[I realize I asked a lot of rhetorical questions in this diary. I think I banged my head into the wall too many times this weekend. Felt good to vent, though. And.. I installed/bled the car's clutch slave cylinder before the meter-maid/street cleaner arrived - ahh, urban living. Plus.. KO - may - be back tomorrow! The world is good. See ya.]
How much of the voting age population think that the redistribution of middle class wealth upwards is an economic trend that benefits the country as a whole and should continue? Apparently a good portion, if the recent Republican voter tally is any indicator.
I'm serious. Is this idea too complex? Is harboring even a private thought that lacks the conventional "Let the Free Market (sic) Sort It Out (tm)" approach actually revealing ones self to be a socialist/communist f*-stick - thereby necessitating suicide for all non-DKos-registered citizens?
What if the top 1% owned 99% of the wealth? Would that get a majority of the voting populace to at least consider adjusting the current structure of our economic reality?
What the f* am I missing here?!?!?! I don't mean to lay bare my social/economic-theory ignorance for all to see, but I'm just at a loss for explanations. Perhaps I can't accept that the Republican/establishment noise/fear-generator is that good at getting average folks to consistently vote against their best interests - or that a majority of the population is that gullible.
The simplicity of this seems irreducible:
Republican voter: "I don't want to board the Wealth Redistribution express."
DKos socialist/communist f*-stick: "That train left the station.. er.. [looks at analog wristwatch] roughly 40 years ago and, as we speak, is going "imminent domain" - for pennies on the dollar, incidentally - on any property or savings you were planning to leave to your descendants. Sorry."
How many reports on the steady decline of wages and wealth of the vast majority of U.S. citizens, which is essentially gutting the middle class, will be ignored or dismissed as being biased? Even the U.N., standard bearer of all things liberal and about as fundamentally protective of the U.S. as an international body can be, reports on it. Do people assume there will be no consequences to this shift?
I wrote the first version of this diary's title mere hours before I read the diary citing Bill Moyers speech that eloquently states the problem inherent in this obvious trend.
Short-sightedness is usually the criticism laid at the feet of the "bleeding hearts" that want govt. to help the misguided and lazy among us who didn't find a way to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and self-actualize into Armani-suit-wearing corporate players. The long-view suggests that's going to be d*mned near every one of us.
"Hey, John - where's my job?" (2.5 years, and counting..)