Anyone who has an $800K house and drives an S-Type and can't afford a trip to Disney is probably living beyond their means. That person might well think they're rich but (in terms of net worth and/or long-term income potential) really be quite poor.

I don't think we're setting a particularly high bar for being considered rich. Many of the people who seem most bitter toward the poor are barely above median income themselves. Some of them are actually at or below median income, but expect to be above some day; studies have shown that people consistently vote according to their aspirations rather than their current circumstance. The ultra-rich probably do more for the poor, and spew less class rhetoric than the "merely" rich - unless it's their job, as would be the case for a politician or pseudo-journalist. That's why I think it comes down to fear. The people who are so rich that they'd be rich no matter what have no fear. The ones who are afraid are those who think that this or that policy will stand in the way of them personally getting/remaining rich (even if it improves fairness in general).

If you want a definition of which rich we're talking about, look at the sources that have already been cited. Look at the by-lines on the articles, or read the program in your TV Guide. Look in the congressional quarterly for examples of class rhetoric, then get a list of campaign contributors for the perpetrator. Ditto for the Republican or Libertarian websites. The evidence of anti-poor hatred, and the demographics of those espousing it, are readily apparent if you just look. We're here to discuss why it exists, not to swim in denial and diversion about whether it exists.



"ALL" is not the question. Get over it.

In order to discuss WHY it exists, one would have to BELIEVE it DOES exist. What you believe and I believe are two vastly different things. Your sentiments may be colored to spin in one dirrection, mine...in another. But Proof to the actually existance is not there...imo.

lol, there was never anything to "get over."

I'll be perusing any additional posts regarding this topic with mild interest.

SoCal,

Proof is something that can vary in someone's opinion. There is plenty of evidence at the websites Platypus provided. If there are magazines published and websites dedicated to the opinion of the "rich" and within those publications rhetoric which disparages the poor, that seems to be pretty good evidence that there exists a significant number of rich people who are bitter towards the poor. Maybe it's not enough to prove it to you, but where is your evidence of the contrary?

I think the only one striking out is you. Let me quote from your Capitalism Magazine, the magazine you seem to claim shows bitterness toward the poor.



What Capitalism Magazine decries is the same thing James Madison and Thomas Jefferson decried, public charity. There is a small minority of people who cannot take care of themselves. That is what friends, family and private charity are for. What you do is equate a political stand against public charity with "bitterness toward the poor. Why can't the supporters of the bitterness toward the poor argument actually point out widespread bitterness toward the poor instead of widespread sentiments against social welfare programs. They ain't the same thing. Strike three, ballgame over.

Excuse me while I go spit on the maid.

Allow me to play editor for a moment and add the words that are clearly missing:



Was that really the least offensive passage you could find on CapMag? I know you're motivated, I know you're capable of picking the one quote or factoid that supports your position from the hundred that refute it. Do you really think anyone believes that quote is representative of what someone would find if they were to do an honest survey of the material available? You must not have very much respect for your fellow ADers...but we knew that. Anyone who actually goes to the site, or to any of hundreds which are similar, with an open mind can form their own opinion...not only about which way the class-hate is flowing, but about your veracity.

BTW, flattery will get you nowere.

Actually I have given one more quote than you have from your source. Since, as you say, there are one-hundred quotes from your source showing bitterness to the poor give me three of them.

Yep, liberals enjoy labeling conservative talk radio as hate radio, and stands against public charity as bitterness toward the poor. Anyone with a truly open mind would realize you can have an anti-welfare position without feeling animosity toward the poor. Let me quote an article of Thomas Sowell's I found in Capitalism Magazine:

It is a very different story for those on the left whose goal is either a self-righteous sense of superiority or the political power with which to express their self-infatuation by imposing their vision on others. Here the poor are a means to an end. These kinds of leftists show remarkably little interest in the creation of wealth, which has raised living standards for the poor, as compared to their obsession with redistribution, which has not.

These kinds of leftists concentrate on inequalities that can be dealt with by turning money and power over to people like themselves. These kinds of leftists will never desert the cause that serves them so well, no matter how badly it serves others.

It is a very different story for those on the left whose goal is either a self-righteous sense of superiority or the political power with which to express their self-infatuation by imposing their vision on others. Here the poor are a means to an end. These kinds of leftists show remarkably little interest in the creation of wealth, which has raised living standards for the poor, as compared to their obsession with redistribution, which has not.

These kinds of leftists concentrate on inequalities that can be dealt with by turning money and power over to people like themselves. These kinds of leftists will never desert the cause that serves them so well, no matter how badly it serves others. (end of quote)

I would argue it is leftist politicians (I guess quite a few of them are admittedly rich) that show contempt for the poor.

Once again, give me three of these one hundred quotes, in Capitalism Magazine, that show bitterness toward the poor.

OK, as distasteful as it is to slog through all that dreck to find examples, when I know that anything short of "I hate poor people" will be explained away as something other than bitterness, here are three examples (clarification within parentheses is mine):

• In essence, forced redistribution of wealth (i.e. anything but per-use fees) punishes those who are ambitious, productive, successful and self-responsible, while rewarding the opposite (i.e. the beneficiaries are assumed to be unambitious, unproductive, and irresponsible) -- from Slavery by Taxation
• those attracted by a welfare state (i.e. anything but a Randian dystopia) are chronically lazy to begin with -- from Immigration, Moochers, and the Welfare State
• A thug who mugs people in the park but then gives his loot to the poor is still a thief violating people’s rights. No matter what sound bites or false claims the government uses to rationalize Social Security, its essential nature remains unchanged. It is a fraudulent Ponzi scheme that is coercively imposed on all of its victims. Social Security has been a leech on the wallets of Americans for over sixty years. -- from End the Fraudulent Social Security Program Now

The last example (I actually agree with parts of it BTW) might not seem directly indicative of bitterness toward the poor, but it feeds straight into the perception of the government and the recipients of services it provides as thugs, thieves, muggers, etc. The rhetoric is meant to sound like crack-head welfare moms are literally holding guns to people's heads, forcing them to hand over money. As I pointed out, nobody comes right out and says they're afraid of becoming poor themselves, in so many words. Instead, they stress the importance of capitalism (plutocracy), freedom (abrogation of social responsibility) and entrepreneurship (being born rich). Half the battle is over the language itself, and the laissez-fairies have been winning that part through sheer repetition. If you scrape away the veneer of linguistic abuse, though, the message comes through loud and clear. The people who write these articles are positively terrified that they might have to compete on merit instead of either being or sucking up to the already-rich.

As you people with an open mind can see,Capitalism Magazine is attacking socialism (Isn't that surprising from something labeled Capitalism Magazine) not showing bitterness toward the poor.

First example:



Yes, redistribution of wealth does reward unambitious, unproductive, unsuccessful and irresponsible people. There is a positive correlation between ambition, responsibility, producyivity, success and wealth. Notice that this quote does not state that all those punished have all the positive qualities listed nor that all that are rewarded have the negative qualities listed.

Platypus's second example is not a quote from the author of the article it is his own strange interpretation of an article that basically praises the contributions of immigrants to America (most of whom happen to be poor).

His third example:



What this example is of contempt for a government distribution plan. In other words, once again, Capitalism Magazine is attacking socialism (WOW,what a shock!) Yes, myself and this author both hold that transfer payments are nothing more than legalized theft. I see no contempt for the poor in this. In fact SS is not even a means based program (though some benefits are taxable to those with higher incomes), rich and poor alike receive SS. The thug in this case is the government, not the poor.

This is what socialists label contempt for the poor, those who oppose socialism.

To think out of his hundred examples these were the best three.

I had a very long winded post written up yesterday detailing how the rich and middle income earners of this country don't hate the poor. They may not associate with the poor, but that doesn't equate to hate.

The bottom line of the entire exercise is captured by Platy's quote.

I do have to confess Platy, I can't understand how you acknowledge that it is NOT about the "rich" hating the poor above, but then continue to use that as an argument in later posts.

It just sounds like the "people verses the power" politick.

For the most part, I think the opposite is true - the poor and middle class hate the rich.

How about this: The rich hate the stereotypical poor person--welfare dependent, crack-smoking couch potatoes that keep having kids while on the public dole; and the poor hate the stereotypical rich person--ala Ken Lay, Michael Milliken and their ilk, the big bosses with plenty of everything who hold the livelihoods of the little people in their hands, cook the books, spend pensions on high risk stock transactions, and inordinately influence politicians. We hate the stereotypes and their bad behavior.

When it gets down to everyday reality, we have our likes and dislikes of individuals but we are more concerned with the way they treat us than whether they have money or not. Their income (or lack of one) is a secondary consideration.

Perhaps it is stereotyping, but I do occasionally turn on talk radio, and listen to all those "angry white men" that dominate the airwaves, or Fox news when I can stomach it, and programs like O'Rielly or Hannity and Colms. What strikes me every time is thier total hatred or bitterness to those less fortunate than themselves. They characterize everyone that the goverment gives any money too (excluding of course, the obvious benefits our goverment gives to the rich, which would fill another thread) as irresponsible crack addicted baby factories, and since I work almost exclusively with the poor, in both my private businesses and and my "day job"- I find it extremely insulting. I run across an occasional loser, don't get me wrong, but most are victims of circumstance, and with a little help, will at least make it to the middle class strata of our society.

I think it is silly to think that the large portion of the rich and upper middle class in this country DON'T resent the poor and in fact do everything they can to make thier life harder if they get the opportunity, politics-wise (on an individual basis, I am sure poeple are more merciful, at least I hope so).

I think that saying it is a "war against socialism" is also a smoke screen for thier hate and bitterness as well. IT IS GOOD BUSINESS TO KEEP A CERTAIN STANDARD OF LIVING FOR EVERYONE IN A COUNTRY!!! I can not make this point often enough or loud enough sometimes. If we cut off all aid to all poor poeple in this country, everyone living below the goverment defined poverty line, it would horribly contrain the ability to do business in nearly every place in the country.

There is a big difference between attacking social welfare programs and attacking the poor. I am not going to debate the efficiency of public welfare programs here. I would also like to see Hannitty, or Limbaugh, quotes that show bitterness toward the poor. I know some people find this hard to believe, but it is possible to be a conservative, or libertarian, and not hate the poor.

Your sentence in CAPS would be a good topic for another thread.

CR, I feel that you are stereotypying just a tad. Also, no one WANTS to take ALL aid to all poor people away, and that was basically what you were trying to say that the RICH want to do.

Homeless people and rich people work harder in different ways.

A homeless person's day: Wake up in strange cold/hot place outside, need to do some kind of bodily hygiene--Where? Breakfast out of a dumpter how many searches does it take to find a discarded half eaten sandwich and who REALLY wants to do that? Dental problems- who wants to pull their own teeth? That's hard work right there. Walk for miles a day perhaps to labor force or panhandling. Necessary items such as razors or chapstick or toilet paper don't come cheap unless donated or stolen.Trying not to get caught stealing just so you can look half way decent is a tremendous burden and bad kharma but you have to do what you have to do. Prostitution- enough said. Trying to block out the nasty looks--tough right there. Trying to avoid police for loitering when exhausted from a days walk. A weekly splurge at a cheap hotel $35.00 to sleep in a comfortable bed one night. Trying to find a new alley to sleep in every night before making way to somewhere hoping things will get better.

Rich person's day: wake early read newspaper or watch depressing news of the day. Off to work in an hour and half traffic. Cell phone goes out. The intra personal relations hoops you have to go through to get that account. Those lunches on the companys visa is really hitting the stomach that's one hour at the gym a day. The schmoozing with the guy with bad breath and manners. Thank god for that 4 year business degree is needed to read the mutual fund company perspectitis and loop holes abound! Get home and find the new maid has stolen the family jewelry have to fire her. Pick up the kids form extra-curricular activities drop them off at home and find extra-curricular time of own. Mother in law is coming to live as can't afford nursing home. Keeping track of credit card, mortgage, car insurance payments. Sending out the birthday cards to everyone. Parties you HAVE to go to when a book would be more enjoyable.

Do you think these two types of people would want to trade places? And if so could they live with it?

Sometimes people forget the majority of the homeless are one or more of the following: mentally ill, may have low IQ's, homeless due to natural disaster and no homeowner insurance, bad choices or escaping abuse. I know this next statement is going to sound harsh but it's a reality... employers generally don't hire ugly people. Of course it's not the fault of the person it is of society.

True, some homeless are criminals trying to evade the law.

But when you see the other picture of corporate scandal issues who needs to be homeless to be degenerates.

mrbluiis - please avoid posting two posts in a row. If you were the last person to post and you have more to add, you merely need to go in & edit your last post. If 12 hours have passed, you may make a new one because your edit window will have closed. Thanks.