Class Warfare is Anti-American

Your Fair Share

We hear this term all the time by liberals, especially of the socialist persuasion. The question no one ever seems to ask is how much is fair? On the few occasions when this question has come up, it rarely gets a straight answer. There is good reason for this. The reason is that if they were to be honest what is fair is that they take everything from the rich or at least enough to make them equally poor with the rest of us. It is more about teaching them how it feels to be us than it is about actually helping the system, jobs, the government or anything else. The liberal, communist, socialists, of course can admit this or the game would be up.

Class warfare is very convenient for creating chaos as well as getting a majority of people behind your cause. The bell curve being what it is, it is clear that most people fall in the middle or middle lower income or at least consider themselves to be in these groups. This being the case it makes it very easy to get these people behind most any cause you have as long as you can make it seem that their particular problem is caused by those who have money. Any creative mind can do this fairly easily. All they have to do is mention how these people got their money by taking it from the rest of us, or worse they simply inherited it. Because they "took it from the rest of us, the reasoning goes that, that is is the reason we don't have what we want or what we "should have". This makes it very easy to get these people behind you.

As I see it many of the people who buy into this class warfare are sadly deficient of logic and common sense. Did Michael Jackson, get his 500 million dollars by forcibly or cohesively TAKING it from someone? It is clear this isn't the case. People WANTED to see him perform and as a result felt it was more than fair to pay upwards of $100.00 per ticket. When you look at any specific you see this is the case, unless you look at someone who was running a Ponzi scheme like Maddow, but these people are clearly the exception and usually don't make nearly so much money. Consider Bill Gates. Did he FORCE or COERCE anyone into buying windows? Maybe debatable, People could have bought Apple, or Linux, or Unix, or any number of other operating system; but then if they had it would still be said that those people did the forcing and coercing. The reality is people bought windows and the computers that had windows on them because the computers were cheaper, and because of the number and functionality of the applications that were available for Windows.

Most of these people got rich by buying low, having the foresight to know where the market was going, then selling high when demand was high, or by hard work and innovation; finding or creating a product that people wanted for a price they felt was reasonable. Consider the IPad. What a great and practical product. Though I personally see no use for the thing, clearly millions of other people have felt that it was worth it and were willing to pay $500-$800 to buy them. It is not and was not done with any thought of making Apple rich, or preventing them from becoming rich. It was about wanting to have the product they invented.

So again, I ask, what does "fair share" mean? Is it a set amount? Is it a set percentage? If it is a sliding scale where doe sit end? Who decides? Do the poor decide what the rate should be? How do they determine? What is their basis for evaluating what fair is? It seems nearly impossible to determine what fair is, and honestly I'm not sure why we need to? Since when has it been written that everything in life needs to be fair? Does anyone even ask anymore what fair actually means?

Does fair mean you get what everyone else gets or does it mean you get what you deserve. Liberals would tell us it means you get what everyone else gets. I would contend that it is the latter. Fair means you get what you deserve. it has nothing to do with what anyone else gets.

If this is the case then it would be clear, at the very least, that if you earned something you deserve it! so then others should not have any say in whether you keep it or not.

Another aspect to this is that it says that others should have the right to decide what happens to and with YOUR money. Well of course they are going to want all of YOUR money they can take. After all why work for money if you can legally just take it from people?

Sadly this has become the attitude in the United States now. You shouldn't get to choose if you're going to keep your money; others should decide that and that is just what is happening now. So here we are in a nation of takers. People who no longer want to work for what they get only take what others have worked hard to gain. Anyone who doesn't realize that Michael Jackson worked many many hours to accomplish what he did is fooling themselves. Anyone that doesn't realize that the CEO of a company like Microsoft hasn't work hard every day of their lives to make sure their company stays a leader is crazy or simply doesn't know what that sort of thing requires. I fear that in most cases people simply don't know what it requires to make something like that happen.

It is this complete lack of understanding that makes people such easy prey to class warfare and it is this ignorance that Socialists, Communists, liberals, and others of Obama's ilk depend on when they continually spout their rhetoric. We need to stand against this rhetoric and make it quite clear that we are tired of it and won't stand for it any more.

Rather than applaud and cheer when Obama and others make statements about class warfare we should boo them till they are ashamed to bring it up any more. The second they start they should be booed into silence. Class warfare may be acceptable rhetorical fare in communist countries but in the United States it MOST CERTAINLY IS NOT!