Poll: Majority Agrees With Obama, Not Joe The Plumber Or McCain, On Spreading The Wealth
Since John McCain is suggesting that Obama is secretly plotting to seize the wealth of masses of hard-working plumbers, builders and hockey moms in order to transfer it to lazy poor people, this new Gallup poll seems significant:
The latest polling, taken amid McCain's big Joe the Plumber assault, shows that 58% favor a fairer distribution of wealth than exists now, while only 37% say the current distribution is equitable. While the poll does show that only 46% favor "heavy taxes on the rich," that's not how Obama would describe his plan, obviously.
Keep in mind that McCain is directly attacking Obama for his generic support for the mere idea of spreading the wealth and of the basic government function of redistribution. As Matthew Yglesias puts it: "A large majority of Americans have favored spreading the wealth around."
I'd only add that there's obviously more to McCain's attack than an effort to have a good-faith discussion about economic policies. Just as with the Ayers attack, this particular assault is really about suggesting that Obama harbors secret and vague radical schemes, whether it's undermining American strength and the war on terror from within or sapping the American economy with.shadowy wealth-transfer schemes that will take your money away. It's just more of the "risky unknown" stuff.
Late Update: Steve Benen adds an important point about the real goals of McCain's "spread the wealth" attack.
It is just more of the Obama is a secret black Muslim terrorist who doesn't own pets and wants to take the money of hardworking white Americans and give it to his peeps in the hood.
Too bad 33 million people saw a different image of Obama on Wednesday night. And all you political pundit concern trolls out there? No, he didn't overreach with that informercial.
October 31, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would also recommend Schaffner's entry in this morning too. The same conclusion.
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/why_the_joe_the_plumber_tax_de.php
I think there has been a huge gap between the reality and the political framing, and that's why so many people voted against their interests. Now, however, the reality is too real to jibe with attempt to redefine it by empty words.
October 31, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mandate for SOCIALISM!
October 31, 2008 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
McSlime is an Anti-Socialist!
October 31, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Damn straight! Who knew the American proletariat harbored such a deep affinity for Marxism?
October 31, 2008 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, my response to this is truly: Well duh.
I can't imagine what McLame was thinking with this line. It only works on billionaires and morons who believe they'll turn into billionaires if they don't have to pay taxes.
The thing is -billionaires don't pay taxes, so all this foofarah about raising taxes on them like it's going to hurt them is bullshit.
They pay less than people who get an Earned Income credit because they can afford to not pay taxes. They can afford to fight paying. I hope the entire tax code is amended - again - with enough regulation to keep individuals and families from amassing these truly obscene amounts of wealth that one person or family has no business amassing. Nobody needs hundreds of billions of dollars to live well. Nobody.
October 31, 2008 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't have anything against billionaires, but I do despise the ones who don't give back. Why can't more of them be like Bill and Melinda Gates, and use their great wealth for good? Most of them seem to be hell-bent on keeping every dime for themselves.
October 31, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mandate for SOCIALISM!!!
October 31, 2008 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
And to that, Wallace, I say GOOD! It's about fucking time.
And I"m the one who is going to pay here - not you.
October 31, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
The thing that kills me about the "socialism" charge is that one of the hurdles I had to get over before coming to support Obama was that he seemed too corporate-friendly to me. When I hear McCain, Palin and Wurzelbacher claim that Obama would enact socialist policies, I can only think "if only..." Let us recall that the Obama campaign uses Robert Rubin as a surrogate on economic issues. If Rubin is a socialist them I am potted palm tree.
October 31, 2008 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
First off, let's make one thing very, very clear. Obama is NOT PROMOTING SOCIALISM unless we define that term so loosely. If that's our metric, then Reagan, T. Roosevelt and pretty much everyone who's not a libertarian is a socialist, including most of the Republican Party (most of whom favor, or at least support, some variation of the progressive income tax).
You can be for or against socialism (this is another argument for another day), but Obama is not promoting socialism!
October 31, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry for the CAPS. This is a pet peeve of mine and I've had to much coffee this morning.
October 31, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
You mean like Palin redistributing the wealth in Alaska.
October 31, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
The use of "socialism" is like the use of "liberal"...the words are both drained of meaning because of incessant repetition and indiscriminate, ambiguous use. To the less informed, though, they have an ability to elicit a Pavlovian jolt of negativity. With socialism, though, I agree that it's so McCarthy era and so pre-USSR-meltdown that it's far too much of a challenge to expect knuckledraggers to have any sense of its meaning in an historical context. It's just a "jolt" word.
October 31, 2008 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
DO YOU even KNOW the defination of socialism. Probably NOT....most of those ranting that rhetoric don't bother to check and see what they are talking about....they just take up the call of their desperate party. And those fools want Flailin Palin . SUCKERS!
October 31, 2008 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
DO YOU even KNOW the defination of socialism. Probably NOT....most of those ranting that rhetoric don't bother to check and see what they are talking about....they just take up the call of their desperate party. And those fools want Flailin Palin . SUCKERS!
October 31, 2008 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
OMG! Americans are sociamalists!
Or to borrow from Jon Stewart, why do Americans hate America?
October 31, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Joe The WHO???
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/31/mccain-refers-to-joe-the_n_139670.html
October 31, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you missed it check out what happened yesterday.
That's right, former POW, hero, mavericky-maverick called an unlicensed plumber his, "role model." Really?!?
October 31, 2008 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, a role model who doesn't even show up!
October 31, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
in this climate a little wealth spreading is probably not a bad thing.
October 31, 2008 12:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know what kills me - people were better off before Bush's tax cuts. This is not some esoteric secret known only to the economists holed up in ivory towers of elite research universities. Everyone knows that we were all better off back in the day when taxes were higher. What more, that has been a consistent trend. The maximum tax rate on the very highest brackets under Eisenhower was 91% (talk about redistribution; that is soaking the rich on steroids); still and all, Eisenhower presided over one of the greatest periods of economic prosperity in our nation's history. Obama is talking about resetting the capital gains tax rate to the rate at which it was set under Bill Clinton, who also oversaw one of the largest expansions in our nation's economic history.
In other words, wealth spreading works, even for those whose wealth is being taken. Everyone does better when the government has the funds necessary to maintain the social investments which are the pre-requisite to our modern economy (courts, schools, transportation infrastructure, etc). Joe the Plumber and the crowds cheering him on would almost certainly do better Obama's economic plan than under McCain's, but so would Joe the Hedge Fund Manager and Joe the CEO. Everyone does better under democratic governments. As such, these folks grousing about "socialism" are not complaining that they would become poorer under Obama; they are grousing that someone else (whom Joe & al consider undeserving) would become wealthier. They are prepared to become poorer themselves, so long as that will ensure that some welfare recipient becomes poorer still. How churlish and petty can one get.
October 31, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well all did better under Clinton.
Including those of us in the top 25% who paid higher taxes under Clinton.
We only do well when everyone does well - doing well at the expense of the economy, the country and most of the people in it isn't doing well - it's robbing.
October 31, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen. Americans are finally having the epiphany that we can't just keep saying "Screw you" -- to those less fortunate, to overseas allies who may not agree with preemptive war -- and expect their overall quality of life to remain the same.
October 31, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right.
Funny how 95% of the people get a tax cut and that's socialism.
But throw-in the billionaires and all of a sudden it's a great idea for stimulating economic growth.
October 31, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well said, sir!
October 31, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well said, sir!
October 31, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I still refer to this HuffPo article about Sam the Gas Station Guy.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-seery/joe-the-plumber-meets-sam_b_135399.html
As Sam clearly states, when the middle class isn't spending, ain't nobody doing well.
October 31, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well said, bagpiper.
"How churlish and petty" is particularly on target. To some extent, we've become a nation of churlish and petty individuals.
The legacy of Limbaugh, Rove, Bush, and Fox News.
October 31, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama: Right again.
Surprise, surprise.
October 31, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you look at the chart, you'll see a not-so-insignificant 10-point swing. It's obvious that McCain's fear-mongering has made some difference but clearly a majority still think that Obama is right.
I find it quite amusing that most people would consider the top 1% of incomes to be "rich" and yet an additional 36% feel things are fair.
Are there that many people in this country that don't take a moment to think about this?
Or is 2008 the year people finally say, "Heyyyyy, wait a minute!"
October 31, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would expect this year the question shows a swing becuase it's the middle of a contentious campaing where McCain has made it an issue. So a larger precentage are answering as a support of McCain's overall positions rather than answering in a relative vacuum of non-election years like 2003 and 2007. The last dip was in 2000, when Clinton was on his way out and his negatives were at all time highs (for him).
October 31, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll admit that McCain has failed to explain it plainly:
Obama: I'll raise your employers taxes so he has to lay you off but, you do get a $500 check from me. Vote for Obama, you may not have a job but you will have $500.
October 31, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
*Le Troll Jizz*
October 31, 2008 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Turdmemore:
I've met masochists before but you are in a league of your own. You have not convinced anyone with your weak logic nor your complete lack of economics knowledge.
October 31, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, tell me more, do. Obama wants to raises taxes back to what they were under Clinton. Was unemployment lower or higher under Clinton than it has been under tax-slashing-Bush?
October 31, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Turdmemore:
I've met masochists before but you are in a league of your own. You have not convinced anyone with your weak logic nor your complete lack of economics knowledge.
October 31, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
You had me at "McCain has failed."
You know, if Hillary can get over her primary campaign loss, why can't you?
October 31, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
You want to talk jobs? That is one fat pitch you just lobbed over the plate.
Obama wants to move tax rates roughly back to where they were under Clinton -- not entirely, but pretty close.
And when you compare Clinton and Bush on job creation, it's no contest.
Under the Clinton tax plan (you know, the one that zero House Republicans voted for because it was sure to cause a recession), the economy created 22 million jobs.
Under Bush's tax plan, the economy has created 5 million jobs (and dropping). That doesn't just pale compared to Clinton, it's not even close to what's needed to keep up with population growth over 8 years.
Plus, real income jumped under Clinton and has declined under Bush. Yes, our standard of living has declined under Bush! Which may be a first for a two-term president since those kinds of stats have been collected.
The historical record is clear, and it's not just Bush vs. Clinton: The economy and the stock market do better under Democratic presidents. What's good for Main Street is good for Wall Street.
October 31, 2008 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
The great scam is that the Republicans have fooled lower middle-class folks with little education into empathizing with millionaires and their tax situations. These millionaires laugh and pity and how these suckers keep getting fooled. If I may ask the group a favor, please check out my Halloween costume of John McCain as Count Chocula:
http://traitorjoe.wordpress.com/
October 31, 2008 12:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
My husband and I were watching MSNBC last night, and "Joe the Plumber" appearing at one of McCain's rallies, after missing the first one. So Joe takes the stage and McCain hands him the microphone. Who is running for office here? WTF, is McCain now totally demented? How sad is it that the centerpiece of his campaign is a non tax paying, unlicensed, illiterate (Israel) idiot who has a publicist?
Who is advising JM? McCain, in his normal life, would rather drive over someone like Joe on the way to the ranch than acknowledge him. It is pathetic.
October 31, 2008 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Cindy McLame in her normal life wouldn't so much as give Sarah Palin the time of day. Cindy is a socialite. Sarah is trailer trash.
October 31, 2008 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sure if we could hear Cindy's thoughts we would be quite entertained. She is one hell of an actress, which is typical for a narcissist's wife.
October 31, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nah, just access to better drugs.
October 31, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
THAT is funny.
October 31, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I keep hoping that Cindy will hook Palin up, what with that voice and all.
'Course, if Palin/McCain wins, I'm going to need better drugs....
October 31, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
OMG, spouse and I have to mute the TV, the voice is gawd awful. I would have to be stoned for four years to listen to her.
October 31, 2008 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point. Do you suppose Cindy and Sarah will be shopping buds after Nov. 4?
October 31, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah right.
Cindy McLame won't be caught dead with Sarah Palin after this.
Sarah may think she's running in 2012, but I have news for her - by 2012, the extreme right will have all but disappeared from the public podium. They are not going to walk away with the Repug Party.
There's a war already going between the extremists and the more moderate intelligentsia on the right and the extremists are not going to win, I don't think. Their moment is over. They reached their height in about 2002.
October 31, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Igloo Trash is more appropriate especially in the winter.
October 31, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought this line of attack had been taking hold?!?!
October 31, 2008 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
In Kansas.........
October 31, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg, way to screw up the story. McCain doesn't want us to think Obama wants to transfer our money to lazy poor people. McCain wants us to think Obama wants to transfer our money to lazy poor black people. I'll be expecting a correction ;)
October 31, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was talking casual politics this afternoon at the bank and the discussion came around to Pallin's real americans comment. The teller said she wasn't a real american - she's an native indian. And I responded, I guess that makes you a true american.
So here's a coup de grace for Pallin's real americans bullshit. If you're not part of the group Pallin calls real americans then you must belong to that other group called True Americans.
October 31, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
You posted a comment last night and never followed up - where did you hear the rumor about Patrick Fitzgerald?
October 31, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tena: What about Fitzgerald? I missed it. I heard he married, that is about it.
October 31, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
What rumor?
October 31, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
beetlejuice posted last night that he had heard a rumor that Patrick Fitzgerald was going to be tapped for AG. That is the answer to my dearest wish, so I'd love to know where that came from.
October 31, 2008 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe that is why the quiet marriage, then right back to work.
October 31, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm shocked to hear he's getting married.
The word always was that Patrick was married to the law. He lived in his office.
He must have found a very understanding woman.
October 31, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
He married last June.
She's a teacher for Head Start.
October 31, 2008 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was more disappointed than anything ;) I'm from Chicago and I've been a big fan of Mr. Fitzpatrick for a long time. He's very well respected and liked around here.
October 31, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, that's a much better rumor than the one I found.
October 31, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I tracked this down. There are rumors in Chicago that Patrick Fitzgerald is leading an investigation into Obama and Acorn for RICO violations.
If you're saying "WTF"? You should. Here's the source:
So-called Hillary supporters yearn for Fitzmas in October
October 31, 2008 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
And people? Make sure you click on the 10/10 "update" link. It's incredibly, mmmm, what's the word?
Insane?
Tin-foil hattish?
Delusional?
October 31, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Delusional. How they make the leap from Rezko and the so-called crime family to ACORN is a mystery cause there is no explanation.
And ACORN is fighting tooth and nail - it hasn't done anything wrong.
October 31, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
That was 3 am European time when I posted.
I heard that from someone at the military installation where I work. I'll see if I can narrow it down where he heard it. I assumed if he read it somewhere on the net it was common knowledge. Perhaps, it's just another rumor. It'll be 12 hours before I can get back with an answer.
October 31, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
So 538 has McCain's win percentage at 3 point something. How are the polls so close, others here have told me 538 is pretty reliable.
October 31, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amelie:
I believe that means McCain has a 3.7% chance of winning the election. So many things would have to change in so many states that it's incredibly unlikely. About 8 states would have to reverse their momentum from today to Tuesday that statistically it's practically impossible.
October 31, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you. Stressful few days here!
October 31, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amelie:
I think we can relax a little. The networks are trying to make it seem close so you'll keep watching. If they told the truth about the upcoming landslide ratings would tumble. McCain simply can't win Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, Virginia, New Mexico and Colorado right now.
October 31, 2008 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
:)
October 31, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Those percentages are based on computer simulations that Nate runs. He runs 10,000 of them daily using a type of algorithm called a Monte Carlo analysis, which I couldn't even begin to try to explain (Nate can, though--the FAQs on the 538 site are very clear and thorough). So, in the most recent 10,000 simulations he ran, McCain won about 370 times.
October 31, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not doubting the numbers, I just wonder how 538/Nate became the guru of polling this year. Has he been around for a while and what suggests that his analyses this election cycle are any more accurate than anybody else?
My main reason for questioning is that I haven't followed election cycles closely before and since this one is expected to be outside the mold of prior ones, how can any pollster have a "better" tag before the votes are counted?
October 31, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
See, I don't know why either. Olbermann had him on, that was a first I think, but I am not familiar with 538's track record.
October 31, 2008 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
He had the best record of prediction during the Democratic primary. That's why he's gotten so much attention.
October 31, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks!
October 31, 2008 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
And so many pollsters lost credibility in 2006 when they failed to account for the Democratic gains in Congress. Almost no one predicted the Senate to switch so there was a vacuum of credible pollsters.
October 31, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, also he has had a very good track record predicting wins in major league baseball. The election prediction business is a new one for him.
October 31, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nate did lots of excellent analysis and predicting during the primaries. That's where he earned his reputation.
October 31, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the answers, guys!
October 31, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Palin said North Carolina was where "Real Americans" live and it looks like Kay Hagen's going to beat Libby Dole and Obama will win over McCain so maybe Palin is right.
October 31, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Might not hurt to call your nieces and nephews...
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politics/orl-earlyvote3008oct30,0,5283353.story
October 31, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Young voters like to vote on election day.
They like the excitement of the real day - I've heard and read more than one say that.
October 31, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
/shrug i voted over a week ago but i know a bunch of other people who waited until today to vote.
October 31, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sure that it isn't true of all the young voters.
October 31, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you a young people? You weren't too tired to go out and vote? Maybe you should e-mail Cokie Roberts with that news.
October 31, 2008 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know if that's totally true. On campus in ABQ, it's been a party near the voting area (student union) for a couple weeks. Last night I walked by at 7:30p and the Obama kiosk outside and it was still manned.
October 31, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Early Voting GOTV effort has really produced here in New Mexico from what I"m seeing on the news - the lines are incredible in Bernalillo Co.
The only places where early voting has not seen the numbers yet are isolated parts of New Mexico from what the news says - it looked like up around the four corners and parts of the south of the state people hadn't turned out like they have across northern New Mexico, over as far as Chama - that's been slow; the Chama Valley.
October 31, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Infomercial bump
http://www.gallup.com/poll/111679/Gallup-Daily-Obamas-Lead-Widens-Some-All-Bases.aspx
October 31, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Obama campaign needs to bring this up: it is Sarah Palin, not Obama, who is a socialist. And she is not even a closet socialist. What she is doing in Alaska is not just re-distribution. She affirms that the oil is collectively owned by Alaskans. Collective ownership --- isn't this the hallmark of socialism?
October 31, 2008 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
She is so yesterday, so over. Contrary to what she said, she is doing ALL this for naught.
October 31, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are so so right.
:)
October 31, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
She will be a hero to the far, far, right but that's it. The Republican party will never rally around her.
October 31, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
PUG economic philosophy in action.
So, McShame believes you spread the wealth to the rich and it will trickle down to everyone else. Except, when Reagan and Bush tried it, the rich never showed up to share with everyone else.
So, McShame goes out and contracts this “rich” (wannabe) Joe the Plumber guy to illustrate his point and what happens? Joe the Plumber didn’t show up, after being paid.
At least their economic plan is consistently shitty.
October 31, 2008 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just spent the past hour going through both Albertson's and Smith's ads to figure out my shopping budget for the week. Torture.
GOD, I can't wait til Tuesday. Maybe there will be some light visible, at least in my mind.
October 31, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stating the obvious, I think BOs "spreading the wealth" line from the JoePlumber conversion was a poor choice of words and a wet dream for the McPalin camp. Yet, the "spreading" meme entirely misses the point BO was making when he spoke to fake-indi voter Joe. His plan is to lower tax rates on those making less than 250k, as he stated to Joe. And if the tax rates were lower for the AvgJoes, the AvgJoes would be able to keep more of their own money for which they could invest/expand/grow their business. With lots more average Joes being taxed less... thereby allowing for more investment and company growth... you could see more people moving from the "average Joe" bracket and into higher tax levels. More wealthy Mercans My Friends.
October 31, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have several panic attacks a day...But Gallup results with the CBS poll from yesterday are giving some peace until tomorrow.
By the way, did you see another mcWar adviser blasting Caribou barbie.
So another good day for Senator Obama. I will give my last $ 150
today..
October 31, 2008 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Two quotes on spreading the wealth:
"To whom much is given, much is expected." (Luke 12:48, paraphrased)
"Money is like manure. If you spread it around, it does a lot of good. But if you pile it up in one place, it stinks like hell." (Clint Murchison, founder of the Dallas Cowboys)
October 31, 2008 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think we should consider using phrases like social justice and economic justice and the word egalitarian. The Joe the Plumber argument and others we hear about bailing out homeowners in default, for example, are based in part on the premise that an injustice is being done.
There may be more leverage is being able to shift the conversation to the topic of justice and fairness. "Sharing" and "Socialism" go nowhere. As this poll shows, our system tilts the table in favor of a small percentage of the population. Even the most radical, hardcore socialist will tell you "If you don't work, you don't eat" and I don't know of anyone who thinks you should not get more if you put in more hours and make more sacrifices that benefit others.
What people want is a fair deal: They want justice. Well... most people, I think, there are clearly those who really are greedy or want something for nothing. We do not have to have economic arrangements that favor either of those groups. "Egalitarian" does not imply absolute equality; it just implies that no one receives special, basically undeserved, unearned or unwarranted, favors.
We do not have to take up their language or get trapped in some early 20th century discourse whose terms have lost all real meaning and are used as epithets or ways to dismiss a different view.
October 31, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
While I understand the premise of changing the name of redistribution of wealth, I don't think that simply calling it another name will change the minds of people who do not believe in the fundamental argument of social and economic justice. If they have the "every man for himself" attitude, i can't see them changing their tune simply by calling it something else. It is difficult to reach those people because their attitude already implies that they don't have the open mindedness to believe in social justice.
October 31, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oops. I meant to say "will not change the minds"
October 31, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just wanted to say "thank you" to most of the commentators on here. I agree and I know that you "get it" when it comes to taxation.
I'm particularily grateful to see this poll and your comments after a particularily incendiary weekend talking about taxes with my friends. All they could keep saying was "the rich work hard too" and everyone should be taxed the same. Then when I explained using statistics and numbers pointing out how Bush's tax plan has fucked us over and how it's good taxes are graduated- it was back to the talking points for them.
Unfortunate to say this but several were Obama supporters and plan to vote for him. This misunderstanding of taxation, its rule, and the fact that a graduated income tax is a good thing was lost on them. Or they weren't listening.
Anyways, glad that people "get it" on here and I'm not alone. Kudos, all!
October 31, 2008 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink