High profile conservatism too serious to be seen

Ha ha. Ho ho. The liberals, please. You know how they are, it’s so obvious, they’re all ‘blearrgh,’ do I need to write this? I don’t think so. No. Right, here it is:

Got equality ‘cuz you want it?
Rick Esenberg | Shark and Shepherd

. . but I did note with interest today’s contribution by George Wagner because it plays off a theme – perhaps the only theme – that might result in President Obama’s reelection. Income inequality.

The Theme From Income Equality. A rip-off of Lara’s Theme, modulated largely from minor to major, it sounds like Phillip Sousa if he were Spike Jonze. Look how #OWS try to march to it in waltz time but only the Polish cadre can stay in line. National comedy ensues, woes vaporize, Obama beats Chet Bainbot in a landslide.

Mr. Wagner goes after the unequal distribution of income with about as [sic] nuance and appreciation for economics as does the President. “We” want incomes to be more equal so all that “we” must do is pass a law to make it so. All we need to [sic] is tax away what the awful one percenters don’t need or, perhaps more accurately, whatever amount it is that “we” want.

Lawyer Rick gets the quotes right. I’m not sure about the rest of his journalism. This fairly resembles the conservatives’ response to income equality, which goes like this:

They “say” all you have to do is give them your whole paycheck. They say “they” just want to take your every penny and leave you homeless. I’ll tell “you” I “think” this is crazy. So who’s crazy: me “or” them?

I give credit where credit is due. When you’re too smart to make any argument about an issue, you’re really smart.

We live in coarse times in which the notion that someone has a right to keep what they earn is regarded as antiquated and insufficiently sophisticated. Because fortunes can’t be accumulated without some publicly provided infrastructure and the rule of law enforced by the state, there is no such thing as property rights free from the claim of the state.

If the logic of that eludes you, you’re not the first.

But, in fairness, no one (at least not since FDR) proposes to take it all and what could be the harm of evening things out a bit?

And now you see why Harvard trained attorneys are so popular: They’re clowns. Even FDR never wanted to “take it all,” but it probably sounds plausible while you’re dancing the carioca.

Eventually, Rick tries to say something like Reagan’s lower tax rates didn’t even change government revenues, so why bother? Let’s ignore his general irrationality and point out he’s ignoring Ronnie 1.) revamped the entire tax code 2.) shifted tax burdens onto poor and middle class Americans to pay for cuts, and 3.) blew up the national debt. Rick can wink at Arthur Laffer all he likes, but the grifter left long ago with Ronnie’s silverware. Arthur has forever refused to place his curve’s peak — which is only the whole point of graphing a revenue/rate dynamic in the first place. The reason for Laffer’s cowardice: the Euros have proven rich folks will still work when you tax them at 70%. So much for the conservative lean of Laffer economics.

Liberals aren’t too hot on 70% anyway. The Bush tax rates, essentially a 3% cut on Clinton’s (which peaked at 39.6%), lost us $2 trillion over 10 years. That’s a number of bridges, schools and jobs gone to ghost. That’s plenty of unemployment checks for recession-bruised families in need of food, shelter and clothing.

But let’s avoid realities, please, while mocking unserious people. Liberals are silly. Do I need to point it out?

Where can you find a decent gulag nowdays?
Rick Esenberg | Shark and Shepherd

Speaking of The Nation. It’s grown nostalgic for the Soviet Union. I mean, after all, where is the front without the communists?

Ho ha The Nation. Communists. [heedless point — a few of those hardliners still lurk behind a fake door concealed by sliding panels to be released by yanking on the candlesticks in the perfesser’s law library. Voila: China! Gulags and all, AKA 19% of Earth.] Why do liberals play these games? Who are they trying to kid? This is so easy *yawn* mocking you all.

Btw, who was the short-arm reliever that tried to save the Soviets’ game of perestroika? Which of The Nation’s bleeding hearts threw that weak junk that Rick ripped back into the bullpen? Without even reading it? Mikhail Gorbachev.

Share