Two for a Monday

Dan sends this link to a daring fireball comment on the inequity of pay basically throws America into the banana republic realm of inequities. I think I've talked about (and linked to articles) showing this point (although, not in those terms). So, if you don't want to read the articles, I'll just quote this juicy tidbit:

The richest 0.1 percent of taxpayers would get a tax cut of $61,000 from President Obama. They would get $370,000 from Republicans, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. And that provides only a modest economic stimulus, because the rich are less likely to spend their tax savings.

To point out the inequity, let's restate that the $370,000 is the tax cut, not their income level. At the end of the fireball blurb, he asks how so many can support policies that support so few. The answer is easy. I've linked before to an article on how out of tune with reality most people's perception of pay and income is, and everybody believes they'll be rich someday.

It's being floated around in the twitter-verse, Non-Sequitor nails it. That is, talks about the current talking points (well, shouting points) and shows just how incredibly bad it would be if those talking points were implemented. History, it's a bitch. No wonder the Texas School Board went on a rewriting campaign last year. Also, speaking of rewriting, along a similar vein there's this story that basically shows the point of "only the treacherous suspect treachery." Remember my comment about how a whole bunch of things would only come out after the election? Like how Ohio had the 5th fastest growing economy last year, but Strickland still was pilloried as not doing anything for the economy. Or how employment finally reached a level of "treading water" unlike how the economy was portrayed in the election. And here, I'll admit, the turn around isn't going fast enough, but it's a lie to say it's not there.