Rick Santorum: 'I Have No Problem With Income Inequality'

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum said Tuesday that he was "for" income inequality, but also wanted "equality of opportunity."

"The reason you see some sympathy among the American public for them is the grave concern -- and it's a legitimate one -- that blue-collar workers, lower-income workers, are having a harder and harder time rising," said the former Pennsylvania senator at a campaign stop in Pella, Iowa, according to the Des Moines Register.

"They talk about income inequality. I'm for income inequality. I think some people should make more than other people, because some people work harder and have better ideas and take more risk, and they should be rewarded for it. I have no problem with income inequality."

He then launched an attack at President Barack Obama. "President Obama is for income equality. That's socialism. It's worse yet, it's Marxism. ... I'm not for income equality. I'm not for equality of result -- I'm for equality of opportunity."

Obama decried the politics of income inequality in a recent "60 Minutes" interview. "The problem is that our politics has gotten to the point where we can't have an honest conversation about the greatest income inequality since the 1920s," he said.

Obama said in February 2010 that he does not "begrudge" bonuses paid to the CEOs of JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs. "I, like most of the American people, don't begrudge people success or wealth. That is part of the free-market system," he said.

In a speech in Osawatomie, Kansas earlier this month, Obama called for "making sure that everyone in America gets a fair shot at success." He also said that rising income inequality "hurts us all."

Income inequality has worsened in recent years. A study by the Congressional Budget Office showed that the top 1 percent of earners saw their incomes rise by 275 percent from 1979 to 2007, while the bottom 20 percent of earners saw their incomes rise by less than 20 percent, and the middle 60 percent of earners' incomes rose by less than 40 percent during the same time.

Comments

[OmnibusKnowledge2]

07:57 AM on 02/18/2012

Historically, there has been a duel between two positions. The left, especially since the dawn of progressivism, has favored equality of outcome, while the right has favored equality of opportunity. But I take a third position that tends to be overlooked; namely, that inequality of both opportunity and outcome is natural and that equality of either should not be the target of any sort of economic interventionism. This position states that each individual should simply do the best one can with what one has, and take no thought of what others have or do with what they have.

[escobar]

11:41 AM on 12/24/2011

Mix Capitalism with two heaping shovel fulls of marxism and the system may actually start
working.
Without question, both parties insist upon socialism for the health insurance corporations, defense contractors, and the bankers already.To maintain the CEO's and their corporate boards the new nobility, the new government.
Santorum is not someone who could unite and lead the country, he is another GOP side show.
Why do they all pretend to stand upon principles? It is so they can ignore reality.
What are they all afraid or their past statements and actions ? Because they are deceptive.
None of them have any sense of principles or obligation to the American people.
They worship money and those who have it above all else.

[Robert SF]

12:55 AM on 12/23/2011

Santorum ignores that the issue isn't income inequality itself. No one has suggested that incomes should be equal. The issue is the DEGREE of income and wealth inequality. At some point, too much is in too few hands, which leaves less for the many, no matter how good they are or how hard they work. We have reached that point.

Santorum also ignores that economic opportunity is the flip side of income inequality. High income inequality necessarily means low economic opportunity. It's virtually self-proving. If economic opportunity were high, lots of people would be taking advantage of that, and income inequality would be low.

[barryrls]

11:23 PM on 12/22/2011

Rick Santorum the man exists as a political entity because there are far too many Americans who have the right to vote but apparently have no brain activity. Why on earth would anyone vote for a person who hasn't entertained a cogent thought in his entire life? The man personifies everything that is wrong with America.

[TimJones]

09:32 PM on 12/22/2011

There is always inequality in life. Some men are killed in a war and some men are wounded and some men never leave the country. Life is unfair. - John F Kennedy

[andyou]

06:38 PM on 12/21/2011

Bet he doesn't mind woman getting paid less than men for the same work either.

[BrianPK80]

05:57 PM on 12/21/2011

It's getting to the point where they overuse the Marxist/Socialist line so much that it begs the question, "what's so awful about socialism then?" And the Goopers have no answer. Already more young people are identifying as socialist rather than capitalist. They're two different ways of looking at life. A good system would accommodate both. This American system is neither socialist nor capitalist. The fruits of our efforts are not apportioned remotely fairly and the worst ideas & behaviors rise to the top and are rewarded while brilliance is snuffed out.

[patricksmom]

09:21 PM on 12/21/2011

I know . It is wonderful that these clowns do not scare people with socialism anymore.

[chatnuptime1]

03:48 AM on 12/22/2011

They just throw those words around alot becaues they conjure up nasty images of wars, and dicatorships with harsh conditions and failed economies and worse their wealth being seized. Norway is a Democratic government with the least amount of disparity from Rich to Poor the gap is less then 25%. Ours is over 70% along with China and Brazil. Both of which have extreme poverty and huge wealth amoung the smallest members of its populations. What is interesting is that the larger the gap gets between the two the less stable the economy is in them. Both China and Brazil especially Brazil has a stagnent economy that has never took off and inflation is over the top. China is do for a cave in and Europe is already caving. Egypt and Greece caved. Some of these are socialist states but it doesn't matter the wealth distribution amoungst its population should not be so wide no matter what the system they use or it cannot sustain itself.

[carl cid inting]

04:09 PM on 12/21/2011

Isn't that the problem? The 1% get all the opportunities, while the rest have to settle for crumbs. That's the whole problem with inequality. Or did Santorum fail to see how Main Street bailed out Wall Street when financial markets crashed?

[patricksmom]

09:22 PM on 12/21/2011

And the 1% use their money to buy politicians...observe Washington.

[Charles W Noble]

03:45 PM on 12/21/2011

Rick, 1% of the population is controlling 50% of the wealth in this country. Now you tell me, is it because the other 99% is lazy and incompetent?

This is essentially what Santorum is saying. The reason there is income equality is because 99% of the population is lazy, incompetent, and not creative. We should have a bumper sticker saying "Santorum thinks you are a lazy bum!"

The problem isn't because the other 99% is stupid, it's because the 1% has rigged the system to pay them not in proportion to their effort but in proportion to their influence. They are not getting paid more because they are contributing to society, but because they have a friend within congress (or within the board of company) who will tell them ahead of time what industry impacting bill will pass and they can buy the stock or short it. It doesn't help other Americans, it just makes them paper money.

[patricksmom]

09:23 PM on 12/21/2011

Fanned and faved.

[chatnuptime1]

03:54 AM on 12/22/2011

We know this about Rick.. he hates Gays and loves inequality. Hmm. What a twisted little man he is. But this guy is not older then I am and he has money because of his parents and his political affiliations none of which were good.. but inequality is a good thing when one percent is being held up by the hot air and little else and a tiny pillar remnant of a middle class on its last leg. Once that goes down they will come crashing to the bottom like it die in the 20s. Then we will see how that inequaltiy in economics 101 works for him. Nothing does not support a very heavy something.

[Islian]

02:37 AM on 12/26/2011

funny - you see by his fingers in the picture above just how small a man he is...

[Charles W Noble]

03:36 PM on 12/21/2011

I think what he means is that he likes a meritocracy. Most Americans, democrats and republicans alike, like Meritocracy. The idea that you get out what effort you put in. So in that world, if person A is hardworking and works 40 hours a week and person B works 20 hours a week doing the exact same job with the exact same effort, they should not get the same check at the end of the week. Or if person A has just found a way to save the business lots of money in addition to his daily duties, he can expect to be rewarded with a raise or a promotion or some form of recognition. But how do you explian it when someone earns 100 times more than their least paid worker? We're talking about a system that is yielding inequality to an extend that is not explainable by hard work or creativity differences....

[chatnuptime1]

04:02 AM on 12/22/2011

Oh I don't mind it myself when real people are getting merit increases for a job well done. But face it Charls When banks busted their own game wide open and needed to be bailed out why did idiot CEO's get patted on the shoulder for putting their fail idea's on the table and cripple our economy and get tax dollars to say well done boy you almost killed us with million dollar bonuses? They should have gone to jail. And how do you expect a guy to get that 100 times bonus in the face of the fact that all those thousand workers below him put his idea into action and they get little regard whatsoever? If it were not for them minions his idea's would not be worth the paper he wrote them on. Value your worker and your workers will value you as the employer. But we don't see that today do we.

[Dunelm]

02:52 PM on 12/21/2011

What a liar! And he calls himself a "Christian." Has he read the words of Jesus "Sell all you have and give to the poor?" Now, that's more like Marxism to me.

[chatnuptime1]

04:04 AM on 12/22/2011

And 'a worker is worth his wage" never muzzle a bull when it threshes the floor" In short give the guy a just reward for his labor.
Another place... Farmers leave your bumper crops to the poor .. Ya the poor can glean your feilds on the bumpers.. he did have the forsite to look after them too.

[Sweettunia]

02:39 PM on 12/21/2011

Is there any wonder why he is so low in the polls? He just doesn't get it in regard to so many issues. Where is he getting enough funding to stay in the race and support 7 children?

[Bob Metcalfe]

02:36 PM on 12/21/2011

'because some people work harder ' Your cleaning lady probably works harder than you. Is she paid as much?

[chatnuptime1]

04:05 AM on 12/22/2011

Hah ah if we were paid by the sweat of our brow by the bucket the CEO would be making the janitors hourly wage.

[cincypix]

02:17 PM on 12/21/2011

Too bad Rick's "equal opportunity" platform is undercut by the rest of his "the fix is in" platform.

Why he had to say that science should stay out of politics is beyond understanding though.

[Hazegrae]

12:54 PM on 12/21/2011

You shall neither side with the mighty to do wrong; you shall not give perverse testimony in a dispute so as to pervert it in favor of the mighty. Exodus 23:2

[New Influence]

07:15 PM on 12/22/2011

Faved.

And how about Exodus 20:16, "Thou shalt not bear false witness..."? He, and other GOP pols who parrot the Marxist/Socialist allegations know that the President is neither, yet they know that repeating a lie often enough makes people think it's the truth.

I am SICK of politicians cherry-picking and misusing the scripture they claim to follow. One would think that