Liberal superstar and New York Democratic socialist candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez took her left-wing platform to the next level this week, saying the “plight of working class people” was the same regardless of location and income.
How does this brain dead fool think people got rich? They worked for it or inherited it from a family member who worked for it. Not many of us got lucky enough to have Sam Walton as a relative!
They did not get rich on welfare, or hand outs. Socialism is alive and thriving in Haiti, Cuba and Venezuela…let her move there and see how she loves it!**
This is why you should never elect anyone to office who has no real life experience. All of her views are based on theory. Not reality. She is seriously clueless. There would be no medications for HIV if people had not been allowed to make money developing and manufacturing them.
A sophisticated response would be that:
None of this is to say the conclusion that they do not deserve the wealth they have is right.
I don’t think that’s true, but that’s not something I really care about.
She may be willing to bite this bullet if it’s true. Heck, maybe she isn’t phased by this kind of argument because she takes a different approach to critiquing wealthy people.
The word “plight” would’ve been applicable in the Gilded Age and would be applicable in other countries like Qatar or Asian nations with sweatshops.
With all of the attention this idiot is getting, it’s almost impossible to believe she only got 15,897 votes.
Given a few weeks of campaigning, I could have gotten 15, 897 votes in her district.
If she wants to critique wealthy people, maybe she should start with congress? Not all of them are rich when elected, but by the time they leave they are filthy, stinking, obscenely rich. Maybe the girl can take her outrage there and solve that little mystery. She is trying to align herself with some of the greediest people the world has ever seen. And do we really want her to be the judge? The person who decides how much money anyone should be allowed to earn? She would be better off getting a real life big girl job before running for office. Just sayin.
No, if she wants to criticize the wealthy, then she should start with billionaires, people who are worth much more than any representative, senator, or president (Trump notwithstanding) and who exercise a degree of control over national, state, and local politics.
She isn’t. She has made it clear she is standing against them.
Policies about “how much anyone should be allowed to earn” have always existed. We’ve had systems that have said you can derive income from slavery, from preying on the commons, from profiting on indentured servitude, and so forth.
You seem to imagine this being like putting a brick wall in someone’s way. That isn’t the only possibility. Under a system of use and occupancy, for instance, a person would only have a legitimate claim to the things they continue to occupy and use. In this scenario, you can own a house and a place of business, but you certainly couldn’t exercise control over properties you barely ever visit or over acres of wilderness like Ted Turner. No one would be arresting you for having those things because instead you wouldn’t have enforceable claims over them.
As usual, none of this is to say that use and occupancy is a good or a bad standard.
Determining the policies that govern a society is very much real life.
You mean like the Clintons? People who are worth who knows how many millions? Tens, maybe hundreds? And they got it all while serving in government. Should she critique them?
And yes. A real life big girl job would great place for a youngster to start her life. Not congress.
“Plight of the working class people”?
Sounds like she’s co-opting Trump’s schtik.
If the Clintons are worth 100mil, then what kind of influence do the people who are worth 100-300x as much as them assert? Usually with any logical triage system, you start with the most critical issues and work your way down. Seems like she’s triaging it logically based on her beliefs.
Congress is very much “real life”.
