Is there anyone who doesn't know that "income inequality" is the same as class warfare and Marxism?

What's this feeble assumption and weakly failing attempt by US working class cons that we are somehow afraid or ashamed to use the term "Class Warfare"?

CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE

I'm just sick of Obama somehow getting the credit for the honorable Class War which I started and maintain. I want my full credit.

@Uh... Actually, I live in Socialist Japan, where organizational missions are "to benefit society." You take your organizational sole missions as "to earn profit" up to the protestor lines with you today. We'll all be working all day today here in Japan and producing, and then having a party tonight.

If you wanna call all this honorable fun and wealth-acquisition we're having "communist," go ahead. I'm not a crier -- and just because I hear a jackass out braying in a field, I feel no deep need to bray back.

And once again...

CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE CLASS WARFARE

It is a ploy used by Marxism. What is "income" anyway? Where does it come from? Is there a department of Income that issues it out?

Income is based on value given for value received. If you need something done and can't or don't want to do it yourself you hire someone else to do it for you. How much and how well you want it done provides a "value". If someone agrees to do provide the labor to do it, he and you must agree on what that value is. You end up benefiting and he ends up benefiting. Value given for value received.

If someone has better skills to do masonry and produces beautiful and safe results his labor is worth far more than someone who has no such skills. Would you pay both equally? Would you pay the same for a 1990 Saturn as you would for a new BMW? Why not?

Do all Professional Basketball players earn the same salary? No. The best players bring far more value to the owners of the team. By being excellent players, they draw more fans who pay more to see them, making the owners more profit. Value given for value received.

There is no such thing as "income inequality". If two people are equally adept and produce equal results in the same area they are very closely equal in compensation. If one is clearly superior to the other he will most likely be more highly valued.

You are correct that in a Communist system, all are compensated equally regardless of their real value. But the question is then, is that fair? If you work much harder and are more productive than I am, should we be equally valued? In the Communist model, the more productive are stupid to work harder. Pretty soon, productivity suffers and no value is created.

People must understand that Supply Side economics works and Keynesian Demand Side economics does not. The reason is, as has been demonstrated by Obama's "stimulus", spending money does not create wealth. What creates wealth is productivity.

Paying one group of people to dig holes and another group of people to fill them back in may create jobs but it doesn't create wealth. Pretty soon, the one paying them will run out of money. On the other hand, if people are paid to produce something of value they are compensated with value and the product is then sold to other people who value it at a profit. That profit is what keeps the engine running.

The only people incapable of understanding this simple cause and effect model are the very stupid and the highly intellectual. It is becoming increasingly difficult to tell the difference.

*

'

Communism/Marxism, in practice, proved one thing for sure: govt involvement is the main CAUSE of income inequality. It doesn't matter if dems, repubs or mother Teresa recommended it, it FAILS.

Pluto C. Rat, while not in agreement with either you or me (entirely) isn't condoning communism or socialism but, rather, the Japanese alternative which frowns upon an adversarial relationship between anyone of any level.

...

Lets hope not. Communists were socialist that advocated violent overthrow of the government. That did not appeal to americans in the 20's and sure hope it doesn't catch on in the 21st century.

"What we're trying to move against is institutionalized unfairness. We want to see that everyone pays their fair share, and no one gets a free ride. Our reasons? It's good for society when we all know that no one is manipulating the system to their advantage because they're rich and powerful. But it's also good for society when everyone pays something, that everyone makes a contribution." Ronald Reagan June 6, 1985

Yes, that is what the fox news sheep hear. It's a good think most Americans don't listen to right wing propaganda outlets like Fox.

According to the latest CBS News/New York Times Poll, conducted before the president announced his plan, the public supports increasing taxes

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20110458-50...

All I heard was "bahahah bahahah" from you.

Don't you see what's wrong with billionaires having a lower tax rate than the rest of us?

No, he's saying that the rich should pay their fair share in taxes, and that includes Mitt Romney. Conservatives only make themselves look uneducated when they label anything as communist if they don't agree with it.

Hey buddy,

A communist wouldn't give hundreds of billions of dollars to BANKS.

Just thought you should know.

I'll believe him if he offers to accept only $40K per year as president