We’re Not Screwing You

Chris HayesOn today’s Up with Chris Hayes, he deconstructs the right wing claim that they will not change Medicare for anyone over 55. I’ve been complaining about this for years, but especially last week. As I wrote then, “In other words: if you are young you probably won’t vote for us anyway, so fuck you!”

The idea is most clearly: if you are people who will vote for us, we will protect you. If you aren’t, oh well.

Here is 13 seconds of video where Chris Hayes lays out exactly what’s going on.

Update (Right Away)

You knew Paul Ryan was a hypocrite, right?

Existential Threats

Romney-Ryan 2012There are existential threats all around these days. In the long run, I believe the rich are facing one. In the short run, I am. And the poor always are. Here are a few thoughts on modern American.

Class Warfare

If there really were class warfare between the 99% and the 1% (actually, more like the 0.1%), then it would no longer be metaphorical. When numbers are this lopsided, the small minority will either be taken out or forced to change. I think the fact that no one is calling for revolution (Even the Occupy Movement just wants a discussion!) indicates we as a people are committed to our political institutions and accepting of high levels of inequality.

Claiming that people who would like to see a wee bit more equality are engaged in class warfare is the height of right wing whining. The truth is that the rich (Especially the super-rich!) should want to see a slightly more egalitarian society. Their lives are great. They should want to preserve it. They should be all for giving alms to the poor—even or perhaps especially the “undeserving” poor. They should be all for calming the anxieties of the middle class. They should be all for fighting environmental threats. If the world goes on tilt due to global warming or there is a revolution because of inequality, all I have to lose is the continued struggle of my crappy life. The rich, however, have very much to lose.

Risk Taking

Another thing that bugs me is this idea that people should be rewarded for “risk taking.” We’ve heard this a lot from Mitt Romney, I gather, because if he is deserving of his hundreds of millions, it is because of the risks he’s taken. On its face, this doesn’t make a lot of sense, because Romney was never risking his own money or even his job or reputation. But there is a much bigger issue here: stakes.

Sheldon Adelson is said to be worth roughly $25 billion. I am worth about $10,000. This means that just based upon the numbers, Adelson could invest $10 million in a new company and this would be equivalent to me investing $4 in—What?—a used book for research. So I don’t see why Adelson should be rewarded for his risk taking—he isn’t taking any risk! This goes further, because Adelson could “risk” $20 billion without really risking anything. He would still be wealthy beyond imagining. On the other hand, for me to risk $1000 is a huge risk. It is an existential risk. Adelson would have to risk something like $25.999 billion to start to face an existential risk.

Romney-Ryan 2012!

I found this on Crooks & Liars. As bad as Obama is, the stakes in this election are too high to protest. Romney-Ryan really are an existential threat to this country. And this video is very funny in pointing this out:

The People’s Touch Not People’s Interests

As much as I have problems with his policies and the way that he dealt with the Republicans, the President it great on the campaign trail. He really has the people’s touch. It makes me want to follow him. But then I remember that he was going to sell out Social Security and Medicare for a tiny tax with Boehner. And I remember that he isn’t good, he’s just better than the Republicans—who are crazy and evil. Still, you can’t but be impressed with this: