Comments on: Spread The Wealth

By: JBraunstein

JBraunstein — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 10:08:30 +0000

Since there is no one on the national scene right now who actually advocates free-market capitalism to call him on his BS, McCain can get away with his astoundingly hypocritical red-baiting. In the mainstream, traditional political and economic labels donâ€™t accurately describe anything anymore, except exhumed caricatures of a bygone era.

By: Daniel Larison

Daniel Larison — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 03:30:09 +0000

Our old friend Mencius has some unusual interpretations on occasion. In fairness to him, I believe Lukacs has also misread Long as an opponent of FDR coming from “the Right” because he was a populist. Being a populist somehow puts him on the right in this scheme despite his record.

By: lolarusa

lolarusa — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 02:55:05 +0000

When I first heard McCain mention that Obama would “spread the wealth” in the last debate, I thought that he probably had intended to say it differently, but got a bit muddled between his internal ideological shorthand and his talking points.

Imagine my surprise when he said again the next day that Obama intended to spread the wealth, as if that were a bad thing. I think he’s taken the “What’s the Matter With Kansas” premise far too seriously. Most people aren’t wealthy, and the sound of spreading around some of that wealth we’ve all heard about but never seen is bound to sound like a good idea, even in Kansas.

I can’t help but feel McCain is quite divorced from reality if he thinks the phrase will discredit Obama.

By: TGGP

TGGP — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 01:53:28 +0000

I remember Mencius Moldbug arguing that Huey Long was a far-right reactionary. I disagreed.

By: M.Z. Forrest

M.Z. Forrest — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 17:32:04 +0000

I’m surprised at the polling. Thanks nyx.

I’m still somewhat surprised at the gullibility of people. So many take it at face value that “Joe” would have had or could have had a personal income of $250,000. People just don’t know how much money that is income-wise.

By: nyx

nyx — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:10:55 +0000

Polls In Missouri where Obama leads 52-46.

Fifty-one percent (51%) believe that raising taxes on those who earn more than $250,000 a year will be good for the economy. Thirty-one percent (31%) believe such a tax hike would hurt.

. Link here.

By: nyx

nyx — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:06:04 +0000

Rasmussen has some poll numbers out on the issue of taxes on those making 250,000 dollars and above.

A plurality of voters (47%) say Barack Obamaâ€™s plan to raise taxes on those who earn over $250,000 a year is good for the troubled U.S. economy, even though 51% still believe that lower taxes are the best way to spur economic growth.

By: Grumpy Old Man

Grumpy Old Man — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 11:00:41 +0000

The accusation of “class warfare” to anyone who questions things like the Bush tax cut is a bit of clever political skullduggery. Pretty funny, though, coming from the party of corporate welfare queens.

By: nyx

nyx — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 05:01:42 +0000

Your writing on this is quite excellent. I don’t understand – doesn’t McCain understand the voters are angry and are ripe for grand old class conflict. What does “spread the wealth” even prove? That Barack is a stealth socialist in the best of years past for a socialist to run? (perhaps its my millennial instincts kicking in but does “socialism” scare anyone anymore) We just had socialism for the rich with the bailout, vast inequality and concentration of power along with governmental abuses and great debt. McCain should be adopting Robin hood’s message by now but that is to assume too much of either McCain or his campaign.