View Single Post
Old 07-01-2004, 05:06 PM   #141 (permalink)
wonderwench
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally posted by smooth
wonderwench: are you arguing that the "poor" are represented by elected officials and that the top 1% wage earners are a minority*? That is, that the interests of the top 1% wage earners are not reflected in the policies of our government?
One can argue and provide evidence for both views. In terms of mass voting, the wealthy are a minority. Take a city such as Berkeley or a state such as CA. Measures and initiatives are passed based upon popular vote, many of which have tax or government debt implications. I would classify these as the "bread & circuses" of the majority. Conversely, the wealthy always have the power of influence and personal pull in order to affect legislation; perhaps we can deem this aspect "guns & butter". Neither situation is ideal, but pick your poison. Would you rather have an incentive for capital to be productive or to encourage redistribution of wealth which is usually channeled to consumption rather than productive investment?

Quote:
If so, I find your claim strange. Wealth is persistently correlated with voting behavior. Wealth also grants access to public officials in all sorts of ways. This thread was started about a dinner party that one had to pay $10,000 dollars to attend. Hillary was speaking to her constituents--and they weren't firemen, police, or steel workers. They certainly weren't a room full of single women trying to raise children while looking for gainful employment.

BTW, why is it that raising children is not looked upon as a job in itself? I hear people castigating women who stay home on welfare to raise children (I'm not going to deconstruct this myth in this thread--I'll just pass on it for the sake of my point), when in reality it seems that is exactly what they should be doing--staying home and taking care of their children.

Unless of course you think the wealthy children are going to grow up and become the factory workers it might behoove you to support the raising of an industrial army. Maybe you don't want impoverished parents reproducing. In that case, you might need to reconsider your stance on immigration...someone has to do the menial labor and it isn't going to be Chelsea...contradictions abound.
I do not believe anyone should have children they are not in a position to financially support. There is a high correlation between children raised in single welfare mother households and inadequate education, leading to a perpetuating cycle in the next generation.
wonderwench is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360