"There is a great deal of historical revisionism happening here. Liberals and progressives don't hate or even begrudge wealthy people. We do have a problem with

"There is a great deal of historical revisionism happening here. Liberals and progressives don't hate or even begrudge wealthy people. We do have a problem with crooks who use our retirement to gamble on casino derivatives, and then expect the federal government to bail them out (there is an example of socialism for you--privatizing the profit and socializing the risk). Recent wall street action and other corporate maleficent beg the question of Ziad, does wealth accumulation really indicate moral integrity? Does that suggest that people who aren’t rich, don’t have moral integrity? I don’t think rich people necessarily lack moral integrity, but I don’t think it is an indication of it either. There are other great attempts to revise history by the far right especially in an attempt to make Hoover into a progressive, so conservatives don't have to take the blame for the great depression. Hoover was against regulation. The favorite phrase of the Republican presidents in the 1920s was "What is good for GM is good for America." This is what led to the great depression. Hoover did implement some tariffs after the depression hit, but that was a drop in the bucket compared to what came after FDR. The GDP drop from the great depression hit a few months after FDR took office. It skyrocketed up over the next several years--unemployment went down by half by 1937. Questions for you who see class envy from those espousing liberal policies? If redistribution is so bad then why, since the income tax was passed (1916), has the US built the strongest economy and middle class known to the world? If Keynesian economic is not successful, then why from 1933 to 1980 (Nixon said "we are Keynesians now) did the US experience explosive economic growth? If redistribution and Keynesian economics are so unfair to entrepreneurs, why was has there always been a thriving wealthy class since the US inception even during the New Deal and Great Society era? Why, if deregulation is so troublesome, did we not have banking and financial calamities like the Savings and Loan scandal, stock market crashes, and the derivative blowup from the time of FDR until Ronald Reagan come along and dismantled the regulatory infrastructure? And my favorite historical revision attempt: Why, if lowering taxes on the wealthy create more revenue, did Clinton raising of taxes increase revenues and create a surplus? Why when Bush lowered taxes on the rich, did revenues nose dive for six years and turn a surplus to deficit?"