Biden’s speech last night
No I didn’t watch it. Others did, though, such as Roger Kimball:
If you look at the Biden press pool — also known as CNN — the Biden administration is responsible for America’s robust response to this latest respiratory virus. But in fact, it was Donald Trump’s ‘Operation Warp Speed’ that produced several effective vaccines in record time — and it was Trump’s plan that provided the entire plan for distributing it.
Joe then went on to describe what he called, without cracking a smile, the ‘American Rescue Plan’. In essence, it is the same plan that was outlined, but in more modest terms, by a certain Italian politician in the 1920s. ‘All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.’…
it was all Bernie Sanders-esque class warfare: raise taxes, eat the rich, take control of — well, everything.
But along the way there were some strange echoes. Biden said his mantra was ‘Buy American’. ‘American tax dollars are going to be used to buy American products made in America that create American jobs.’ Where have we heard that before?…
Biden is here to bring us MAPA: ‘Make America Poor Again.’
Here’s how we do it. First, spend more money than anyone thought possible. Promise free stuff for everyone (except Republicans). Second, destroy the engines of prosperity. Start with the energy industry. Tax it, regulate, mount a huge ‘green- new-deal PR campaign against cheap, abundant energy. It’s working! Hundreds of thousands are out of work and gas prices are up some nine percent in just 100 days! Good going, Joe!
I think my favorite part of this dog’s breakfast was the part where he asked, how are we going to pay for all this. ‘I’ve made clear that we can do it without increasing deficits.’
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. Who knew that Joe Biden, like Hamlet, had an antic disposition.
The deficit is already skyrocketing. But Joe is going after the ‘millionaires and billionaires who cheat on their taxes’. Did you know that the top one percent of earners already pay more than 40 percent of all income taxes? Think about that. The top 10 percent pay more than 71 percent, while the top 25 percent pay nearly 90 percent of all income taxes. So what is Joe talking about?
And then Biden went on about how terrible the January 6th insurrection was, how it almost brought down the country.
All predictable stuff from the Great Uniter.
More from Kimball:
I thought it was a horrible speech — cliché-ridden, yes, but also deeply mendacious. The latest import from China is not ‘one of the worst pandemics ever’. We were not ‘staring into an abyss of insurrection and autocracy’ on January 6.
But mendacity is Joe’s middle name – always has been. And the worst thing about all of this is how many people are perfectly okay with it.
Meanwhile in Portland, the psycopaths at Antifi are quite literally threatening the life of their hyper-progressive mayor if he doesn’t resign. And this is after months and months of destruction and mayhem.
But, yeah… the tiny unarmed (unless you count bear mace) January 6th rabble of “insurrectionists” who killed no one and did virtually nothing are the real danger to America. Sure.
“Did you know that the top one percent of earners already pay more than 40 percent of all income taxes? Think about that. The top 10 percent pay more than 71 percent”
“In the third quarter of 2020, the share of net wealth in the United States held by the top 10 percent increased slightly from the previous quarter to 69.2 percent. At the beginning of 1990, this figure stood at 60.5 percent. During this period, the wealth share of the 90th to 99th percentile remained broadly constant at around 37 percent, while the share of the top one percent increased from 23.5 percent of net wealth to 31 percent.”
https://www.statista.com/statistics/299460/distribution-of-wealth-in-the-united-states/#:~:text=In%20the%20third%20quarter%20of,figure%20stood%20at%2060.5%20percent.
“In 2019, total wealth had grown to $96.1 trillion. The 2019 population was approximately 129 million families.
To be in the top 10%, a family needed $1.22 million or more (slightly less than in 2016). Together, these roughly 12.9 million wealthy families owned 76% of total household wealth in 2019.”
https://www.stlouisfed.org/open-vault/2020/december/has-wealth-inequality-changed-over-time-key-statistics
And here’s a link to a federal reserve chart that says by the end of 2020, not only did the top 1% in the U.S. have more wealth than the bottom 90% combined but the top 10% had more than TWICE AS MUCH WEALTH as the other 90% of the country.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/dataviz/dfa/distribute/chart/
Yes, Biden and the Democrats will be a disaster but there’s also a stunning ignorance on much of the Right of economic realities.
Mike
A bit off topic, but two items:
1) No one else concerned about the Soviet style police state raid on Guiliani? Scares the hell out of me.
2) The D’s plan is working. Our local paper reports that restaurants are having trouble rehiring their workers, or even hiring new ones. Reason: workers report they get more money from the government cover checks.
Bunge discovers that wealthy have money and the poor will always be with us, with statistics! Next will he propose confiscation of those ill gotten gains? Wealth inequality is truly the root of all evils (or something).
Cue the all caps and “you are stupid.” See I saved Bunge a rant. It’s sunny and 75 degrees outside, time for a run around the block. Bunge will get back to me? 🙂
I don’t know where Kimball lives but where I live (Tucson AZ) gas went from $2 to $3.10. We just visited CA where it is now $4.
I am anticipating 1974 style inflation next. One problem with being old is that you remember stuff. Like buying a house for $35,000 that is now priced at $1.4 million.
I see no Volker in Biden’s future.
there’s also a stunning ignorance on much of the Right of economic realities.
I don’t know if you qualify as “right” but those people all supported Biden. I think they know something and they call us “chumps.”
And here’s a link to a federal reserve chart that says by the end of 2020, not only did the top 1% in the U.S. have more wealth than the bottom 90% combined but the top 10% had more than TWICE AS MUCH WEALTH as the other 90% of the country.
The issue of merit is not wealth distribution, but its availability, influence, and diversity in matters of pro-life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
And here’s a link to a federal reserve chart that says by the end of 2020, not only did the top 1% in the U.S. have more wealth than the bottom 90% combined but the top 10% had more than TWICE AS MUCH WEALTH as the other 90% of the country.
That’s not a novel situation.
Keep in mind the ‘wealth’ you’re referring to would be salable assets. It doesn’t account for your human capital, which is what generates most of the production and income in this economy.
I’d also remind you that the wealthiest man in America in 1937 was John D. Rockefeller. His share of the country’s salable assets, IIRC, exceeded the sum of that share had by the first three names on the Forbes 400 list ca. 2016. Not too many years ago I saw a piece of soft data: that the Rockefeller heirs (of whom there are scores) are in sum worth about $11 bn. There was at that time one Rockefeller on the Forbes 400, and he was near the bottom of the list. No Rockefeller has supervised a business of much consequence since John D. Rockefeller’s youngest grandson retired in 1981. Recall also that Gloria Vanderbilt (who when she was in middle age ran a profitable business for a time) left an estate of less than $2 million to those children of hers to whom she was still speaking at the end of her life (presumably some of her assets were distributed to them in trust before she died). In just three generations, the Rockefellers went from America’s wealthiest family to a collection of people among whom there are some who might be the wealthiest family in Dayton if that’s where they lived. Gloria Vanderbilt went from big rich to petty rich.
When I was a kid, my mom wouldn’t let me buy “G.I. Joe,” or “Sgt. Rock” or “Superman” comics (I got by with a little help from my friends). Nope, only “safe” stuff for me. Mostly losers like “Little LuLu,” “Nancy and Sluggo” or “Casper the Friendly Ghost.” But Donald and Mickey saved the day. I especially liked Uncle Scrooge McDuck, because he was so rich.
Fast forward thirty years and I acquired a signed lithograph by Carl Barks, entitled “An Embarrassment of Riches.” It hangs on the wall above my computer desk, as kind of a goal to reach. Take a look.
When I was seven, that painting represented what I thought rich people did with their wealth, just pile it up in a vault.* But later on, I learned that wealthy people invest their money, putting it to work — often in the private sector of the economy — expecting it will earn a return by providing goods and services that people want. Or sometimes, inventing some new thing. And in the process of doing so, quite often providing jobs and opportunities for other people. I think history shows that capitalism has benefitted the world more than socialism.
* I think Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez still thinks that that picture represents what rich people do with their money, despite her B.A. in Economics (Cum Laude) from Boston University.
* I think Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez still thinks that that picture represents what rich people do with their money, despite her B.A. in Economics (Cum Laude) from Boston University.
Once more with feeling. She received a BA in international relations, which is social science jumble major. You commonly have to take some econ courses with an IR major. She added a couple of extra courses and was allowed to declare a minor in the subject.
Art
DuckDuckGo on “alexandria ocasio-cortez degree in economics”
Check out a few of the results. It’s what she claimed. Maybe not the Cum Luade part, but some say “with honors.”
I didn’t watch the dog and pony show either. What would be the point?
Mbunge-wealth and Income are not the same things. Retired people and people approaching retirement (at the upper earnings levels but also more broadly) have lots of “wealth” and relatively low “income”. Young people, especially young high earners, have lots of income and relatively little wealth, as they typically have large debts (mortgages, loans) which offset whatever wealth (equity) they might have.
I am hardly an economist or god forbid a statistician, but it seems to me the aging of the boomers and the relatively small numbers of millennials might account for a significant portion of the purported concentration of wealth.
I’m surpised that BU hasn’t denied AOC’s claim about having a degree in economics since she evidently knows so little about the topic. It’s possible that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez may understand less about wealth creation than that towering pile of economic nincompoopery that calls itself Paul Krugman. And he won a prize.
I liked Kimball’s comment that he had thought people at the speech were wearing masks, until he realized they were barf bags.
physicsguy, yes, I’m concerned about it. The FBI/DOJ are no longer trustworthy.
Conservative Tree House has an article about the audience ratings for Biden’s speech versus Trump’s 4 speeches.
President Trump 2017 – 48,000,000
President Trump 2018 – 46,000,000
President Trump 2019 – 46,800,000
President Trump 2020 – 37,200,000
Joe Biden 2021 – 11,600,000
One would have expected “the President who won the greatest number of votes in American history” to have done a little bit better . . .
Costco premium gas is now $3.95/gallon, thanks Joe, Nancy, Chuck and Gavin
I was amused when I found out what Donald Duck does for a living. He drives the bulldozer that keeps the cash in Scrooge’s money bin level!
Got a letter today from “Old Joe,” though the return address was the IRS which caused some worry until I opened it. In it he claimed credit not just for the $1400 stimulus check but implied he was behind that $600 one back in December 2020 and that together they added up to the $2000 he’d promised.
@Cap’n Rusty:
Nobody except party climbers seriously watches Xinwen Lianbo either:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinwen_Lianbo
It’s not your government so there’s no need to watch except occasionally when there’s a big hint of change in wind direction… Most of the viewership figure comes from it being on in the background while people do other stuff.
BU now says she was a double major, so I stand corrected.
On the ‘cum laude’ part, I believe in most selective schools these days that means she had a GPA above the median. BU emphasizes in their public relations that the reference group was the graduating class, not the body of IR majors or Econ majors.
People who study economics have different viewpoints on normative questions. They do have to be familiar with the literature and what theoretical and empirical study indicates about how production and consumption work. She shows very little evidence of that. BU, you got yourself a distinguished alumna.
physicsguy, yes, I’m concerned about it. The FBI/DOJ are no longer trustworthy.
What are the chances that the Republican Party’s vacuous and clueless leadership would ever take the hint and scarify the federal criminal code?
When I was seven, that painting represented what I thought rich people did with their wealth, just pile it up in a vault.*
CapnRusty:
I believe Barks’ early artwork documented Scrooge McDuck swimming in the vault’s gold coins. Mostly the backstroke. Not just for show! Great cardio workout.
https://tenor.com/view/scrooge-mcduck-swimming-money-gif-5178207
“Income inequality,” or “wealth inequality” or either of the above with “inequity” subbing in, is as much of a red herring as “food insecurity.” The left realized – unhappily – that the standard of living of the lowest American quintile is wealth unimaginable in some parts of the world in which socialism reigns (and is “middle class” in the rest), and did as they always do: defined a new problem by redefining old words.
Mbunge, is the wealth of the top 1% preventing you from getting rich? Did those meanies take too much of the pie? Because the real problem, as we are all aware, is envy.
The subject, I know, was share of taxes – but we’re not taxed directly on wealth (not yet, at least), so your stats are irrelevant. (And God forbid a wealth tax is successfully levied – kiss your retirement goodbye if you’ve been assuming that, because you’ve planned and saved and invested and now have “wealth” in anything other than a designated retirement account, you’d live on more than Social Security.)
C’mon, man. NO amount of taxes can pay for the proposed spending. Taxes exist in new monetary theory only to influence (or force) behavior. Or maybe to punish and defang your opponents.
In all of these wealth distribution discussions, and with an implied major imbalance in said distributions, no one seems to know just what a “proper” and “valid” balance should be.
But would the Leftist leaders really be happy with a “fully equitable” distribution such as (say):
Top 1% own 2% of the wealth
Bottom 4% own 3% of the wealth
Middle 5th thru 99th group each own 1% of the wealth
Surely with their exalted talents and abilities, they deserve a greater share than that, right?
So just how much are the top 1% and top 10% “allowed” to own before they own “too much”? Especially if that wealth comes from their own talents and abilities and work effort, or even that of their grandfathers/grandmothers. [Presumption is no criminal or corrupt practices were involved].
What Jamie said!
And we almost never hear about just how much wealth you really do need to accumulate over a working and investment lifetime to achieve a “decent” level of retirement income from that principal amount: namely about $1M for each $35K or so of income you want/ need/ desire*. Want to live a $70K/year life style? Save at least $2M in principal, etc. Paid off your mortgage and your cars, supplemented with SS, and you can live pretty well indeed. Relying on SS alone and then maybe “not so much”. The wealth charts cited above showing average wealth levels in the $200K to $500K range even for the higher ranges and things may be not so rosy on a national level after all.
As the over 72 year old’s here know: the IRS demands required minimum distributions (RMDs) from your IRA such that you are expected to exhaust (or consume) the original (tax deferred) principle of your IRA in 27.4 years (i.e., around age 99). This translates into 3.36% of the original amount (at age 72) for each of those 27.4 years. But this becomes a greater and greater % of the remaining principal as that principal shrinks (which appears to be what the IRS presumes).
*This $35K “throw off” amount might even be on the high side under some circumstances, but also can be somewhat higher yet. This does not take account of your IRA principal increasing or decreasing over time as your investments fluctuate, nor the hidden tax of inflation on said principal.
Jamie:
Thanks for the clarity. Envy and covetousness is an age old problem even for Marxists, Leftists, or “populist” individuals it seems.
}}} But Joe is going after the ‘millionaires and billionaires who cheat on their taxes’. Did you know that the top one percent of earners already pay more than 40 percent of all income taxes? Think about that. The top 10 percent pay more than 71 percent, while the top 25 percent pay nearly 90 percent of all income taxes. So what is Joe talking about?
ANYone paying less than 100% in taxes (yes: **any** one) is cheating, to a socialist.
Dennis Prager almost always replays big Presidential speeches with commentary so heard it that way. It was lies the whole way start to finish.
It’s unicorns and lollipops heading our wayhe said and we won’t survive it.
}}} Yes, Biden and the Democrats will be a disaster but there’s also a stunning ignorance on much of the Right of economic realities.
Mike
… and stunning cluelessness from the Envy Class about the notion that this means ANYTHING WHATSOEVER.
Sure, I’d love to have Bill Gates’ money.
**I think**. Having never had anything the like, it would be interesting.
But unlike most, I DO grasp that there’s not only a downside to such, but an actual burden. There is a REASON so many lottery winners wind up 5y to 10y later broke and friendless. Having serious money, when you’re not prepared for it by learning how to handle it, is an actual problem
What I REALLY want is more of the middle-ground — enough that I don’t have to worry about petty things, and maybe that I can try some ideas of my own that I think might better the world.
But I’m not going to get that by whining about how much Bill fucking Gates has, and I am DAMNED sure not going to get it by trying to take it from Gates using the fucking asshole GOVERNMENT to accomplish it.
The REAL fact is, as long as *I* am getting wealthier at a steady pace, I really really don’t give a RATFUCK if Bill Gates is getting wealthier at even a more rapid pace — because he ain’t gonna live 100x longer than me as a result, nor is he going to have 100x as much fun.
That’s not to suggest you promote Marx. It’s quoted because MARX WAS RIDICULOUSLY WRONG.
People around the world are getting far far more wealthy AS A WHOLE…
Only a complete idiot wants to fuck with a system that does that.
}}} I see no Volker in Biden’s future.
Well, if the plane stairs are any indication, I see a walker in Biden’s future.
😛
}}} I’d also remind you that the wealthiest man in America in 1937 was John D. Rockefeller. His share of the country’s salable assets, IIRC, exceeded the sum of that share had by the first three names on the Forbes 400 list ca. 2016. Not too many years ago I saw a piece of soft data: that the Rockefeller heirs (of whom there are scores) are in sum worth about $11 bn. There was at that time one Rockefeller on the Forbes 400, and he was near the bottom of the list. No Rockefeller has supervised a business of much consequence since John D. Rockefeller’s youngest grandson retired in 1981. Recall also that Gloria Vanderbilt (who when she was in middle age ran a profitable business for a time) left an estate of less than $2 million to those children of hers to whom she was still speaking at the end of her life (presumably some of her assets were distributed to them in trust before she died). In just three generations, the Rockefellers went from America’s wealthiest family to a collection of people among whom there are some who might be the wealthiest family in Dayton if that’s where they lived. Gloria Vanderbilt went from big rich to petty rich.
Art, et al:
The REAL problem here with this information is that none of the “Rich Bastards” (my official term) actually has ANY major wealth of their own.
Ever since about 1910, it’s all been in “Tax Free Foundations”, with only a small portion actually held directly in their name.
So any stat like this is highly specious, as there is a major legal/tax difference between OWNING something and CONTROLLING something. They control a MASSIVE amount of wealth… few actually OWN that much.
Case in point.
Buffet, some years back, when he was in the news with the claim that “his secretary paid more in taxes than he did”, was worth around 25 BILLION at the time.
Now, first off, his “Executive Secretary” is someone who earns upwards from one to two MILLION a year. This ain’t no Bubbleheaded shiksa from the steno pool…
Second off… on average, anyone who Knows Their Stuff is going to AVERAGE about 10% a year return on assets. So — 25 Billion — 10% means 2.5 BILLION a year. But, yeah, 2008 was a bad year. So, let’s say he made only 5%… That’s STILL 1.25 billion dollars.
So his nominal “income” should have at least been in the ballpark of a billion or so dollars.
BUT… the article I read ALSO identified how much he paid in taxes. And some back-figuring suggested he paid that income tax on … about 65 MILLION dollars.
So… what happened to the other billion plus???
Right. Didn’t pay taxes on it, because first off, it wasn’t “income” and it wasn’t “his income”.
It was all kept in a TAX FREE FOUNDATION (note those first two words) and the “income” he had was the salary he got paid for “running” it and being its chief officer.
Mind you, he still got to USE the assets of that foundation as though they were his own — the estate in the Hamptons, the island in the Caribbean, the Mansion in Monte Carlo, the Converted Minesweeper Yacht and the private 727 jet…
But he doesn’t oooooowwwwnnnn any of those things.
And herein lies the REAL point: It is of no use whatsoever to attempt to use the GOVERNMENT to go after the wealth of the Rich Bastards, even WERE you inclined to do so. Because they’re more connected to the system than you are, and, if you make any serious inroads, they will have their minions obfuscate, block, and misdirect and delay anything until they ALSO get laws passed that allow them to circumvent your efforts — case in point, the Income Tax, which was sold on a “soak the rich” scheme, was held off until they got the various laws allowing for “Tax Free ‘Charitable’ Foundations” arranged, and the Rich Bastards transferred everything they had into those, and only THEN the Income Tax Amendment got “passed”.
The Rockefeller Foundation, the Carnegie Foundation, the Pew Charitable Trust… and today we have the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Buffet Foundation, and… ohhhh, yeah, The Clinton Foundation.
Raising “Income Taxes” does nothing whatsoever to these people. NOTHING
“No one else concerned about the Soviet style police state raid on Guiliani? Scares the hell out of me.”
Yes it’s pay-back time and it’s terrifying.
Indeed, Stasi tactics are now the de-facto law of the land—i.e., the Democratic Party-run land.
And now “Biden” doesn’t even have to bother to hide it, obscure it, finesse it, cover it up (as they did when they went after Flynn, Papadopolous, Page, Manafort, et al.)
Or when they went after Trump, whom one must assume is still in the cross-hairs.
Actually, every American citizen is, potentially, in the cross-hairs under the rubric: If you support Trump, you will be considered a “domestic terrorist”, or a potential one (and given the way things are going, this may well evolve into: If you don’t support the Democratic Party, then you will be considered….):
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/biden-doj-actively-considering-domestic-terrorism-law-target-white-nationalists
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/schiff-we-cant-ignore-some-trumps-base-are-white-nationalist-domestic-terror-threat
Related:
Giuliani/FBI watch:
https://www.newsmax.com/us/drive/2021/04/28/id/1019426/?oRef=wnd
Biden watch:
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/politics/joe-biden%E2%80%99s-speech-was-declaration-war-america-183962
Cuomo watch:
https://www.blazingcatfur.ca/2021/04/30/i-recorded-them-murdering-patients-covid-nurse-goes-public-with-shocker/
+ Bonus — Media watch:
https://spectator.us/topic/goodbye-america-josh-glancy-sunday-times/
H/T blazingcatfur blog.
An intellectual exercise I have tried with my liberal friends who fret about income inequality is to ask them: I give you a choice-cut Bezos’, Gates’ et al’s income/wealth in half, or double your own. The former makes your income more “equal” than the latter. Which is better?
Usually gets the subject changed.
@Boatbuilder:
Yes. That deals with leftist blind jealousy.
On the Right, however, you have people who cannot grasp that Gates, Bezos, Zuck, etc. can and do buy up the Government at all levels *and* fund the NGOs, have the legacy media over a barrel, and are literally untouchable. These guys get about with bigger security details than most heads of state.
There *is* a point at which oligarchs become so dominant that their existence in a Republic or Democracy (oh cursed word!) becomes incompatible with these forms of polity. History shows this with no exceptions that I can think of. One or the other will have to go. Look around you and guess which side has already won this time around.
The Roman Republic had many terminal problems, but Crassus and Pompey put the final nails in by demonstrating that plunder paid and could be parlayed into more yet plunder through the purchase of legal means of plunder.
The REAL problem here with this information is that none of the “Rich Bastards” (my official term) actually has ANY major wealth of their own.
1. This is a fantasy of yours.
2. The endowments to which you refer are generally a fraction of the private wealth of the scions of the founders. The Rockefeller Foundation has an endowment of $5 bn. The Ford Foundation has one of about $12 bn. The Gates Foundation has a much larger endowment; that endowment is less than 30% of the Gates’ private wealth.
3. That aside, the families which founded the philanthropic agencies you mention don’t typically control them for more than a generation. An extreme example would be the MacArthur Foundation.
4. The social problem presented by these foundations can be finessed by requiring they liquidate after 60 years, with the residue of the endowment distributed per stirpes among the legitimate descendants of the founders’ grandparents.
What has been true in he U.S. is that people on n the bottom of the income/wealth spectrum can rise to the top. There is nothing standing in their way except their own ability or ack thereof to grasp the opportunities that are available.
One may not become fabulously rich, but becoming financially comfortable is available to all those willing to exercise discipline and judgement. Save 10% of you take home pay, avoid big debts (except for purchasing a home) invest in the stocks of sound companies, and let the magic of compound interest/growth rate of the economy do its work. If you begin this at 22 years of age and stick with it, you will have a nest egg for a secure retirement. It’s been done by millions of people and is a large part of the reason why our system is resistant to calls for redistribution of income/wealth. I’ll grant that there are many people who do not have the discipline and foresight do what I outlined above. And that’s a shame, but it’s what human nature is – some people don’t have what I call the “money gene.” Probably the reason why the poor will always be with us.
When I drive around the North Puget Sound area, I see marinas filled with expensive boats, vacation vehicles parked in front of homes, large homes with multiple cars out front, retail parking lots filled with n shoppers’ cars, and heavy traffic on the freeways – all signs of economic activity and a middle class that seems to be doing well. This is not an economy that needs to be taxed to death or subjected to strangling regulation.
Yes, I see homeless encampments, but know that most of those people are addicts and the mentally ill. Not a sign of a bad economy, but of local governments inability/unwillingness to deal with those issues.
As for the ultra rich. As long as they don’t try to stop other people from getting rich and invest most of their money in the economy, I say more power tot them.
As for the ultra rich. As long as they don’t try to stop other people from getting rich and invest most of their money in the economy, I say more power tot them.
As long as they’re producing goods and services which add to the collective welfare (not rent-seeking), as long as they’re not generating vice, as long as they’re sticking to business and not attempting to distort and disfigure civic life, as long as they’re not engaged in restraint of trade injurious to the public, as long as they’re not invading the off-site lives of their employees, and as long as their dealings will all parties are aboveboard and transparent, they can be left alone.
Art+Deco; a good list of specifics,. Better than my generalization. Thanks.
Dems should use “Jive Talkin'” as warmup music for Biden speeches.
1000+’s to what JJ and Art+Deco most recently said.
I guess Art’s extra + makes that 1001 +’s.