Not evil, Harley. Not evil at all. Owning slaves didn’t make Washington and Jefferson and the rest evil. They were born into a slave-owning society, and did no more than what was necessary to protect their interests when they pursued runaway slaves or had them whipped when they were recaptured. Even though they disapproved of slavery in principle, they could see no way to do without it personally. And after all, they personally had never kidnapped and enslaved anyone. Their slaves had all been born slaves. But slavery was evil even if none of the slaveowners were evil people. I have no objection to anyone having great pots of money. And really, there are very few people who do. You’re characterization of liberalism is silly. You’re confusing it with something else. What is objectionable is not that some people should have a lot more money than others: it is that they should have a lot more power, and that they should be allowed to use that power to “rig” the system in their favor: privatizing profit and socializing risk; perverting the tax code so that the principle that he that has more contributes a higher portion of his wealth to the public good than he who has little. A principle which is, I might add, older than the U.S.A. and was heartily approved by the Founding Fathers themselves. Nobody should hate the rich for being rich; some of them are very nice people indeed. Nor should we be surprised if they use some of their money to further their own interests, or come to believe that what is good for them is good for the whole country. That’s just human nature. But it is well that we understand what is going on, consider what their behavior costs the rest of us, and whether that “rigging” is, as the very rich often honestly believe, in the best interest of the nation, or not.Many of our laws and policies at present subsidize the rich, it is as simple as that. We have to be wise enough to see the sleight-of-hand employed, but it is there.
Notice that Toles uses the caricature of the tycoon from the MONOPOLY game to represent the rich and ultra-rich. MONOPOLY appeared in 1935, but was based on “The Landlord’s Game” which was devised in 1903. The original game was more explicitly didactic, but even the MONOPOLY game we all know is intended to teach us something: that the nature of capitalism is to concentrate all wealth into fewer and fewer hands, and to bankrupt all rivals and competitors. Oh, to suggest that luck as much as savvy goes into the creation of monopoly.So why has the right wing never condemned the game as left-wing propaganda? Because, it turns out that it is FUN to slowly grind down and impoverish the opposition and monopolize all wealth! Why it’s just a game! Who cares what happens to the losers? Who cares if the rules are fair or humane? It’s business, and that’s how business works! So the game, instead of providing an object lesson in how a set of rules can be written so that when they are played out a few are enriched and many are ruined, even when all start out on the same square one, - becomes instead a first step in acquiring the amorality that business requires! I read somewhere that the real wheelers-and-dealers don’t take what they do very seriously. It isn’t about the money, which they might very well just give away after they’ve gotten it: it’s about winning, about beating the other guy, about making the score, about coming out on top. No matter who suffers as a consequence. And isn’t that what MONOPOLY is all about, too?
The most consistent thing I see from “the right” is that outrage is inversely proportional to knowledge and/or I.Q.. The same applies to their “sources”.
“The tax code is to raise revenue to run a government. To many liberals use it to dived, reward and punish.”The tax code has never been used ONLY to raise money for the government. The US Constitution allowed for protectionist tariffs from day one, and the US government instituted them from day one. Their purpose was to make Americans buy American goods, by raising the price of imported goods, and thus “punish” those who bought foreign products. Taxes have always been placed on “vices” like tobacco, alcohol and gambling to raise a revenue AND discourage certain behavior: to “punish” smokers and drinkers and gamblers. I know it is foolish to talk to you Harley. You know nothing and you absolutely refuse to learn anything. I’m just that kind of fool, I guess.
^ Obviously Harley never learned the axiom taht you learn more by listening than by talking. High word count doesn’t make you look smarter, just the opposite.I could have said all that with just two words.Guess what they are.
Dtroutma over 9 years ago
Too bad they use the rest of us like fireplugs.
Caldonia over 9 years ago
I’m curious: Why are the one percenters so badly in need of our approval??
Doughfoot over 9 years ago
Not evil, Harley. Not evil at all. Owning slaves didn’t make Washington and Jefferson and the rest evil. They were born into a slave-owning society, and did no more than what was necessary to protect their interests when they pursued runaway slaves or had them whipped when they were recaptured. Even though they disapproved of slavery in principle, they could see no way to do without it personally. And after all, they personally had never kidnapped and enslaved anyone. Their slaves had all been born slaves. But slavery was evil even if none of the slaveowners were evil people. I have no objection to anyone having great pots of money. And really, there are very few people who do. You’re characterization of liberalism is silly. You’re confusing it with something else. What is objectionable is not that some people should have a lot more money than others: it is that they should have a lot more power, and that they should be allowed to use that power to “rig” the system in their favor: privatizing profit and socializing risk; perverting the tax code so that the principle that he that has more contributes a higher portion of his wealth to the public good than he who has little. A principle which is, I might add, older than the U.S.A. and was heartily approved by the Founding Fathers themselves. Nobody should hate the rich for being rich; some of them are very nice people indeed. Nor should we be surprised if they use some of their money to further their own interests, or come to believe that what is good for them is good for the whole country. That’s just human nature. But it is well that we understand what is going on, consider what their behavior costs the rest of us, and whether that “rigging” is, as the very rich often honestly believe, in the best interest of the nation, or not.Many of our laws and policies at present subsidize the rich, it is as simple as that. We have to be wise enough to see the sleight-of-hand employed, but it is there.
Darsan54 Premium Member over 9 years ago
That shade of nose make-up really becomes you.
Darsan54 Premium Member over 9 years ago
http://www.alternet.org/economy/4-infuriating-and-unfair-things-about-our-economic-system
Check this out Harley, as a counter to whining.
Mugens Premium Member over 9 years ago
Wouldn’t have put it quite that way, but you did beat me to it anyway so well said.
magicwalnut Premium Member over 9 years ago
Wow! Let me say that this cartoon is one of the greats!
magicwalnut Premium Member over 9 years ago
….as is Doughfoot,s respons…
magicwalnut Premium Member over 9 years ago
…ok, here,s the ‘e’….
Doughfoot over 9 years ago
Notice that Toles uses the caricature of the tycoon from the MONOPOLY game to represent the rich and ultra-rich. MONOPOLY appeared in 1935, but was based on “The Landlord’s Game” which was devised in 1903. The original game was more explicitly didactic, but even the MONOPOLY game we all know is intended to teach us something: that the nature of capitalism is to concentrate all wealth into fewer and fewer hands, and to bankrupt all rivals and competitors. Oh, to suggest that luck as much as savvy goes into the creation of monopoly.So why has the right wing never condemned the game as left-wing propaganda? Because, it turns out that it is FUN to slowly grind down and impoverish the opposition and monopolize all wealth! Why it’s just a game! Who cares what happens to the losers? Who cares if the rules are fair or humane? It’s business, and that’s how business works! So the game, instead of providing an object lesson in how a set of rules can be written so that when they are played out a few are enriched and many are ruined, even when all start out on the same square one, - becomes instead a first step in acquiring the amorality that business requires! I read somewhere that the real wheelers-and-dealers don’t take what they do very seriously. It isn’t about the money, which they might very well just give away after they’ve gotten it: it’s about winning, about beating the other guy, about making the score, about coming out on top. No matter who suffers as a consequence. And isn’t that what MONOPOLY is all about, too?
Kip W over 9 years ago
Are you saying that population only consists of the bottom 99%, and the other bit is just empty with a WATCH THIS SPACE sign?
Dtroutma over 9 years ago
The most consistent thing I see from “the right” is that outrage is inversely proportional to knowledge and/or I.Q.. The same applies to their “sources”.
Doughfoot over 9 years ago
“The tax code is to raise revenue to run a government. To many liberals use it to dived, reward and punish.”The tax code has never been used ONLY to raise money for the government. The US Constitution allowed for protectionist tariffs from day one, and the US government instituted them from day one. Their purpose was to make Americans buy American goods, by raising the price of imported goods, and thus “punish” those who bought foreign products. Taxes have always been placed on “vices” like tobacco, alcohol and gambling to raise a revenue AND discourage certain behavior: to “punish” smokers and drinkers and gamblers. I know it is foolish to talk to you Harley. You know nothing and you absolutely refuse to learn anything. I’m just that kind of fool, I guess.
BaltoBill over 9 years ago
^ Obviously Harley never learned the axiom taht you learn more by listening than by talking. High word count doesn’t make you look smarter, just the opposite.I could have said all that with just two words.Guess what they are.