Why the Rich love Socialists

Chicago Boyz ^ | Chicago Boyz

[KFAT]

Why do all these billionaires (Buffett, Paulson, Soros) support Obama? Or CheBama versus the ChicagoBoyz

[PapaBear3625]

Reduced to one sentence: The ultra-rich like the idea of a planned economy, because they are arrogant enough to believe that they would be among those doing the planning.

Keep in mind, that in the old USSR, while the regular people stood on line for moldy potatoes, the elites lived like royalty. And among the advantages of being an elite in a desperately poor country, is that your servants and mistresses know what happens to them if they do an inadequate job of pleasing you.

[Marylander]

They remember the fate of Marie Antoinette?

[Yaelle]

The ruling class in their dachas loved Communism in the USSR too. As long as you can be one of the elites, looking down on the masses, all is well.

[PapaBear3625]

Because Communism is secretly run by David Rockefeller?

David retired and handed the job over to Soros.

[LibWhacker]

Because if you have more they have less.

[Zionist Conspirator]

David retired and handed the job over to Soros.

Well, he is 93 years old.

I'd have thought the position would go to a relative, however.

[drangundsturm]

They have the resources to shield their assets in trusts and offshore accounts, and pay $500 per hour lawyers to find esoteric loopholes. By overtaxing smaller businesses they ensure those small businesses can never grow up to compete with themselves. They create barriers against competitors and ensure their own pockets get lined.

[CORedneck]

The super-rich elite are of the attitude and opinion that people who are less wealthy better know their place. The idea of taxes is not to fund the government, it is keep those who are not wealthy from getting wealthy. People like Clinton and Obama, when they are talking about taxing the rich, what they are really saying, they don't want people in the lower classes to succeed and to get to a point of getting some financial independence.

I saw it firsthand when I worked for one manager who is a liberal democrat. I heard of him badmouthing those who were smart with their money such as not getting into large amount of debt. I myself had no debt. My house and a couple of vehicles are paid off. I always got called into his office and asked where I got the money from. My answer, NOYB. He didn't take to that too kindly !

[Theophilus]

Barriers to entry. Abort the competition. Reduce the stress of employee retention.

[PerConPat]

Two candidates are standing for election to an office that will have very significant impact on the government's approach to dealing with matters that bear heavily on the overall nature of life in the nation.

One candidate espouses a program that promotes and even requires individual industry and productivity as prerequisites for success. The other states that he/she loves all within the electorate and definitely feels the public's pain to the extent that many generous government programs will soon be forthcoming, in the event of his/her election.

Now, given the normal distribution of human intelligence, the latter candidate has a tremendous advantage. This fact is not lost on a small but powerful elite who really don't give a damn which candidate is put into office- so long as their loopholes, trusts, and other perks are not molested.

Liberals very often find firm friends in the ranks of the Super-rich.

[okie01]

Under socialism, the rich stay rich; the rest of us take it in the butt.

Recall that Adolf Hitler (a National Socialist), immediately upon election to the Chancellorship, co-opted the heavy industry magnates of Germany. Krupp, Thyssen, et al became active supporters because they were promised prominent -- and non-competitive -- roles in the economy.

If you get to keep what you have...and nobody will be allowed to undercut your position so long as you play ball...you play ball.

Problem is, only the rich will be allowed to "play ball". The rest of us will be asked to "submit". -- i.e., usher and work the concession stands.

[okie01]

Amazingly cynical viewpoint... though it does have the ring of truth.

It is also absolutely correct.

The super-rich love socialism -- because, if they play ball, they can keep theirs. And nobody will be allowed to compete with them.

In fact, the super-rich have a genuine advantage in a socialist regime. They will have more influence than in a non-authoritarian regime.

[nmh]

“Reduced to one sentence: The ultra-rich like the idea of a planned economy, because they are arrogant enough to believe that they would be among those doing the planning.
Keep in mind, that in the old USSR, while the regular people stood on line for moldy potatoes, the elites lived like royalty. And among the advantages of being an elite in a desperately poor country, is that your servants and mistresses know what happens to them if they do an inadequate job of pleasing you. “

WELL PUT!

You need to be a journalist.

[nmh]

“Buffet is a fraud and liar. He believes ‘THE RICH” should pay more in taxes and yet he is the richest of the rich and yet never, ever wrote a check to Uncle Sam, for the difference between what he’s currently getting taxed and what he claims would be “fair.” “

Buffet has his “investments” offshore and HIDES his wealth.

Wasn’t it also Buffet that used stated his SECRETARY PAYS MORE THAN HE DOES ON LESS?

I could swear it was him.

It was galling.

[AmericaUnited]

Yes it was Buffet. Nothing was stopping Warren from voluntarily paying more tax than his secretary. Honest people do what they say is “the right things to do”, without having the government put a gun to their head to make them do it.

[PapaBear3625]

My wife has a friend who is very wealthy (at least by my standards). The friend keeps a several full-time servants on her payroll: housekeepers, a nanny/tutor, a cook. Most of her weekly expenditures are for services, not goods. I think her situation is representative of the lives of the very wealthy.

In a wealthy country, with a strong middle class and many job opportunities, you have to pay a lot to get good servants. In a poor country on the edge of starvation, you can get servants cheaply. The effective standard of living of the very rich is better when they are in a poor country.

[Niuhuru]

“As part of the elite, they feel that under socialism, they would be the in charge or rubbing elbows with those that are”

The very crux of the issue. Being able to be part of the world of real power. Another reason Hollywood is so Socialist as well. They want to be more than actors and think that Obama will put them in charge of things.

Ironically I think they’ll be the first ones in front of the firing squad and their assets and children confiscated.

[Niuhuru]

You sir, are a genius.

In essence, another reason Hollywood loves the thought of a socialist regime.

[Infidel Puppy]

BECAUSE SOCIALISTS CAN BE BOUGHT

End of explanation.

[PapaBear3625]

In fact, the super-rich have a genuine advantage in a socialist regime. They will have more influence than in a non-authoritarian regime.

Once characteristic of "old money" rich is that they have connections. They have relationships with politicians and other members of the power elite, relationships that were built over years, decades, generations. This is the competitive advantage of the old-money rich.

It is to the advantage of the old-money rich that there be a lot of government power, because they exert a lot of control and influence over the politicians, and can use the politicians to get what they want: zoning laws to preserve their neighborhood's character, immunity from being hassled by the laws that affect the lowly, the ability to use government to harass those who annoy them, etc.