Eat the Rich!

[TheBlackPeterSchiff]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=661pi6K-8WQ


:cool:

Is America really broke? Michael Moore (and others) tells us that there are oceans of cash being hoarded by the wealthy. But Iowahawk (iowahawk.typepad.com) did a little addition, and armed with these statistics Bill and the 'Hawk blow a hole in the "hoarding" lie big enough to fit a documentary filmmaker through.

[Vessol]

If we are going to start eating rich people, I think we should start with Michael Moore. He looks like he could feed a half dozen families.

[Dreamofunity]

If we are going to start eating rich people, I think we should start with Michael Moore. He looks like he could feed a half dozen families.

Meats too fatty.

[ctiger2]

Whittle was on with Schiff today: http://archives2011.gcnlive.com/Archives2011/apr11/PeterSchiff/0405112.mp3

[heavenlyboy34]

If we are going to start eating rich people, I think we should start with Michael Moore. He looks like he could feed a half dozen families.

lulz :) And Rush Limbaugh, too. ;)

[silverhandorder]

Nom nom nom

[heavenlyboy34]

In many ways, Michael Moore is correct. The regime did in fact transfer thousands of dollars from taxpayers to corporate banks, etc. Whittle and Moore are both manipulating words to dupe their audiences and appealing to emotion rather than logic, and are succeeding in many cases.

[RCA]

In many ways, Michael Moore is correct. The regime did in fact transfer thousands of dollars from taxpayers to corporate banks, etc. Whittle and Moore are both manipulating words to dupe their audiences and appealing to emotion rather than logic, and are succeeding in many cases.

One of the things I've noticed is that the liberty movement tends to be a little too simplistic sometimes: We love freedom! We love capitalizum! Everybody working for a privately controlled company is moral and just! etc. But in most cases the situation is never this cut and dry. Yes, many of Michael Moore's ideas are socialistic, however, he does hit the nail on the head EVERY once in a while. The middle class is gone. There are very rich people in the top 1%. This did not happen via a free market. Not all rich people are our heroes. Neither are all those who claim to be pro business.

Keep in mind, there were PLENTY of rich business people in Atlas Shrugged, however, only a handful of them were drawn in a positive light. The same goes for businesses today. One should be pro moral-free-market, not pro free-for-all-market.

[Mahkato]

When talking to people about how rich people get rich, I am always careful to qualify that I approve of people getting rich by providing goods and services to others by means of voluntary transactions. Wal-mart has done wonders for efficient production and distribution methods, and I applaud them for that, but they also use their clout with governments to get special treatment. Many (most) of our country's richest got that way by partnering with the government.

[heavenlyboy34]

One of the things I've noticed is that the liberty movement tends to be a little too simplistic sometimes: We love freedom! We love capitalizum! Everybody working for a privately controlled company is moral and just! etc. But in most cases the situation is never this cut and dry. Yes, many of Michael Moore's ideas are socialistic, however, he does hit the nail on the head EVERY once in a while. The middle class is gone. There are very rich people in the top 1%. This did not happen via a free market. Not all rich people are our heroes. Neither are all those who claim to be pro business.

Keep in mind, there were PLENTY of rich business people in Atlas Shrugged, however, only a handful of them were drawn in a positive light. The same goes for businesses today. One should be pro-moral-free-market, not pro-free-for-all-market.

I agree. I hope you're not accusing moi of being simplistic. I consistently point out the fact that many self-proclaimed "capitalists" approve of corporatism and grossly immoral practices. Yes, Moore does get some things right (I liked "Roger and Me"), but he does manipulate words to dupe audiences-just as his opponents on the "right" do.

[RCA]

I agree. I hope you're not accusing moi of being simplistic. I consistently point out the fact that many self-proclaimed "capitalists" approve of corporatism and grossly immoral practices. Yes, Moore does get some things right (I liked "Roger and Me"), but he does manipulate words to dupe audiences-just as his opponents on the "right" do.

No, I wasn't accusing you. I was actually agreeing with you because you had the courage to say Michael Moore can be right sometimes when most people on this board blindly scream SOCIALIST FATASS!! without acknowledging he ever does ANYTHING right even though the majority of his views are dead wrong.

EDIT: In my 10 years of working as a professional, I've seen very little, if any, morally capitalistic behavior based on merit and hard work. This problem is not caused solely by government, but may just be a problem with society itself. In fact, government is just another problem of the society we currently live in.

[Carehn]

Awesome!!!

[heavenlyboy34]

No, I wasn't accusing you. I was actually agreeing with you because you had the courage to say Michael Moore can be right sometimes when most people on this board blindly scream SOCIALIST FATASS!! without acknowledging he ever does ANYTHING right even though the majority of his views are dead wrong.

EDIT: In my 10 years of working as a professional, I've seen very little, if any, morally capitalistic behavior based on merit and hard work. This problem is not caused solely by government, but may just be a problem with society itself. In fact, government is just another problem of the society we currently live in.

Thanks. I beg to differ with you somewhat, though. There are certainly some immoral people in business-in any population it is likely that there will be at least a few immoral people. However, government tends to be a cause of immoral/stupid behavior of certain people in the population simply by creating moral hazard, using favortism, etc. If your point is that the regime is a symptom of a morally bankrupt society, there is some merit to that-but it seems to go to the extreme, blaming the victim. Government as we know it was conceived by corrupt people to benefit themselves and their friends. If I am mistaken on what you were saying there, I apologize.

[RCA]

Thanks. I beg to differ with you somewhat, though. There are certainly some immoral people in business-in any population it is likely that there will be at least a few immoral people. However, government tends to be a cause of immoral/stupid behavior of certain people in the population simply by creating moral hazard, using favortism, etc. If your point is that the regime is a symptom of a morally bankrupt society, there is some merit to that-but it seems to go to the extreme, blaming the victim. Government as we know it was conceived by corrupt people to benefit themselves and their friends. If I am mistaken on what you were saying there, I apologize.

I'm saying that I've noticed a disturbing pattern in business of nepotism, favoritism, backstabbing, cheating, thwarting, conspiring, fraud, etc. at ALL levels of a business. In Atlas Shrugged there were a few leaders of companies and floor men who were completely sound morally when it came to an honest day's work. Most of the other characters in the book represent the majority of the people I've been exposed to during my various experiences. It is nice to see someone who is genuinely honest and moral, but I don't seem them very often.