Only higher taxes on the rich will save us from riots in the street

Always remember these three words: Hungry people riot.

Ben pointed out how it was in the Depression. People were pissed off then, because their kids were going hungry, and there wasn't any social safety net set up to help them, outside of those few bread lines. They were fighting each other to work for a few cents an hour. And when there was no work, they were fighting the bosses.

We're not to that point. Yet. Because there's unemployment insurance. And welfare and food stamps for people who are out of work. Yes, it's abused. Like everything else. That doesn't mean we should get rid of it. Yet, one party always wants that to happen. And one party always whines about how it's the lazy people who are unemployed for two years. No, dumbasses. It's because they can't find work, and the minimum-wage hirers say they're overqualified. Which they are.

Get rid of the social safety net, and you'll find a lot more angrier people. Because they're hungry. And willing to work. And they get even more angrier when they see their kids going hungry. Only the owners only want to squeeze every last penny out of the overworked few instead of providing a fair wage. Hence, the minimum wage, another liberal socilist idea. You know, there's a reason for it. People were essentially becoming slaves again, working for free, or close to it. But don't tell that to Michelle Bachmann.

EDIT: As I wrote this, Devil made my same point just as well.

 

I, for one, would happily support a little blood in the streets...provided those streets are found in gated communities.

A little fear in the oligarchs' heads can only be a good thing. I'm sure the "Second Amendment Remedies" folks would agree with me. As would Thomas Jefferson.

 

As of now, it's rhetoric.

Give the GOP what they want, and eventually, it becomes reality. Because ipads and flat-screen TVs won't do a whole lot of good when people are hungry.

 

I agree, but sometimes I do wonder if the unemployment benefits are robbing people of the incentive to work.

Shit, I've been there and I know a lot of people who only found jobs when their benefits were about to go dry.

On the one hand, I'm sympathetic to those who need that money to get by in between jobs, but I know a lot of people who are very happy to collect rather than look for work.

To be fair, I think the state of the economy and the lack of jobs out there also prevents people from looking for work.

It's a tough debate and I can't claim to have an easy answer.

 

The corporate fascists to whom both parties have been slaving for years are finally getting what they want. The people whose necks they're stepping on are starting to figure it out.

But as long as many of the second group continue to be tricked into defending the first group for ridiculous, made-up reasons, that first group has nothing to worry about.

 

And a perfect example: Claiming that "unemployment benefits" are the only reason people refuse to go get a job, when there aren't any damn jobs to go get.

 

Damn it. I meant to refer to the "Second Amendment remedies" in my initial post and forgot.

There was such an uproar over that. (Even though it was a theoretical statement. The Second Amendment is there, in part, to prevent a tyrannical government.)

But now, multiple people talk about violence against the rich, and no one is offended or surprised.

 

You're offended.

 

This.

People like Scarborough crack me up. Out of one side of their mouth, they say Americans are hopeful about the future because they think if they work hard enough, they'll strike it rich. And out of the other side of their mouth, they complain that Americans would rather sit on the sofa and draw unemployment than go out and find meaningful employment.

Which is it?

 

Yeah, that's really racist, to point out the widening gap between the haves and have-nots. A little class consciousness would do us good at this point.

 

You will always have lazy people. Always. They will milk the system, but what you do not want is people who are smart and work hard not being able to work.

If I get trained in a skill and work hard my family should have roof over their head, food on the table and health care.

When good hard working people cannot have this, then the balance has tipped. Those people are your barometer.

 

Seems to me the industry this board's based around (journalism -- not coffee machine repair) is a perfect example of the systemic economic flaw America faces.

Practically by definition, newsrooms are populated by well-educated, informed, hard-working people. Yet newsrooms are shrinking quickly nationwide...so where are the programs that take those well-educated, informed, hard-working people and train them to either continue to work in their chosen industry (by making them all experts in computer programming, design work, research, social media tools, etc.) or by funneling them into new, expanding professions (like medical coding, as discussed in previous threads)?

Corporations have no original incentive to (re)train quality workers. That's something only the government can do. Democrats are trying to get community college funding to do just that...but as we all know, the GOP will block any use of government funds to help people improve themselves.

The system's broken, and I think at some point the only incentive to fix it will come with bloodshed.