A disgusting vat of filth that no self-respecting intelligent person would wade into.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
I'm very, very sad about Molly Ivins' death. She was an awesome lady, and a good, hysterical check on the government. I don't think her voice can be replaced.

This sucks.

• Molly Ivins could have played in the league of the big boys. They invited her in, giving her a bureau chief job with the New York Times--which she wrote her way out of when she referred to a "community chicken-killing festival" in a small town as a "gang-pluck."

link

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Why you show such disrespect for the man who freed you from the cold war and 70% marginal tax rates is beyond me. Would you rather be speaking russian now?

You giving that credit to Newt?

Maybe if I'd ever paid a 70% marginal tax rate I'd have more appreciation. As I've noted to my wife at more than one of her friends' weddings -- its easy to be patriotic (and conservative) if you're rich.

S_A_M

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
The Dems can't even work with the Dems.

I can't imagine why this is a surprise to anyone.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

• Molly Ivins could have played in the league of the big boys. They invited her in, giving her a bureau chief job with the New York Times--which she wrote her way out of when she referred to a "community chicken-killing festival" in a small town as a "gang-pluck."

link

The New York Times HR people are humorless lot.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Sounds like a good speech by Bush yesterday:

• President Bush acknowledged Wednesday that there is growing income inequality in the United States . . . .
  
  "The fact is that income inequality is real -- it's been rising for more than 25 years," Bush said in an address on Wall Street. "The reason is clear: We have an economy that increasingly rewards education and skills because of that education." . . .
  
  Bush aides did not deny that Bush was seeking to address Democratic concerns, but they said income inequality has been on the minds of senior administration officials such as Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., who mentioned the subject in his first major address last spring, and chief economic adviser Edward Lazear.
  
  "It's something that obviously the administration has made note of," said presidential counselor Dan Bartlett. The president "understands that there are many Democrats who have spoken to this issue. It is an important time for the Congress and the American people to hear what he says," Bartlett said.
  
  Few economists would disagree that income inequality is real and getting worse. The gap between rich and poor has been growing wider since the 1970s. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the wealthiest 20 percent of households accounted for 45.4 percent of total U.S. income in 1979, but claimed 53.5 percent in 2004. Households in the bottom fifth dropped from 5.8 to 4.1 percent over the same period. . . .
  
  "The question is whether we respond to the income inequality we see with policies that help lift people up, or tear others down," Bush said. "The key to rising in this economy is skills -- and the government's job is to make sure we have an education system that delivers them."

WaPo

eta: Good piece on inequality here.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

• Molly Ivins could have played in the league of the big boys. They invited her in, giving her a bureau chief job with the New York Times--which she wrote her way out of when she referred to a "community chicken-killing festival" in a small town as a "gang-pluck."

link

But could any of the "big boys" have made it to Molly's league? The only one I can think of who even comes close was Royko and he had Hizzoner Da Mare for inspiration.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Sounds like a good speech by Bush yesterday:

• President Bush acknowledged Wednesday that there is growing income inequality in the United States . . . .
  
  "The fact is that income inequality is real -- it's been rising for more than 25 years," Bush said in an address on Wall Street. "The reason is clear: We have an economy that increasingly rewards education and skills because of that education." . . .
  
  Bush aides did not deny that Bush was seeking to address Democratic concerns, but they said income inequality has been on the minds of senior administration officials such as Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., who mentioned the subject in his first major address last spring, and chief economic adviser Edward Lazear.
  
  "It's something that obviously the administration has made note of," said presidential counselor Dan Bartlett. The president "understands that there are many Democrats who have spoken to this issue. It is an important time for the Congress and the American people to hear what he says," Bartlett said.
  
  Few economists would disagree that income inequality is real and getting worse. The gap between rich and poor has been growing wider since the 1970s. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the wealthiest 20 percent of households accounted for 45.4 percent of total U.S. income in 1979, but claimed 53.5 percent in 2004. Households in the bottom fifth dropped from 5.8 to 4.1 percent over the same period. . . .
  
  "The question is whether we respond to the income inequality we see with policies that help lift people up, or tear others down," Bush said. "The key to rising in this economy is skills -- and the government's job is to make sure we have an education system that delivers them."

WaPo

This is, of course, the sort of article which gets accused of "liberal bias", because there are a significant number of economists who are hard at work fighting the bolded language above.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by taxwonk
But could any of the "big boys" have made it to Molly's league? The only one I can think of who even comes close was Royko and he had Hizzoner Da Mare for inspiration.

This is the best thing ever done in her honor. The Texas Observer has a page of rememberances from various people she's skewered over the years. The link for the Governor's comment says "Gov. Goodhair." The link from the President's says "Shrub," a nickname she coined.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
and the government's job is to make sure we have an education system that delivers them."

And this is precisely why the income gap will contiue to grow.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Cletus Miller
This is, of course, the sort of article which gets accused of "liberal bias", because there are a significant number of economists who are hard at work fighting the bolded language above.

I don't doubt it, but I also don't know why that's a bad thing.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Cletus Miller
This is, of course, the sort of article which gets accused of "liberal bias", because there are a significant number of economists who are hard at work fighting the bolded language above.

"Significant"? I don't think so.

And if so, Cato wouldn't have to spend money to try to persuade people that there really is a controversy about it.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
"Significant"? I don't think so.

And if so, Cato wouldn't have to spend money to try to persuade people that there really is a controversy about it.

Well, the number may not be particularly significant, but when adjusted for the amount of noise they make and the play they get in, for example, the WSJ, they are significant. I don't think it makes them more correct (or, if you prefer, less wrong), but it does make them significant--it's not as if it's three guys in the basement offices of the Econ department at Liberty University disputing the growing gap. They're ideologues, not wackos (per se).

[SlaveNoMore]

sgtclub
And this is precisely why the income gap will contiue to grow.

Unlike the deficit, which rapidly continues to shrink because of unanticipated tax receipts collected on the flood of cash released into the markets after the capital gains tax cut.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
You giving that credit to Newt?

Maybe if I'd ever paid a 70% marginal tax rate I'd have more appreciation. As I've noted to my wife at more than one of her friends' weddings -- its easy to be patriotic (and conservative) if you're rich.

S_A_M

I never paid a 70% marginal rate either, but I know that they existed and would still exist but for Reagan.

As for the rich comment, the assumptions in it and the assumptions that liberals frequently make regarding class are amazing. If I am rich, which would be at the broadest characterization, that state has only occured since W came into office. the previous decades ranged from lower to lower/middle. I would tend to think that the foundations of my viewpoints were based in those first 30 or so years and derive as much from experiencing what not having economic means and working hard to get to a different level as they do from any current status.

Of course the liberals with their keen eyes for diversity, tolerance and non-bias would just classify patriotic americans as the evil jesus freak rich.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
The New York Times HR people are humorless lot.

Dear god, they're still humorless. Her obituary:

While she drew important writing assignments, like covering the Son of Sam killings and Elvis Presley’s death, she sensed she did not fit in and complained that Times editors drained the life from her prose. “Naturally, I was miserable, at five times my previous salary,” she later wrote. “The New York Times is a great newspaper: it is also No Fun.”

After a stint in Albany, she was transferred to Denver to cover the Rocky Mountain States, where she continued to challenge her editors’ tolerance for prankish writing.

Covering an annual chicken slaughter in New Mexico in 1980, she used a sexually suggestive phrase, which her editors deleted from the final article. But her effort to use it angered the executive editor, A. M. Rosenthal, who ordered her back to New York and assigned her to City Hall, where she covered routine matters with little flair.

They're still too chicken to print the words "gang pluck"?