January 12, 2012

66% of Americans think there's a conflict between rich and poor.

Pew: "Not only have perceptions of class conflict grown more prevalent; so, too, has the belief that these disputes are intense."

135 comments:

campy said...

That's all? One of the two major parties has been fomenting such a conflict for as long as I can remember.

Pastafarian said...

In related news, I read that President Obama, champion of the downtrodden, is looking at a $28 million mansion for his post-POTUS home.

Original Mike said...

Gee, our President beats on this incessantly, and people start to believe it.

I've always disagreed with his policies. I'm coming to the belief that the man himself is despicable. I've never thought that of any President before.

Tank said...

The big lie.

You got stuff. I want your stuff. How can I steal your stuff?

Hint: Use the gov't stupid.

Curious George said...

This from Pew:

survey found that younger adults, women, Democrats and African Americans are somewhat more likely than older people, men, Republicans, whites or Hispanics to say there are strong disagreements between rich and poor.

Democrats/Obama:

1) Sell class warfare.
2) Wreck the economy.
3) Offer more free shit
4) Profit

EMD said...

I could give a shit about both the rich and the poor.

And the middle class, too!

There is only me, and my family, and our lives.

t-man said...

The real conflict is between taxpayers and taxeaters. The "rich" and "poor" fall into both of those categories.

bagoh20 said...

There is something mentally deficient about someone who both wishes they had more and hates those who do for having it. It's the pinnacle of hypocrisy and just stupidly myopic.

And anybody who does not desire more than what they have has a lack of both imagination and compassion.

m stone said...

Class warfare is the classic archetype: the idea that seeps into our culture and becomes entrenched and "real." Segregation was once an archetype and was defeated by the democratization of better ideas that took hold.

garage mahal said...

This kind of talk should only be spoken in quiet rooms!

Spread Eagle said...

The first step in attaining more is to decide there's something out there one wants, and setting the goal to achieve it. Then, systematically arranging events and variables in one's life to persevere and succeed in reaching the goal. Some people get that. Some people don't. And it's the latter who snivel about the unfairness of it all.

Michael said...

There is no conflict between the rich and the poor, though there may be some between the poor and the rich. The "conflict" is that the 80% of the country still living in a recession is hurting and still way over leveraged. Way over leveraged. It is inconvenient to blame oneself for the fact that one has borrowed more than one can easily repay and therefore this cohort is susceptible to being diverted to the "conflict" meme using the shamefully wrong view of a static economy as a wedge. If people can be made to think that they did not get a raise because George Soros made that exact amount of money in an investment not available to the employee then a magical way to win an election, and ultimately control of the economy, has been located. This class warfare has not succeeded in the past because Americans have generally been an optimistic people with a view to getting rich or comfortable themselves. We shall see if this view holds. We have a very negative president, one who is neither cheerful nor optimistic, and he plays well to the fears of those who are still suffering terribly from the economy. I pray that he is put out of office, fired, and replaced with both more optimism and competence.

Bender said...

perceptions of class conflict grown more prevalent
___________

It's Newt's fault, it's Newt's fault! If only he hadn't attacked the pristine Romney, whose Bain Capital we all know is, by definition, a paragon of virtue inasmuch as it is "capitalist," then people would not think this way.

Of course, more seriously, perhaps if the Squish Party and it's leadership, including Boehner, McConnell and, yes, ROMNEY, had bothered to promote conservative principles, including authentic free market principles, then perhaps people would not, once again, get suckered into leftist spin.

prairie wind said...

I'm coming to the belief that the man himself is despicable. I've never thought that of any President before.

You are not alone.

Smilin' Jack said...

I've always found it amusing that people get so morally outraged about the 1% of Americans who have a lot more than they do, but couldn't care less about the 99% of the world's population who have a lot less.

SteveR said...

No surprise here, when "Hope and Change" fails you go beat the standard class warfare drum.

Democrats (Obama) can't run on results or an accurate examination of the influence of money in politics, which they, at best, are no better than Republicans.

Romney Rich Bad

The MSM will go right along with them

Christopher in MA said...

Tank's got it right. Ask that 66% to define what the "conflict" is and it will almost certainly come down to "you have more, I want more!" - the whine of the selfish brat.

But then again, "selfish brat" is the Democrat party:

- Slavery? Selfish brat slaveowners want the darkies to pick their cotton.

- Abortion? Selfish brat feminists want to sleep around, but want no nagging reminders that they're sluts.

- National defense? Selfish brat elites send US troops to every Godfosaken shithole in the world like Rwanda or Kosovo on "peacekeeping" missions, but would never dream of letting their own precious kiddies rub shoulders with the redneck baby-killers wearing that gauche Stars & Stripes patch on the shoulder.

timmaguire42 said...

Conflict? What kind of conflict? We live different lives, but we don't beat each other.

I don't invite them to my parties, they don't invite me to theirs. But it's more like the silent treatment than the War of the Roses, even the War of the Buttons.

prairie wind said...

They don't get excited about the 99% who have nothing in the rest of the world because they count themselves in the 99% of America who have less than the 1%. Nevermind that America's poorest are unimaginably wealthy compared to most of the world's poor.

Tank said...

It is very seriously bad when people stop thinking about earning the things that they want, and think more and more about the stuff other people have. This can not lead to good things.

See my avatar.

edutcher said...

Pew has been in the tank for GodZero since the start, so this should be taken with a grain of salt.

Lord knows, it's right out of the Commie playbook.

But, yes, Zero really hates this country and really wants to destroy it.

Especially if he can't be re-elected.

PS Hopefully, all the stories about how the Os have spent the last 4 years livin' large will take some of the air out of this, because this is how you start a civil war.

PPS Note the people who buy this are the big Democrat constituencies.

Curious George said...

Of course, what all this means is not what garage mahal wants to convey it means.

More from Pew:

Perceptions of the Wealthy

While the survey results show a significant shift in public perceptions of class conflict in American life, they do not necessarily signal an increase in grievances toward the wealthy. It is possible that individuals who see more conflict between the classes think that anger toward the rich is misdirected. Nor do these data suggest growing support for government measures to reduce income inequality.

In fact, other questions in the survey show that some key attitudes toward the wealthy have remained largely unchanged. For example, there has been no change in views about whether the rich became wealthy through personal effort or because they were fortunate enough to be from wealthy families or have the right connections.

A 46% plurality believes that most rich people “are wealthy mainly because they know the right people or were born into wealthy families.” But nearly as many have a more favorable view of the rich: 43% say wealthy people became rich “mainly because of their own hard work, ambition or education,” largely unchanged from a Pew survey in 2008.

Chip Ahoy said...

Yes, why just yesterday I heard again the tattered catchphrase "millionaires and billionaires" inserted utterly non sequitur as if it were a bullet point not to be missed in the course of a brief interview.

Debbie Wasserman, how I love to say the name with a "V" and the rest of the name automatically comes out in German just as plainly as if I said Water Man in English. I crack myself up.

I am annoying when she is on. I had the sound up to see and hear for myself if a wart had been removed or a scar patched over. Did she have her speech impediment fixed or any work done? I was curious, I'm always curious, to see if she is still a dreadful hag.

It took exactly two sentences *click* and she's gone.

[You probably already know had I stayed with the project of listening to D.W. again I'd have heard her impugn Tea Party activists, so I've read since.]

But there's your class conflict right there. Completely manufactured. It will cease to exist when the administration ceases. In my view it is singularly unAmerican.

Michael said...

ChipAhoy: I personally love the "millionairesandbillionaires" phrase which has elided into one word, a word I use with my leftie friends. Many of whom, if not most of whom, are millionaires. They do not appreciate the irony, much less humor, of being lumped in with people whose worth is one thousand times greater than their own. Millionairesandbillionaires. Splendid new word coined by our President, the smartest one ever.

garage mahal said...

The questions that need to be asked are:

"Are you a little better off than North Korea?"

"Do you feel fortunate to have a refrigerator?"

"How bad do you feel for your employer when he fires you?"

Peter said...

Well, obviously if you have more that means you must have obtained it somewhere, and where else than from me?

Because if you have more then I must have less. Because economics is a zero-sum game. Isn't it?

One would hope the class warriors would at least be clever enough to cite John Rawls' Theory of Justice, but they don't seem to be that bright.

For Rawls' Theory of Justice inescapably attacks the concept of meritocracy, and the "I'm entitled to a middle class income" crowd isn't about to admit to any lack of merit.

traditionalguy said...

The poor should be tired of watching the Democrats give out billions and billions of borrowed dollars of dollars to "Stimulate" the Dem bundler's latest faked green business designed to go Bankrupt as closure so that a new pig can get its snout into the trough.

The Fantasyland of wealthy property owners that the Democrat-Media sends out over the air 24/7 will go away the day a real conservative leader communicates his message.

But I fear Romney has no skill at such communications. It will be a close election.

Browndog said...

I thought "greed" and "envy" were inherent traits of humanity.

All humans, always. As are the flip side virtues.

Now, it's simply a political issue to be resolved by politicians?

Normally, I'd go into my rant about progressives, and how they believe--through indoctrination/regulation--they can remove the "bad" traits of human nature, and create the more perfect being, the more perfect society.

They can do this, they believe, because they are superior--having been blessed with the knowledge to do so...

All they ever demanded....er...asked for..was the opportunity.

Yes, normally I'd go into a rant about the god-like ones that can cure all that ails humanity...

But, I won't. Not today.

You're welcome.

Christopher in MA said...

"Debbie Wasserman, how I love to say the name with a V. . ."

Chip, I just call her Debbie Wasserman Test, myself. Captures exactly the flesh-crawling creepiness she exudes.

Brennan said...

The retired UAW worker with a hobby garage for all his toys is really feeling this gap.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Isnt rich a relative thing? I mean if you can spend say, $1000 on a mutt and the cost for the care and feeding of such a canine specimen of that worth, I would say you are rich, or at least have more money than sense.

YMMV

garage mahal said...

Two thirds of this country just needs a good pepper spraying is all. They'll come around.

Michael said...

Browndog: You remind me of what we used to call "sins" which were violations of the "Ten Commandments." The traits that you refer to were so evident in mankind that the "Ten Commandments" doubled up in ordering (Ordering! Commanding! Who needs that shit?) us not to covet our neighbor's goods and not to covet our neighbor's wife. Then, redundantly almost, we were commanded not to commit adultery and not to steal. Back in the olden times when sins were bad and bad behavior was not a ticket to the front page of a tabloid or a leadership position in OWS.

gadfly said...

So what does this prove? Why is Pew spending money to find answers on nonsense questions that have no benefit to anyone at all?

Answer - client money. If clients are willing to pay real greenbacks for unreal answers, Pew will run the questions up the flag pole. Ethical research is their only aim - um, maybe not.

Big Mike said...

I suppose that my take on this is quite a bit different due to my being in IT. Here in Northern Virginia we had -- a few years back -- the phenomenon of the "AOL millionaire." These were people who took jobs in AOL back when a dial-up modem was nearly everybody's means of access to the Internet. They took lower salaries than they might have gotten elsewhere, but also got stock options, so when AOL took off they got rich.

For years thereafter -- and still sometimes today -- articles in the local scandal rag (that's the Washington Post to you out-of-towners) just dripped with envy that computer geeks could get rich. I suppose the same is true for Seattle, where the "Microsoft millionaires" live, though I'd like to think that Silicon Valley is more used to the phenomenon.

So I'm not much concerned at the wealth of Larry Ellison or Steve Jobs or Bill Gates or Len Bosack or Steve Case or "The Woz." They created wealth and made life better for all of us. What has Barack Obama done that's as useful to society?

Lionheart said...

We have spent ever increasing time and treasure "educating" the youth that self esteem is all, everybody wins if nobody keeps score and if we just leveled the materialistic playing field all would be wonderful. Now the chickens come home to roost. First and only answer to why you are more successful than me: you are a dirty, money-grubbing pig and should fork over your share of the collective goods. It doesn't matter if you earned your wealth or stole it.
The cherry on top of this dysfunctional meme: Obama, soon to be one of the top 1% of the top 1%, preaching the politics of envy and the ability of Big Government to level those scales of achievement by stealing from those who actually contribute and doling out the proceeds however it sees fit.

edutcher said...

Browndog said...

I thought "greed" and "envy" were inherent traits of humanity.

Two of the Seven Deadly Sins.

Not necessarily inherent, but those tendencies which, if allowed to grow, will lead one to the occasion of sin.

To be fought by practicing the Seven Heavenly Virtues.

Note, please, the Lefties don't like that last part. More of that Opiate of the Masses stuff.

ic said...

Only the Poor could afford their champion and his not-angry wife a $4 million vacation, and Antoinette tours. Only the Poor enjoy the Cake that the not-angry wife let them eat.

McDucks love to count their money, and care about every penny.

Revenant said...

Uh, there have been massive protests ostensibly on behalf of the "poor", directed at the "rich".

What this poll tells us is that 66% of Americans watch television.

AJ Lynch said...

The PEW foundation, the non-profit that did this poll, has $4 Billion in assets!

I wonder if the poor consider the PEW rich?

Freeman Hunt said...

Uh, there have been massive protests ostensibly on behalf of the "poor", directed at the "rich".

What this poll tells us is that 66% of Americans watch television.


I agree. This supposed conflict has been in the news for the last many months, so it is no wonder that two thirds of Americans think it exists.

DADvocate said...

One of the two major parties has been fomenting such a conflict for as long as I can remember.

Pretty much sums it up. The Democrats attacks on the eeeeevul rich go back to FDR or before.

I've never understood how the masses have bought this crock of shit from rich Dems like the Kennedys, John Kerry, John Edwards, Nancy Pelosi, etc for so long. I guess that's why they want control over education, so they can keep people stupid and voting for them.

Christopher in MA said...

"Two thirds of this country just needs a good pepper spraying is all. They'll come around."

You could use it. The shock might actually cause a coherent thought to jump out of that feculent swampland between your ears.

Original Mike said...

"Yes, why just yesterday I heard again the tattered catchphrase "millionaires and billionaires" inserted utterly non sequitur as if it were a bullet point not to be missed in the course of a brief interview."

The Madison representative in the Wisconsin Assembly is a fellow named Brett Hulsey. I'm surprised the man hasn't had "millionaires and billionaries" tattoed to his forehead, he says it so much.

Original Mike said...

"I personally love the "millionairesandbillionaires" phrase which has elided into one word, a word I use with my leftie friends. Many of whom, if not most of whom, are millionaires. They do not appreciate the irony, much less humor, of being lumped in with people whose worth is one thousand times greater than their own."

The typical millionaire takes his/her lunch to work in a brown paper bag. They became millionaires by hard work and frugal living. It really is offensive to be denigrated the way the Democrats have taken to doing. Frankly, I'm fucking sick of it.

Michael said...

OriginalMike: I don't bring my lunch but I do order the special at our little deli here in the office building. And I eat it at my desk.

You are not the only one sick of it. Obama and his crowd think of millionairesandbillionaires as tie-wearing, elevator riding, desk sitting, jet plane riding, thieves. But the vast majority are guys in leased SUVs hustling to make a buck, the owners of plumbing supply houses and guys who own airplane hangers and on and on. The plain truth is that you make a big mistake by dissing millionairesandbillionaires because they may not be who you think they are and they may resent the hell out of being lumped in with plain old billionaires.

Henry said...

67% of Americans agree that they are sheep.

Original Mike said...

"Obama and his crowd think of millionairesandbillionaires as tie-wearing, elevator riding, desk sitting, jet plane riding, thieves."

With the emphasis on thieves. Although, I fear it's worse than that. They don't really believe it. They're just using this cynical line of atack to further their own interest.

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... But the vast majority are guys in leased SUVs hustling to make a buck, the owners of plumbing supply houses and guys who own airplane hangers and on and on..."

You're all full of crap. Those guys all look like the top hat guy in Monopoly raking in the money on Park Place and Boardwalk while the rest of us 99% are ekeing out a bare living in our shantys on Oriental Avenue

Scott M said...

Those guys all look like the top hat guy in Monopoly raking in the money on Park Place and Boardwalk while the rest of us 99% are ekeing out a bare living in our shantys on Oriental Avenue

You people on Oriental make us Baltic-dwellers sick.

Original Mike said...

I own Oriental Avenue. I haven't seen your check this month, Hoosier.

Scott M said...

I own Oriental Avenue. I haven't seen your check this month, Hoosier.

That's because he's still trying to roll doubles to get out.

garage mahal said...

With the emphasis on thieves. Although, I fear it's worse than that. They don't really believe it.

According to the commenters here, and conservatives in general, you're a thief. All public workers are thieves. But that sort of class warfare is okay I guess.

Rusty said...

n related news, I read that President Obama, champion of the downtrodden, is looking at a $28 million mansion for his post-POTUS home.


Gosh. Think it's big enough for his ego?

Original Mike said...

"That's because he's still trying to roll doubles to get out."

He'll never do it with the dice I provided. Us robber barons didn't get where we are by relying on chance.

Scott M said...

All public workers are thieves. But that sort of class warfare is okay I guess.

I consider single-source, price-inflated, no-competition health plans for public employee union members a form of theft, yes, GM. I doubt seriously you do.

Original Mike said...

"According to the commenters here, and conservatives in general, you're a thief. All public workers are thieves. But that sort of class warfare is okay I guess."

A few people here are over the top. Not most. And none of them have the bully pulpit.

Rusty said...

According to the commenters here, and conservatives in general, you're a thief. All public workers are thieves. But that sort of class warfare is okay I guess.





That's quite a cartoon you have running in your head.

Seeing Red said...

Can I just pass "Go" and collect my $200 before I have to pay my electric & water taxes?

Original Mike said...

"I consider single-source, price-inflated, no-competition health plans for public employee union members a form of theft"

Yes, as far as I understood the situation, that was a racket.

Christopher in MA said...

"That's quite a cartoon you have running in your head."

I think of it more as a constant loop of "Yakety Sax."

Original Mike said...

"Can I just pass "Go" and collect my $200 before I have to pay my electric & water taxes?"

No, but I'll lend you the money. 20% seems fair.

Alex said...

and today garage feels victorious. Look at how he's mocking all of you.

garage mahal said...

"That's quite a cartoon you have running in your head."

That was acknowledged, and backed up immediately with a comment confirming what I said!

Michael said...

"All public workers are thieves. But that sort of class warfare is okay I guess."

But public workers work for the public. The public only wants public workers that produce as opposed to leaning on their shovels. The public, the boss, wants the workers they hire to toe the line. Not the same thing as class warfare. More of an employer/employee relationship.

Andy Freeman said...

Envy is the only sin that gives no benefit to the sinner.

Alex said...

garage - where do you come up with all these straw men? Do you really believe conservatives say things ar ok if life is better then North Korea? I've never heard one conservative ever say that.

Christopher in MA said...

"You people on Oriental make us Baltic-dwellers sick."

Please. Baltic is Mediterranean with fewer hookers. Just stay on the other side of Marvin Gardens, you OWS scum.

Michael said...

"and today garage feels victorious. Look at how he's mocking all of you."

Because he did not read beyond the headline. He did not read the full Pew report that is linked.

Jay said...

Chip Ahoy said...
Yes, why just yesterday I heard again the tattered catchphrase "millionaires and billionaires" inserted utterly non sequitur as if it were a bullet point not to be missed in the course of a brief interview.


It never ceases to amaze me that someone lumping “millionaires and billionaires” (the latter 1000 times wealthier than the former) together isn't laughed off the public stage.

Imagine if that idiot Wasserman said that "thousandaires and millionaire" were taking advantage of those making $500 a year.

Idiot.

Scott M said...

Please. Baltic is Mediterranean with fewer hookers. Just stay on the other side of Marvin Gardens, you OWS scum.

I once lived on Park Place, but then I took an arrow in the knee.

Michael said...

Jay: Eureka!! Yet another new word to confound the innumerate left: thousandairesandmillionaires!! Or why not thousandairesandbillionaires? Even better, no?

Original Mike said...

"That was acknowledged, and backed up immediately with a comment confirming what I said!"

By me??? You exaggerate.

Alex said...

Remember only 43% in the Pew report said they thought the rich earned it. 57% did not think so.

Alex said...

That 57% will vote for Obama because I can't imagine such a mentality ever voting for a Republican.

Curious George said...

"Alex said...
Remember only 43% in the Pew report said they thought the rich earned it. 57% did not think so."

Incorrect. Only 46% did not think so. The rest were undecided.

garage mahal said...

But public workers work for the public. The public only wants public workers that produce as opposed to leaning on their shovels.

Nobody would notice if bankers took the day off, but this state couldn't function without just snowplow drivers on a day like today. If being a public worker were so easy and lucrative, Mitt Romney's kids would be public workers.

Revenant said...

According to the commenters here, and conservatives in general, you're a thief. All public workers are thieves.

Congrats, garage. According to Google, you're not only the first person here to say "all public workers are thieves" -- you're the first person in the entire internet to say that. :)

Alex said...

hey garage - guess what our computers really run the banking/commerce system 24/7. They never take a day off.

Big Mike said...

If "millionairesandbillionaires" are so bad, hows come no one is prosecuting Corzine for the outright theft of his customers' money?

Big Mike said...

@garage, here's what the public workforce is all about!

Sloanasaurus said...

This is all driven by Obama. Its sad that he has done this but he is a divider.

This country is about freedom for everyone - including the "so-called 1%." If we start taking that freedom away for some nebulus issue such as equality, then everyone will eventually lose their freedom.

Scott M said...

If we start taking that freedom away for some nebulus issue such as equality, then everyone will eventually lose their freedom.

Equality is still something to strive for, but the equality should always be in the opportunity, not an outcome equality. It's simply not doable without tyranny.

Sloanasaurus said...

The great think about America is that you should not feel guilty about getting rich... there should be no fear of being envied. That is why we have smart people shooting for the sky rather than artifically limiting themselves.

Obama (and now apparently Newt and Perry) wants to change this - he wants a culture of envy.

Michael said...

Bankers in NY used to arrive at their offices around 7am to catch the midday European action and make their calls to London. Given the immediacy of news and trading activity more trains have had to be put in service at 4:00 and 5:00 in the morning. Their West coast counterparts are now at their desks at those hours. Very few people can conceive of the hours worked by the one percent on Wall Street. Weekends? Vacations? Dude, you better have your phone on and your bags packed.


Those days are behind me, thank God, and I am now good with a mere ten to twelve hours and what it can earn.

LilEvie said...

Even Marx knew that poor people don't hate rich people - they want to BE rich people.

Every poor person thinks of himself as a temporarily inconvenienced wealthy one. Thus lottery tickets are sold. And Obama's war on the wealthy should fail.

wv: sumflogg. Gasbag thinks he's doing sumflogg'n here.

Tarzan said...

You could use it. The shock might actually cause a coherent thought to jump out of that feculent swampland between your ears.

Tarzan is enamored of this use of the word 'feculent'. Had Tarzan not already bested him in dire and mortal combat, he would glee at hurling this insult at the mighty and vainglorious Kerchak himself!

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
But public workers work for the public. The public only wants public workers that produce as opposed to leaning on their shovels.

Nobody would notice if bankers took the day off, but this state couldn't function without just snowplow drivers on a day like today. If being a public worker were so easy and lucrative, Mitt Romney's kids would be public workers."

Yes, the "false choice" response. garage, it's not that it's so easy and lucrative that it would attract a doer like Mitt Romney, it's that it's so easy and lucrative that it attracts those that seek high pay for a little work.

And next time you have school closings, go by McDonalds or other retailers. They'll be open. Hell, a year ago state workers were bitching because they had to come in or take a vacation day to stay home due to snow.

Sloanasaurus said...

These attacks by Obama on Bain - that you can't fire someone are attacks on the free market itself. Obama wants us to be like Europe where people are not free to run their business they way they chose. That's why no one starts new businesses in places like France and Greece.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Nobody would notice if bankers took the day off, but this state couldn't function without just snowplow drivers on a day like today. If being a public worker were so easy and lucrative, Mitt Romney's kids would be public workers.

Public workers are no more or less noble than anyone else. With unemployment over 8%, I'm sure there are a large number of people that would be willing to do these jobs.

Alex said...

Public workers are no more or less noble than anyone else. With unemployment over 8%, I'm sure there are a large number of people that would be willing to do these jobs.

No according to garage, these particular union workers are the salt of the earth, good progressive Democrat unionists who are HOLY I tell you HOLY!!!!

garage mahal said...

Alex
I read somewhere that over 30% of public workers voted for Walker in 2010. I would be shocked if any union member, public or private, votes Republican in those kind of numbers this year. Why would they?

Original Mike said...

"Hell, a year ago state workers were bitching because they had to come in or take a vacation day to stay home due to snow."

Ahh, some state workers.

Alex said...

Alex
I read somewhere that over 30% of public workers voted for Walker in 2010. I would be shocked if any union member, public or private, votes Republican in those kind of numbers this year. Why would they?


30% of union workers are social conservatives. So maybe 15% will vote for Walker in the recall election. But keep fantasizing about all union workers are mindless socialist automatons.

Henry said...

I would be shocked if any union member, public or private, votes Republican in those kind of numbers this year.

How many times is each union member voting, exactly?

DADvocate said...

The public only wants public workers that produce as opposed to leaning on their shovels.

That's what we want, not what we get.

Easy and lucrative? Sure is. Thirty or forty years ago, many public jobs didn't pay that well, but were still easy. When I worked for the state, they didn't give a shit about how effective you were, just about doing the paperwork.

It's become a Washington tradition for all sorts of administration officials, Senators, Congresspersons, and other federal officials to make really big bucks as consultants, etc after leaving government. The average federal worker makes a lot more than the average private worker, the same is true for most state workers. Plus, they have the protection of civil service. It's a racket that attracts more than it's share of the unmotivated and unambitious.

EMD said...

I idolize the non-idle rich.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

No according to garage, these particular union workers are the salt of the earth, good progressive Democrat unionists who are HOLY I tell you HOLY!!!!

To those on the left, what is holy about public workers is the amount of their pay that can funneled to Democrat politicians. The over the top bennies and privileges are part of the quid pro quo agreement between unions and Democrats. And the best part is, taxpayers get stuck with the bill!

DADvocate said...

I would be shocked if any union member, public or private, votes Republican in those kind of numbers this year.

Duh. They've proven their greed many times. Fortunately, union membership is way below its peak.

DADvocate said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
Alex
I read somewhere that over 30% of public workers voted for Walker in 2010. I would be shocked if any union member, public or private, votes Republican in those kind of numbers this year. Why would they?"

Google "public union layoffs" or for OH, IL, CA, etc. You will see thousands of reasons why. Google "teacher layoffs Milwaukee" for hundreds more. Then google "merit pay for WI teachers" for thousands of more reasons. Now do "tax increases" for above.

I know public union workers are not the "best and the brightest" but they are not all morons either.

garage mahal said...

So maybe 15% will vote for Walker in the recall election.

You're dreaming. You won't get that in private unions. They know they are next.

traditionalguy said...

The over a million per year in net income crowd is always wide open to a Tax Rate increase to 40% instead of 35%. So why does no bill in Congress approach it that way?

Simple: the extra income that would bring in is about one day's worth of the year's deficit, and it would start tax shelter tricks again in the Congress filled with vote sellers for "contributions.".

To close the deficit, only a large "middle class" tax rate increase would work, if the Congress did not spend it on new give aways buying themselves campaign contributions by midnight the day they passed it.

Revenant said...

Nobody would notice if bankers took the day off, but this state couldn't function without just snowplow drivers on a day like today.

What would prevent someone else from driving the snowplows? Oh yeah: union contracts forbid it.

The reason banks can keep running in the temporary absence of bankers is that banks' primary goal is attracting and retaining customers. Therefore they use automation, fail-overs, and other processes to insure that the system can function in the absence of employees.

That is the polar opposite of what unions want. What unions want is for *nothing* to function in the absence of union labor. Thus, regulations forbidding snowplows from being driven by other people when the official "snowplow driver" doesn't show up for work. Even though any trained monkey can drive a freakin' snowplow.

If being a public worker were so easy and lucrative, Mitt Romney's kids would be public workers.

"Easy and lucrative" are relative terms. Public employment is lucrative if you're of average or below-average ability. If you're a skilled worker, the private sector is more lucrative, because the private sector pays a premium for people who know what the heck they're doing.

Revenant said...

I would be shocked if any union member, public or private, votes Republican in those kind of numbers this year. Why would they?

You're forgetting that people in those professions have two choices:

1. Belong to the union.
2. Find another profession.

Just because they're union members doesn't mean they like the union -- no more than being an American means you like the US government.

NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...

@Sloanasaurus said...

This is all driven by Obama. Its sad that he has done this but he is a divider.

No! No! No! It is as he said. He is a uniter.

He's just uniting the people who want him out of office!

Don't Tread 2012 said...

"Just because they're union members doesn't mean they like the union -- no more than being an American means you like the US government."

My wife is a teacher and an NEA member, no choice of her own. She is not liberal by any metric. She resents that $850 + per year is funnelled away from her paycheck for 'union dues'. We all know this money is fed to the democrat party. Fair? Not on your life. So the next time some mealy-mouthed liberal starts bleating about fairness, just laugh.

TosaGuy said...

"Nobody would notice if bankers took the day off, but this state couldn't function without just snowplow drivers on a day like today."

2-4 inches is hardly Snowzapollozza 2012.

Original Mike said...

"He's just uniting the people who want him out of office!"

I saw Gary Bauer being interviewed last night. He was asked if he woould support the GOP nominee, no matter who it is. His response was absolutely. Anybody is better than the current White House resident.

Don't Tread 2012 said...

"Anybody is better than the current White House resident."

Amen.

Lather, rinse, and repeat.

Calypso Facto said...

sloanasaurus said: If we start taking that freedom away for some nebulus issue such as equality, then everyone will eventually lose their freedom.

"People who aim for equality before liberty, will end up with neither equality nor liberty" Milton Friedman

Equality before the law, not equality of outcomes, fosters the individual effort that drives an economy.

Calypso Facto said...

GM:I would be shocked if any union member, public or private, votes Republican in those kind of numbers this year. Why would they?

Because they realize a fiscally healthy state government is better for their long-term employment?

and: "Nobody would notice if bankers took the day off, but this state couldn't function without just snowplow drivers on a day like today."

I know that state workers were required to take furlough days every month thanks to Gov. Doyle, but I never ran into a situation where I personally noticed the absence...

Original Mike said...

"Because they realize a fiscally healthy state government is better for their long-term employment?"

This public employee supports the changes because a fiscally healthy state government is better for everybody.

garage mahal said...

Because they realize a fiscally healthy state government is better for their long-term employment?

Hasn't really worked out that way yet has it? Wisconsin unfortunately is sucking wind after Walker's budget was enacted.

And how does making unions re certify every year save the state money, or make it healthier? I'm guessing unions sniffed this bullshit out a long time ago.

dispatches said...

If people believe class warfare exists, then does not class warfare, in some sense, exist?

Class warfare has no objective existence. Marx tried to objectify it by turning it into the engine of history. He failed.

Class warfare is one of those most dangerous of concepts: its very reality depends upon belief. We can make it real by simply believing it to be real.

The Crack Emcee said...

"Perceptions" and "beliefs."

They mean nothing. This article says nothing.

When will people learn?

Hazy Dave said...

There is a war between the rich and poor,
a war between the man and the woman.
There is a war between the ones who say there is a war
and the ones who say there isn't.

- L. Cohen

bagoh20 said...

I'm no billionaire, but I consider myself rich and I was pondering just last night why that is. I was born poor, never inherited anything, and never even got a college degree. Sure I worked hard and long, but so do a lot of people, and that alone would not have done it.

I finally distilled it down to primarily being highly trust worthy.

I basically proved to a series of people, with far more than I had, that I could be trusted 100% with their assets. I did it by working and performing well for them and always being impeccably honest. Also borrowing from the rich and always paying them back with interest. Eventually I had a long record of that to where I could get people to give me money, business, or their hard work and dedication for no other reason than their own self-interest, because they know they can trust me to make it worth while and not waste their investment.

In short, to become rich, I think you need: 1) to be highly trusted and 2) know someone who is already richer than you and who wants to get richer.

I never even tried to get wealthy. I was just taking reasonable risks with reliable payoffs when they were available. Always making sure I could keep my promises.

Wealth is contagious if you just make yourself a welcome host.

The Crack Emcee said...

This goes to the heart of my debate with some about Newt Vs. Mitt:

Some perceive Newt to be a loose cannon, so they believe he would be a bad president. None of which explain the reality of his political accomplishments, which go far beyond any of his opponents.

On the other hand, they perceive Mitt as being steady, which they believe will make him a good president. Except, in reality, he doesn't have the accomplishments to show for it and has been running a losing campaign for over a decade.

Perceptions and beliefs are getting in the way of reality, which some seem determined to change - putting the perception of the best man ahead of the actual one - just as they did for Obama.

It's a recipe for disaster - again.

Phil 3:14 said...

I want rich people's money. Because I can't get it, I get angry.

Therefore there is more conflict between the rich and poor.

Phil 3:14 said...

Well, I bet these rich folks are angry.

TosaGuy said...

"And how does making unions re certify every year save the state money, or make it healthier? I'm guessing unions sniffed this bullshit out a long time ago."

And the Fleeing 14 guaranteed that particular element would get passed when they heading south instead of picking off a Republican or two here and there to get rid of some of these secondary elements. The essential bill would have passed, but without elements like this.

Calypso Facto said...

GM:Hasn't really worked out that way yet has it?

Actually it has:

Moody’s wrote that the Aa2 general obligation bond rating “reflects the state’s improved liquidity position…as well as the fully funded pension system.” They note that “the state’s ability to make progress toward structural budget balance and improve its liquidity and fund balances will be important to future credit analyses.”

Hoosier Daddy said...

"Easy and lucrative" are relative terms. Public employment is lucrative if you're of average or below-average ability.

Well a quote from Ghostbusters sums that up:

Dr Ray Stantz: Personally, I liked the university. They gave us money and facilities, we didn't have to produce anything! You've never been out of college! You don't know what it's like out there! I've *worked* in the private sector. They expect *results*.

garage mahal said...

Calypso
I don't know how that Moodys release from last May reaffirming our bond rating had anything to do with Walker or the budget that hadn't even been passed yet.

Palladian said...

"Wealth is contagious if you just make yourself a welcome host."

Infect me! Infect me!

Calypso Facto said...

Garage, because Moody's prognosis of Wisconsin's fiscal condition is more important than your assertion (wish?) that "Wisconsin unfortunately is sucking wind".

Republican said...

My former boss's statistics:
Lives in $750k home
Drives 2011 Cadillac :Wife=2012 Mercedes SUV
Owns Miami Beach condo:$650K and keeps "old" 2010 Cadillac at condo
Vacations 4x year Miami; Vegas 2x; Europe 1x; +SF, LA, NY trips

His employees: No raises in 6 years; no paid vacation; no retirement plan, health insurance, paid sick days.

He keeps 2 sets of books, under/reports to the IRS, games every tax loophole and insurance system he can,and screws the employees out of nickels and dimes.

How does he get by with it? Because: The business world is full of like-minded business owners who admire him for his "success" and work with him. THEY ALL DO IT. He practically acts as a consultant in advising how to lie, cheat and steal your way to financial success.

Embarrassed? Shamed? No! He sees himself as being smart. Savvy.

And when anyone rumbles about increasing taxes on the wealthy, guess who complains?

I think THESE are the kinds of "rich" people everyone is thinking about when we discuss conflict.

The rich like him, really are NOT doing the right thing. They're staying rich because they exploit the poor who work for them, and exploit govt loopholes (JUST LIKE WELFARE TYPES) to keep from even paying what they should be paying. They aren't losing their homes or doing without health insurance, etc etc.

Michael said...

Republican. "they" do not all do it. The boss you described was engaging in illegal activity which no conservative would approve of, especially the rich ones. There are surely tax cheats and the description you give is of criminal behavior which you should have alerted the authorities to. "They" generally got rich by following the rules, not getting ripped every night, staying on course and not engaging in criminal actions. Employees who stay with a boss like you describe are clearly fairly paid or they would go elsewhere. Or they are unskilled and stuck.

Michael said...

Crack. Romney is pretty lame, as close as one could get to the miserable McCain in terms of bland. Newt, unfortunately, caused the closing of the Washington zoo for a few hours a couple of decades ago and for that he cannot be dogcatcher. Newt turning against the business record of Romney is pretty unforgivable.

Romney, had he more carisma, more spunk, would have said that he loved firing the unproductive and replacing them with better more hard working employees. He should have said that the American people cannot act fast enough to fire Barack and his team and replace them with competents.

bagoh20 said...

Republican,

Anyone who continues to work for your ex-boss is accepting his offer. There must be soemthing in it for them. If I treated my employees like that, I'd lose most, if not all, of them. I give them all those benfits plus they all got raises last year and quarterly bonuses for every single employee. Still, I had a few blatantly steal substantial amounts from me and the rest of us there.

Without gratitude you will suck as a boss OR an employee, and you will be unhappy, rich or poor. It sounds like your ex-boss is trying hard to fill in a hole in himself that wealth cannot address. I'm not surprised by that.

I drive a pick up truck and rarely travel or vacation, because I'm fricken ecstatic just the way I am: greatful.

The Crack Emcee said...

Michael,

Crack. Romney is pretty lame, as close as one could get to the miserable McCain in terms of bland. Newt, unfortunately, caused the closing of the Washington zoo for a few hours a couple of decades ago and for that he cannot be dogcatcher. Newt turning against the business record of Romney is pretty unforgivable.

No it isn't - it's perfectly understandable if you're not infected by spin and stay in touch with reality. I'ma do a blog post on that, because it's a great topic, considering how easily people have bought the current conventional wisdom. For now, just keep your other idea in mind:

Newt, unfortunately, caused the closing of the Washington zoo for a few hours a couple of decades ago and for that he cannot be dogcatcher.

That's all you really need to know, right there,...

The Crack Emcee said...

Here's the blog post, Mike:

You're in it.

Freeman Hunt said...

I don't believe Republican's story. I know plenty of bosses, good ones and bad ones. A boss living that lifestyle while committing fraud is unlikely to also treat his employees badly as that makes them likely to report him to the IRS.

You may find the occasional bad man who lives like that, but he almost never gets to live like that for long.

Ryan Costa said...

Honestly, what is this "conflict" that 66% believe exists?