Income inequality and other stuff from the "Gimme Dat" party.

I ran across this rant and it was soo good that I shamelessly plagerized it, and added 

some stuff to it.

The Petulant boy king's new mantra is income inequality. Ironic isn’t it that the man and the party most responsible for income inequality are the ones who claim they want to fix it? Obummercare is destroying jobs so the new spin is that it’s a good thing. People shouldn’t have to work according to the Dimocrats and the LSM propaganda arm of the Dimocrat"Gimmedat" Party. Work ethic? Bah! Who needs it? Stay at home and sponge off the suckers who do work. That’s the position of Paul Krugman and the editorial board of the New York Slimes (Motto: All the news that fits our views). And now we find out that Those who strongly agreed that “the government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality” gave away $140 on average to charity. Among those who strongly disagreed, the average gift was $1,637. Link from Instapundit.

The 2008 election marked the return of progressive politics in America. For the first time in 16 years, Democrats won both houses of Congress and the White House. They wasted no time in articulating a progressive agenda they claimed would offset the Great Recession and turn America toward greater fairness and compassion. Lifting up the poor, decreasing inequality, and curbing runaway income gains among the wealthiest Americans ranked high among their stated priorities.
It has been five years. How has their project turned out?
Since January 2009, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has more than doubled. Last year brought the largest annual increase in the S&P 500 since the late 1990s. And the vast bulk of this sustained market surge has accrued to the extremely wealthy. According to New York University economist Edward Wolff, the top 10 percent of earners own 81 percent of stocks and mutual funds, 95 percent of financial securities, 92 percent of business equity, and 80 percent of non-home real estate. So it comes as little surprise that nearly all the real income growth that President Obama’s “recovery” has generated would flow to the wealthiest Americans. According to University of California, Berkeley, economist Emmanuel Saez, 95 percent of all recovery gains have accrued to the much-vilified “top 1 percent.”

At the same time, the poor have become even more desperate. The number of Americans receiving aid through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (known as food stamps) has increased by almost 50 percent since January 2009, from 32.2 million to 47.7 million. One in six citizens in the richest country in the world now rely on food aid from their government.

WTF? After five years of Obummernomics things have gotten worse? No surprise. Dimocrats love poor people. That’s why they favor policies that create so many of them.
The rich get richer because they continue to do the things that make them rich. The poor get poorer because they continue to do the things that make them poor.

Of course, every time the Dimocrats raise the minimum wage, they make entry level jobs more expensive, thus reducing the jobs for unskilled labor. Have you seen the unemployment numbers for black teenagers after five years of Obungler? Obumbler has been a disaster not only for black teenagers, but for black males. You’d think he would care more about his base.
But now, to defend Obummercare, liberals are telling people they’ll be better off not working. Un-frickin’-believable! No wonder there’s income inequality and it will remain that way as long as the Dimocrats deride having a work ethic. They’re telling future workers that having a work ethic is a waste of time.

Today, a lower percentage of Americans are in the workforce—63 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics—than at any time since the infamous days of Jimmy Carter.

Oblunder is the black Jimmah"The Djimmi" Carter so it’s understandable.

This has the effect of reducing the official unemployment rate, which led Binyamin Appelbaum of the New York Times to quip: “We are basically ‘recovering from the recession’ by reducing the share of Americans who participate in the labor force. Hurrah!”

I feel like I’m living in the world of Alice In Wonderland. All that’s missing is Thunder Rodent Thighs screaming, “Off with their heads!” That will happen after she’s elected crowned in 2016. I mean we had the first black president. Now we need the first woman president. to fix all the stuff that went wrong during the black presidency Long live the Queen!
Anyhoo, buried down in this article is this little tidbit.

Conservatives eager to reverse these facts naturally reach for their checkbooks. As I found in my 2006 book Who Really Cares, the average conservative household contributes significantly more to charity than does the average liberal household despite earning less income. According to the 1996 General Social Survey, those who strongly agreed that “the government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality” gave away $140 on average to charity. Among those who strongly disagreed, the average gift was $1,637.

I remember when Pope Albert I of the Church of AGW was running for VP his released tax forms showed that this “caring liberal” gave less money to charity than my mother. He was a millionaire. My mother was worth about $200K and had an income of around $18K. Remember, liberals are generous with other people’s money, not their money. Red states give more per capita to charity than blue states. Liberals really, really want to help the poor, but they want gummint to do it.
The reviled Chimpy McHalliburton Bushitler and his wife give a lot of money to chairity. Much more than comparable Dimocrat politicians. That’s what gummint is for.
Don’t work! Don’t worry! Be happy! The Dimocrats will keep you poor and dependent upon gummint. Just hope that enough suckers continue to work to support you and conservatives continue to give to charity. The liberals won’t.