Busting The 99% Vs. 1% Liberal Lie

Barack Obama, most of the Democrat Party and pretty much all the Occupy Wall Street hooligans are Trotskying I mean trotting out the tired Marxist myth that Republicans only care about the rich and that the rich are a bunch of evil thieves who somehow stole “the people’s” money by somehow forcing them to buy stuff.  The entire movement is based on the servile, mindless philosophy of people who believe that somebody else owes them whatever they think they deserve to have.

I was glad to come across this editorial byInvestor’s Business Daily:

IBD Editorials
Busting The 1% Vs. 99% Myth
Oct 18, 2011

Inequality: President Obama’s class-envy strategy is built on a false premise — that the rich get richer at the expense of the poor. Amazingly, such zero-sum thinking is influencing public opinion.

Twice as many Americans support the anti-Wall Street protesters as oppose them. And even Rasmussen is polling that nearly half of Americans support proposals to soak the rich.

This is an emotional response to both the hard economic times and dishonest political rhetoric. People are buying into the notion peddled by the left that the rich steal from people. It’s a pernicious myth left over from preindustrial Marxism.

The left says current levels of income inequality echo the late 1920s and the Gilded Age. They’ve zeroed in on the richest 1%, citing Census Bureau data showing these top earners “grabbing” more income than the bottom 90%.

But the census stats are misleading.

For one, they are a snapshot of income distribution at a single point in time. Yet income is not static. It changes over time. Low-paying jobs from early adulthood give way to better-paying jobs later in life.

And income groups in America are not fixed. There’s no caste system here, really no such thing even as a middle “class.” The poor aren’t stuck in poverty. And the rich don’t enjoy lifetime membership in an exclusive club.

A 2007 Treasury Department study bears this out. Nearly 58% of U.S. households in the lowest-income quintile in 1996 moved to a higher level by 2005. The reverse also held true. Of those households that were in the top 1% in income in 1996, more than 57% dropped to a lower-income group by 2005.

Every day in America, the poor join the ranks of the rich, and the rich fall out of comfort.

So even if income equality is increasing, it does not mean income mobility is decreasing. There is still a great deal of movement in and out of the richest and poorest groups in America.

The beauty of our free-market system (what’s left of it), is that even among the thousands of Wall Street protesters thumping, “We are the 99%,” there are those who might not be able to say that a decade or so from now. Some might go on to profit from an Internet start-up. Others might get a rap contract. Anything’s possible in America.

One of those street agitators might even become president, following in the shoes of Obama, who’s now one of the 1-percenters he mocks.

Another problem with the census data is they don’t include the noncash income received by the lowest-income households. Each year, the poor get tens of billions of dollars in subsidies for housing, food and health care. None of these transfer payments, a lot of it paid for by the 1%, is counted as income by the Census Bureau.

One report estimates that the share of total income earned by the lowest-income group would rise roughly 50% if such welfare were considered.

Likewise, the share of total income earned by the top income quintile would drop about 7% if taxes paid to fund welfare were considered.

Census doesn’t take into account the equalizing effects of taxes. Though they earn more than 45% of total income, the top 10% of taxpayers pay over 70% of the total income-tax burden. The top 1%? They shoulder a whopping 40% of the tax load.

Federal Reserve and other data — which include all financial and nonfinancial assets, including bank accounts, investments, houses and cars — give a more complete picture of the gap. When you count all wealth, not just income, inequality has not gotten worse.

The top 1% account for 35% of total wealth, compared with 37% in 1922. In fact, the worst wealth disparity ever was in the 1990s under President Clinton.

That last sentence of the article bears repeating:

“In fact, the worst wealth disparity ever was in the 1990s under President Clinton.”

Democrats love lies.  Their souls swim in lies.  Lies and hypocrisy define Democrats.  Take away the lies and the hypocrisy and Democrats simply dematerialize like the Cheshire cat.

Democrats have fabricated the narrative that the streets were paved with gold under Bill Clinton.  They cite Clinton’s tax hikes as proving that high taxes and a healthy economy go hand in hand.

That it erally isn’t true doesn’t mean a thing to them.

For one thing, Bill Clinton LOWERED the capital gains tax even as he raised the income tax.  That offset is completely off the modern Marxist Democrats’ radar now, but it was an essential offset, a sine qua non without which there would have been no healthy economy.  Because low taxes HELP create a healthy economy.  It is simply a fact.

Another thing that is important to consider is that a primary cause of the economic health of the 1990s had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Bill Clinton.  The presidents who created that condition – the collapse of the Soviet Union and the opening of many markets that had previously been completely inaccessible to the United States – were Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.

In the short-term aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union there was – unsurprisingly – a severe recession.  Why was this not surprising?  Two reasons:  Because 1) investors don’t like uncertainty; and the world was a very uncertain place the first few years after the U.S.S.R. imploded as breakaway republics and unaccounted-for nuclear weapons abounded.  And because 2) Western Europe went into a deep recession due to the fact that suddenly they were inheriting the shambles of the Soviet economy that had resulted from all the liberal socialism of the communist Soviet Union.  Our major trading partners got weaker, which reduced their purchase of American products, which in turn affected the American economy.  Obama has in fact been using that very same argument to try to claim that he wasn’t responsible for the failure of his economy the last three years.

By the time Bill Clinton was elected president in 1992, the world was beginning to recover from the collapse of the Soviet Union.  New markets were opening.  We were about to enter boom times.

But that still leaves a third thing to consider about the Clinton years.  They didn’t start out so well: remember 1994?  Remember that historic asskicking of Democrats in the midterm elections?  Things weren’t going well at ALL; and it wasn’t until after the American people wisely elected Republicans to take over both the House of Representatives and the United States Senate that things BEGAN to start going well.

Democrats give Bill Clinton total credit for “balancing the budget.”  But the fact of the matter is that balancing the budget was THE VERY FIRST PLATFORM OF THE FAMOUS REPUBLICAN CONTRACT WITH AMERICA.  Things that were instrumental to balancing the budget – such as welfare reform – were FORCED on Bill Clinton.  Clinton vetoed welfare reform TWICE before signing the same thing he’d vetoed into law.  And then Clinton took credit for the thing he’d twice vetoed that was ultimately shoved down his throat.  And with the help of a completely dishonest media, he managed to sell that lie.

But all in all, the 1990s (under the wise leadership of Republicans who controlled two of the three political branches of government after 1994) were good years.  And they were years in which the wealthy had the largest share of the wealth in America of ALL TIME.

Which simply proves that the demagogic, Marxist, dishonest tirades that Obama, Democrats and liberals are screaming about today about “the rich paying their fair share” is simply a flat-out lie.

After pointing out that Democrats are liars and hypocrites, let me also point out that they are stupid people.  Because believing lies and constantly putting up double-standards doesn’t make one more intelligent; it makes one more stupid.  And the problem with Democrats today is that they are radically committed to a depraved, dishonest and perverted view of the world which cannot possibly be true because everything they believe has been refuted by history time after time.

And so they claim that socialism works when in fact it has failed every single time it has ever been tried.  And they claim that Bill Clinton’s tax policies more fairly distributed wealth when in fact it did the exact opposite.

What we have seen again and again is that when taxes are lowered, the rich have more incentive to invest and risk their money creating jobs.  Why?  BECAUSE THEY ARE REWARDED FOR DOING SO AND THEY ARE ALLOWED TO KEEP MORE OF WHAT THEY EARN.  Conversely, when demagogues demand that “the rich pay their fair share” (when all dishonest lies aside the facts are that they already pay FAR more than their “fair share“), the rich shelter their money and the economy contracts instead of expanding.  The rich aren’t going to risk their wealth with job-creating investments if they are demonized.  And you tell me how many poor people have given you a job and made you rich.

Another way to put it is this: we tax cigarettes to reduce smoking; so why in the HELL do Democrats want to tax investment???

Even Bill Clinton has pointed out that raising taxes won’t work.  Hell, even BARACK OBAMA has said that raising taxes in a recession is bonehead stupid:

“First of all, he’s right. Normally, you don’t raise taxes in a recession, which is why we haven’t and why we’ve instead cut taxes. So I guess what I’d say to Scott is – his economics are right. You don’t raise taxes in a recession. We haven’t raised taxes in a recession.”

And yet here he is, trying to do what he himself said was “the last thing you want to do.”

Which is another way of saying the first thing the American people should want to do is throw this useless bum out of the people’s house.

This is breathtaking stupidity; and yet the stupider I believe Democrats are, the more right I turn out to be. 

Barack Obama understands that Democrats are unbelievably stupid people who live in a world of lies.  And he’s counting on that stupidity to try to lie his way to re-election.  That’s the bottom line.

If you want to see liberal hypocrisy in action, just look at the Occupy Wall Street movement and the liberal media coverage of the movement. These are people who have every single Apple gadget in their hands, but are decrying the very capitalism that Apple so profitably exploited. The fact of the matter is that Apple has a FAR higher profit margin than either the oil companies or the banks that these loathsome hypocrites demonize, but consistency is simply not a virtue they care about. Furthermore, they have nothing to say about the greatest crony capitalist boondoggle ever seen: the Obama-backed Solyndra fiasco. And if that isn’t enough to demonstrate the hypocrisy that the left wallows in, consider the fact that the “whiteness” of the Tea Party demonstrators was brought up by the mainstream media over and over and over again to decry the movement as “racist.” And yet where are all the charges of racism now when the leftwing Occupy Wall Street movement is every scintilla as “white” as the Tea Party was??? Ninety-nine percent of the Occupy Wall Street demonstrators are WHITE. And they are clearly racist, too as they blame all the problems in their terrible useless lives on the Jews.  But suddenly no one in the mainstream media seems to care about the whiteness of the mob – or this particular mob’s active racism – any more.

Tags: , , , , ,

11 Responses to “Busting The 99% Vs. 1% Liberal Lie”

  1. Matthew Gerlach Says:

    There is soo much hypocrisy in the OWS movement it is sickening when they compare it to the Tea Party. The behavior of the OWS protesters is horrible, the vandalism and disregard for the common law. They are supposedly a “Grass Roots” movement…but they are led and organized by AdBusters an anti capitalistic magazine from Canada…and then all the progressive movement can do is tell how the Tea Party are just tools of the Koch brothers.

  2. Anonymous Says:

    Love your analogy on cigarette tax..Recently ran across this blog while researching something else and have enjoyed reading it ever since. With regard to the left, I have yet to figure out if they are just simply blinded by their failed ideology, or just refuse to admit that they are just plain wrong. I am equally frustrated with their unjustified praise of Bill Clinton ignoring or dismissing the fact that he dragged the country through the mud with his sordid behavior. Keep up the good work..!!

  3. Michael Eden Says:

    Thanks. Appreciate the encouraging note.

    I believe that Democrats have embraced a thoroughly postmodernist and existentialist worldview. They are radically committed to a warped and depraved view of the world (worldview). It is not that they are “stupid” in the sense of having low intellect; it is rather that they are utterly committed to a worldview that is utterly false and therefore cannot possibly see the world as it actually is.

    They live in a world of theories, such as Marxist theory. When Karl Marx provided a central tenent of Marxist economic philosophy and said, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need,” how is that NOT identical to Obama’s “spread the wealth around” crap???

    Marxism is a completely failed economic system that has been PROVEN to fail every single time it has ever been tried in the actual world. But there’s the rub; because you have to have some clue about the actual world to KNOW that; and Democrats are determined to remain blind to the actual world as they continue to cherish their failed theories.

  4. Michael Eden Says:


    Thanks for pointing that out.

    It’s completely true what you are arguing. They called the Tea Party violent when there were virtually NO arrests; versus the thousand or so arrest for the Occupy Wall Street movement. They called the Tea Party “astroturf” and claimed that it was “manufactured outrage” when the movement DIDN”T come from billionaires or from unions or corporations or the GOP; versus the George Soros and AdBusters and unions and Democrat Party ties to the TRUE astroturf OWS. They called the Tea Party “terrorists”; versus the OWS movement threatening to tear the justice department apart by forcing the court system to separately try every single case against them in court (i.e., “Judicial terrorism”).

    Hypocrisy is the quintessential ingredient to being a liberal. If you took the hypocrisy out of a liberal, he/she would simply cease to exist.

  5. Anonymous Says:

    there is no myth !!!!! the wealth keep getting wealtier and the working class keep getting shafted by corporate america and the politicians that are supposed to be on the side of the average citizen.

  6. Michael Eden Says:


    Your answer is breathtakingly stupid on two levels:

    1) You ignore the entire point that I am making in the article: the “Occupy” Movement represents the “99%” less than I do. It is a radical organization of marginalized people – and I mean marginalized like NAZIS who are under the banner. If you want to embrace your inner Nazi, knock yourself out. But you are a liar from hell to claim that “Occupy” represents 99% of America.

    2) You are an ignorant ideaologue who just doesn’t get that the places on earth with the greatest wealth inequality are places like CHINA – which is governed by the LEFT (i.e. communists). I think about the fact that it turns out that France’s New Socialist President Owns Three Homes On Exclusive French Riviera. And I think of you damned leftists whining about wealth inequality and I think of how you vile people live your lives when you get power – and I puke.

    And you people are as pathologically incapable of comprehending reality as you are capable of demonizing everybody around you.

  7. James Pare' Says:

    If the happenings of today is a reflection of those who were charge before wouldn’t that make Obama a better president seeing we had 8 years of Republican rule before hand? ie: Clinton vs Reagan/Bush years. As you said the 1% are the ones who can create new jobs for the 99%. Supply and demand. If the 99% can’t afford the product/service then all those jobs you create are essentially no longer needed. I pay my share of taxes; far more than a corporate exc. I disliked Obama’s bailout of the big three. This should’ve been regulated. The fact that many of 99% were either laid off or let go while the 1% got big bonuses was outrages. This creates jobs? If you refer to the 99% as Nazis; then the 1% must be the kings and queen of yore. “Let them eat cake!”

  8. Michael Eden Says:

    James Pare’,

    Well, let’s see. First, I never call “the 99%” “Nazis.” I myself am very definitely in the income range that is considered “the 99%.” I don’t earn over $250,000 a year. So I hope you were asking an honest question rather than making a snide insinuation there.

    The Occupy Movement, OWS, IS a fascist organization. Not only have they welcomed open fascists as members (e.g., the American Nazi Party, the Communist Party in America), but their tactics are without any doubt or question “fascist.”

    My point is rather obvious: either the “99%” thing is a demagogic and frankly Marxist canard by Occupy – which very clearly does NOT represent the overwhelming majority of the “99%” – or else we are a nation represented by Occupy, Nazis, communists. rioters, terrorists and rapists. Because that’s precisely what OWS does.

    Second, you do NOT pay “far more than a corporate exec in taxes.” The fact of the matter is that the rich pay a HUGE tax burden in America that actually is significantly more than their actual share of the income.

    The Associated Press did a fact check, and guess what? Secretaries do NOT pay more taxes than their bosses. That was a lie. You believed a lie.

    Furthermore, the man whom you trusted is the very sort of guy you would tell me you don’t like: Warren Buffett. And to make it even more pathetic, the guy who is being lauded as the “Citizen Kane” of the Democrat Party himself actually owes a BILLION DOLLARS in taxes going back a decade. So you believe a tax-cheating rich guy just because he’s a liberal???

    Obama just recently campaigned with a tax cheat celebrity and actually had the chutzpah to cite this tax cheat as a moral exemplar to demagogue higher taxes that the tax cheat won’t pay.

    Do you like being the kind of person who believes lies, James? You see, I wouldn’t. That would piss me off. I would change my vote.

    I can’t understand why people like you (and to be fair you didn’t tell me you specifically voted for Obama or plan to vote for him again) would hear lies, believe the liars, and just keep going back again and again to the people who keep lying to you.

    I think of black people, who are – and this is an accurate term – “slaves” of the Democrat Party. What has it got them? They keep becoming more and more worse off; their incarceration rates are astronomical; their drug addiction rates are astronomical; their fatherlessness rate is astronomical; they are aborting 60% of all their babies; they are a community in complete catastrophic failure; they’ve lost EVERYTHING that that had gained over decades under this failed president. But you can count on them to come out and vote Democrat and vote for Obama. It doesn’t matter that inner cities that have been Democrat for fifty years get worse and worse and worse every year. They believe lies and they believe nothing but lies.

    I don’t understand why there are virtually no black leaders who are coming out and saying “The Democrat Party’s values have completely failed us.”

    But I’m just a “king” of yore, so what do I know?

  9. James Pare' Says:

    You ignore the entire point that I am making in the article: the “Occupy” Movement represents the “99%” less than I do. It is a radical organization of marginalized people – and I mean marginalized like NAZIS who are under the banner. If you want to embrace your inner Nazi, knock yourself out.

  10. James Pare' Says:

    Hmmm touched off a nerve did I? The above post is directly from your comment. When I owned a business I paid a huge chunk in taxes. But; I had loopholes. You know those deductions most people don’t get. ie: write offs. My percentage dropped dramtically. Are you telling me those making a 6 or 7 figure income don’t have write offs or deductions?? Please?! Spare me!! So those 17% figures are inaccurate? I doubt it. The original occupy movement in nothing like it became. As a business ower and investor if I was paying huge sums of my income in taxes close to the amounts you stated above why would I bother continuing since the government will take it anyway?! As far as who I voted for it wasn’t Obama. But most Repulicans I’ve met are ignorant and idiots. As far as blacks are concerned; the 1% way back when were plantation owners who enslaved the blacks so they can make big money.

  11. Michael Eden Says:

    James Pare’,

    Yeah, that’s right. Lying pathological turds set off my nerves. Get over yourself.

    I look at your last two comments here and I see a guy who can take his act somewhere else.

    You are clearly an incredibly dishonest slime. I just got through documenting two if not three lies you started out telling: that you pay more in taxes than executives when no you don’t you liar, that somehow I said that “99% of the American people are Nazis.” In your first post you said, “I pay my share of taxes; far more than a corporate exc.” Now you’re changing your story to brag about the damn loopholes that YOU get??? Which is it, you liar? Are you paying more damn taxes than an exec or are you the guy that is making off like your fellow damn lying liberal Warren Buffett? And don’t try to slime your way out by saying you “used to pay more” because your comment was present tense: “I pay.”

    I documented my case with facts. And you respond my producing a personal assertion: “So those 17% figures are inaccurate? I doubt it.” Well, I doubt you’re sane and I very definitely doubt you’ve got a brain. If your “doubts” mean anything, well then so the hell do mine. And your being stupid trumps your doubting tax statistics because who the hell really cares what a moron doubts?

    Republicans have been ALL FOR eliminating loopholes by having a flat tax, you weasel. And the only reason we’ve got all the damn loopholes is because your fellow Democrats won’t allow a tax system that eliminates loopholes and reduces Democrats’ power to pick winners and losers and reward their cronies and punish their enemies.

    To wrap that bit up, you say that “I had loopholes. You know those deductions most people don’t get.” MOST people either pay zero or next to zero in federal income taxes. And a lot of people who pay NOTHING in federal income taxes get plenty of “loopholes” in the form of TAX CREDITS and REFUNDS.

    Now you’re trying to attach me to the Occupy movement like I’m part of it? “the “Occupy” Movement… is a radical organization of marginalized people… like NAZIS. If you want to embrace your inner Nazi, knock yourself out.”

    There is absolutely ZERO question that the Occupy movement which was endorsed by both Obama and Nancy Pelosi – who literally invoked God’s heavenly blessing on these rapist terrorist rioting thugs – is a Democrat entity. And now I’m supposed to “wear my inner Nazi” that comes out of the very movement I have actively despised even as YOU defend it on the grounds that “The original occupy movement in nothing like it became“??? I don’t think so, cockroach.

    I read your “But most Repulicans I’ve met are ignorant and idiots” and I realize that youy are a Homer Simpson type whose biggest character flaw is that he just can’t understand how stupid he is.

    It is time for you to get lost. I don’t waste my time with people who constantly change their arguments and I don’t waste my time with people who ignore the facts I present without bothering to offer any of their own. You did both.

    Yesterday I got a pair of comments from a liberal telling me what a tough guy he was. Today I’ve got a liberal telling me what a successful business god he is. Both comments come from unhinged liars.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: