Slog AM: Two Fires on Capitol Hill, Biden's Signin' More Executive Orders on Gun Violence, Go Preregister for the Vaccine



«There were two giant fires on Capitol Hill yesterday evening....CHS Blog says 'explosions were reported at an encampment in the brushy area.'»
Hobo camp accidentally detonates propane containers?


@1 - yup, most likely.

lets hear all the weepy excuses of why these "poor, vulnerable neighbors" of ours should be able to camp anywhere, steal everything and anything, shoot drugs all day, have dangerous camps with fire/explosion possibilities. such awesome members of our community.


Manchin is such a clown and his logic is flawed. The filibuster is used almost exclusively to play political games by both parties. He can go fuck himself with a rusty shovel.


@2 - most of them are better members of the community than you, you heartless prick.


@2 I’d rather hear more of your frantic strawman fallacies.

Seriously. Nothing brings out the immoral dirtbags and their hysterical projection like the tragedy of homelessness. Well. Except for any mention of Sawant, that is.


@4: I wouldn't say heartless, but inelegantly stated. Essentially correct for a signifiant portion of the homeless population.


@4 - riiiiight.

the propane tank (or whatever blew up) was likely stolen, as was anything else at the "camp".

ever try to rehab a feral cat or dog? add a life of shooting drugs, stealing, no responsibilities or consequences and it equals a pretty fucked up and unsalvageable person likely to need taxpayer assistance the rest of their lives - or to be left in their "camp" to continue stealing, drugging and being a mess.

they're awesome!


@3 He’s clearly staking out a place where Biden has to shower his district in pork to get him to play along.

Someone HAS to have dirt on that guy. Right? Like, he’s got to have played grab ass or taken a bribe or fucked a nanny or something. This is where the Democrats need a son of a bitch like Lyndon Johnson.


1) The name of the suspect in the South Carolina mass murder: former NFL--and Seahawk--player Phillip Adams. This comes one day after a former New York Giant was formally accused of first-degree murder, and this after a slew of other recent off-the-field incidents, starting with the brutal beating committed by Seahawk Chad Wheeler (and separate incidents involving Broderick Washington, Isaiah Wilson, and many others; the mysterious death of Louis Nix; et al). Yes, other major league sports players have committed their share of off-the-field violence--but that violence pales compared to off-the-field incidents of NFL players. And the horrifying frequency and severity of this year's off-season incidents justifies even deeper suspicion about the psychological effects of playing that game. This can't be written off as a few bad apples acting out. No championship is worth the kind of violence we're seeing this offseason. Roger Goodell, players, coaches, fans: figure it out and do better or let go of this game as an entertainment addiction. 2) Good for Joe Biden. The Stranger's customary passive aggressive condescension ("tepid") notwithstanding, Biden's doing a million times more than Donald Trump would ever do. Good, Joe. Keep it up. 3) Still waiting, Stranger staff, for meaningful--or any--reporting about the tragedy in Myanmar. You've got a Nobel-Prize winning president of a credible democracy winning a landslide victory being usurped by a military junta (committing hundreds, and probably thousands, of murders, including those of children and pro-democracy protesters)--and next to nothing from you about it. Yes, I can find some news about it elsewhere, but shame on you for looking past this story. Myanmar--not the latest Russell Wilson trade rumors or tomorrow's weather or Kshama Sawant's latest criticism of Jenny Durkan--is the biggest story in the world right now after the pandemic. And it could get much worse. Educate your readers about it. It's not going away--and something like it could happen here--and almost did.


@7 man I’m gonna play Strawman, too. It looks fun!

Ok. There were two fires. One was a house fire. Was that guy a thieving junkie, too? Because I guess that’s the only way fires happen! Man. So many more house and apartment fires too!

My god! We have to something about these home owners! They steal shit and catch their homes on fire. Clearly a danger to the community!

I can’t wait for all those pro-home owner people who think we can’t just put up houses anywhere justify these pyro drug addicts to just up and buy homes!


It was a series of propane tank fires, along with a couple of high profile murders, and rapes which finally convinced Mayor Murray to close down the Jungle. I wonder what it will take for our current City Council to close down the jungle encampments that have spread out throughout the entire city.

Of course there are those who claim our "most vulnerable neighbors" are only committing survival crimes. I guess I never realized Arson, Murder, and Rape were crimes of survival.


Be careful what you wish for Jasmyne. If Joe Manchin were to retire before his term expires in 2024 the Republican Governor of West Virginia would appoint his successor, handing the gavel back to Mitch.

As horrible as this 50-50 tie is, a 51-49 Republican majority would be much much worse.


@10 - a pretty poor attempt there, Professor.

for the life of me i will never understand the defense/excuse making/etc for "campers". i guess some people are just into feral junkies? good for you they're all over the place - even the woke mob at SPS is fighting to keep camps on school grounds, awesome idea!


Kool down strawberry men; I was just speculating how two explosions might go off in a homeless camp.


@13 For the last and final time: Nobody is saying this is way things should be. They are saying this is way things ARE. Everyone is frustrated by this. Nobody is happy about it.

And dude. this about it for five seconds. Stop allowing yourself to be amniupated by your knee jerk reactions to a news item.

There are more people in homes in apartments. Therefore there are more fires happen. They happen in homes, too. More muurders happen in homes. Thieves have homes. Drugs are purchases by home owners. Home owners are also addicts. Fuck. People that own homes abuse parks, too! Use critical thinking for fuck sake.

There is nothing unique to these social diseases to homeless people. Except in concentration, frequency, and the fact they are homeless so these things happen in plain sight.

So what do we do? Sweeps merely move the problem. Arrests are expensive to society and generally only add the expensive burden of criminalizing homelessness adding another stigma and barrier to the return to a productive life.

Shelters are unpleasant, temporary and dangerous. Most court ordered drug treatment is unregulated for-profit garbage that doesn't really work and comes with strings like phony work requirements. That's why addicts don't want them.

And we have no real public in-patient mental health infrastructure.

The fact is this city has no other place for all these people. And BTW some of them they are families. People with children. Many even HAVE jobs, dude. You can't constantly pain them all the same.

So. Fuck you and all you assholes and your constant demonizing and dehumanizing of these people. It doesn't help.

There very few practical humane options for the growing homeless population. Growing ALL over the nation. This a national crisis. You don't have solutions. You just want them gone. You just want them someone else's problem. You refuse to understand the reality of where we are.

There is only one proven solution that works: Homes. From there you have the stability for drug treatment. You have bridge to productive living and the stability necessary to take care of all the other issues. You start there.

Nobody want to it because of MONEY. it fucks with the developer interests, it effects land costs, and it takes a ton of time and effort.

So this is where we are. And this is where we will stay no matter how much you bitch and complain. The best you will achieve is make it someone else's problem.


Geez, with all the vitreol levelled against homeless people in the comments at the slightest opportunity, it seems like jumping the gun to assume this fiery violence could only have been self inflicted.

Granted it was more likely an accident made all the more unforgivable by the inability of the accused to give enough money to landlords or banks for housing, but holy smokes fellas, let's put down the pitchforks and take a deep breath eh?


@11 Well, its good thing "Arson, Murder, and Rape" are never committed by people who have homes or live in apartments.

Man. All we need to do is execute all the homeless people and we will literally end all crime!


@9 "nd the horrifying frequency and severity of this year's off-season incidents justifies even deeper suspicion about the psychological effects of playing that game. "

Physiological effects. Constant traumatic brain injury and steroids. Until technology is developed that can address these issues before they happen the NFL should either be played by robots or banned. Fuck even MMA is safer and more humane.


In all the comments about the homeless I've seen over the years, very few of them would fit the "demonizing or dehumanizing" category.

More like blunt talk about reality is what it mostly is, like it our not @ph.


@17 I thought you had me blocked with you magical blocking software.


I wonder if the union vote is similar to political elections in which lower turnout favors more conservative interests? Seems at least possible, inasmuch as the more motivated folks who'd be driving turnout would stand to be those in favor of shaking up the industry and fomenting change. I wasn't super optimistic they'd be able to pull it off when the effort first launched, but am also just skeptical and rather pessimistic by nature. Fingers crossed though.


Everyone wants to get rich but how many of us would spend wisely the moment we were? If you give a homeless person all your money and everything you own, what does that make you? Does being uncomfortable and without shelter eliminate your humanity?


That scene from Norma Rae really is great too. I don't know that I could sit thru that entire movie as there's probably a ton of it set in that noisy-ass industrial warehouse and it's so insanely noisy, claustrophobic and gloomy, I feel like it'd grate on me. Fantastic choreography and atmospheric capture in the direction though.


@22: ok, I'll bite:

Q: Everyone wants to get rich but how many of us would spend wisely the moment we were?
A: Actually, unless won by lottery or inheritance, the rich got rich by spending wisely in the first place and will get richer by continuing to spend and invest wisely.

Q: If you give a homeless person all your money and everything you own, what does that make you?
A: Perhaps a philosophical and spiritual "vow of poverty" to gain inner peace and wisdom - but other than that, a complete and utter fool.

Q: Does being uncomfortable and without shelter eliminate your humanity?
A: Or course not, no more so than being comfortable in a home.


@18. Yes, unquestionably: physiological effects are essential in this. That said, the physiological and psychological seem interrelated. What's beyond question is that the NFL's off-the-field violence is horrific this year--worse than any year I can recall, and I go way back. Roger Goodell, coaches, staff, and everyone concerned need to focus on this now--not tomorrow, not as a back-burner issue, not as something to be sort of hushed-up for fear of losing fan support, not as secondary to the draft or trade rumors or gossip about which player dislikes his coach. But off-the-field violence needs to be addressed by the league today. The Phillip Adams horror has to be the last straw. And this one day--one day--after a former NY Giant was formally accused of first-degree murder. One fundamental issue: if this much insane violence is occurring despite all the advancements in equipment safety and rule changes--then can the game actually be reformed to limit the off-the-field violence? If not, does it deserve fan support?


Great comment by MarvelUS @9.

Two quibbles:
1. Hard to read without paragraphs.
2. I think you can call attention to the monstrous situation in Myanmar without making this about The Stranger and its skeleton staff. The issue is Myanmar and the western world's response to it, not how some alt-weekly struggling through the pandemic is supposed to pay attention to it.

Having gotten those two quibbles out of the way, I had about the same reaction to the story about that ex-NFL player committing mass murder and then killing himself. Chances are this is traceable to the brain damage inherent to the sport of football. It is simply not possible to play the game in a safe way. It's hard for me to even view it as a legitimate sport anymore. And we'd be best as consumers to let it fade from our attention.

Confession: I did enjoy this year's Super Bowl. Scarcely watched any of the NFL season that preceded it--even my favorite Pittsburgh Steelers.


Most wealth is inherited. Domalb Tlunff and his vulgar spawn certainly didn’t get wealthy by spending wisely; they actually lost their shirts several times over. No, they inherited their wealth from an unscrupulous klan enthusiast who either worked hard and/or ripped people off at a time when it was much easier for shady people to get rich.

The myth that wealth is mostly the product of hard work and not an accident of birth perpetuates this sick cultural belief in meritocracy, and you see it here in these comments — the idea that the poor deserve to suffer because they are bad people is something people absorb like oxygen because it means their lack of compassion is righteous.

Just as not all rich people are human garbage like the Tdturp family, not all homeless people are, I don’t know, intentionally exploding tanks of propane (????) because they are terrible people.

Judge people by their individual merit, not by their socioeconomic status.


the police are too heavily armed
Defund the police
Queers are subject to violence, oftentimes by the police
Narrative of an outside force coming into cities and kidnapping people, extrajudicial killings by federal law enforcemey (portland, olympia this summer)
Legitimate fears of fascism grow, especially in minority communities.
Take the guns away from the (assumption being) far right, white, owners.
Melt all the guns.

How TF do you think things are going to go if we disproportionately disarm minorities while the spectre of fascism and religious extremism rises before our very eyes all around us? Who is going to take the guns away? Do you think our fair, safe and stable LE community is going comply? What planet are you guys on?

Many POC and queers have guns, and many are buying for the first time. You should interview them.


@26. Thanks, Cressona. I appreciate the feedback.


@20 Who said that? I don't know who you are, Pippy. But you seem consistently pretty desperate for me to pay attention to you. Which is reason enough to hide your comments, I guess.

And it's Greasemonkey/TamperMonkey. Pretty well known. Doesn't take much to hide comments by user name. Though not perfect.

It doesn't work on iPhone or Safari, unfortunately. What I'm on at the moment. But since you don't say much of any interest. Sure. I can block you.


@27 What is it with the straw men today.

I think we can manage to allow law-abiding sane people to buy a shotgun for home defense —AND— simultaneously make it harder for lunatics to casually acquire arsenals and walk around with them like toxic homicidal cowboys.

Your laughable appeals to the "OMG what about the gay people need to protect themselves!" is as fucking stupid as it is transparently pandering nonsense.

You can hold aloft your AK and yell "WOLVERINES!" all you want, but Joe Bob already out numbers you and out arms gay people.

No amount of weapons they can amass (people do not know shit about using them in the combat context) will protect them from a full blown Nazi takeover of the professional US armed forces with an airfare and and a Navy. The best you will ever achieve is a bloody terrorist stalemate rendering your own community and cities unlivable hell holes. Need examples of how well that shit works? Wellcome to Iraq. Or Mogadishu. Or Aleppo.

Christ. Joe Bob believes the same paranoid shit you do. Somehow YOU'RE gonna take over and shove god fearing Christians into Gay Camps or something. You're all lunatics.Frankly I'd spend more time wearing a mask, exercising and eating right than worrying about this bullshit.

What WILL work is the same boring drudgery of political engagement. It's not as fun as LARPing the zombie apocalypse. But it's what works. Not arming your self to the teeth. I mean sure. Have a shotgun at home. Fine. No problem with that. But there is zero conflict with that right and making sure guns are not casually and easily acquired by mad men. And shame on you for implying there is.

And trust me. If it comes to a shooting Civil War in the US there will be plenty of opportunities to arm yourselves. There will be nations lining up to supply any side with as many weapons as you want.


Every day there is a mass shooting in America. It's the price we pay for our freeDUMB in this violent and stupid society that cares nothing at all about human life (unless it's a useless, unviable outside of the womb clump of cells).

This country could solve homelessness and every other social problem 10X over with the amount of obscene wealth there is (not even personal wealth, I mean what exactly does the Pentagon spend $2 BILLION a day on when military personnel are on food stamps and make poverty wages and veterans make up a huge proportion of the homeless population)?

I am exhausted by everything and over it all completely. Lucky for me I have a pretty good chance of being murdered by a fucktard with a gun before I die from my motor neuron disease. Either way it's a win-win, am I right?



@26: No need for myths when we can point to examples. No need for generalizations either.


Kind of seems the Internet equivalent of sticking you fingers in your ears while chanting “Nyah Nyah Nyah! I can’t hear you!”

But you be you Professor.


@32 He didn't SAY that. He did say "millionaires" you lying asshole. He SAID "wealth." It deliberate conflation like that which makes everyone know you are a dishonest pile of shit.

And your stupid quote was from a book written in the 1980's! And link from investopedia? Seriously? You literally pick a site with literally a vested profit interest in maintaining the myth that you're going to be millionaire by buying stock. HAHAHAHA. God.

Maybe some actual data:


Scott Rudin: a case study in unchecked EGOTism.


@38 IOW: "WAAAAAH! Pay attention to me! Waaaah"

No, it's the equivalent of you not entitled to anybody else's time because you think you're a special snowflake who knows a fucking thing. You do not.

Look, Sally. There are a million desperate for attention internet cranks out there. You're not even a remotely entertaining crank. Nobody owes you their time.


Of course wealth cannot be inherited if wasn't created by hard work in the first place. Moreover, inheritance wealth still creates economic activity.

Blip's argument is essentially moot.


32 how you define "wealthy" matters. For one I never said "millionaires" (I would argue that is a dubious standard for wealth in 2021), and while I technically did not define the parameters, if pressed I would abide by a relative metric because this is how wealth is generally described; the top 1% of earners is the most common standard, and among those about 40% self-report inheriting wealth. And further, if you look at the data by deciles the amount of wealth inherited increases dramatically as people climb the wealth ladder.

So sure, not a majority of them, but it's not far from it -- also this is self-reported, and I would guess at least some of them have a motivation to lie, but even if we take them at their word I still stand by my larger point, just change "most" to "almost most" if you prefer. Wealth or lack of it is not a proxy for a person's decency or value as a person.

Anyway cheers on actually bringing some facts to support your point for a change


It is in our nature to be fearful and violent at times, so I think you’re right a lot of the violence we see can be chalked up to human nature.
CTE is so well documented to be linked to these sorts of behaviors, that this case is one we might be able to fit into that 3% though (after all how many people are footballers).

I think our society needs to grow a lot to be able to identify and heal people who are in desperate situations. There may be a policy that can drive it but ultimately it’s individuals reaching out and supporting one another which is difficult in this automated world.


42 I know poor people who work multiple jobs to feed their families. The idea that hard work is rewarded with wealth is an ugly and untrue statement that gives people a free pass to not give a fuck about people who are suffering, because they think they deserve it. It's a dogshit point no matter how much you parse out shitstain families like the Tmudrps who offer no value to humanity whatsoever.


rainmist @31, I'm confused. You seem to be willfully misconstruing my point @26. Nowhere did I say that Phillip Adams was not criminally or morally liable for his actions.

I'm curious now. Why did you feel compelled to put those words in my mouth?


@34 ok bro I'll just melt all my gay guns, and tell all my gay friends to melt theirs. It's not pandering. I am armed and so are a lot of the queers and POC round you.

Anyway, enjoy trusting the police.


@45: Your stereotypes don't negate the fact that hard work can lead to success so they don't elevate your argument.


Looks like the Prof is backing, dominating, bullying, and sucking all of the oxygen out of the comments per usual. Did I miss an election where Herr Prof was put in charge, or did he/she/they appoint themselves?

Because that's the definition of a dictator. Dissent will not be tolerated.


Also consider upward mobility: it has been on a steady decline for decades, meaning fewer people are able to lift themselvess from their station regardless of how hard they work, giving lie to the notion that hard work will take you places.

While people who were born into wealth may not necessarily inherit most of it (just, you know, a large percentage), their hard work is more prosperous because they “inherited” academic and professional connections and other wealth-adjacent factors that propel them further than people who are literally starting from nothing.

This is not meritocracy. This doesn’t mean that higher-SES people don’t work hard, just that their hard work is more richly rewarded than those less fortunate, and it is bad reasoning to equate “wealthy” with “hard working” and “deserving of empathy” because the necessary corollary is that poor people earned their lot in life.


49 here I'll call you a fucking idiot if that helps, now it's a democracy


giving lie to the notion that hard work ALONE will take you places.


@47 "ok bro I'll just melt all my gay guns, and tell all my gay friends to melt theirs. "

Yes. You and your imaginary armed gay friends absolutely should melt all your imaginary gay guns. Then mold them into a shiny pretend gay metal dildos, shove them up your pretend gay ass. And when that is done then make another one for the imaginary anus of your imaginary gay straw man you concocted and shove that one up there too.

"Anyway, enjoy trusting the police."

You got so many straw men there you'll be able to form an imaginary gay skeet shooting club!

And you enjoy your much higher statistical probability you'll either be eating the barrel of that gun (admittedly a plus), or using it to shoot any partner stupid enough to pair up with you.


48 all these people shitting on the homeless and destitute and you're over here defending rich people from stereotypes like "many of them inherit their wealth". I hope you don't pray to jesus with those hands.


@49 There he is!

Look. I fucked a lot of biker chicks in the 1980's. I'm not proud of it. But I'm not ashamed, either. If one of them was your mom you gotta know I guarantee you she had a pretty good time. And she knew these wings were meant to fly, baby. Your mom was hot.

And if I promised I'd show you how to play baseball or something I just said that shit to get you to the back of the trailer so me an your old lady could get it on. It was nothing personal. Let it go, little man.

And hey man, seriously. I know I intimidate you. That you feel I dominate you with my extra powerful electrons. I'm sorry. I do not mean to (maybe try steroids or something). But those electrons are free, my sad little buddy. They're just out there swimming in the ether waiting to be turned into abusive SLOG poetry. I'm just doing what the gods of quantum mechanics and the internet demand.

You can do it too! There's plenty for everyone!


PS. Wen Wino, I like you. But I think the point of dictatorship is to bypass elections.

And now that you have said I am in charge of this here rodeo of agoraphobic sock puppets I demand that you at least be entertaining or be logically cogent. One or the other.

I'm not asking for much. I'm not asking you to be smart like blip. Or considerate like MarvellUS.

I'm not asking for perfect grammar (HA! coming from me). I'm not asking you to be little angels. Or even that you be nice. I just ask that IF you are going to post total bullshit all the time at least do so with some flair.

Honesty, I'd take the ranting Feebs or that sock puppet named after the french machine gun who said he fought The Terminator over 100 silly whiny bitches like Tensor.


blip, multiple things can be true at this same time. Yes, upward mobility is unfortunately on the decline but that doesn't mean that successes are still not occurring. It's not all negative.

Nobody is shitting on the homeless and destitute. That is the myth you need to recognize. You and the angry professor use it to perpetuate false arguments, and it's really getting old.





@35 -- no it isn't.
I'd prefer you
Stuck around.


57 you call this a testimonial?

“lets hear all the weepy excuses of why these "poor, vulnerable neighbors" of ours should be able to camp anywhere, steal everything and anything, shoot drugs all day, have dangerous camps with fire/explosion possibilities. such awesome members of our community.“

Plenty more where that came from. Granted it’s usually the same 2 or 3 losers who do this but it’s persistent and it’s far more damaging than any stereotypes about wealthy heirs.


wealthy Heirs have
Agency. in


@60 - What part of that quote is untrue? maybe it wasn't "nice" but not false. of course not every single person that is homeless doesn't fit what was said but unfortunately for just about everyone many, many, many do.

can't there be some middle ground between the extremes of "rarr house everyone and this will be fine" and just letting people camp, shoot up, trash, dump RV sewage, steal countless bikes, etc (though it is super totes great that the houseless community are such avid bikers, very environmentally forward - i've seen single camps with dozens of 'em! inspirational!)?

should there really be a ring of beater RVs around greenlake? can the greater good be considered every once in a while as opposed to "aww, what would make this junkie thief feel less victimized?".


junkies are merely the Symptoms
guesty the Disease is Winner
take ALL capitalismd

and Heartless

Respect the MILITARY!
they Shreik whilst
avoiding their
Stares on our


@63: So everything terrible is because of capitalism and heartless republicans? Anything else you want to add to this blame list?

For extra credit, write your answers in iambic pentameter.


a. Yes
b. no
c. just You


@67:Characterizing taxation of the wealthy as "redistribution" is a conservative talking point, not an accurate description of this form of Keynesian spending. The idea is not to just take X dollars from the richest 1% and hand it to the poor. The idea is for them to pay taxes that are then spent on things that enhance quality of life and, yes, mobility, for everyone from the bottom to the top. Things like education, infrastructure, etc.

When tax rates in the US were highest, back in the 1950s and 1960s, the revenue was spent not just on New Deal era social welfare programs, but on publicly-funded research -- including the research that led to the creation of entire sectors of the modern commercial economy. It was spent on infrastructure programs from rural electrification to hydroelectric dams to the freeway system, which opened up new markets for consumer goods -- it's hard to sell a washing machine to someone with no electricity -- and literally provided the roads upon which goods were shipped. It was spent on things like the G.I. Bill, which led to unprecedented levels of home ownership and higher educational attainment than ever before for millions of Americans.

These initiatives certainly benefited the poorest Americans, but they also allowed for unprecedented levels of entrepreneurship and wealth accumulation at the very highest strata. Try telling the Ford Motor Company that publicly-funded highways were stealing something from them (in the form of taxes) and giving nothing back. Or try telling Amazon that government-funded programs like DARPA, which gave birth to the modern internet, were somehow robbing from the rich to give to the poor.

There are two reasons why progressive taxation -- meaning people with more money pay a higher percentage-- makes sense. First, the obvious: A person who earns $25,000 a year who paid 10% of their income would have to live on $22,500 a year. That missing $2,500 is a paltry sum in the grand scheme of government spending, but a significant burden for that person. A person who earns $2,500,000 a year can still live quite comfortably on $2,250,000 a year, and they contribute the equivalent revenue to 100 of those $25,000/year earners. Put simply: it's not about how much one pays in percentage terms, it's about how much they have left in absolute terms that determines ability to pay.

The second reason is less obvious: the very wealthy benefit disproportionately from government spending. Those semi trucks that Amazon uses to ship goods around the country cause considerably more wear and tear on the roads than ordinary cars do. Corporations reap exponential ROI for tax dollars spent on everything from electrical grids to the programs that made communications satellites and modern microcomputers possible. Does an average citizen have the means to monetize the results of the publicly funded Human Genome Project? No, but billionaire Venture Capitalists certainly do! And these disproportionate benefits to the wealthy apply to less obvious government spending too -- there are large swaths of the legal system, for instance, that individual private citizens never use at all. And yet without the means to enforce contracts, patents, etc, business would grind to a halt.

Since Reagan, the trend has been for those at the very top of the income and wealth spectrum to try to achieve true free rider status, reaping all the benefits of public spending while bearing none of the costs. That is what a return to a fairer and more progressive -- not in the sense of "politically liberal," in the sense of "those with more to spare pay more" -- is about. From previous examples there is every reason to believe that it will increase both mobility for those at the bottom and profitability for those at the top.

It is not a zero-sum game.


@35 xina and @54 blip: Agreed and seconded with kristofarian @58 & @59.
Keep rocking the house, all of you! :)