|
|||
 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
 |
|||
|
|
|
|
 | ||||
 | ||||
| A key gem from this debate is that it is actually statism (and not capitalism) that is the primary cause of economic inequality/disparity -- the primary driver of the gap between the rich and the poor. Because of really bad thinking, one of the questioners -- Karen Tumulty of The Washington Post -- would/could not mentally grasp that fact, which was on display for her at least a half a dozen times before she asked her direct question about income inequality. The idea that big and powerful, central governments -- as part of being so big and powerful -- can and do get away with picking winners and losers in a market, was repeated several times. At one point, a question was taken from the audience regarding small, community banks failing to give out small business loans and, in his answer, Mitt Romney illustrated the ability of big government to make things better for the well-connected, while making it worse for everyone else (i.e., statism as the primary cause of economic disparity). He said that the regulation in Dodd-Frank can be handled by big banks who put literally hundreds of lawyers on their payroll, but at the same time is totally destructive of small banks -- which do not have the resources to come into compliance with such 1000+-page regulations. And even her own 'gotcha' question to Gov. Perry (about Solyndra) highlights the fact -- if you make the minimum mental effort required in order to integrate facts -- that big governments funnel money away from regular people (taxpayers) to give it to the rich and pandering cronies. Apparently, Karen Tumulty's moral failing as a human being is that she doesn't even make the minimum mental effort required in order to integrate the facts that are right in front of her own eyes (at a simple discussion across a table). Ed p.s. .... And Michelle Bachmann summed up the housing crisis really well. ... And Mitt Romney revealed his true colors as following in McCain's shoes and being merely another slow-death version of 'Obama-lite' (as Newt Gingrich, referring to a page in Romney's 59-point plan, astutely brought attention to). ... And Ronald Reagan's worst-ever presidential moment (his worst argument/worst thinking) was played back in a clip. ... And Santorum's argument against Cain's 9-9-9 plan is a fallacy. And David Cote (CEO, Honeywell) said that 20 years ago, 1 billion folks engaged in a global economy, and that now (20 years later), 4 billion folks do! | ||||
| ||||
 |
 |
|
 |
|
