Wednesday, July 16, 2008


Blogger TMink said...

Makers and Takers is catchy. I had been using Producers and Dependants. I like his terminology better.


5:04 PM, July 16, 2008  
Blogger Peregrine John said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

6:03 PM, July 16, 2008  
Blogger Peregrine John said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

6:07 PM, July 16, 2008  
Blogger Peregrine John said...

(Ok, I'm really really going to spell everything right this time.)

Sounds like it was printed at the Sacred Cow Slaughterhouse! Many heads shall burst into flame, and behold, I shall laugh myself into a stupor. Can hardly wait.

Or, as Dr. H's hubby famously puts it: Heh.

6:42 PM, July 16, 2008  
Blogger Cham said...

Sounds like a case of "my group is better than your group". :rolleyes:

7:35 PM, July 16, 2008  
Blogger TMink said...

Cham, I agree the way it is presented in the interview. I think of makers as producers, people who create wealth. I hope you are a Maker! The world depends on us. We provide more than we use, and our extra funds everything: Aids research, food to Africa, food for America even, Welfare, Insurance, everything. We are producers and we get things done.

The Takers are dependent on others for their funds. They receive subsidies and charity and programs. The Takers tend to have more children than us, and we end up taking care of many of their children.

For me it is not a left v. right distinction, but an up v. down distinction. It transcends race, religion and culture in importance. The illegal alien problem has to do with importing makers to make up for the abundance of takers that we have fostered and supported through insidious or dangerously clueless government programs.


9:18 PM, July 16, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The illegal alien problem has to do with importing makers...

Perhaps you should reconsider that view, Trey. The people streaming across the border illegally tend to be the dregs of other societies looking for anything they can get here. They will end up on the dole by the millions. Why do you think Democrats openly oppose border control? They see another large socially-dependent victim group forming that represents future ignorant Dem voters.

11:25 PM, July 16, 2008  
Blogger TMink said...

P. r., I think it is both! The Business Owners appreciate the cheaper makers and the Democrats appreciate the possible voting block of more takers. Then there are the folks you describe too, and that is a scarry problem.


12:54 AM, July 17, 2008  
Blogger Francis W. Porretto said...

The book is indeed interesting. Schweitzer provides a lot of statistical substantiation for his thesis. But I'm a little sad that he left out the vital third category of Fakers: those who masquerade as Makers while behaving largely as Takers, thus constituting a net drag on the economy and society despite being nominally "productive" elements.

Fakers make up nearly 100% of government employees, and are well represented in large corporations, too. Who hasn't heard of the 80-20 Rule? It's out there...and if you're a sincere Maker in a lax environment such as those, the Faker remoras are either swarming around you or have already gotten a purchase on you. They can be hard to identify...until they've sunk their fangs into your neck.

5:03 AM, July 17, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have wondered how much more productive a company could be if those who expend so much time and energy getting out of work, or in making it look like they are doing something when they are not, channeled that effort into actual results. We have a few who are incredibly successful with claiming other people's work and getting away with it. It happens everywhere though.

6:48 AM, July 17, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is a scary problem, Trey. And I don't see a solution happening any time soon.

10:11 AM, July 17, 2008  
Blogger DADvocate said...

That is that when they're asked about how important money is and the type of job that they desire, in terms of their values, liberals actually rank it higher than conservatives. ....

I also think that there is a satisfaction that often comes to people on the left from believing that they are selfless because of their political belief system. I would argue that in some individuals, that leads them to believe that they in effect have a "Get Out Of Jail Free" card -- that they are now able to pursue money and do so aggressively because they have done their bit for income equality because of the ideas that they embrace.

This part of the interview about materialism reflects what I see, especially in my own family. All my liberal siblings put a greater importance on income and possessions than myself and my one conservative brother.

My brother and I also spend hundreds of hours each year doing volunteer work of various sorts. The liberals in my family spend very little, some maybe none.

2:20 PM, July 17, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have reserved this book at the local library, and I look forward to reading it; however, I am suspicious of any book that claims "this is why we're better than THEY are." They all drip with bias.

And as for statistical analysis, well, there are lies, damned know the rest. It is very easy to fiddle the figures to make bad news look good and vice versa.

I don't doubt for a second that conservatives are, on the whole, better off in the long run than libs (I have long observed that libs believe "action" and "getting involved" means wearing face paint, a clown wig and protesting down Pennsylvania Avenue, ranting hatred at the president, while conservatives associate "action" and "getting involved" with volunteer work and community service. No-brainer there.)

One claim of the book goes: "Rush Limbaugh, Ronald Reagan, Bill O’Reilly and Dick Cheney have given large sums of money to people in need, while Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Michael Moore, and Al Gore have not." Might even be true. But most charitable people engage in altruism discreetly, even secretly. Pink Floyd's guitarist, David Gilmour, was outraged when an investigative journalist revealed that Gilmour had for the past 15 years given away 5M pounds Sterling to worthy causes. There are numerous reasons rich give secretly. And I wouldn't have to cross the street to find wealthy libs who give millions to good causes and more than a few conservatives who pinch pennies on a professional level. Let's be serious, just being a conservative doesn't mean you're a great person. Conservatism is a philosophical disposition, not a religious movement. (I would also grant that liberalism is a degenerative brain disorder, manifesting typically in protracted immaturity and a belief in "Once upon a time" and "Happily ever after." But I digress.)

So, yeah, I'll read the book, but titles like these, making grand statements about THOSE people are downmarket and easy to sell because they preach to the choir. Or do you really think there's a genuine difference between Bill O'Reilly and Keith Olbermann? One's a conservative, and the other a lib, but both are loudmouth, pontificating, blustering, bloviating, self-righteous, arrogant and ill-informed media whores and asses.

...We just prefer one over the other.

Rant over. You may now move freely about the cabin.

4:30 PM, July 17, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

...oh, and Gilmour gave away 5M in sterling EACH year. I neglected to clarify that.

Bad proofreading skills.

4:36 PM, July 17, 2008  
Blogger David Foster said...

The "makers & takers" idea is closely related to the "hard america / soft america" dichotomy proposed by Michael Barone in the book of that name.

7:40 PM, July 17, 2008  
Blogger TMink said...

Kevin, great post.


8:39 PM, July 17, 2008  
Blogger Unknown said...

kevin -- I second your position. We recently had the libs say the same thing and the conservatives scoffing them for it. Meh.

8:52 PM, July 17, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah, but the libs are lying.

12:08 PM, July 18, 2008  
Blogger Unknown said...

Helen, there's also a good book called "Who Really Cares" by Arthur C. Brooks, a liberal-turned-conservative, who outlined with data who gives the most to charity/society. It even surprised me.

12:36 PM, July 18, 2008  
Blogger Helen said...


Thanks, I'll have to check it out.

1:33 PM, July 18, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

視訊做愛聊天室avdvd-情色網ut13077視訊聊天A片-無碼援交東京熱一本道aaa免費看影片免費視訊聊天室微風成人ut聊天室av1688影音視訊天堂85cc免費影城亞洲禁果影城微風成人av論壇sex520免費影片JP成人網免費成人視訊aaa影片下載城免費a片 ut交友成人視訊85cc成人影城免費A片aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片小魔女免費影城免費看 aa的滿18歲影片sex383線上娛樂場kk777視訊俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片85cc免費影片a片免費看A片-sex520plus論壇sex520免費影片85cc免費影片aaa片免費看短片aa影片下載城aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaaa片俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片台灣論壇免費影片免費卡通影片線上觀看線上免費a片觀看85cc免費影片免費A片aa影片下載城ut聊天室辣妹視訊UT影音視訊聊天室 日本免費視訊aaaa 片俱樂部aaa片免費看短片aaaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看短片免費視訊78論壇情色偷拍免費A片免費aaaaa片俱樂部影片後宮0204movie免費影片av俱樂部aaaa彩虹頻道免費影片 杜蕾斯成人免費卡通影片線上觀看85cc免費影片線上觀賞免費線上歐美A片觀看免費a片卡通aaa的滿18歲卡通影片sex520免費影片免費 a 片免費視訊聊天jp成人sex520免費影片

4:41 AM, April 15, 2009  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................

6:13 AM, May 20, 2009  

Post a Comment

<< Home