It’s interesting how it is just a given in the United States of America (and in other plutocracies) that in an economic downturn, it’s the poor and the vanishing middle class who will have to do with even less — certainly it won’t be the rich.
I say: Fuck. That. Shit.
We easily can turn the federal budget deficit into a record federal budget surplus.
By confiscating the nation’s wealth that the rich stole in the first place.
I love the argument that a millionaire or billionaire “earned” it, “worked hard” for it.
The only way to become a millionaire or billionaire is to sit atop the legalized pyramid scheme that is called “capitalism.”
No one does a million or billion dollars’ worth of work — especially if we define the value of work as the minimum wage.
Oh, the minimum wage is not the value of labor?
Then why is the minimum wage the supposed value of labor for millions and millions of working Americans but not for the rich? Why the fucking double standard?
The rich didn’t earn their wealth. They stole it. Their wealth came from vastly overcharging consumers for goods and services and from vastly underpaying employees for the value of their labor.
The rich aren’t hard workers. The rich are thieves.
And just as the stolen wealth of the common thief would be confiscated, so should the stolen wealth of millionaires and billionaires.
It wouldn’t be stealing from them — it would be taking back what they stole from us.
Under what I might call Plan Robin Hood, there would be an established limit on any one individual’s accumulated wealth, plain and simple. No one needs a billion fucking dollars.
Wealth above the established upper limit would be confiscated and returned to the national treasury. Any individual refusing to comply would be tried for treason, for threatening the welfare of the many by hoarding wealth, and, if found guilty, would be imprisoned — and his or her surplus wealth would be confiscated and returned to the national treasury.
Do I expect the rich to cooperate with such a radical redistribution of wealth?
No — so it would be done by force, if necessary. Anyone aiding and abetting the rich — yes, even police officers or members of the military (most of whom are just tools/thugs for the rich anyway*) — would be tried for treason, as their actions (protecting the excesses of the few) would be detrimental to the good of the many.
A bloodless revolution is preferable to a bloody one, but I prefer a bloody revolution that returns the wealth of the people to the people rather than the slow national death that the Repugnican Tea Party and its wingnutty allies have in store for us by ridiculously exclusively focusing now on extending the unelected Bush regime’s tax cuts for the rich above all else.
The rich have declared a class war upon the rest of us.
It’s war that they want; it’s war that they should get.
Yes, things are going to have to change if the United States of America is to survive, and yes, things are going to have to get a lot tougher for some Americans. But things should get a lot tougher for the most comfortable among us, not for the least comfortable among us.
It’s time to go after the root of our economic ills — the rich and their treasonous selfishness — and to destroy that root, once and for all.
We don’t have to just accept that those of us who already have the least have to sacrifice even more, while the traitors at the top get even more.
*These “heroes'” function is to preserve the socioeconomic status quo more than it is anything else. Some of them will be able to realize that, but others will not and will wish to remain loyal to their treasonous overlords. The latter thus will need to be dealt with accordingly. (Again, my preference is bloodlessness, but you have to crack some eggs to make an omelet.)