« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Elizabeth Warren and All The Contempt That She Deserves.

There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: you moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did. Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.

-(HT:Freemanonline)

There are times when someone says something that is so utterly stupid that it no longer even qualifies as wrong, per se. As a blogger who dedicates himself to opposing and eviscerating the stupid arguments of people who constantly attempt to over-empower the state at the expense of individual liberty, I’m supposed to denounce this. Yet, from an epistemological standpoint, it almost becomes pointless. It’s like shooting the suicide bomber after the attack is through.

Elizabeth Warren’s brain is clearly dead to logic and reason. The State of Alabama built several roads that I drove to work on this morning. They therefore own the beer in my refrigerator, if I bought it using proceeds from my paycheck. I can drink half-a-case myself and should enjoy it, but those last few should go a government-sponsored reality abatement program. It’s like medicinal marijuana, except that it makes you piss and burp, rather than eat all the Doritos.

Sadly, politics is like a cheesy work of zombie fiction. Despite her obvious lack of any intellectual pulse, her career staggers forward. It lurches towards a seat in the US Senate that would be better represented by the famous Roman Racehorse Incatatus. There are several ways to approach stupidity sent to the college and therefore taken seriously. Rich Lowry attempts to dissipate Elizabeth’s quaint little smug-cloud that obscures her perceptions of the petite bourgeoisie below.

She argued that these goods are things “the rest of us paid for,” the “rest of us did.” When it comes to federal income taxes — the focus of the current debate — this isn’t right. About half the country doesn’t pay them, and the top 10 percent pays about 70 percent. Insofar as those taxes fund Warren’s public goods, her rich industrialist disproportionately contributes already.

You could attempt to argue by allegory, a la Plato’s shadows on the wall of the cave. Anthony de Jasay explains why your loyal pet dog has every right to eat the home title below.

Your dog is alert, plucky and a fearsome guardian of your property. For all we know, without his services, you would have been burgled over and over again. Your belongings would be depleted and the utility you derived from your home would be much reduced. The difference between the actual value of your home and its unguarded value is the contribution of your dog, and so is the difference between the respective utilities or satisfactions you derive from it. We do not know the exact figure, but the main thing is that there is one.

(HT: Econlib.org)

Warren seems to unreasonably anthropomorphize society. The State of Alabama never decided to pave a road so that Repair_Man_Jack could cruise on in to work and earn enough scratch to drink his juice down in the hood. A bunch of people decided to live and work near where I do. They complained about the state of the roads in that area (and still do). Athwart La Belle Dame Warren, that’s how the stinkin’ roads around here finally got improved.

The State of Alabama and the City of Huntsville therein, only came into being as an integral sum of volitional human decisions. They may or may not remain in existence as an integral sum of future volitional human decisions. Alabama, and some days Huntsville in Beeping particular, possesses no volitional will to do anything. They are discorporate. It’s not like either can walk up and shake your hand.

The bigger problem here, and the one that makes Elizabeth Warren’s despicable and dangerous demagoguery particularly cancerous to good civil order, lies in its consequent deconstruction of the nature of what a price is. A price is what you pay for value received. That value results from volitional actions of others. Therefore, that house I live in, car I drive and paycheck I earn should unconditionally belong to me. And as for Mr. Brewski, don’t try and bogart my Frigidaire. Anthony de Jasay expounds more fluidly below.

All contributions of others to the building of your house have been paid for at each link in the chain of production. All current contributions to its maintenance and security are likewise being paid for. Value has been and is being given for value received, even though the “value” is not always money and goods, but may sometimes be affection, loyalty or the discharge of duty. In the exchange relation, a giver is also a recipient, and of course vice versa.

In a civil and decent society, you own what you pay for and you keep what you earn. There are no spurious or exogenous claims to your house unless you really need to fire the attorney who did your claims search before the closing meeting. A society where everyone who helps pay taxes and support the fire department gets a piece of everyone else’s pie is a functional anarchy. That is until it stops functioning. And then the fit truly hits the shan.

For this reason, Elizabeth Warren deserves our condign contempt. She should be taken about as seriously as Bob Higgs takes her. She needs to be resoundingly defeated in her bid for higher office and then hooted out of serious and contemplative society. She is a joke. It disturbs me that so few people get that and start laughing.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • msctex

    . . .is her lack of acknowledgement that the workers who built the factory were paid BY the man who financed and constructed the factory, while this man simultaneously paid his fair share for the roads, the police, etc — and probably more. His factory is a CONTRIBUTION to society as a whole, not any sort of drain, as it employs people and creates goods.

    People like Warren are easily explained. As long as people like the man who built the factory are allowed to use their minds to better the world, Elizabeth Warren and those like her are simply unnecessary. They have no place in the world, unless we allow them to slow true progress by redefining and bastardizing the concept of “Fairness.”

  • anjinconsulting

    The guy who built the “factory” (to follow the classical marxist theme) typically saved or borrowed, or some combination of the two, the money it took to invest in his “factory”. He risked his own credit and his own capital to pay the “workers” while simultaneously paying off the loan and all of the taxes on his income and his property.

    In fact, it is his contribution, proportionally more than any indivuidual “worker” that finances all of those goods and services the government distributes to the “workers”; oh, and to the the “factory owner” as well.

    In fact if it werent for “factory owners” there would be no wages for “workers” to pay taxes with. Using her “logic” and the apparent concept of the “social contract” she has so defined, it is obviously unfair to those who risk their own assets for the benefit of society.

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      to rise up in defense of Karl Marx. A study of his writings about French politics during the rule of Louis Napoleon suggests that he has gotten to Obama’s Right by a discernable margin on the issue of Federal Stimulus.

      Louis Napoleon apparantly ran out some policy similar in it’s asininty to The American Jobs Act of 2011. Marx ripped it up one side and down the other over concerns that his policy would lead to official corruption.

      If you can stand reading the abominable prose of Krazy Karl, here ya go.

      http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1852/18th-brumaire/ch01.htm

      • anjinconsulting

        What a bunch of drivel. It is much more succinctly stated in verse when The Who sings Dont Get Fooled Again. Karl was just another clown making a living casting aspersions on the productive members of society and fomenting hate and discontent.

        Your analogy seems a little like calculus to me in that you can look at and quantify some miniscule change in the overall value or some difference between the value and the limit, yet still declare a difference. Like when the transient value approaches the limit, the difference in movement or change, or the distance between the limit and the value is exponentially smaller…..

        If Karl were the limit then Warren and the blithering fools who follow her, not to mention her proponents (specifically Captain Zero and his useful idiots in the media) personify the the theory that a Marxist is a Marxist no matter how you quantify them.

        • Repair_Man_Jack

          you could defend that argument using the the following values

          A – maps to “Suck”
          Not A – maps to “Not Suck”

          I just enjoyed pointing out objectively that the Peckerhead-In-Chief had managed to careen to the left of Karl Marx.

  • johnt

    That makes sense. And if I pay for the federal government I guess I own that, I wonder how that works out in practice, can I start giving orders now?
    I imagine I also own Harvard,[I'm getting to like this.] Which means I have a claim on Warren’s income, maybe on Warren herself. Can she cook & clean? I have to survey what else I own, back later.

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      Warren would spit in the food of any man she EVAH had to cook for. It’s the whole class warfare thing….

  • Uma Richie

    does that qualify as “paying forward” in Warren’s “social contract”?

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      you KNOW Mizz ‘Lizbeth has got to have her vig….

  • tailfins1959

    In your opinion, is time better spent campaigning for Scott Brown or Sean Bielat (assuming he runs again)?

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      I’d support Brown because he has a higher P(S) than Bielat, but if Brown were to throw a few events w/ Bielat, than you could engage in actively helping both in synonymy.

      • tailfins1959

        From a “rock in your shoe” standpoint it’s a REALLY tough decision. Being a supposed constituent of a Congressman that talks like Elmer Fudd grates on you after awhile. Newton and Brookline are heavily Jewish which could hopefully make Bielat the Massachusetts version of Bob Turner. MA-4 has lots in common with NY-9.

        Liz Warren’s shrill factor is off the charts.

        • Repair_Man_Jack

          Which Of These Two Is More Likely?

          A) Scott Brown pulls other GOP Congressional Candidates along with him as he beats E. Warren.

          - Or -

          B) The chance to pick off Bawny Fwank inspires a huge GOP vote from that CD that helps swing the election in Brown’s favor.

          Whichever one you choose can tell you who to give $$ to.

  • davidleigh

    Elizabeth Warren is a spoiled little girl. Her train of thought is completely Marxist. Surely not ALL folks in the blue states think like this, although they come darn close.

    Everytime the subject of Warren comes up I get incensed. I wish a MAN would have told her to “SHUT UP” and “SIT DOWN!” You know a feminist like this would have gone bizzerk. I’m so sick of liberals, liberal women, in particular, making despicable comments like this. Only liberal women do this kind of thing. I mean, you’ve got Gov. Beverly Perdue in NC wishing elections would be cancelled. Oh, okay….

    Hey Liz, I bet the factory’s that made your boxers were owned by a successful man. How do you like that! How’s that nice Edsel you’re driving doing? Made in a factory! And how many MEN died in American wars to give you freedom to be a repulsive marxist.

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      A) The Modern Liberal Arts Education.
      B) Too Much Money/Not Enough Adversity.
      C) The “Progressive” Left.
      D) All of the above.

      Correct answer = D. That is all.

      • davidleigh

        Touche, Repair Man Jack…Very well put and very true. People like this remind me of elitist higher education schools in Nazi Germany or Mother Russia. They are completely devoid of how America became great. Think about the comparisons with our Founding Fathers. She would be shunned. And she had better be shunned in the primary and defeated.

  • renl57

    You’ll notice from her words and tone that Ms. Warren doesn’t consider building a factory much of an achievement.

    A basic assumption among all modern leftists is that economic progress is collective rather than individual and will happen anyway, just so long as basic infrastructure is created by collective action.

    In the 1970s, build enough homes with enough garages and driveways, and eventually some guy will invent user-friendly personal computers in one of those garages. So Steve Jobs didn’t really accomplish anything, anybody could have done that in their own garage–as long as unionized construction workers build enough garages.

    To Elizabeth Warren, it’s the guy who built the garage who made personal computers possible. It’s the guy who built the house that Jonas Salk lived in that made polio vaccines possible.

    And it’s this philosophy in which North Koreans continue to starve, waiting in vain for collective progress.

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      That tone of voice just made her contempt for entrepreneurship so obvious. I don’t want her running a cash register. Forget about anything vital or important.

      • earlgrey

        Hate has been trademarked by liberals to apply to anyone that diagrees with them.

        • Repair_Man_Jack

          with a long and wet strand of Italian pasta.

  • johnt

    hate for the productive class, hate in general, hate based on the awkward knowledge that they underwrite, make possible the comfortable existence that these intellectually denuded, tenured protected, grubs live. Probably more than a little self hate as well.
    Rand called the shots on this essentially destructive class.

    • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

      NT

  • dukefergus

    as contemptible as warren is, Obama’s second choice to head the CFPB is no better. As AG of OH, he put a hatred towards the productive class into actual motion by cutting deals with his trial lawyer buddies that allowed them to file suits against businesses on behalf of the state and then profit share with the state. just think what he’ll do with absolute power and a 5 year term at CFPB if ever confirmed…

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      Like a dog returning to its vomit, you a fool returneth to his folly! Proverb 26.

      • Repair_Man_Jack

        NT

      • dukefergus

        the true difference between them and parasites/moochers are that parasites don’t usually kill their hosts.

  • sisquinanamook

    The people who work for an industrialist pay their taxes out of the wages their industrialist employer pays them. Government employees pay their taxes with the tax money paid by the employess and the industrialist. So when you get right down to it, the industrialist paid his taxes, his employees taxes, AND the taxes of the gov’t employees!

  • ombd

    Even in Massachusetts, this picture perfect liberal elitist will NOT attract the blue collar votes necessary to beat Brown. Her leftist rants are are just another example of Democrats Behaving Badly. Something we’ve seen quite a lot of lately …

    http://www.ombudizen.com/2011/09/29/democrats-behaving-badly/

  • JSobieski

    She essentially inherited a country built on the ideas that are enthetical to hers, and proceeds to use the product of those ideas (i.e. the American Superpower) to undermine those very same foundational ideas (individual liberty, accountability, etc).

    Elizabeth Warren, the government in DC has the capability to do what you want only because past governments did not do the things that you want to do.

    Elizabeth’s diatribe should be re-written as follows:

    There is no branch of the government that creates wealth. Not a single agency not a single program. Does government do something good with tax dollars? Good for us. But I want to be clear: you collected the tax dollars on the backs of people working hard to bring goods to market, and people taking risks in investing money and hiring employees. The fact that government had any money at all is a tribute to those who pay the most taxes while creating the wealth that sustains a vibrant middle class. Government didn’t have to worry about the creation of wealth but the American entrepreneur and the American capitalist took care of that. Every cent that the government takes is created by a private citizen in the private economy.

    • aesthete

      exclusively through “public service” and her work in an academic institution which largely serves to launch the careers of “public servants”. It would have been impossible for her to feather her nest as she has done if rank government thievery hadn’t also existed. It is plausible be that she simply cannot imagine someone getting rich without another getting poor, given that sales taxes across New Jersey and income taxes across the country have funded her own move towards prosperity.

      • aesthete

        she’s a typical dumb, rich, white, liberal broad who has never encountered either a wealthy or a truly poor individual outside of a confrontational context. Even so, mere ignorance does not account for the seriously warped view embodied in Warren’s now-famous quote.

        • aesthete

          Very few liberals are willing to engage in a discussion of either 1) actual, concrete costs/benefits that result from their policies, or 2) how past predictions have worked out. Liz Warren is no different: she has no intention of looking objectively at alternate or cheaper ways in which police and roads could be provided, or how much benefit factory owners derive from these things. She has no desire to discover what separates third-world from first-world countries. She just wants what’s in the vault, and is willing to make whatever noises with her mouth will get her this. For all the discussion of Palin and conservatives’ lack of intellectual curiosity (and there are certainly some incurious conservatives out there), there’s no doubt in my mind that people like Warren are much more slavishly devoted to unchallenged axioms or feelings than even the most inflexible and unaware of conservatives.

          • Uma Richie

            As she spoke of some hypothetical factory owner, it was obvious that Elizabeth Warren has never relied on a manufacturing plant for her family income.

            The factory where my husband worked for a short period early in our marriage was in a town that had an all-volunteer EMT and fire fighting force. When the alarm rang, the volunteers with whom he worked would leave the floor to respond. They stayed on the clock the whole time they were gone, and were never charged for time off. In a way that wasn’t reflected in the books, the plant owners were contributing to the fire company above what they paid in local taxes.

          • aesthete

            They only know how to take. Only the most grasping, parasitic and amoral make it to the top, because only the grasping, parasitic and amoral have what it takes to endure the slings of arrows of politics while avoiding the moral burden of forcing a person to do something with money that’s not yours.

  • aesthete

    “those who cannot do, teach”. It is easy to pretend that something is easy, intuitive or obvious when one has never done it before. Does Warren really think that F(police, education, ROADZZZ) = (Bill Gates + Mark Zuckerberg)^Steve Jobs ? That entrepreneurship is inevitable, and that the wealth of entrepreneurs was arbitrarily earned? That CEOs can negotiate contracts for millions because shareholders just love wasting their money? Long-term, unprofitable behaviors and institutions, such as unions, disappear or become vestigial in a free market. Why hasn’t this happened with high-level CEOs and CFOs? Why are their salaries *increasing*, rather than *decreasing*? Could it have to do with the fact that they provide actual value that would go away if they left?

    Methinks that Warren should read some Schumpeter (not that she’d get anything out of it…)

  • A_Texan

    I found her remarks obnoxious, because they seem to admit of no limit to the power of the state to take property–tho she does refer, somewhat ambiguously, to a “big chunk.”

    Still, I do believe that the community, national, state, and local, has a claim, rooted in justice, to tax the citizens, and yes, to tax those with more property more than those with less. The military draft is just, forcible conscription for public works is just, and taxation is just. We owe an extensive duty to our community–a duty that can, in part, be enforced by compulsory seizure of property and even our bodies (draft) in extraordinary times.

    That does not mean, however, that government “owns” each of us and our property in fee simple absolute, however. Where to draw the lines? I don’t know.

    • aesthete

      “The military draft is just, forcible conscription for public works is just, and taxation is just.”

      [citation needed]

      “We owe an extensive duty to our community?a duty that can, in part, be enforced by compulsory seizure of property and even our bodies (draft) in extraordinary times.”

      Community =/= government. Moreover, what specific duty do we owe to a community (i.e., an arbitrary group of people) as opposed to people or organizations in general? I own, have purchased, and love several Apple products, but I feel no obligation to support everything they do, nor do I feel an obligation to support them in the future based on past support. What makes a community different, and why?

  • trickamsterdam

    Well, I’m not sure I’d call call her illogical, since most of society has already accepted her argument (in essence).

    Otherwise, why is there a progressive tax code?

    The reason I don’t think attacks on capitalism like this will work (well, they might work for Warren, but they probably won’t for Obama) is that the American People no longer trust the Democratic Party to spend the money they take in an effective way.

    People understand that “spending on education” really means giving teachers raises, not spending for the kids, that “spending on the poor” means giving a social worker a raise, not providing help for the destitute…and these union members then reward the D party, of course.

    Also, providing for union construction jobs, not private construction, on and on. Not to mention when it’s just wasted, like with Solyndra.

    So I have to say, what’s going to do the D party in, in 2012, is their corruption and incompetence; not their socialism, or the a lack of logic in their defense of socialism.

  • 1stRichard

    The key word Elizabeth Warren is using is ?Social Contract? as justification and blurring it in to a conservative ideology. As explained from one of the moonbats around here?..

    ?Social Contract The concept of the social contract is one of the foundations of the American political system. It is the belief that the state only exists to serve the will of the people, and they are the source of all political power enjoyed by the state. We are governed by a process of mutual consent, agreeing to abide by common rules/laws and accept corresponding duties to protect society and promote the general welfare (See Plato, Hobbes, Rousseau, Thomas Jefferson, John Locke, and James Madison).?

    This is where the argument is, eloquent counters to the narrative are not as important as arguing against the justification.

  • sbm1

    Is the people I know on facebook who posted the link to the moveon front page about this…with the title “She just said the best thing. Possibly ever. ”

    It really scares me how much the left worships government…