Also do more people become liberal or conservative with age? More people become conservative. People realize that it's possible to still be a compassionate humanist while being fiscally and culturally logical and responsible.
I am very conservative on everything except the environment and on the truly needy. I suspect Obama is a smart person who will do some good things. I am not happy about the impending debts to come, but he is the inheritor rather than the cause of this crisis. I do not forget that it was the Dems who began the Social Security system, which is becoming the most profound way to hold up 14+% (counting the company's payment) of a middle income person's lifetime earnings for the benefit of a horrendous return on money they may never see. The main reason I voted against Obama is for the people he will inject into higher courts and the profound effect it will have on the future.
Like the bush-voting neanderthals here on ET, You spend way too much time on the "white power" websites. faulty world view = faulty logical conclusions. very few were voting FOR Obama. The vote was AGAINST the cluster-fuck known as the modern republicon party
Obviously you have not done much looking into this and just accept "common knowledge" as truth. The vast majority of wealth in the United States is in fact CREATED wealth, and while having a nice sized inheritance can go a long ways towards helping you create more, or just sitting around like Paris Hilton, your assumption is proven wrong by the real data. Again, the vast majority of wealth in the United States is created by the person holding that wealth.
for our sake, the neanderthals, would you, or someone, please provide us with the appropriate "world view"... enlighten us, how should we think?
You can't reason with arealpissedgoy. There are some liberals who provide solid arguments. This guy has never participated in an actual intellectual forum in his entire life.
Here's the data I see, what do you have to back your views? http://www.faireconomy.org/press_room/1997/born_on_third_base_sources_of_wealth_of_1997_forbes_400 "But careful identification of how Forbes' centi-millionaires and billionaires attained their wealth tells a different account of the plebeian origins of the richest Americans. Half of those on the Forbes 400 list started their economic careers by inheriting businesses or substantial wealth. Of these, most inherited sufficient wealth to put them immediately into Forbes' heaven. Only three out of ten on the Forbes list can be regarded as self-starters whose parents did not have great wealth or own a business with more than a few employees. The data, then, do not support the assumption that the United States is a true meritocracy where the most able rise to their rightful positions. Nor do they defend the contention that the United States is structured so that authentic equality of opportunity prevails. Inheritances undermine the achievement-reward equation. " As you can plainly see, what I said is supported by fact.
You are looking at a very small group of mega-wealth. People who amass great fortunes like the Forbes list are usually the inventors and innovators. These are the people who have changed the course of society. Most of these fortunes have been earned in the last 60 years and now the originals are dying out. You will notice by the 3rd or 4th generation most will drop of the list. Generational dilution of wealth is another American trait. Money and wealth recycles like no other country. There are millions of rich successful immigrants and American businessmen who have started from very little. More then any other place on Earth.
Funny, I always thought a lot of that was due to luck, right place right time kinda stuff... oh, and picking the right parents.