共和党的一个很大区别不是说帮不帮助穷人，而是说如何帮助的问题。
【在 n***p 的大作中提到】
: 就事论事，作者的观点有什么问题？
|
n***p
发帖数: 7668 | 8 这年头，说真话不容易。
【在 l******n 的大作中提到】
: 能够说出这种话的，是保守的共和党人的可能性更大。
: 民主党跟共和党的一个很大区别不是说帮不帮助穷人，而是说如何帮助的问题。
|
d****g
发帖数: 7460 | 9 基于国家兴亡，皮肤有责的角度，原文作者也只是个会抱怨的主儿。
归根到底，美国的制度有很多F**ed up的地方。穷人需要有翻身的机会。民主党的福利
制度不解决问题。共和党的依靠资本家的制度也不解决问题。要说起来，还是共产党的
制度好。
【在 n***p 的大作中提到】
: 这年头，说真话不容易。
|
d****g
发帖数: 7460 | 10 我来提议一个。
１。教师算政府官员，由教委统一分配，在不同学校轮换，保证资源平等。
２。按成绩实行高考制度，分数够中专线的，国家保证有学上，学费，生活费全免。
３。福利制度跟孩子成绩挂钩。孩子成绩得A可以领得C的两倍。
【在 d****g 的大作中提到】
: 基于国家兴亡，皮肤有责的角度，原文作者也只是个会抱怨的主儿。
: 归根到底，美国的制度有很多F**ed up的地方。穷人需要有翻身的机会。民主党的福利
: 制度不解决问题。共和党的依靠资本家的制度也不解决问题。要说起来，还是共产党的
: 制度好。
|
|
|
d****g
发帖数: 7460 | 11 天。要删水了。白码字了。。
【在 d****g 的大作中提到】
: 我来提议一个。
: １。教师算政府官员，由教委统一分配，在不同学校轮换，保证资源平等。
: ２。按成绩实行高考制度，分数够中专线的，国家保证有学上，学费，生活费全免。
: ３。福利制度跟孩子成绩挂钩。孩子成绩得A可以领得C的两倍。
|
n***p
发帖数: 7668 | 12 最根本的解决方案是，政府统筹，孩子们全部试管婴儿方式产生，统一由保育院养育，
然后上学，就业，一条龙服务。
【在 d****g 的大作中提到】
: 我来提议一个。
: １。教师算政府官员，由教委统一分配，在不同学校轮换，保证资源平等。
: ２。按成绩实行高考制度，分数够中专线的，国家保证有学上，学费，生活费全免。
: ３。福利制度跟孩子成绩挂钩。孩子成绩得A可以领得C的两倍。
|
h**d
发帖数: 5161 | 13 难道0税率最公平？其实这本身是一个“度”的问题，文章太激进也太幼稚了
【在 n***p 的大作中提到】
: 就事论事，作者的观点有什么问题？
|
l******n
发帖数: 4276 | 14 世界上还剩下几个国家是GCD执政了啊？
【在 d****g 的大作中提到】
: 基于国家兴亡，皮肤有责的角度，原文作者也只是个会抱怨的主儿。
: 归根到底，美国的制度有很多F**ed up的地方。穷人需要有翻身的机会。民主党的福利
: 制度不解决问题。共和党的依靠资本家的制度也不解决问题。要说起来，还是共产党的
: 制度好。
|
a*w
发帖数: 4495 | 15 别的共产党不熟悉，就中共而言，执行的根本不是共产主义。
如果说社会主义，欧洲发达国家、日本、加拿大，甚至美国都比中国更
像社会主义。
中国是半封建半权贵资本主义。
【在 l******n 的大作中提到】
: 世界上还剩下几个国家是GCD执政了啊？
|
l******n
发帖数: 4276 | 16 你说的那些国家根本就不承认自己是共产主义，人家都是号称自己是老牌资本主义。
再说共产主义那套拿到实际生活中真的可行？
【在 a*w 的大作中提到】
: 别的共产党不熟悉，就中共而言，执行的根本不是共产主义。
: 如果说社会主义，欧洲发达国家、日本、加拿大，甚至美国都比中国更
: 像社会主义。
: 中国是半封建半权贵资本主义。
|
n***p
发帖数: 7668 | 17 没人说0税率吧？但是，对于有劳动能力的人来说，“不劳动者不得食”，我觉得天经
地义啊。
【在 h**d 的大作中提到】
: 难道0税率最公平？其实这本身是一个“度”的问题，文章太激进也太幼稚了
|
l******n
发帖数: 4276 | 18 即使从维护中产或者富人利益的角度来说，也得或多或少的给穷人一口饭吃吧？
给穷人一口饭吃没错，但穷人要想自己吃龙虾，就得自己努力了。
【在 n***p 的大作中提到】
: 没人说0税率吧？但是，对于有劳动能力的人来说，“不劳动者不得食”，我觉得天经
: 地义啊。
|
X****r
发帖数: 3557 | 19 不需要试管婴儿，也不用国家包就业什么的。不平等的根源是家庭制度，只要所有孩子
不由父母养育就解决了。
不过也就是这么一说，乌托邦而已。
【在 n***p 的大作中提到】
: 最根本的解决方案是，政府统筹，孩子们全部试管婴儿方式产生，统一由保育院养育，
: 然后上学，就业，一条龙服务。
|
n****y
发帖数: 6260 | 20 his assumption is that if you work hard, you are going to get reward, which
simplifies the whole situation, especially those who are poor.
However, I agree that everyone is living the consequences of their previous
choices. On the other hand, though, not all the choices are available to all
the people. In essence, if one's family is relatively well off, this person
would have more choices than, say, the one whose family constantly worries
about if they have a place to sleep for tonight.
【在 n***p 的大作中提到】
: 就事论事，作者的观点有什么问题？
|
|
|
n***p
发帖数: 7668 | 21 刚刚午饭时跟同事聊天，他说他十几岁的时候就在麦当劳打工，赚minimum wage.
他读大学时，他父母完全没有能力资助他，于是他跟他老婆一起打工，赚minimum
wage,养活自己。学费当然是学生贷款。
说到底，穷人之所以穷，就是因为懒。比如 Minimum wage 每小时8块钱，每天10
小时，就是80，每周是400， 一年50周，也有20000块。要是一家两口子都工作的
话，也有40000块每年，尽管不是很多，但是怎么也超过贫困线了。
which
previous
all
person
worries
【在 n****y 的大作中提到】
: his assumption is that if you work hard, you are going to get reward, which
: simplifies the whole situation, especially those who are poor.
: However, I agree that everyone is living the consequences of their previous
: choices. On the other hand, though, not all the choices are available to all
: the people. In essence, if one's family is relatively well off, this person
: would have more choices than, say, the one whose family constantly worries
: about if they have a place to sleep for tonight.
|
n****y
发帖数: 6260 | 22 10 hours per day?
【在 n***p 的大作中提到】
: 刚刚午饭时跟同事聊天，他说他十几岁的时候就在麦当劳打工，赚minimum wage.
: 他读大学时，他父母完全没有能力资助他，于是他跟他老婆一起打工，赚minimum
: wage,养活自己。学费当然是学生贷款。
: 说到底，穷人之所以穷，就是因为懒。比如 Minimum wage 每小时8块钱，每天10
: 小时，就是80，每周是400， 一年50周，也有20000块。要是一家两口子都工作的
: 话，也有40000块每年，尽管不是很多，但是怎么也超过贫困线了。
:
: which
: previous
: all
|
n***p
发帖数: 7668 | 23 就算每天8小时，两口子一年也可以有32000，也不算很少了。况且，既然穷，
一个人应该不介意每天多干一两个小时，或者是周末多干点活。
多劳多得，对普通人来说是一个很平常的道理。我也见到有的人白天在快餐店做
收银员，晚上在Target做收银员，打两份工，我很钦佩这样的人。
【在 n****y 的大作中提到】
: 10 hours per day?
|
I*****e
发帖数: 7085 | 24 现在的问题是吃救济比这样打工拿到的钱多，懒人就更不会去工作了
【在 n***p 的大作中提到】
: 刚刚午饭时跟同事聊天，他说他十几岁的时候就在麦当劳打工，赚minimum wage.
: 他读大学时，他父母完全没有能力资助他，于是他跟他老婆一起打工，赚minimum
: wage,养活自己。学费当然是学生贷款。
: 说到底，穷人之所以穷，就是因为懒。比如 Minimum wage 每小时8块钱，每天10
: 小时，就是80，每周是400， 一年50周，也有20000块。要是一家两口子都工作的
: 话，也有40000块每年，尽管不是很多，但是怎么也超过贫困线了。
:
: which
: previous
: all
|
