Life isn’t fair

Erika Johnson at Hot Air discusses Elizabeth Warren’s speech last night:

There is so much material here, I don’t even know where to begin, so I’ll just pick out a few key lines and go from there.

“We fought to level the playing field before.  About a century ago when corrosive greed threatened our economy and our way of life…” Greed. Oh, greed. You call it greed, I call it rational self-interest; but whatever you want to call it, one thing is certain: The profit motive, which all human beings share, by the way, is the driving force behind everything we have. Individuals trying to provide for themselves and for their families are what continually creates prosperity, a.k.a., economic growth, and an individual’s personal wealth is an indicator of how successful they’ve been in providing a good or service upon which other people voluntarily place a lot of value. How do corporations become corporations, Ms. Warren? I might patronize the hair salon or the car wash once a month or so, and these small businesses are important, to be sure. But “oil companies” and “investment banks” have so much money because I use their services every single day. I drive to work and accrue interest in my savings account all time time, just like most Americans do — and these are all voluntary, mutually beneficial transactions. And what’s more, these large corporations also provide huge numbers of jobs as well as government revenue. Please get off your high horse and quit acting like the life choices of the CEO of the oil company are somehow ignoble compared to those of the hair stylist.

“The Republican vision is clear — ‘I got mine.  The rest of you are on your own.’ Republicans say they don’t believe in government. Sure, they do. They believe in government to help themselves and their powerful friends.” Uhm, why yes actually, I am just on my way to play poker with the corporate emperors of the universe, along with the rest of Republican party. …What the what? Who are these ‘powerful friends’ I’m supposed to have, exactly, and why am I unable to divorce my motives from their oh-so-greedy wishes? News flash: I do not have powerful friends. I vote Republican because I want to lessen the impregnable power of the federal bureaucracy and create more opportunities for myself and my fellow Americans. That is all.

“People feel like the system is rigged against them, and here is the painful part, they’re right.  The system is rigged. …Wall Street CEOs, the same ones the direct our economy and destroyed millions of jobs still strut around Congress, no shame, demanding favors, and acting like we should thank them.” Blergh. This is a perfect manifestation of my precise problem with Elizabeth Warren and her “consumer financial protectin’” ilk. Yes, I grant you, the system is kind of rigged. But why are we blaming Wall Street for rent-seeking, when the metastasized federal government is what’s affording them the opportunity to rent-seek? People will always look for a way to beat out their competition, and if that includes courting favors from the government and crony capitalism, they will. This isn’t rocket science. Federal busybodies trying to incentivize the financial sector into doing things they wanted to see happen based on their political agenda was what caused the financial crisis. Everybody has an agenda — but only the government can enforce theirs through fiat without fighting the natural regulator of free-market competition. Elizabeth Warren was a big supporter of the Occupy Movement, and I made this point right when the Occupy protests first broke out — stop directing your ire at the symptoms and instead direct it at the disease.

And finally, as to the Elizabeth Warren’s claim that the Romney/Ryan ticket doesn’t care about the middle class — doesn’t anybody at that convention realize that Barack Obama’s proposal to hike taxes on America’s wealthiest earners is an absolute farce that cannot hope to pay for the level of government he wants to keep going? I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!

So much of modern leftist ideology is based upon the idea of fairness. There is nothing inherently wrong with that because fairness is a worthy ideal. The problem comes from trying to define “fair.”

Life is not fair. If it was then we would all be identical. While (ideally) we may all be equal under the law, we are not all equal. Some of use are bigger, faster, smarter and/or stronger than others. Some are better looking. A lucky few choose the right parents and are born wealthy.

Government cannot create equality. In can, however, prohibit the more egregious forms of discrimination. Government cannot guarantee equality of opportunity but it can do something about providing opportunity to everyone.

In some places your entire life is basically predetermined at birth. If you are born poor you will always be poor. Your tribe, race or caste controls the choices available to you.

Here in this country your options may be limited by who your parents are but they do not control your life. An Ivy League education was not really an option for me, but that didn’t prevent me from getting an education. I didn’t inherit anything but my genes but just because I couldn’t rise to the top doesn’t mean I couldn’t rise above my parents.

Government cannot legislate prosperity. All it can do is maintain a physical, legal and economic infrastructure that allows prosperity to take place. That includes penalizing cheaters and preventing unfair competition.

But referees are there to enforce the rules, not choose the winners.

This entry was posted in Democratic Party, Economy and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

40 Responses to Life isn’t fair

  1. votermom says:

    Thomas Bergeron lives.

  2. That was a good rebuttal in that article to what was, I hate to admit it, a speech that will resonate. Warren can make an argument that sells, I’ll give her that. I don’t buy it, but plenty will. I’m glad to see the right finally take on that argument that small government is a step in addressing corruption and crony capitalism. For thelongest time in the 90s and early 2000s they were all about reckless deregulation and giving voice to everybody’s gripe about high taxes. But there’s more to the small government argument than that, and plenty that will appeal to moderate liberal Democrats. Nothing will appeal to Obamacrats, of course, but more Obama flesh.

  3. SHV says:

    “That includes penalizing cheaters and preventing unfair competition.

    But referees are there to enforce the rules,”
    With Obama, the cheaters are his biggest donors. He and Holder run a game with no penalties. The latest was no prosecution of Goldman for mortgage/securities fraud.

  4. myiq2xu says:

    BuzzFeed Objects To Nasty Sexual Slur Directed at Sandra Fluke;
    When They Find Out It Was Actually Directed At Dana Loesch, Suddenly, It’s Not Worthy of Remark or Reprinting

    If you can follow this, someone Tweeted to Dana Loesch that she should s*** a f** d*** or something like that. As Andrew Breitbart used to do, she RT’d it to broadcast the unhinged hatred and breathtaking hypocrisy of the left.

    Well, BuzzFeed, being incompetent, thought that was being RT’d about Sandra Fluke, and made a big stink about it. “Hate” and such.

    When it was pointed out to them that was actually directed against Dana Loesch, they simply deleted it from the story, without revealing that it had been uttered by someone on the left towards a woman on the right.

    You see? It was hateful and worthy of mass repudiation when directed at Sandra Fluke; when it turned out to be directed at Dana Loesch, it promptly ceased being worthy of rebuke, or even worthy of mention.

    Here’s the extent of their correction: “We’ve removed a Tweet that was aimed at someone other than Fluke.” No acknowledgement whatsoever that it undermined the Narrative they were trying to get going.

    • wmcb says:

      Not a one of them gives a shit about misogyny. Any more than they give a shit about racism. It’s a handy and effective political bludgeon, a means to power, nothing more.

  5. Lulu says:

    The preference cascade grows. It is given a kick by of all people Bob Woodward. The lame stream media cannot ignore it because it is “Bob Woodward!!!”. CNN has an article up after ABC broke it, and the WaPo’s Rubin has an especially mean (and truthful) recitation of the quotes. She ends with “It is not merely a portrait of a man who failed in his most critical domestic challenge; it is a portrait of someone unable to do the job. By putting meat on the bones of the Republicans’ arguments, Woodward, maybe more than Jerusalem and God, has created a whole new problem for the president’s effort to persuade voters to keep him on for four more years.” I wonder if the Obama campaign thinks it is fair that the book quotes were released on the day of his coronation?

  6. Oswald says:


    Verdict is in: Obama levels more personal attacks

    A crabby, negative campaign that has been more about misleading and marginal controversies than the major challenges facing the country? Barack Obama and Mitt Romney can both claim parenthood of this ugly child.

    But there is a particular category of the 2012 race to the low road in which the two sides are not competing on equal terms: Obama and his top campaign aides have engaged far more frequently in character attacks and personal insults than the Romney campaign.

    With a few exceptions, Romney has maintained that Obama is a bad president who has turned to desperate tactics to try to save himself. But Romney has not made the case that Obama is a bad person, nor made a sustained critique of his morality a central feature of his campaign.

    Obama, who first sprang to national attention with an appeal to civility, has made these kind of attacks central to his strategy. The argument, by implication from Obama and directly from his surrogates, is not merely that Romney is the wrong choice for president but that there is something fundamentally wrong with him.

    • Lulu says:

      What the hell is going on? First occasional negative stories about Obama and his rotten administration and campaign. God and Jerusalem and other absurdities, the inability to fill up a stadium, Woodward yanking the scab off with a leaked book, and now Politico stating the obvious. Is there a full moon or something?

    • angienc says:

      While it pisses me off to no end that pointing out Obama’s failures to do the job and/or keep his campaign promises is considered “negative campaigning” I’m very glad that at least they are pointing out the difference between the Romney “attack ads” and Obama’s. They must be breaking out the winter coats in hell.

  7. Oswald says:

    Drew Peterson found guilty of murder.

  8. yttik says:

    “So much of modern leftist ideology is based upon the idea of fairness.”

    I know! So much of it sounds like it’s coming from little kids too, “it’s not fair you won’t buy me that! It’s not fair I have to clean my room!”

    I once told a kid, “what’s fair is that you have a safe home, food to eat, and a school to go to.” That’s it! You aren’t entitled to anything else. Unfair is constantly abusing your parents because you think you’re entitled to have exactly the same as everybody else. The thing is, the grass is always greener on the other side of the septic system. You don’t walk in somebody elses shoes, so you have no right to compare yourself to them.

  9. angienc says:

    This woman is sophomoric — she actually teaches law at Harvard & pretends to not understand Romney’s “Corporations are people” statement (which,btw OUT OF CONTEXT! OUT OF CONTEXT! OUT OF CONTEXT!) and cries about people having hearts, living & dying, blah, blah, blah in a bid to appeal to the lowest information voter imaginable (aka Obama supporters). Blergh.

  10. HELENK says:

    you tube ad by Herman Cain about Godgate has been pulled down by the user

    • HELENK says:

      cancel that
      you can get the ad through the drudge report and it is Alan West not herman cain, I apologize for my stupidity

  11. HELENK says:

    Earth Wind and Fire will not perform at Democratic convention tonight due to venue change; ‘physical footprint’ too big for arena – @NBCNews

    1 hour ago by editor

  12. yttik says:

    “There is nothing inherently wrong with that because fairness is a worthy ideal.”

    I used to believe that, but I don’t anymore. Today I think there really is something inherently wrong with fairness and it’s not a worthy ideal. For one thing it forces you to compare yourself to others. You have to make sure things are fair, right? So not only do you constantly focus on what others have and you don’t, you now have to butt into other people’s business to find out what they got. Always, you’re going to feel like a second class citizen because you’ll find something they have and you don’t.

    All those old fashioned ideals, integrity, justice, the golden rule, those are great values to have, but fairness, no. “Fairness” hurts people.

  13. HELENK says:

    this is one powerful ad

    • lyn5 says:

      HelenK, where do you find this stuff? I always value your links. You have a good eye!

      • HELENK says:

        when i see things that make me think, I link them so that others may see them. now that I am retired I have more time then most

  14. you’ve got to watch this—“Dem delegates say BAN CORPORATE PROFITS” the choom gang has taken over. Time to move to Canada….

Comments are closed.