Comments about ‘Letters: Imbalance in spite of cliff’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Jan. 1 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Hutterite
American Fork, UT

It's the kardashian effect. The average person is now able to be distracted by something as trivial and meaningless as a kardashian. So things that really matter are not only ignored. They're downright held in disdain by the people they affect most.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

Yep.

But who can stop the rich from doing this? Repubs are now claiming that corporations are people and can contribute millions and millions to candidates.

No wonder why politicians (only) care about the rich! Voters don't have the funds to eat at Mitt Romney's $900 per plate dinners!

one old man
Ogden, UT

I thought it was more like $1500 and up to eat with Mitt.

Some folks have forgotten that ALL of us -- except perhaps some of the 1 percenters -- are only one illness, one accident, one job loss, one layoff from joining those the right loves to hate.

red state pride
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Why is "Thou shalt not covet" one of the ten commandments? Probably because it will destroy your soul if you are covetous. I wish I made Paul Milsap's salary but I don't. Why should I concern myself with it? His money isn't coming out of my pocket. How does it hurt me if the starting lineup of the Jazz make more money in half a season than I'll ever see in a lifetime of work? It's their money- not mine.

Grover
Salt Lake City, UT

Red: The players on the Utah Jazz put fannies in the seats and as such they are clearly worth what they are being paid. I don't recall the team ever reporting a loss since the team has been here. The point of the letter is that we are seeing the disintegration of our economic vitality as a nation at the same time as the upper 1% are profiting handsomely. We have an economy based 70% on consumer buying. What happens to everyone when the 70% lose their ability to drive the engine of GDP? EVERYONE loses.

PS. Last I checked, Greed was also verboten in the Bible. Why is it that one bothers you so little but coveting sticks in your throat? If you are going to chastise the poor shouldn't you be evenhanded and do the same for the rich...er, job creators?

Eric Samuelsen
Provo, UT

While I liked this letter, it did seem to be discussing two, or perhaps even three very separate issues. First, it suggested that there's some relationship between the budget deficit, and the recession in which our economy finds itself--the widespread joblessness. Those are two very different problems. There is NO connection between the federal debt and the recession, except in one sense--the recession caused the debt. But paying off the debt, or even reducing the deficit will have no positive job creation impact--quite the contrary.
Income disparity is another separate issue, the fact that rich folks have gotten richer over the past thirty years, while the middle class and the poor have seen their real dollar incomes diminish. It'd nice to solve that one too.

red state pride
Cottonwood Heights, UT

@ Grover - there is a big difference between greed and ambition. Ambition makes the world go around. The fact is that the "poor" in America live better than any people in the history of civilization- that's indisputable. A good example would be a primitive tribe of people living a rudimentary lifestyle in the jungle. There will be very little income disparity between the chief and the lowest tribe member but neither would have a very high standard of living. Is that what you would prefer in America? Would it make you feel better?
@ Eric - where did you learn Economics? Let me guess- from Paul Krugman. Of course the national debt is a huge drain on the economy. Of course the massive deficits and debt are contributing to this feeble recovery. Let me ask you this- would you buy a home in a city with huge unfunded pension liabilities? Because if you did you'd be signing up to help pay for them through your property taxes. So why wouldn't that translate to capital investment at the macro level?

Grover
Salt Lake City, UT

Red: Maybe Margaret Meade would understand your tribal example as germane to the discussion, but I don't. When 70% of the economy is driven by the "masses" then it is in everyone's interest to protect their economic vitality...even the wealthy it is or used to be called the commonweal. You equate the wealthy with ambition when in fact ambition exists at every economic level. Similarly envy and greed. History tells us that if the gap between rich and poor becomes too great or that the middle class disappears, societal chaos becomes more likely.

Christian 24-7
Murray, UT

Mav

"Voters don't have the funds to eat at Mitt Romney's $900 per plate dinners!"

You forgot Obama's $1000's per plate dinners.

But there is a class of voters that sure can be bought with cell phones and health care paid for by someone else, the taxpayers.

Eric:
Debt does contribute to recession/depression. There was large scale speculative borrowing before both the great recession and the great depression. People borrowed to invest, in the stock market (more so for the great depression) and in the housing market (more so in the great recession). A large percent of those foreclosed on were speculators. Many were second and third homes. Many more were purchased by people knowing they were too much for the family budget, but thinking they would sell in a couple years and pocket a big profit. In the case of the housing debts, those are federal debts because the congress, with President Clinton's signature, guaranteed those loans.

Grover:
"We have an economy based 70% on consumer buying."

That is a sick economy. A 50/50 consumer/production ratio would be healthier.

Democrats punish productivity, and they are in charge. The result: Jobless Recovery.
More idle people.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments