Hillary gets the De Blasio stamp of approval

8 Comments on Hillary gets the De Blasio stamp of approval

1. Oh that’s really funny. A two faced, commie/nazi endorses a person who has lied, cheated and changed her stance in accordance with whomever or whatever she is standing next to?

   HELL NO, TO CHAMELEON HILLARY, despite all the worms coming out of the earth to endorse her. Judging her by these creeps, just reinforces my yuck factor upon hearing even the mention of her.

2. I can see the signs….”Red Bill, for Red Hill !”

3. How could Ble Dasio’s endorsement help anyone achieve anything?

4. Fight income inequality! Work harder than the next guy.

5. Birds of a feather fluck together.

6. “Income inequality.” What a nice catch phrase for a completely stupid idea.

   Let me interject a weird concept into the “income inequality” argument – the concept of risk. If I engage in an endeavor that entails significant risk, I expect to be rewarded more if I succeed because I will lose more if I fail. And from a probability standpoint, failure is more likely than success – just ask Henry Ford and Walt Disney, both of whom filed for bankruptcy on multiple occasions before they succeeded.

   Income inequality diminishes, if not ignores the concept of risk. Let’s say a law is passed which states I, as an employee, an entitled to “x” percentage of profits if the business is successful. If all employees are entitled to this percentage of profits, then why would I exert any more effort than I need to in order to keep my job if there is no further reward? Why would the business owner undertake any significant risk if there is no commensurate reward? Why would I want to start a business when it is less risky, yet financially rewarding to work for someone else and let him or her assume the risk of failure?

   People like DeBlasio are in government because there is no risk of failure. DeBlasio’s policies can succeed or, more likely fail; yet DeBlasio is in no danger of being removed from his political office. But society does not advance because of government – it advances despite government. Governments do not care about innovation or advancement because there is no reward for these endeavors, and no risk of failure if the status quo is maintained. Only people who desire greater rewards undertake the risk involved in innovating new products and services, and if the rewards associated with these risks are eliminated under the guise if income inequality, innovation and advancement stagnate.

   Economics should involve a study of human behavior as much as a study of suppy and demand graphs and mathematical concepts. Societies will always have income inequality – trust me, DeBlasio is not going to cut his pay to help out the garbage collector’s union anymore than Kim Il Un is going to give up his palace to help feed his people – and the question is whether or not this income inequality is more endemic in the pubic sector or the private sector. But, as a study of communist, socialist, or autocratic systems teaches, there will always be income inequality somewhere.

   Sorry for the rant, but catering to the ignorant through catchy phrases just galls me.

7. Well if yer gonna start makin sense I’m going home!

   Oh wait… I am home!

   Income equality – Ha! Absolutely Wyatt! There will be worse income equality under Socialism, they’ll just tell you they’re for the poor and when everybody is poor, viola! Look! Income equality! See what we did for YOU!!
   Yes, they’re for the little guy!
   Remember their motto:
   Wherever there’s wrong-doing, we’ll be there.
   Wherever there’s injustice, we’ll be there.
   Wherever there’s corruption, we’ll be there.
   And wherever there’s a bunch of big guys beating up
   on a little guy, we’ll be there too…
   helping to hold the little guy down!

8. Wyatt, I hear you. Of course there is going to be “income inequality” between, for example, me and your average breeder-on-benefits in the South Bronx.

   I get more money than she does because I’ve spent my life doing more than she has…..studying, working, taking civil service exams, investing. Her life is all about watching daytime TV, smoking weed, and popping out another baby by another man every year or two. These wastes of oxygen should be branded with Ls on their foreheads

   I’ll get with “income equality” when I see “effort/production equality.”