LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 2,531
0 members and 2,531 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 12,534, 02-14-2026 at 02:04 PM.
View Single Post
Old 09-09-2007, 05:26 PM   #2857
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 26,231
"The Constitution does not enact Mr. Herbert Spencer’s Social Statics."

Quote:
Originally posted by Not Bob
Riiiiiiiiiiiiight -- voting for economic policies that might benefit the working class? Redistribution of income, socialism, 1970s era liberalism, bad, foolish, against the laws of economics, etc. Voting for economic policies that favor the rich? Wise, economically sound, American, the right thing to do, etc. Got it.

Snark aside, here's an example -- NAFTA. Free trade is a great thing for the country overall, I agree, but really bad for certain segments of the economy and really good for certain segments of the economy. The current political reality holds that anyone who says "hey, wait a minute -- these textile workers in South Carolina who lost their jobs when their boss relocated to Hondorus need some help" are accused of class warfare. But the idea of cutting the capital gains tax for the factory owner is applauded.
Globalization is a reality no one can escape. It is hitting the white collar worker just as hard as the blue. Your argument's a few years late.

Pssst... A lot of those people who worked in manufacturing jobs own stock. You've a pretty snotty view of those you claim to want to help. But by all means, give them some sort of benefit with one hand while you increase their capital gains rates on the other.

Bush isn't helping the rich. He's just not handcuffing them as you'd seem to like.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
sebastian_dangerfield is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:46 AM.