And Now Oprah

Last week I wrote about the efforts of Representative Sherrod Brown and others to change a system in which the federal minimum wage has been frozen for eight years at $5.15 an hour, while a corporate CEO earns $13,700 an hour.

But this week there were some hopeful signs--Arkansas raised its state minimum wage to $6.25 an hour. And today the most popular woman in America--Oprah--will feature the struggles of minimum wage workers who earn a maximum of approximately $10,000 annually, and the growing coalition of organizations working to make certain that a hard day's work receives a fair day's pay.

Perhaps if the Republican Congress won't listen to America they will listen to Oprah. Stranger things have happened (why it was only weeks ago that George Bush attempted to wax – while not exactly eloquent--wax interested about America's addiction to oil).

With 86 percent of Americans in favor of an increase in the wage, this much is clear: no one wants leaders who turn a blind eye to people now forced to live out of their cars; working two and three jobs and still not making ends meet; and an increasingly squeezed middle class that is a stone's throw away from financial ruin.

And if Congress won't listen – not even to Oprah – then make sure they listen on Election Day. In the meantime, get involved on the local level to continue changing things for the better--state-by-state.

Nation Event Note

The Nation is visiting Yale University on Wednesday, April 26, 2006. Click here for details on a free public event, sponsored by the Roosevelt Institute, featuring Nation editor and publisher Katrina vanden Heuvel.

Comments (72)

1. The really odd thing here is I suspect they will listen to "Queen Oprah" before they listen to the public they supposedly serve.....

   Posted by leftofcenter at 04/14/2006 @ 2:51pm

2. Enough "half-measures"....

   Sign my online petition for a $100,000 Minimum Yearly

   Posted by Mask at 04/14/2006 @ 2:53pm

3. I'd sign your petition for $25,000 yearly minimum. By the way, what's with the "queen" reference. She obviously does more to inform the people than most politicians. She did a piece on Darfur over a year ago as well as a two-part education piece on America's public school system a couple of days ago. Come on now. Stop hating.

   Posted by k330k at 04/14/2006 @ 3:10pm

4. Doesn't Oprah make $ 13,000 an hour?

   Posted by john maasch at 04/14/2006 @ 3:10pm

5. K330K

   No hatin' with the "Queen" ref....its queen as in "Queen of TV talk shows" Besides, I'm still hoping I can get in the audience on "new car day"!

   Posted by leftofcenter at 04/14/2006 @ 3:35pm

6. my sweety has tickets for a show in a couple of weeks.

   It won't be a new car show though

   Posted by Will C. at 04/14/2006 @ 3:40pm

7. I came across an interview with Oprah where she was asked if she was ever embarrassed of her opulence. Oprah told the interviewer (paraphrase) "No. How would it help poor people just because I'm poor too?"

   She makes a good point. Poor people aren't poor simply because other people are rich. One doesn't have anything to do with the other. In addition, that so-called "outrageous" wealth allows for some pretty astounding acts of generosity. Oprah herself is a great example of this. 50(?)Million dollar house, yet millions given to philanthropic endeavors. That part often gets forgotten, if not intentionally "missed" in these discussions.

   Posted by usc1 at 04/14/2006 @ 4:58pm

8. That part often gets forgotten, if not intentionally "missed" in these discussions.

   Posted by USC1 04/14/2006 @ 4:58pm

   generosity doesn't absolve greed

   Posted by Will C. at 04/14/2006 @ 5:34pm

9. Greed and rich are not neccesarily connected. But envy is connected to alot of other sentiments.

   Posted by john maasch at 04/14/2006 @ 5:41pm

10. care to be more vague maasch

    Posted by Will C. at 04/14/2006 @ 5:43pm

11. and greed and a high fat content are connected leading to the decription "rich"

    Posted by Will C. at 04/14/2006 @ 5:45pm

12. Oprah should run for president (Michael Moore is right). She could win, and she knows what is wrong. She has experience running and growing her business empire, so she knows how to be a successful manager. She also knows how to talk to people (diplomacy) and could get things done. She has integrity and empathy, and has been poor so knows what it is like. Run, Oprah, Run!

    Posted by leknox at 04/14/2006 @ 6:15pm

13. JM:

    Exactly. The sole purpose of bringing up the earnings of another individual in this debate is to stir up feelings of jealousy &/or pity. The fact is, it is no one's business how much that CEO earns except his and the corporation that pays him. If the board of directors feels his experience and education are worth the money, then they are perfectly within their province to pay him as deemed fit.

    Either way, it's irrelevant to a discussion about minimum wage.

    Posted by usc1 at 04/14/2006 @ 8:39pm

14. Just a little tidbit about rich and famous people. Vice President Cheney's tax return was made public today, April 14. Income: over eight million dollars. Came from "stock options." Stock in some company that provides services in postwar environments, maybe?

    He gave something like six million to charity. Seems a little out of IRS norms.

    And he and the little lady got a refund of nearly two million.

    Yeah, this guy's living in the real world.

    I'll take the $13,000 an hour entertainer, thanks. At least she makes her money because people trust her.

    Posted by MyParadigm at 04/14/2006 @ 9:30pm

15. OH, you know, Will C. It's the same old song. If people criticize the millionaire elite, it's because we want to be them, right? Fuck that shit. I criticize them because, for all the damn money they have, they're not producing the excellence their philosophy says should be rising with their fortunes. They instead support mediocrity and just enough to get by. Everything they touch turns into shit, look at what money has done to the arts in this country. That's why I don't like them. In addition to being pigs, they like to glorify their slop. If they just want to be a bunch of boring nebbishes on their own time, I'm cool. They can go off to their little rich people paradise and bore each other to death for all I care. At least that way the rest of us wouldn't get bored to tears with what they think of as culture. Who wants to be a millionaire, indeed. Who wants to be a dink is more like it.

    Posted by OyaSon at 04/14/2006 @ 11:12pm

16. The fact is, it is no one's business how much that CEO earns except his and the corporation that pays him.

    Posted by USC1 04/14/2006 @ 8:39pm

    That CEO pays federal income tax. The federal govenment is by definition government of the people.

    I... am one of the people

    My country. My business

    Posted by Will C. at 04/15/2006 @ 01:12am

17. and you might want to include share holders in your formula.

    their company. their business

    which means all I need is a single share to make it my business

    Posted by Will C. at 04/15/2006 @ 01:14am

18. if the we the people thing wasn't good enough for you.

    (why do I think that's probably true)

    Posted by Will C. at 04/15/2006 @ 01:15am

19. That CEO pays federal income tax. The federal govenment is by definition government of the people.

    I... am one of the people

    My country. My business

    Posted by WILL C. 04/15/2006 @ 01:12am

    Oh, now quit bein' silly.

    Posted by usc1 at 04/15/2006 @ 09:44am

20. "look at what money has done to the arts in this country"

    Which kind of art? The tax payer funded piss in a bottle NO ONE would buy or the $40,000 paid to an "artist" to weld broken forks together? Is is it bad if someone pays for something he likes and then in turn supports the arts or the shit we are all stuck paying because some idiot says it is art?

    Which is it?

    Posted by john maasch at 04/15/2006 @ 10:00am

21. USC1,

    People like WILLC DO think your money is their business. Don't ever forget or lose sight, for without your money they couldn't fund all the wonderful programs they deem important regardles of the viability or success of them.

    And if you make more than most people, you are the problem and you must be stripped of your efforts.

    Remember, USC1, without your money liberals would have a hard time existing and pushing the victum class.

    Posted by john maasch at 04/15/2006 @ 10:06am

22. "The struggle for the freedom of the individual soul takes different forms at various periods. Here in Britain we have achieved freedom of conscience, freedom of thought, freedom of speech and action within the law, freedom for workers to combine together. They are victories which we will not allow to be reversed, but the fight for freedom continues.

    The Labour Party is the expression of the revolt of men and women against a materialist system of society which condemns to a narrow and stinted life the majority of our citizens and gives rewards to the greedy and acquisitive. The Labour Party's object is the building of a new world on the foundation of social and economic justice. During its existence it has done much to preserve and extend the rights won by its predecessors. It has done much to modify and humanise the capitalist system itself." Clement Attlee, House of Commons Speech, 1940.

    Perhaps Mr. Attlee had and has a point; humanizing capitalism.

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 04/15/2006 @ 11:26am

23. Oh, now quit bein' silly.

    Posted by USC1 04/15/2006 @ 09:44am

    Nah

    Silly is more fun

    Posted by Will C. at 04/15/2006 @ 12:08pm

24. Remember, USC1, without your money liberals would have a hard time existing and pushing the victum class.

    Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/15/2006 @ 10:06am

    Son, as much as you bitch about government of the people taking your money... whose the victim here.

    Why don't you take your own advice in this matter. If you can;t find it within yourself to support the good old U.S. of A with a slice of you hard earned money... leave.

    Trust me, we won't miss you

    Posted by Will C. at 04/15/2006 @ 12:12pm

25. oh by the way... I hear Commie China is the up and coming place and they have more english speaking citizens then we do.

    you'll fit right in. Ask Freibaby

    Posted by Will C. at 04/15/2006 @ 12:16pm

26. JM:

    Agreed. Ol' Will is an odd one though. He rails against government eavesdropping on potential terrorists, yet he once told me that he would rather have government in charge of his health records. And now he thinks other people's incomes are HIS business. Go figure.

    Posted by usc1 at 04/15/2006 @ 1:06pm

27. see forth amendment

    as a former soldier the government already has charge of my health records

    my country, my business

    and.. (whew) seven years of post grad work? Doesn't figure.

    Posted by Will C. at 04/15/2006 @ 1:14pm

28. Posted by USC1 04/15/2006 @ 1:06pm | ignore this person

    Or how about this conundrum....Liberals want the Federal Government to run health care....

    yet never consider what happens to abortion services, when "pro-lifers" can run the Federal Government?

    Posted by Mask at 04/15/2006 @ 1:15pm

29. I personaly want the federal govenment to tke charge of health insurance.

    And as I understand it, private health insurance doesn't cover abortion because it's an elective decision.

    unless you want to chnge that, the forced birth crowd is safe

    Posted by Will C. at 04/15/2006 @ 1:18pm

30. "look at what money has done to the arts in this country"

    Which kind of art? The tax payer funded piss in a bottle NO ONE would buy or the $40,000 paid to an "artist" to weld broken forks together? Is is it bad if someone pays for something he likes and then in turn supports the arts or the shit we are all stuck paying because some idiot says it is art?

    Which is it?

    Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/15/2006 @ 10:00am

    Watch how you toss around the word "idiot". It just might stick to your hand when you enter a topic you clearly know nothing about.

    Why are wingers unable to look at the very recent past when trying to get things back on track in this country yet they will go back to the friggin' 1980s and treat it like it's a contemporay issue?

    For you edification, John. The little tantrum that Jesse Helms through over Mapplethorpe and Serrano (who did not create a work of art that was "piss in a bottle"; his artwork was a photograph of piss in a bottle--for the difference between an object and a representation of that object, please see, among many others, Magritte's well-known "Ceci n'est pas une pipe. [This is not a pipe.]") resulted in a revamping of NEA funding. Artists are not eligible for federal funding; only institutions may apply. Meanwhile the funding levels have remained virtually unchanged for decades. While in the overall sense this has not had a dramatic impact on governmental funding for the arts, it has impacted states in different ways. Since the arts tend to be best supported in urban areas, New York and California disproportionately benefit from NEA funding. Many states have stepped up to the plate with Art in State Buildings/Public Places programs or other forms of institutional funding. Some (far too few) states still fund individual artists, rewarding well-established statewide artists with modest grants. Heck, even Nebraska does this, like it or not.

    You are foolist to underestimate the impact that the arts has on our society. Our capitalist world depends on creativity and innovation. Such things do not come from MBA programs. These things come from those of us who are fortunate to be situated between the creative culture and the business culture. What is the wave of today or tomorrow? Is it advertising, marketing, and design? Is it the ability to condense the world around us into short bits of visual, verbal or auditory communication? Is it connecting with a wider, more exotic array of tastes, cultures, and tradtions to foster growth? And how will you do this, my friend for whom basic typing is a major hurdle? The arts. The arts are the first line of expressing what the people, rather than their government, are experiencing.

    You might not like art or artists. If so it is probably for a lack of trying--citing 17 year-old examples of art suggests this. There are deliberately weird people in the arts just like there are deliberately boring people in the business world. But there's no harm in opening yourself to new ideas, but plenty of harm if you close yourself off.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 04/15/2006 @ 1:20pm

31. JM:

    Agreed. Ol' Will is an odd one though. He rails against government eavesdropping on potential terrorists, yet he once told me that he would rather have government in charge of his health records. And now he thinks other people's incomes are HIS business. Go figure.

    Posted by USC1 04/15/2006 @ 1:06pm

    USC1 is confused.

    Will C. is not at all like Bush, Cheney, Frist, and Delay. This quartet attempts to control a woman's health choices, and they tried to interfere with Terry Schiavo's right to die.

    But that's the conservative way to do things; proscriptions against others' rights, but don't interfere with or criticize their right to be greedy.

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 04/15/2006 @ 1:21pm

32. "conservative way to do things" should read "conservative way of doing things"

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 04/15/2006 @ 1:23pm

33. Isn't "greed" one of the seven deadly sins?

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 04/15/2006 @ 1:28pm

34. So much for the pious types on this blog.

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 04/15/2006 @ 1:29pm

35. Will C, what any American makes other than an elected official is nobodies business...so stay out of what you have no right to!

    Posted by LVLIBERTY1 04/15/2006 @ 1:34pm

    I hope you don't have your 401K all lock up in stocks liberty.

    Since you believe the CEO of the company that provides that stock doesn't need to have his performance (and his compensation for that performance)to be held into account.

    That's the essence of Will C's argument.

    Posted by lefthookjab at 04/15/2006 @ 2:37pm

36. Will C, what any American makes other than an elected official is nobodies business...so stay out of what you have no right to!

    Posted by LVLIBERTY1 04/15/2006 @ 1:34pm

    ahhh, ya might want to check out the sixtenth amendment.

    and since we all beleive in the concepts of personal accountablity and trust but verify (except for perhaps you liberty) we're just keeping everything open and out in the light of day...

    where it belongs

    (unless you and all the rest of the hamsters have something to hide liberty)

    Posted by Will C. at 04/15/2006 @ 2:55pm

37. Posted by TJBEHRENS1 04/15/2006 @ 1:20pm

    I like and support art. My middle son is an artist.

    My presvious post still stands.

    Posted by john maasch at 04/15/2006 @ 4:37pm

38. "Why don't you take your own advice in this matter. If you can;t find it within yourself to support the good old U.S. of A with a slice of you hard earned money... leave. "

    I do support my government and the good ol USA. I just don't support your vision of it. I just question the size of the slice.

    And as far as leaving, no, you need my money confiscated to support your vision, so, you would indeed miss me....trust me on this one, you would miss my efforts and my money....at least you would miss my money.

    What makes one like me nervous about the left is they obviously hate Bush, Haliburton, Cheney,high income earners, capital gains tax payers, enterpeneurs,and the bulk of the middle class whom they describe as rich, is that they think the answer is surrender now that we are in Iraq, never confront peace loving peoples like Iran and Chavez,have peopleas Conyers, Hillary,Dean, Rangel, Waxman, et al, in charge and all will be well in the universe. The same blind belief you use to describe the right side of the equation..

    Posted by john maasch at 04/15/2006 @ 4:46pm

39. Will is right on one thing, however, if you own a share of a company you have te right to question and review the pay of its officers. But if the board votes in the pay and benefits and they are happy and majority of stock holders are ok with the deal, then it stands..no matter how much the Wills of the world hate it.

    Posted by john maasch at 04/15/2006 @ 4:51pm

40. Rather than engage in inconclusive debates about how big earnings have to be to be too much, or whether it is fair. I decided to look at the other end of the spectrum: poverty.

    Here is my 2 cents on how to eliminate poverty in the US:

    Eliminate US Poverty [robertdfeinman.com]

    For those in a hurry, what I suggest is by giving them money. The essay explains how this would pay for itself.

    Posted by rdf at 04/15/2006 @ 5:14pm

41. Doesn't Oprah make $ 13,000 an hour?

    Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/14/2006 @ 3:10pm

    More, JOHN, more.

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 04/15/2006 @ 5:35pm

42. ILP,

    Cool, very cool.

    Posted by john maasch at 04/15/2006 @ 5:39pm

43. Which kind of art? The tax payer funded piss in a bottle NO ONE would buy or the $40,000 paid to an "artist" to weld broken forks together? Is is it bad if someone pays for something he likes and then in turn supports the arts or the shit we are all stuck paying because some idiot says it is art?

    Which is it?

    Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/15/2006 @ 10:00am

    A few years back some guy got a few hundred bucks for a one-word poem. You know what? I read the poem and I actually liked it. I was stoned at the time...

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 04/15/2006 @ 5:40pm

44. For those in a hurry, what I suggest is by giving them money. The essay explains how this would pay for itself.

    Posted by RDF 04/15/2006 @ 5:14pm

    Well I do agree with one thing - if what you are doing hasn't worked, try something new.

    But the problem with giving people money is that many of them would spend it on drugs. Hey, I am not against drug use, but street drugs are overpriced. They are only available on the black market, thus one must pay a premium for them. So we would be in effect wasting tax dollars on overpriced drugs. Just as I don't want the Pentagon paying $600 for a toilet seat, I don't want poor people overpaying for drugs with my tax dollars.

    On a more serious note, giving people money is a big disincentive to working. I am not down with your program, RDF

    Posted by ILOVEPHYSICS at 04/15/2006 @ 5:52pm

45. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/15/2006 @ 4:46pm

    do support my government and the good ol USA. I just don't support your vision of it. I just question the size of the slice.

    But maasch. It comes from an ever growing pie, correct. That would mean the size of the tax slice would also be ever growing just so the government could keep the books balanced (you with your ever growing pies, my favorite roman declaring that economics is a natural law... when will the fun ever end)

    And as far as leaving, no, you need my money confiscated to support your vision, so, you would indeed miss me....trust me on this one, you would miss my efforts and my money....at least you would miss my money.

    Sorry maasch, but putting your own measure of self importance aside (see: the Rapture) we'll do very nicely without you. And hey just in case some here might pine away at your departure, you could write us and tell us how things are going in commie China for you. We could be pen pals

    Ha Ha Ha Ha

    What makes one like me nervous about the left is they obviously hate Bush, Haliburton, Cheney,high income earners, capital gains tax payers, enterpeneurs,and the bulk of the middle class whom they describe as rich, is that they think the answer is surrender now that we are in Iraq, never confront peace loving peoples like Iran and Chavez,have peopleas Conyers, Hillary,Dean, Rangel, Waxman, et al, in charge and all will be well in the universe. The same blind belief you use to describe the right side of the equation..

    Again with the red state hate. It goes everywhere you go. Should the day come when you realize that you are as useless to this country as your posts are to this blog, don't suddenly forget to take that with you. Commie China should get the true hamster experience. They have a growing Christian church there don't they? Something new for you to infest, eh...

    Posted by Will C. at 04/15/2006 @ 8:00pm

46. Maasch, I know that deep down, you want to be cool, but telling us that one of your offspring is an "artist" just takes the cake. Does he do macrame, or possibly decoupage, (that's French for pasting paper images on cast-off junk, and applying a clear finish)?

    I suppose that you and your loyal, jerk-stick buddies, fancy yourselves "artists" also. I have heard that Libsucker does a fine performance piece with a bottle of Night Train and a rubber duck.

    I await further winger contributions to truth and beauty with eager anticipation.

    Spring is "fully engaged"

    Love, Bloppy

    Posted by bloppy at 04/15/2006 @ 10:27pm

47. Yes the pie is ever growing. The slice off my slice the governmemt wants is also growing, only with progressive tax rates they grow faster. Some day we will end taxing income and tax spending. It will end many liberals power to create another victum class, like illegals are the libs new victums.

    "Again with the red state hate."you always seem to find things that are never there....never hate, just a little pity for you,..when I or others disagree with you it is always hate that you accuse us of, which is never there. And you reply with the hamster nonsense, as if it is witty and quick. Maybe the hamster kick you are on would qualify as art for yppolb.

    Yppolb,

    Your posts are artsy...kind of like paint by numbers..you already know what the painting will look like..predictable...and useless.

    Posted by john maasch at 04/15/2006 @ 11:49pm

48. JOHN M,

    My father neither knows nor cares about anything "cultural", but he knows that I do. And he respects my opinion--hell, he played a major part through his genes and nurturing in shaping them. On things cultural, he agrees with me as I do with him when it comes to woodworking, golf, or the real message of Rush Limbaugh. Perhaps your son's talent might allow you to reconsider your current poorly considered opinions on the importance of art and the inconsequential support the federal goverment tosses idly toward it. He can then listen to your taste in beer with an equally open ear and mind.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 04/16/2006 @ 12:12am

49. And to touch on your latest points:

    Yes the pie is ever growing. The slice off my slice the governmemt wants is also growing, only with progressive tax rates they grow faster. Some day we will end taxing income and tax spending. It will end many liberals power to create another victum class, like illegals are the libs new victums.

    Thank goodness for the children, women, poor, blacks and other racial minorities that some day we will eliminate the tyrannical income tax. Things were infinitely better 100+ years ago when the government just let the good-hearted folks running American business spread their love throughout the land.

    Posted by tjbehrens1 at 04/16/2006 @ 12:15am

50. "Again with the red state hate."you always seem to find things that are never there....never hate, just a little pity for you,..when I or others disagree with you it is always hate that you accuse us of, which is never there.

    Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/15/2006 @ 11:49pm

    Hmm where to begin

    If the pie is ever-growing than the tax slice will grow at the same rate as the pie even with a progressive tax rate. It's the beauty of percents. You should really try to tackle basic mathematics before you try to dive into economics.

    next... pity maasch? Everywhere you look you see hate. Someone disagrees with you: hate. Someone disagrees with the president: hate. Someone disagrees with the direction the country is going: hate. Someone disagrees with the war; hate. It's your answer for everything. You guys are always the first to bring it up, but as all hate blinds, you can't even recognize that the upwelling of all the hate you see is from within you. You can't even see that you introduced the concept of hate into this thread. Here let me refresh your memory

    What makes one like me nervous about the left is they obviously hate Bush, Haliburton, Cheney…

    Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/15/2006 @ 4:46pm

    If me calling you on your hate creates up more hate, well… I can't help you with that. It just isn't within my power.

    But we'll leave the light on John and we'll leave the front door open. And hope that you and all the rest of our conservative countrymen who are lost and wandering alone in the dark of your raging storm, someday find your way...

    someday come home

    Posted by Will C. at 04/16/2006 @ 12:37am

51. Yes the pie is ever growing.

    Gee, I coulda swore Dubya said "Make the pie higher?"

    Posted by leftofcenter at 04/16/2006 @ 08:32am

52. There is no "correct" distribution of wealth. The private sector plays its role and the government plays its role. The debate is which activities should be done by one or the other or both. Fire and police and water are "socialist". Cars and boats are private sector. Education is a mix. From a purely economic standpoint, if the distribution of wealth is too disparate, economic growth is impaired. More simply put the most important part of any business are its customers. Right now the minimum wage is too low and this is causing imbalances in the world economy. The investor class (including myself) is awash in capital around the globe. There is not enough demand to warrant investment in new or old businesses. That's why long term interest rates are so low by historic standards. There is so much money in the world looking for a place to go that money is very cheap. This imbalance will lead to a serious recession before the before the '08 election. Bush will be the first president to have two recessions during his tenure. This, hopefully, will put the silver stake in the heart of "supply side" economics, or what his father corectly called "vodoo economics".

    Posted by richschneid at 04/16/2006 @ 7:04pm

53. Speaking in terms of the "goodness" of giving, how do you see the difference between giving money to charity and having the government take it from you for its "charities?"

    Posted by PLAIN BRUCE 04/16/2006 @ 9:05pm

    the tax break

    Posted by Will C. at 04/16/2006 @ 10:47pm

54. and the government takes nothing from me. Paying taxes is part of my duty as a citizen. And the second the bill is signed into law the mechanism of govenment of the people has been rightly exercised and thus my consent as one of the governered is freely given.

    If we wish to do it another way... see: article five

    Posted by Will C. at 04/16/2006 @ 10:52pm

55. correction... one of the governed is freely given

    Posted by Will C. at 04/16/2006 @ 10:56pm

56. again... government of the people derives its power from the consent of the governed. It is your right to disagree with the majority. It is your right to advocate alternative policies.

    I've never had a local charity knock on my door and ask for money. I have had numerous direct mail charities send me mail. And for all the assertions that private charities are more effective than government programs, not one social problem has been eliminated by either one of them. If we want to eliminate the problems we have in this country than we must build a country where the problemns don't manifest themselves to begin with. Or a least we must minimize the frequency at which they manifest themselves to a point where charities can have an effect.

    I believe a more equitable distribution of income would go a long way toward doing that. For the simple reason that people who have the money to pay the bills have a tendency to cause fewer problems for society.

    remember something... no mother ever picked up her new born child and dreamed that one day they would be homeless and begging for money at the end of the exit ramp.

    Yet the country we have right now creates that nightmare for many a son and daughter

    Posted by Will C. at 04/17/2006 @ 09:48am

57. "Yet the country we have right now creates that nightmare for many a son and daughter "

    The rubber meets the road...

    ...you believe the country cause this problem and I beleive the people and many of their choices create the same problem...the combimation is probably closer to the truth as many people are in circumstances beyond their immediate control.,,but to blame it on the country means what?

    I never picked up any of my children and dreamed any of them would end up on an exit ramp..but actions and decisions of one of my sons, if left unchecked by us,his family, may well have kept him from drifting towards the ramp. His choices and decisons, not the government,had placed him in that particular position and in a similar manner the government(country) can't help him, his family can, not Hillarys village. And it was not Hillarys responsiblity.

    Posted by john maasch at 04/17/2006 @ 09:59am

58. The differences in what is considered "wealth" and what is considere "greed/avarice" needs defining by those who believe there are differences in the two.

    When does "wealth" become "greed/avarice"?

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 04/17/2006 @ 10:36am

59. And for all the assertions that private charities are more effective than government programs, not one social problem has been eliminated by either one of them.

    Posted by WILL C. 04/17/2006 @ 09:48am

    Take a look around. Government hasn't exactly eliminated any social problems, either. Government probably has made matters worse as the entitlement mentality permeates society and people expect more for less. As always, our "representatives" in government are always happy to exchange empty promises for votes.

    My country. My business

    Posted by WILL C. 04/15/2006 @ 01:12am

    If you truly believe this, then put your W2 where your mouth is and send me a copy. After all, it's my country, too. Therefore, it's my business, right?

    Posted by usc1 at 04/17/2006 @ 1:01pm

60. As a physician and a certified high school teacher I can tell you neither private charity nor government will solve the social prblems in this country until we have universal health care and mental health care parity. And yes, we can afford this. We currently waste at least 500 billion a year on our inefficient health care system.

    Posted by richschneid at 04/17/2006 @ 1:52pm

61. Bruce, VA medicne sucks. The best health insurance in the country is Medicare even though it needs a better drug program. We could put the whole country on Medicare. It needs better quality indicators for providers and better cost analysis for each provider. Then we would have a real market driven from of health care. Please note the Business Roundtable asked Medicare last week to release its quality indicators on all the doctors so they could direct their business to the best value providers. I believe in market capitalism but the medical marketplace is much more complex than, say, the auto industry. I am writing a book about this. I started medical school in 1969. I ran my own business. I know a lot about this. Sorry I can't go into it fully in this forum. But I would be happy to answer any other questions you might have. By the way, Medicare overhead costs are only about 3%, much lower than in the "private" sector.

    Posted by richschneid at 04/17/2006 @ 8:59pm

62. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 04/17/2006 @ 09:59am

    The country is the people. When are you guys going to grasp that concept. For every one of us that finds their dream we can look behind them and count all the doors that opened for them. Likewise for every one that becomes wreckage standing on the end of the highway exit ramp, we can look behind them and count all the doors that slammed shut in their face.

    None of us did it alone, one way or the other. We're all part of this thing called the United States of America. It's bigger than us. But it is made up of us. And in it none of us is better then the next. None of us is more valuable then the next. All of us count. All of us matter.

    It's time to build that society. A we can do it.

    But you're going to have to give up your dream of being the next multi-trillionare. Otherwise it isn't going to work.

    Posted by Will C. at 04/17/2006 @ 9:34pm

63. Take a look around. Government hasn't exactly eliminated any social problems, either.

    Posted by USC1 04/17/2006 @ 1:01pm

    No shit idiot. That's why I said this...

    And for all the assertions that private charities are more effective than government programs, not one social problem has been eliminated by either one of them.

    Posted by WILL C. 04/17/2006 @ 09:48am

    Which you then quoted. I can't believe you have seven years of post grad work under your belt. You can't even read. Which means my W-2's would be useless to you.

    Posted by Will C. at 04/17/2006 @ 9:38pm

64. WillC:

    There you go again, taking things out of context and completely missing the point. Not unexpected, but tiresome.

    Fact is, your "vision" does not exist without the likes of myself, JM, and others. Without us, your "vision" is nothing but a fantasy paid for with Monopoly money. But you go on believing in it. You go on believing that you can promise all things to everyone. And then, when you wake up from your reverie, you'll realize that your vision just evaporated with the stampede of talent, intellect, and ambition to other more realistic shores, places where the best and brightest can enjoy the fruits of their labor. Then you can traipse outside, join hands with other like-minded individuals around the community vegetable patch and watch the dirt grow, because you can't afford any seed.

    And I'm still waiting for that W2 form. (As I recall you're not so good with numbers.) My country, my business. Right? Or are you just full of shit?

    Posted by usc1 at 04/17/2006 @ 11:43pm

65. Posted by USC1 04/17/2006 @ 11:43pm

    So your seven years of post grad are suggesting to you that I took myself out of context, having of course created the context of neither government of charities has ever solved a social problem. To which you responded that government hasn't solved a social problem either. And now I see you trying to weasel your way out of your delemma by suggesting that the existance of "my" vision, requires you. And then you proceed to babble about topics I never suggested...

    All in this crazy hamster wheel spin effort to prove to the world that your not too schtoopid to have a use for my W-2's.

    Posted by Will C. at 04/18/2006 @ 09:49am

66. Plain Bruce,

    Is 168 million dollars in pay abundance or excessive?

    Exxon-Mobil shareholders are speaking out that it is excessive.

    Posted by oraibi1952 at 04/18/2006 @ 12:05pm

67. These are publicly owned companies, not executive owned. I see no reason why executive compensation should not be approved by the shareholders. Since the shares are traded publicly, the public has a right to know the CEO compesation when they decide if and when to buy or sell sharees in that company.

    Posted by richschneid at 04/18/2006 @ 1:50pm

68. WillC:

    First it's numbers that throw you. Now, it' reading for comprehension. Go back to the 1:01 post and tell me how many sentences are in that paragraph to which you refer. Oops, sorry. Let me help you. There are four sentences in that paragraph. From which you took one out of context. And missed the point.

    PB:

    That one was for you. You're welcome.

    Posted by usc1 at 04/18/2006 @ 5:36pm

69. First its numbers that throw you. Now, it' reading for comprehension. Go back to the 1:01 post and tell me how many sentences are in that paragraph to which you refer. Oops, sorry. Let me help you. There are four sentences in that paragraph. From which you took one out of context. And missed the point.

    Posted by USC1 04/18/2006 @ 5:36pm

    I didn't take anything out of context you retard. I said that neither charities nor government have solved a single social problem and you responded that government hadn't solved any social problems either. And now on top of everything, your crushing retort seems to be fixated on the number of sentences in your original crushing rebuttal... which was retarded.

    Ha Ha Ha Ha

    You know, you've told us about the seven years of post work, but what you've never told us what you graduated from.

    My guess is it was obedience school.

    Posted by Will C. at 04/18/2006 @ 10:04pm

70. I see you're still having problems with reading for comprehension, which might explain why you once again have resorted to puerile insults instead of responding to the "crushing rebuttal." Not unexpected, but tiresome.

    Alas, it seems we have been down this road before--that is, your launching invective instead of making reasoned arguments--so I shall leave you to cultivate your veggie patch.

    But not until after you send that W2.

    Posted by usc1 at 04/18/2006 @ 10:58pm

71. I'm still waiting retard.

    and if you have any reason in you fido, you'll know what I'm talking about

    Posted by Will C. at 04/18/2006 @ 11:36pm

72. Invedtive always creates more heat than light.

    Posted by richschneid at 04/19/2006 @ 11:59am