The Right wing response to the 99 Percent: Lets hate on the lower-income peple who don't have federal income tax liability (but do pay other forms of tax) and spew some more incoherent Randian bull **** and argue that Wall Street doesn't matter. Don't I remember Eric Cantor saying something about how it's wrong to divide Americans? Guess the 1 vs. 99 division is wrong, but 53 to 47 is just fine. http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/10/malkin-award-nominee.html [rquoter] It's a fascinating insight. The key notion is that: "I will succeed or fail because of me and me ALONE." But the dude says his house has lost 40 percent of its value. He did that all by himself? [/rquoter] [rquoter] I admire the attitude and share it. But empirically, he's out of his mind. This global depression was triggered by fancy-ass financial products that were unintelligible even to those who sold them. The huge amount of public money spent to bail the bankers out came from the 53 percenters. Wall Street has nonetheless slowed down Dodd-Frank to a crawl and are festooning themselves with millions of dollars in bonuses, while poverty soars. It does matter what Wall Street does. It has transformed our world, including that of conservatives. Maybe we should do nothing about it. But that it doesn't matter? Please. [/rquoter]
The top 400 Americans own more than the bottom 60% in terms of net worth. http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...l-moore-says-400-americans-have-more-wealth-/ that's something to think about for the 53% movement.
I think it's more effective if you present it like this: The top 400 Americans own more than the bottom 180,000,000 Americans in terms of net worth. Or like this: The average top 400 American owns 450,000 times more than the average bottom 60% American in terms of net worth.
It should be 53 to 46 and it is perfectly fine. 53 vs. 46 is not class warfare since they are all of the same class.
