My view: Class warfare is Anti-American: Time to preserve American Dream


Return To Article
  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 16, 2011 1:01 p.m.

    To "10CC | 10:01 p.m." actually I can.

    Capitalism is the lifeblood of those nations that in Europe that you mention, along with China.

    Capitalism created the middleclass in Europe over 400 years ago.

    Capitalism historically has been the best system for bringing people out of poverty.

    Lets look at Chile. Once the government divested itself of major industry, they bloomed.

    Before we had the big push of Socialism within our own government, we had greater income equality than we currently have.

    The US leads the World in innovations and research, you don't see that in the countries where failure is rewarded.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 15, 2011 10:01 p.m.


    Using the broadest definition conservatives have provided us, Socialism is merely any nation with higher taxes and more government regulation than the US. Well, there are many examples where quality of life, economic mobility, economic freedom and equality of opportunity have surpassed the US: Canada (not European), Germany, Finland (which is a perrenial top 3 nation in education), Sweden, etc.

    If you want to use the definition of Socialism leftists have used historically, Cuba does 2 things fairly well - healthcare and education - and everything else is a miserable disaster. But no Americans are calling for the elimination of private property, so that comparison is moot. "Everyone turn in your IPods for redistribution". Yeah, right.

    Your question can be cynically reciprocated - how has gun control and lack of government regulation benefitted Somalia?

    A more serious question, what nations are more capitalistic than the US? Conservative darling Chile? Major social unrest, after 25 years of brutal dictatorship. Guatemala? Very low taxes on the rich. Cayman Islands? Tax haven, but nothing else. Remember, China's government went on a stimulus binge of $2Trillion, compared to our $700B.

    I can answer your question, but I'm afraid you can't, reversed.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Nov. 15, 2011 9:46 a.m.

    To "10CC | 9:21 p.m." ok, if socialism is so great, name one nation that has fully tried out socialism that has had the economic prosperity that the US has been able to have.

    To say that Airbus is doing well against Boeing is wrong because that is a capitalist company working within socialist nations. There are some government that own a portion of the company, but the majority of the company is owned by private companies and stockholders.

    You are living the liberal lie. The countries that have significant socialist policies are living off the work of the capitalists within those societies.

    So, if socialism is so great, why did Russia fail? Why is Cuba so poor? Why is it that China wasn't much of an economic power until they adopted Capitalism?

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    Nov. 15, 2011 7:30 a.m.

    There is a widespread feeling in this country that our political system simply does not work any longer.

    Nearly all of our leaders seem to be wealthy elitists that are rapidly becoming wealthier. Today, the average net worth for a member of Congress is approximately 3.8 million dollars, and the collective net worth of all of the members of Congress increased by 25 percent between 2008 and 2010.

    It would be one thing is they were accumulating all of this wealth legitimately. However, it is just not right for members of Congress to use government secrets and inside information that is not available to the general public to make huge profits in the stock market.

    If any of the rest of us engage in insider trading, it could get us thrown into jail.

    But as a recent CNBC article noted, members of Congress can pretty much get away with it as much as they want to.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    Nov. 15, 2011 7:28 a.m.

    How Can The American People Ever Trust Congress Again After Learning Of The Rampant Insider Trading That Has Been Going On?

    Will the shocking insider trading revelations that have come to light in recent days finally be enough to motivate the American people to start throwing all of the con men and charlatans out of Congress?

    Members of Congress have been using secrets that they have learned during the course of their duties to make huge amounts of money in the stock market. If you can believe it, during the financial crisis of 2008 some members of Congress were making huge stock moves that would only pay off if the stock market crashed really hard at a time when they should have been focusing on creating legislation that would help the U.S. financial system survive.

    It is hard not to feel sick after learning how low some of our leaders have stooped to enrich themselves. Now that the American people are learning the truth, how can they ever trust Congress again?

  • Christy Beaverton, OR
    Nov. 14, 2011 9:51 p.m.

    "We must work within the current economic model to address the challenges we face."


    What's that saying? Doing the same thing, over and over, and expecting different results is the definition of insanity?

    Or is it that Ms. Love is advocating for more of the same?

    Trickle down economics is a proven failure.

    The OWS protesters don't want a free handout from the rich. We want out jobs back from India. We want Citizens United repealed. We don't want lobbyists buying our politicians. We don't want tax laws passed that only benefit the top 1 or 2%.

    I want to know who thinks it's ok that a CEO (with tax breaks the rest of us don't get) make 400 times what his average worker makes when we have 1 in 6 Americans living in poverty? And don't give me that malarkey that the poor aren't 'poor' because they have refrigerators and sneakers.

    I want to know who thinks it's ok for the people on Wall Street who crashed our economy, and were then bailed out by our tax dollars, to receive millions in bonuses after the fact? But we have to raise the S.S. eligibility age?


  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 14, 2011 9:21 p.m.


    Conservatives repeatedly paint themselves into a fallacy. Taxation and government regulation are socialism, and socialism always results in laziness, lack of productivity, economic failure. There is no incentive to do anything productive or to strive toward excellence. These are conservative articles of faith, unquestioned pillars of truth and wisdom.

    Except nobody told the engineers and workers at Airbus, who are soundly whipping Boeing in the market with an excellent product. Evidently the economy of Canada didn't get the memo, as they surpass the US in economic freedom, with a balanced budget (but higher taxes on upper classes).

    Conservative mythology continues, unabated, reality not withstanding.

  • Salsero Provo, UT
    Nov. 14, 2011 7:16 p.m.

    When the wealthy and powerful lobby to reduce their responsibility and protect their position in America at the expense of the Middle Class, they see it as a normal outgrowth of their American rights. However, they neglect to acknowledge that protecting their position of special interest necessitates the reduction of opportunity for others not of their economic class.

    When people point out the unfairness of the system, they yell, "class warfare!" They refuse to see the warfare made upon the Middle Class in order to protect their interests. In order to maintain their economic and political strength, they attempt to reduce the economic and political opportunities of those outside their world.

    The Occupy Wall Street message is: The system is rigged against the Middle Class and people are being pushed out of the Middle Class and into poverty because their interests are not seen as worthy by the rich and powerful. The wealthy (generally speaking) have gamed the system to their advantage and fight to maintain the inequities lest they give-up some of what they've acquired.

    Many of the ultra-rich now see that they don't need America anymore because they have moved onto a global society of "haves".

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Nov. 14, 2011 7:09 p.m.


    "...It doesn't matter if the referee can be trusted or not, having a referee to enforce the rules is the key factor...".

    So, if the "referee" has been bribed, the bribe is not a key factor?

  • Steven Harper Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 14, 2011 4:20 p.m.

    As someone who was present & heard the president speak at the MLK Memorial Dedication let me be perfectly clear: Mia Love's opening claim is fictitious. She made it up to make her points about being anti-socialist and all the rest of the right wing agenda she espouses. While not a fan of Occupy, they have never claimed to want to murder the rich! While Love's fabrications & exaggerations might endear her to an extremist segment of Utah's voters, the majority can easily see her spurious & unwarranted claims for what they are. The opening salvo of a run against the founders of the Patrick Henry Caucus who are already in the 4th district race. She's trying to establish her extremist bona fides. Good luck to any Democrat who is willing to jump in and tell the truth.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Nov. 14, 2011 3:56 p.m.

    To "There You Go Again | 2:04 p.m." you are wrong. It doesn't matter if the referee can be trusted or not, having a referee to enforce the rules is the key factor, otherwise you have anarchy, which was my original point.

    The problem is that even under ideal conditions, socialism does not work. Supposing that there is no corruption at the highest levels, the workers have no incentive to do better or to work harder. If there is no incentive for working or producing, things will stagnate.

    With capitalism, if you stagnate, you will be overtaken by somebody with better ideas.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Nov. 14, 2011 2:04 p.m.


    "...capitalism requires a referee...".

    Capitalism requires a referee that "winners" and "losers" can trust.

    "...problems are not due to capitalism, but to corruption...".

    Non-believers would simply counter: problems are not due to socialism, but to corruption.

    How do you bring two sides together when neither side has any trust for a "referees'" decision, let alone trust in each other?

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Nov. 14, 2011 10:37 a.m.

    To "LDS Liberal | 9:50 a.m." ok, lets look at what you said, and see if we can make sense.

    You said that "Governments are referees, not the players on the court." Yet you support a socialist aspect to government. If there is socialism, then there WILL BE government run businesses, or else the government will have a large interest in the businesses.

    I hate to tell you this, but the only system where the government is only a referee is pure Capitalism. (Your examples of pure capitalism are wrong. First, Mogadishu is the capital of Somalia, and that is Anarchy with no referee, capitalism requires a referee. Columbia is not purely capitalist, it is more capitalist than most South American nations. Their problems are not due to capitalism, but to corruption.)

    So again, if governments are only referees, how can you support socialism? Socialism to any degree, results in the government becoming a player on the court.

  • DeltaFoxtrot West Valley, UT
    Nov. 14, 2011 10:16 a.m.

    @LDS Liberal: What do you call it when business owns and operates the government?

    Our Captains of Industry don't care about the good of this country, they only care about the good of themselves.

    With great power comes great responsibility, and the super rich aren't being responsible.

    What was it that Christ said about being a good steward?

    Our corporate leaders have quite literally sold the future of this nation in order to make another buck.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 14, 2011 9:50 a.m.

    RedShirt | 9:05 a.m. Nov. 14, 2011
    USS Enterprise, UT
    Ok liberals, since you have collectively decided that capitalism is bad and evil, tell us, what is the alternative?

    I know that many of you want a capitalist-socialist system, but here is the problem with that. Why do you need the capitalism portion, why can't the socialist portion work on its own?


    Pure capitalism without out Government regulations best exampled by Mogadishu, Somalia, and Columbia.

    Pure Socialsm would mean the Government then owns and operates the business.

    Capital-Socialist economies such as Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, Korea, ect. mean that Businesses are heavily regulated by the Government so they can't exploit the citizens, and are allowed to be privately owned and operated.

    Governments are referees, not the players on the court.
    They are not meant to run businesses, only make things fair for all the players.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 14, 2011 9:05 a.m.

    Ok liberals, since you have collectively decided that capitalism is bad and evil, tell us, what is the alternative?

    I know that many of you want a capitalist-socialist system, but here is the problem with that. Why do you need the capitalism portion, why can't the socialist portion work on its own?

  • Ok Salt Lake City, Utah
    Nov. 14, 2011 7:16 a.m.

    Jon Huntsman is misleading people when he speaks of the wonders of his flat Utah tax. But then, he is the former governor who walked away from his job and left us with Gary Herbert. He is not a good choice for president.

  • Digbads South Jordan, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 10:28 p.m.

    Wow, a potential candidate for the 4th district that appears to be someone I can support!

  • watcher@75 SMITHFIELD, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 7:21 p.m.

    Mia Love, your article was spot on. We are a nation of Americans free to work as hard as we want. Some believe wealth has to do with an abundance of money. Wealth is actually the right to work, to enjoy labor, and live within the means one's labor provides. Excessive living, huge credit, greed exhibited by some rich and some poor coveting the rich have weakened our economy. Let's quit fighting amongst ourselves and restore the American Dream that has sparked a patriotism most profound, even in the hearts of those who yearn to be American.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 6:06 p.m.

    I think it's safe to say Mia Love and the OWS protesters have a common goal of America not becoming another Haiti.

    However, the protesters think it's important to point out our deteriorating distribution of income. The CIA ranks nations' economic (and hence political) stability using a ranking called the GINI coefficient, which is a measure of income distribution. nations where there are large extremes in income and wealth tend to be less stable.

    Well, the US ranking has been sliding toward third world status.

    Is it anti-American to point that out?

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Nov. 13, 2011 5:16 p.m.

    OWS has succeeded on one level at least. They have diverted the obsession with the deficit (which needs to be addressed long term) to jobs, excesses of Wall Street/banking system, high cost of tuition etc.

    Mia fails to recognize that the growing inequality in this country is a threat to the American Dream, and the failure to recognize that will create conditions where the middle class disappears. Capitalism works where corruption is not allowed to flourish, where money does not equal power.

    "The real difference between democracy and oligarchy is poverty and wealth. Wherever men rule by reason of their wealth, whether they be few of many, that is an oligarchy, and where the poor rule, that is democracy."

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 5:14 p.m.

    @spark | 11:10 a.m. Nov. 13, 2011
    Saratoga Springs, UT

    I know many small business owners who would like to grow their businesses and hire more people, but their taxes are too high.


    So then,
    You must be part of the 99% -- and support the OWS movement.

    Small businesses don't get the tax breaks and subsidezes that the uber-wealthy Corporations get. Most of them not only never pay a single penny in taxes -- they actually recieve $Billions of Government dollars to line their Golden pockets.

    Coporations have rigid the system, so little guys can never grow.

    Welcome to OWS.

  • JMOpinion Orem, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 4:43 p.m.

    OWS so far has proven to be nothing but a gathering of folks with no solid platform, no consensus (unless everyone in the group wiggles their fingers), and no forward movement that anyone can grab onto and DO something about! It's nice that all the commenters here seem to know the reasons for OWS, some of which I could agree with - but they are not the ones "occupying". Seems the protestors forgot to bring along those who can elucidate on the real issues, rather they have managed to be a magnet for criminals, druggies, and those who seem to be stuck eternally in the 60's. If someone here can tell us all WHAT TO DO about the issues - without creating a socialist society "of give to me because I want it and you have it" mentality, I'd be happy to listen!

  • watchman Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 4:35 p.m.

    I think Ms. Love has laid out the present situation much closer than most of the comments have. We cannot judge our economy by what it is today because mostly government is to blame for where we are.

    If you go back about 20 years you will see that Ms. Love's comparisons of what America's government should be, where Haiti's went wrong, and why the OWS thinks it is protesting, I believe you can better understand what she is saying.

    A Free Enterprise Capitalistic system with limited government still champions other forms of government. Our problem is that we seem to have forgotten the 'limited government' part.

  • conservative scientist Lindon, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 3:37 p.m.

    Most commentors above seem to think Mia is wrong. Let's then move in the direction of Haiti! I think she has a great deal more wisdom and personal experience than most people realize.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Nov. 13, 2011 2:43 p.m.

    According to banking data by economic research firm Moebs Services, the uncertainty plaguing the American economy has nothing to do with government regulations or taxes on millionaires. It's uncertainty driven by consumers and small-businesses who are worried about their short-term financial prospects. And it's been going on since well before Obama became President.

    Since the end of 2007, bank customers have pulled over $900 billion out of certificates of deposits at major U.S. banks, parking their money in checking accounts and money market deposit accounts. Banks pay customers interest to park their money in CDs, but pay out next-to-nothing for money market accounts, and usually nothing for checking accounts.

    "These are enormous shifts," said Chairman Mike Moebs. "We haven't seen stuff like this since the 1930s."

    Money market/checking accounts offer consumers the ability to withdraw their money quickly. CDs require the funds to be locked up for years. The heavy reliance on short-term cash indicates a tremendous amount of uncertainty about the future, people with jobs are uncertain about whether they will have one in a year, people without jobs don't know how long their unemployment checks will keep coming in.

  • nonceleb Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 1:32 p.m.

    Americans are not demanding we "throw out" the capitalistic system. We are just opposed to the excesses and recklessness which were major contributors to the recession that has left over 9% unemployed. We have not had laissez-faire capitalism since the establishment of Interstate Commerce Commission in 1887. More agencies came later and with oversight and reasonable regulation there was a tremendous growth of the middle class in the 20th Century. But since deregulation began in the 1980's the top 1% have double their wealth, the middle class has been shrinking and has only made modest gains and the percentage in poverty has increased.

    There needs to be "shared sacrifice" in bad times, but the super rich are not being asked to share any burden or take any responsibility for their speculative excess.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 12:25 p.m.

    So let me get this straight, the OWS crowd does not want to punish all rich people equally. They want to only punish those who have somehow earned their wealth through what they perceive as immoral behavior.

    They don't want to take money from the hard working guy who works long hours and builds a successful business and now finds himself in the top 1%. They only want confiscatory taxes imposed on bankers and hedge fund managers. Did I get that right?

    Because that is news to me. I have heard nothing of the sort in any of the protest movements, only from comments on this blog. Everything I have heard is how EVERYONE in the 1% (except of course Michael Moore, Barak Obama, and most of the Hollywood crowd) is evil and deserves to have even more taxes heaped upon them.

  • rnoble Pendleton, OR
    Nov. 13, 2011 11:43 a.m.

    What makes an 8-10 hour day working in a bank worth more than the same time working in groceries; at any level? What motive could be cited for "earning" more than one needs for expenses and reasonable savings for when unable to continue earning? The answers given will illuminate how individuals think and the degree of self-interest in the responders.

    Productivity used to be a major determinant of wage or salary, but recently the process has begun to shift to rewarding questionable ethics. If I can successfully perform some economic task, whether by fair means or foul, I will have "earned" a larger salary. And I can let my ego overcome any bad feeling I might have regarding the means. Implicit in this is the tendency to think short-term because the short-term results drive any boost in income/ego.

    That trend is the real problem and is what needs our focus in any attempted change. If government has any role, it is limited to defining the field. The larger role in society is to educate our children, and discuss with our neighbors, that fairness does matter. Let's stamp out "taking advantage" in our dealings.

  • spark Saratoga Springs, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 11:10 a.m.

    Thank you, Mia, for having the courage to speak honestly about class warfare in America!

    The way to truly help the disadvantaged in this country is by helping them understand the opportunities that we still have to make our own way. Freedom does NOT mean giving power to the government to provide jobs, education, health care, housing and food for whoever demands it. In fact, the more a government tries to redistribute the people's income, the more it takes from everyone's freedom and opportunities. I know many small business owners who would like to grow their businesses and hire more people, but their taxes are too high.

    Why should we trust in bigger government to create more "solutions" when this will only encourage more crony capitalism? The temptation to play favorites with the people's money has already proven to irresistible to our politicians.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 10:55 a.m.

    So, it's OK to have class warfare if conducted by the mega-wealthy and powerful, but if the poor (or even the middle class), and those without power and influence, want to sit at the table, then it's a bad thing? I see....

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 10:45 a.m.

    Casual Bystander -- perhaps if you stop standing casually by and got out to actively start looking and examining and seeking the truth, you would be singing a tune differently. Instead, your casual listening to hate radio has simply left you parroting thoughtless comments.

    Don't just stand by. Get out and do. At least seek the truth.

  • shaun_ SAINT GEORGE, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 10:31 a.m.

    Mia Love doesn't get it.

  • Nonconlib Happy Valley, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 10:14 a.m.

    Mia Love's view suffers from the same two-dimensional thinking that plagues most politicized speech today. She sees capitalism and socialism as the only two possibilities. Of course capitalism is right and socialism is wrong. In reality, what she is defending is a system in which people do work hard but are not compensated fairly for their labors. The corporate owners and executives are taking more and more of the wealth while shipping jobs off to Third World countries and hiring fewer Americans.

    Meanwhile, technological advances enable the remaining American workers to be more productive (produce more product in a given amount of time). This enables businesses to get by with fewer workers. The problem with this system is that consumers have less disposable income to buy all those glorious corporate products with. Wonder what the source of our accumulating debt really is? It comes from government having to prop up underpaid consumers and struggling corporations.

    The solution, of course, isn't Socialism (whatever that means). The solution is to get capitalism to become what it was intended to become--a system in which wealth is balanced because consumers and producers have roughly equal power in the marketplace.

  • mormonmama West Jordan, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 9:52 a.m.

    Well spoken, Ms. Love.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 9:44 a.m.

    Lofty words by Mia Love, but they don't measure up to our current national challenge. By what mechanism(s) do we restore the American Dream?

    It is conservatives who cry "class warfare" at the suggestion that the small group that has done fantastically well the past 10 years be asked to shoulder more of the common burden. Really, isn't this poisoning the well?

    In our nation, progress has appeared at acute stress points in our history. Example: labor laws that "punish" employers by mandating higher pay after 40 hours in a week. (Family values Utahns should relate to this example of the majority extracting concessions from the minority. Just sort of makes sense, doesn't it?)

    Nobody seriously believes we're on the road to Soviet communism. Let's be real, leave all the tired talking points behind for a moment.

    The Des News noted that *Canada* has passed the US in terms of economic freedom, according to two indices, including the conservative Heritage Foundation. How? Their tax structure is similar to the US, except tax rates on higher earners and the wealthy are significantly higher. Wealthy Canadians don't scream "class warfare".

  • casual_bystander West Jordan, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 9:03 a.m.

    Excellent commentary. People seem to think they'll get better opportunities by getting more handouts from government. It's simply not true. Better opportunities come when we make it easier for regular people to start a business, borrow money, compete in the marketplace, etc. We do that by limiting government, not by expanding it. Mia Love gets it.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 8:51 a.m.

    For many decades the distribution of income held fairly steady with about 2/3 going to labor and 1/3 going to capital. Over the past three decades that has shifted to 55% labor, 45% capital. This means that everyone who works for a living has a much smaller share of the pie to split among themselves, while the tiny minority of people who own everything have far more.

    This has not happened because the wealthiest Americans started working harder. It has happened because they used their wealth to influence the government to adopt policies favorable to their interests.

    When I talk about economic justice, I'm thinking Eisenhower, not Lenin, Stalin, or Mao.

    p.s. Martin Luther King was a socialist.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 7:56 a.m.

    LDS Lib, you did it again. Kudos.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 7:17 a.m.

    Protesting crony-capitalism and robber-baron behavior on Wall Street does not mean you are a socialist.

    It means you've been paying attention.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    Nov. 13, 2011 7:13 a.m.

    As an OWS supporter, I protest (!). The writer insists on mischaracterizing us as demanding "equal results." That's not so. What we are demanding is that the Wall Street powers who continually plunder our economy be held accountable for their actions. These pirates repeatedly put the rest of us at huge risk so they can reap huge returns, but they themselves don't actually risk anything!

  • liberal larry salt lake City, utah
    Nov. 13, 2011 6:40 a.m.

    Despite Mia Love's perceptions, the United States ranks lower than most developed European democracies, in economic mobility, We rank very high in the correlation between paternal income, and how much their offsprings earn. By the measures I've found, countries with progressive tax structures, and government legislated health care seem to have MORE opportunity than we do.

  • Baron Scarpia Logan, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 6:36 a.m.

    "The answer to our current economic problems lies in preserving the economic engine that made America what it is today."

    This is what the OWS is fighting for.

    Today, we have massive oligopolies from banking to energy to medical insurance that lock out competition to keep their control of the market and exploit consumers who are "trapped" by the few players in those industries. In short, the free market and economic innovation has been choked out by the consolidation of these mature industries. Because these profitable oligopolies dominate their industries, there's no need to pursue innovation -- think about it: We're still using the same energy technologies from the 19th and 20th centuries! Imagine if competition drove innovation in energy; we wouldn't be suffering with $3.50 per gallon gasoline!

    These same powerful oligopolies live by a philosophy of "profits above all" where business interests lie above citizen/national interests. So job outsourcing, polluting, lobbying to eliminate tax obligations and regulations, etc., are key profit objectives to serve stockholders at the expense of broader citizens.

    OWS is not fighting for socialism -- this is a Fox News spin! Rather, they're fighting for citizen freedom from corporate domination and exploitation.

  • JoeBlow Miami Area, Fl
    Nov. 13, 2011 6:23 a.m.

    Every discussion turns into it is wrong to "take from the rich and give to the poor"

    Sounds great, and most people would agree.

    We have all heard that "it takes money to make money". Anyone disagree with that general premise?

    Isn't is just possible that the playing field now so favors those with money that over time, the money has collected at the top?

    Is this trend good for the country?
    Why do you think it is happening?
    Do you think it will continue?
    If it continues, what will ultimately happen?

    Until you answer these 4 questions for yourself, it is pointless to speculate on what, if anything should be done.

  • kcmannn Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 5:28 a.m.

    Nice try Mia. You have spilled forward all the right wing wacko talking points. These folks are not asking for equal results they just want a fair chance. Furthermore, your class warfare complaint goes both ways. It is entirely possible that class warfare can be fought from the top down rather than from the bottom up. I am very happy that you and your family have done so well in this country. Why do you begrudge others the same fair shot?

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 13, 2011 1:07 a.m.

    Mia Love conviently forgets that "the content of their character" is precisely what Occupy WallStreet is fighting against.

    Charlatains, Cheats, and Robbers are what is being protested against -
    you know, the Law of the Harvest --
    not Fred or Bob who worked 12 hour days for 30 years to finally make it big or an honest business providing an honest product.

    I call it Character Warfare.

    When an 80 year old woman can got to jail for a parking violation,
    but a corrput CEO can bilk $Billions from investors and the Government and never even be charged with a crime...I have to wonder if the same rules apply.

    Equal and Justice for all?

    If the 1% don't see it that way -- the need to prove it.