Michael Ramirez by Michael Ramirez

Michael Ramirez

Comments (27) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Jeff H

    Jeff H said, over 1 year ago

    Sorry, O, you can’t push them any farther apart than you already have.

  2. John Locke

    John Locke said, over 1 year ago

    When the income gap was between those starving in the streets and those living in palaces, it was a problem. Today, the poor have TVs, DVD players, and cell phones just as good as the rich. Where’s the problem?

  3. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, over 1 year ago

    @John Locke

    If you don’t understand the problem, then you and those you love have been very fortunate. Perhaps you will learn more about the problem as more cities and business declare bankruptcy in order to default on pensions and retirements. I hope not.
    The ‘luxuries’ you mention are part of the ‘bread and circus’ mentality of our legislature. Keep the people ‘entertained’ and they are more likely to watch dancing with the stars than being politically active against the cannibalistic two party oligarchy weakening and dividing our nation.
    One can almost see some of the most extreme politicians jumping up and down on the President’s back as he tries to bridge this gap. One also wonders if his efforts to lead are too little too late. It will be up to the electorate to decide what is more important… a nation united in purpose, or a house divided against itself.
    Respectfully,
    C.

  4. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, over 1 year ago

    @John Locke

    ^But do the rich really need six mansions with one in every room?

  5. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, over 1 year ago

    @DaSharkie

    I’ve already done all that and I’m as rich as I need to be.
    .
    Doesn’t mean I can’t criticize greed when I see it and observe that the nation would be stronger and wealthier if there were less personal greed and income disparity.

  6. John Locke

    John Locke said, over 1 year ago

    @Gypsy8

    Greed is a moral term, not a political or economic term. If you don’t like greed, go to church and encourage others to do the same.

  7. John Locke

    John Locke said, over 1 year ago

    @Gypsy8

    Where is the Commissar to judge how many homes/cars/phones/etc. anyone needs? You?

  8. Rx71Wm29

    Rx71Wm29 GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    Odd, I didn’t know Presidents had that much power! They can actually influence wealth distribution? Wow! I’ll have to write Mr. O. requesting a substantial raise!

  9. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 1 year ago

    @Gypsy8

    uhhh some of the “useful” admonition from a famous person.

    1Judge not, that ye be not judged.
    2For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
    3And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
    4Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
    5Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

    1DO NOT judge and criticize and condemn others, so that you may not be judged and criticized and condemned yourselves. 2For just as you judge and criticize and condemn others, you will be judged and criticized and condemned, and in accordance with the measure you [use to] deal out to others, it will be dealt out again to you.

    BUT, my brother, I can see your point. When exactly does one have “enough”? The problem seems to be that the attitude is there is “never” enough money.

    Which is why this man also said of his “true followers” : by their fruits you will know them ……………….just a thought.

  10. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, over 1 year ago

    @DeSharkie, @PAJ, @Locke, & @Rev. Bruce
    .
    We live in a social community where the economic\resource pie is only so big. I’ll agree that those working harder and contributing more deserve more of the pie. But the distribution can get out of whack because the rich also become the maker of the rules and they load the game in their favour. Then we are irresponsible if we don’t seek a fairer balance, which ultimately benefits the larger society.

  11. John Locke

    John Locke said, over 1 year ago

    @Gypsy8

    Your concerns are the very reason the Founding Fathers created a government of divided powers. To the extent the Constitution has been disregarded is the extent that the rich have loaded the game, among other real concerns. If you want a fairer balance, vote in the next election for the only true independent representatives available who buck the establishment – Tea Party.

  12. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 1 year ago

    @Gypsy8

    Dude, thanks for the title. I’ll pass.

    So, yes, their is only so much stuff and you want to see the government in charge of it all so that it can be “divided” equally among the masses.

    Would that be for the USA?

    Or maybe for the NA Continent?

    Should it maybe include all in the western hemisphere?

    or perhaps, we should include the entire world?

    Now, ok. The world.

    Who is it again that will be impartial, fair, and honest about the distribution?

    The UN?

    Yes, there is a limited amount of “stuff”. Please, outline your plan for a world government to take possession of all this stuff and then make sure that each individual will get exactly the same thing that every other individual has so the “stuff” will be divided fairly.

    Sounds like a job for someone who has no need himself for anything you have, someone who does not depend on “stuff” for their existence.

    know anyone like that?

  13. jack75287

    jack75287 said, over 1 year ago

    If President Obama falls we all fall, don’t like it but if people keep sending their money out of town with no jobs it may be the best thing. What little job growth we have replaces fifty grand with twenty four grand a year.

  14. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, over 1 year ago

    @Bruce4671

    You over-reached with what I said:
    .
    - I’m not is favor of government being in charge of pay distribution.
    - I’m not in favor of equal pay for all.
    - I’m definitely not in favor of World Government, and when you combine that with exactly equal distribution, well, that’s just plain crazy talk. Bruce, think before you rant!
    - For a geo-political entity, I’ll go with country – a group of people who have banded together for mutual benefit.
    .
    I’m not talking major reconstruction – just a little common-sense tinkering.
    .
    When, as in the U.S., the CEO of major corporations are paid 300-400 times the average pay of the workers, something is definitely out of whack. And that will result in loss of purchasing power by the working \ middle class to buy what is being produced.

  15. Mephistopholes

    Mephistopholes GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @Gypsy8 – The problem with your idea is that as soon as the government starts tinkering at all it gets corrupted.

    We need the government to work towards making Americans more competitive i.e. Better schools, Better Infrastructure, reduced red tape (NOT NO REGULATIONS) but a simple streamlined process for government interactions. That is what will grow the pie. By the way the Pie is always growing (read hear GDP).

    I am NEVER in favor of the government getting involved in deciding who should be able to take from whom.

    The guy who invested in his future and work long hours should be able to make as much as he wants and spend as much of that as he wants.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (12).