<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: You&#8217;re on Your Own vs. We&#8217;re In This Together</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/youre-on-your-own-vs-were-in-this-together/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/youre-on-your-own-vs-were-in-this-together/</link>
	<description>Facts, Thoughts, and Commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 17:51:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/youre-on-your-own-vs-were-in-this-together/#comment-289408</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2012 14:28:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/?p=6427#comment-289408</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The problem with this, again, is that YOYO isn&#039;t the real philosophy. YOYO is a stalking horse, a &quot;respectable&quot; position that hides the real belief -- that it is wrong for women, African-Americans, LBGTQ people, and liberal race and gender traitors to have good, middle-class lives.  YOYO is a means.  Rewriting the social contract is the end.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem with this, again, is that YOYO isn&#8217;t the real philosophy. YOYO is a stalking horse, a &#8220;respectable&#8221; position that hides the real belief &#8212; that it is wrong for women, African-Americans, LBGTQ people, and liberal race and gender traitors to have good, middle-class lives.  YOYO is a means.  Rewriting the social contract is the end.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jared Bernstein</title>
		<link>http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/youre-on-your-own-vs-were-in-this-together/#comment-289383</link>
		<dc:creator>Jared Bernstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2012 13:48:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/?p=6427#comment-289383</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That&#039;s FT--you and I are soldiers from way back, so I trust you&#039;re keeping up the good fight as well.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s FT&#8211;you and I are soldiers from way back, so I trust you&#8217;re keeping up the good fight as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fasaha Traylor</title>
		<link>http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/youre-on-your-own-vs-were-in-this-together/#comment-289098</link>
		<dc:creator>Fasaha Traylor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2012 03:58:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/?p=6427#comment-289098</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jared, I&#039;m kinda surprised that you are not the man behind the curtain of YOYO and WITT in all the Dem speeches.   You couldn&#039;t convince me that y&#039;all didn&#039;t sit down in one big meeting with George Lakoff and just decide that this was our answer to government drowning in a bathtub.  Are you telling me this was accidental?!?  Don&#039;t believe it!

But you deserve to raise it, because I thought when you published the book-- and believe even more strongly now--that we are about to emerge from the long night of having no conceptual framework to do battle with the limited-government types.  The financial crisis, Citizens United, and the Republican Congress are revealing &quot;limited government&quot; for what it is:  a fig leaf over a truly oligarchical movement in American politics.

It&#039;s been great watching you do battle on MSNBC.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jared, I&#8217;m kinda surprised that you are not the man behind the curtain of YOYO and WITT in all the Dem speeches.   You couldn&#8217;t convince me that y&#8217;all didn&#8217;t sit down in one big meeting with George Lakoff and just decide that this was our answer to government drowning in a bathtub.  Are you telling me this was accidental?!?  Don&#8217;t believe it!</p>
<p>But you deserve to raise it, because I thought when you published the book&#8211; and believe even more strongly now&#8211;that we are about to emerge from the long night of having no conceptual framework to do battle with the limited-government types.  The financial crisis, Citizens United, and the Republican Congress are revealing &#8220;limited government&#8221; for what it is:  a fig leaf over a truly oligarchical movement in American politics.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s been great watching you do battle on MSNBC.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Gatliff</title>
		<link>http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/youre-on-your-own-vs-were-in-this-together/#comment-288189</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Gatliff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Sep 2012 21:30:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/?p=6427#comment-288189</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks again, Jared, for a remarkable post.

Caught a lot of Grover Norquist on CSPAN last week, and was absolutely shocked by how well he can espouse the so-called virtues of fierce individualism---and how little he seems to recognize what a literal implementation of that society would do to its members who lacked the means to participate.  The sound bites you hear on the news just don&#039;t do this guy justice.

Grover&#039;s Wikipedia page claims his devotion to this vision is &quot;monk-like&quot;, and that he doesn&#039;t openly exploit his wealth.  Were he to be forced to live the Allegory of the Long Spoons, however, I wonder how his position might change.

It&#039;s sometimes said that the Democratic Party is the party of the poor and weak.  I&#039;m beginning to believe that it&#039;s also the party of those who live in the real world---a world I didn&#039;t realize was even there until I was forced to live in it for a time.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks again, Jared, for a remarkable post.</p>
<p>Caught a lot of Grover Norquist on CSPAN last week, and was absolutely shocked by how well he can espouse the so-called virtues of fierce individualism&#8212;and how little he seems to recognize what a literal implementation of that society would do to its members who lacked the means to participate.  The sound bites you hear on the news just don&#8217;t do this guy justice.</p>
<p>Grover&#8217;s Wikipedia page claims his devotion to this vision is &#8220;monk-like&#8221;, and that he doesn&#8217;t openly exploit his wealth.  Were he to be forced to live the Allegory of the Long Spoons, however, I wonder how his position might change.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s sometimes said that the Democratic Party is the party of the poor and weak.  I&#8217;m beginning to believe that it&#8217;s also the party of those who live in the real world&#8212;a world I didn&#8217;t realize was even there until I was forced to live in it for a time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jake</title>
		<link>http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/youre-on-your-own-vs-were-in-this-together/#comment-288075</link>
		<dc:creator>Jake</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Sep 2012 18:04:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/?p=6427#comment-288075</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Respectfully, this take needs a tighter focus. WITT can be misused to mean redistribution and &quot;fairness&quot;.  If the proponents are serious in saying the concept is government steps in when markets fail, then the focus has to be limited to what the market was trying to do and couldn&#039;t get it done. Example: Health insurance is unaffordable for some. The issue is not fairness but cost to a market segment. WITT can advance ideas for partnering with existing market participants to reduce unaffordibility in market segments, and if market participants need a profit to participate so be it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Respectfully, this take needs a tighter focus. WITT can be misused to mean redistribution and &#8220;fairness&#8221;.  If the proponents are serious in saying the concept is government steps in when markets fail, then the focus has to be limited to what the market was trying to do and couldn&#8217;t get it done. Example: Health insurance is unaffordable for some. The issue is not fairness but cost to a market segment. WITT can advance ideas for partnering with existing market participants to reduce unaffordibility in market segments, and if market participants need a profit to participate so be it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred Donaldson</title>
		<link>http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/youre-on-your-own-vs-were-in-this-together/#comment-288069</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred Donaldson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Sep 2012 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/?p=6427#comment-288069</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What is wealth and what is a man&#039;s worth?

If we piled $100 bills - 5 reams (2500 sheets) would equal about one foot high.

Imagine we took a pile of money equivalent to less than the fortune of either Gates, Buffet, etc. - $50 billion - and started to make a stack of $100 bills that stood aside the Empire State Building.

The money would not run out when we hit the roof - 1250 feet above the street.

Nor would it run out at the second pile. Nor the 10th. Nor the 100th.

At the end of the 160th pile of $100 bills, each side by side, reaching 1250 feet high, we would finish our task. 

The median American&#039;s family money pile is less than 3&quot; high of the same $100 bills, far short of the 200,000 feet of just one of the super rich.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is wealth and what is a man&#8217;s worth?</p>
<p>If we piled $100 bills &#8211; 5 reams (2500 sheets) would equal about one foot high.</p>
<p>Imagine we took a pile of money equivalent to less than the fortune of either Gates, Buffet, etc. &#8211; $50 billion &#8211; and started to make a stack of $100 bills that stood aside the Empire State Building.</p>
<p>The money would not run out when we hit the roof &#8211; 1250 feet above the street.</p>
<p>Nor would it run out at the second pile. Nor the 10th. Nor the 100th.</p>
<p>At the end of the 160th pile of $100 bills, each side by side, reaching 1250 feet high, we would finish our task. </p>
<p>The median American&#8217;s family money pile is less than 3&#8243; high of the same $100 bills, far short of the 200,000 feet of just one of the super rich.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clint Sr.</title>
		<link>http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/youre-on-your-own-vs-were-in-this-together/#comment-287964</link>
		<dc:creator>Clint Sr.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Sep 2012 16:13:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/?p=6427#comment-287964</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was thrilled to hear strong echoes of WITT and YOYO in Clinton and Warren talks.  Jared&#039;s theme has really caught on, and it is great!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was thrilled to hear strong echoes of WITT and YOYO in Clinton and Warren talks.  Jared&#8217;s theme has really caught on, and it is great!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
