Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://prospect.org/article/opportunity-society

"Conservatives not only seek a world where everyone has the same opportunities, most of them think that's pretty much what we have already, so major changes aren't necessary, except in the area of getting government off your back."

"There are a thousand ways in which wealth determines the opportunities available to you, in large part by making things easy. Yes, if you're a poor kid being raised by a single parent who never finished high school, you can get to Harvard. But you're going to have to be one in a million. It's going to take extraordinary spirit, determination, and luck for you to make it. I'm sure Tagg Romney is a fine fellow, but the truth is that even if he was a lazy dolt he'd still do well. He went to the best schools, his parents gave him all kinds of enriching experiences, and he never had to worry about much of anything. He wasn't going to get pulled out of college and have to take a job if one of his parents got sick. When he decided this private equity thing looked interesting, there was an escalator waiting, and all he had to do was hop on. That's opportunity."

The article is built around the story of Mitt Romney's son Tagg, who despite having no experience in private equity, formed his own firm and managed to secure $244 million in investments from among his Dad's contacts and political contributors. The article makes the point that no matter how smart and hard working Tagg might be, without those connections he never would have been able to attract that kind of level of investment.

The point, simply, is that when Republicans talk about equality of opportunity, they're ignoring the plain and simple fact that no such thing exists, that people born into poor families attend poorer schools, lacking the and that most of the 'class warfare' stuff they rail against, like effective social welfare and public healthcare, is really just trying to get something closer to the even level of equality of opportunity Republicans claim they want.

The Republicans talking about equality of opportunity is just that - talk. Since I've started paying attention (mid 80's) the Republicans have moved away from that standard in every way except in their rhetoric. Everything they have done has been about helping the rich be rich, and keeping the poor poor.

If you want to see this in action firsthand, chat up one of their kids. They won't be able to kick you out fast enough lest their precious child get emotionally involved with <shudder> the lower classes.

(Thinking about it, that's probably true of all politicians. But at least the Dems try do do things to help the poor politically.)

Vulcan wrote:If you want to see this in action firsthand, chat up one of their kids.

Something tells me an adult trying to harass children is going to be viewed negatively anywhere. My boy would probably just walk right over you. he's less consdierate than I am (unless you're cute of course). Genghis Connie, well, if you've ever seen what a pack of vicious attack BADGER DOGs can do to a person in 60 seconds...

I suppose I should have clarified this. Since the article mentioned Mitt's son - who is what, 25ish? - I was referring to adult children. Especially if you are of the opposite gender.

Man I wish I had that kind of equality of opportunity.

Come on Republicans, you're slacking off, I want my equality of opportunity already!

Unlike this brat I'm having to WORK for a living where he gets easy street from day one >.<

Well, two words for you then:

BOOT

STRAPS

streamdragon wrote:Well, two words for you then:

BOOT

STRAPS

Or:

UNICORNS

ZEUS

streamdragon wrote:Well, two words for you then:

BOOT

STRAPS

But I don't wear boots...

How about

Lotto

John Dillinger?

How do you change it though. I always thought everyone should have the exact same education system, and all wealth confiscated when you die, but even that doesn't really work out.

Right-wing politicians deny class system exists.
Class system does actually exist.
Nothing new.

Frazzled wrote:How about

Lotto

John Dillinger?

How do you change it though. I always thought everyone should have the exact same education system, and all wealth confiscated when you die, but even that doesn't really work out.

If that happened i would never have been able to go to college frazz, my entire family gave me the money from my grandpas account when he died so i can go to college.
But yeah, standardized education is a good idea.

Frazzled wrote:How about

Lotto

John Dillinger?

How do you change it though

According to the Republican party, you change it through tax breaks to the rich and getting rid of the tax on capital gains (while taxing everyone else more by cutting down on exemptions that mostly apply to the middle class).

Joey wrote:Right-wing politicians deny class system exists.
Class system does actually exist.
Nothing new.

Left wing politicians argue that class system is rigid.
Class system is not actually rigid.
Nothing new.

biccat wrote:

Joey wrote:Right-wing politicians deny class system exists.
Class system does actually exist.
Nothing new.

Left wing politicians argue that class system is rigid.
Class system is not actually rigid.
Nothing new.

Social mobility in the UK has all but ground to a halt thanks to piss-poor education for the masses.
Apparently the US isn't much better.

Melissia wrote:

Frazzled wrote:How about

Lotto

John Dillinger?

How do you change it though

According to the Republican party, you change it through tax breaks to the rich and getting rid of the tax on capital gains (while taxing everyone else more by cutting down on exemptions that mostly apply to the middle class).

According to Democrats you steal the money from the middle class to give it to other people. Wait, that applies to Republicans too. Neither are correct.

Oppotunity and education are the only real equalizers.

Frazzled wrote:According to Democrats you steal the money from the

Rich.

Incorrect. Rich pay less taxes than the middle class as a precentage. Poor pay less taxes than the middle class as a percentage. DOn't believe the propaganda. look at the facts.

Melissia wrote:

Frazzled wrote:According to Democrats you steal the money from the

Rich.

middle class.

Although it's nice to hear you finally refer to it as stealing.

From biccat's article:
We are all going to have to contribute to this, and if middle class people’s wages were going up again, and we had some growth to the economy, I don’t think they would object to going back to tax rates [from] when I was president” - before the Bush tax cuts.

Yeah sure, IF wages were going up.

But they aren't.

Frazzled wrote:Incorrect. Rich pay less taxes than the middle class as a precentage. Poor pay less taxes than the middle class as a percentage. DOn't believe the propaganda. look at the facts.

Heritage claims the top 10% pay 71% of federal income taxes. Though, of course, we could then argue about what constitutes the middle class. The general rule being that the vast majority of people will at least claim to be.

Or did you mean as a percentage of income?

Joey wrote:

biccat wrote:

Joey wrote:Right-wing politicians deny class system exists.
Class system does actually exist.
Nothing new.

Left wing politicians argue that class system is rigid.
Class system is not actually rigid.
Nothing new.

Social mobility in the UK has all but ground to a halt thanks to piss-poor education for the masses.
Apparently the US isn't much better.

I love how Biccat hasn't responded to this. I would be interested in what he'd have to say about it.

rubiksnoob wrote:I love how Biccat hasn't responded to this. I would be interested in what he'd have to say about it.

I love how biccat has had work to do.

Or, at least, the people biccat is doing work for love that biccat has had work to do.

Here's a chart that I'm going to post without any explanation:


See? Now why hasn't Joey responded to that?

edit: image fixed.

I'd have thought America of all places would at least try to be a meritocracy, what with the whole "american dream" thing. Standardised education is the way to sort it out, and personally i'd go down the route of negative income tax/unconditional basic income to sort out poverty and from there everyone has a better chance of fulfilling their potential.

Edit: Derp!

Biccat fixed his link.

Thanks Biccat!

dæl wrote:I'd have thought America of all places would at least try to be a meritocracy

What we do is pretend that we have a meritocracy and then ignore all evidence to the contrary. It makes us feel good, and that is the American way.

sebster wrote:The article is built around the story of Mitt Romney's son Tagg, who despite having no experience in private equity, formed his own firm and managed to secure $244 million in investments from among his Dad's contacts and political contributors. The article makes the point that no matter how smart and hard working Tagg might be, without those connections he never would have been able to attract that kind of level of investment.

Son of successful P/E manager has greater ease of entry into P/E management? SAY IT AIN'T SO.

This doesn't change that fact that fund management is easily among the most brutal, cutthroat industries on the planet, at least from a job security standpoint (although in the 'old days' it could be from a physical security standpoint too).

The article is more or less assuming that Tagg can be a bumbling buffoon (in the most cutthroat, profit-driven industry in the world, save for maybe drug running) and retain a quarter billion under management. Absolutely not. Easier access, perhaps, probably actually, but if he underperforms the indices then he'll face redemptions and $244 million begins to drop, precipitously. Similarly if he does well it will grow, but that will be because he's an adept and adaptable money manager, not because of a Ha'va'd education and Daddy Mitt. Money management is actually the worse possible analog for the silver-spoon trust fund baby 'success' story because it ultimately boils down to individual performance-driven results. Paris Hilton is a good example of somebody no one would care about except for her parentage; Tagg Romney probably not as much.

The point, simply, is that when Republicans talk about equality of opportunity, they're ignoring the plain and simple fact that no such thing exists, that people born into poor families attend poorer schools, lacking the and that most of the 'class warfare' stuff they rail against, like effective social welfare and public healthcare, is really just trying to get something closer to the even level of equality of opportunity Republicans claim they want.

Did you know Lloyd Blankfein was born broke? John Merton? That Corzine was a Democrat? That the richest individuals in the Senate are Democrats? Did you know that individuals like myself, a teacher's kid, born lower middle class, liberal arts degree, voted democrat in 08, are now working in risk management and prop trading for a seriously large market cap company?

I know guys like Tagg Romney. Personally, professionally. And that's how I know that 1. it does take a different sort of individual to work 80 hours a week in a high-stress environment, 2. 244 million under management makes him a tiny, tiny fish in the ocean of global capital management, and 3. it sucks not having a paycheck that isn't tied to your performance. See, that's the rub when you're a money manager, 70% of your compensation generally comes from your bonus -- taxed at a marginal 50% rate by the way--which is dependent on you beating the rest of the world. Oh, there's also a 50% washout rate, in general, in this field.

But I don't expect you to know that, or understand it. You'll read news blurbs and throw rocks, and think everything seems so'obvious' two weeks in hindsight. Heck, you already think you understand Tagg Romney's career path, and why he doesn't deserve to be judged on his own merits. Never mind that 'virtue' doesn't have a party affiliation (Corzine = Democrat lolol, Madoff = Democrat lolol).

As to social welfare? The Republican/Democrat divide isn't one about no social welfare vs. some, it's a divide over 'enough' vs. 'more. All the glorious social construct models that continuously point to 'more'? None of them can stand up to the real world fact that California is losing money/jobs/population to Texas, that Greece had one of the narrowest income gaps globally prior to the recession, and that the Pilgrims wouldn't have survived Plymouth if they hadn't gone from communal redistribution to free-market.

sourclams wrote:This doesn't change that fact that fund management is easily among the most corrupt, regulation-ignroing industries on the planet

I think I fixed that for you.

Although I should just remove "amongst the most" from that instead, but PMCs get rather close.

sourclams wrote:As to social welfare? The Republican/Democrat divide isn't one about no social welfare vs. some, it's a divide over 'enough' vs. 'more.

Given the rather hefty percentage of people in America who can't afford even basic medical care, I'd argue whether we have 'enough' social welfare in this country.

sourclams wrote:As to social welfare? The Republican/Democrat divide isn't one about no social welfare vs. some, it's a divide over 'enough' vs. 'more.

That presumes falsely that we have enough.

I'm going to cut to the chase here. Let's make it simple. Find me a person going into investment from a middle-class background who went to an average college, with the same GPA that Tagg Romney graduated with, who can scrape up $244 million from investors. Then tell me that everyone has the same equality of opportunity.