September 22, 2011 9:55 AM

Elizabeth Warren: "There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own"

By
Lucy Madison
Topics
Campaign 2012

An August video of Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren on the campaign trail is heating up on the internet, and some commentators are pointing to the clip - in which Warren makes a case for progressive economic policies - as evidence that the newly minted Democratic candidate could give incumbent Republican Senator Scott Brown a run for his money.

In the video (at left), which was filmed at an event in Andover, Mass., Warren rebuts the GOP-touted notion that raising taxes on the wealthy amounts to "class warfare," contending that "there is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody."

Warren rejects the concept that it is possible for Americans to become wealthy in isolation.

"You built a factory out there? Good for you," she says. "But I want to be clear: you moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did."

She continues: "Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along."

Warren's entrance into the Massachusetts Senate race marks her first-ever political bid - and while the longtime consumer advocate is beloved by a number of liberals, some wondered if her lack of political experience would prove crippling in the contest.

The Washington Monthly's Steven Benen, however, points to the video as an explanation as to "why Warren has a strong base of supporters who adore her."

"If there are lingering concerns about whether Warren could be an effective speaker on the stump, I think those questions are being answered," Benen writes. "If more Democrats were able to make the case for the underlying social contract as effectively, our discourse would be vastly less mind-numbing."


Add a Comment See all 538 Comments
by dukestory January 8, 2012 2:48 PM EST
So the 48%+ individuals that do not pay taxes...where do they stand in Ms. Warren's comments... Sure but I have worked for many companies that have actually built infrastructure for cities and turned that infrastructure over to the county or city free of charge.... Ms Warren only thinks in one dimension with limited feel for what all the pieces are that make up an economy. I wonder what her answer would be if ...no one built a company..no one created jobs...where would the money come from then? Kind of Chicken or the egg...a company hires people...pays the salary...they pay the taxes...the company pays the taxes. Someone mention synergy and people lack of ablity to know what that means...that person should learn for him or herself what synergy means....
Reply to this comment
by luval22 October 13, 2011 5:19 PM EDT
"You built a factory out there?"But I want to be clear: you moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for."

She is either ignorant or a liar. Don't these companies pay property taxes? In some towns their rate is higher than for the rest of us. Most towns use 50-60% of that revenue for their schools, which the "companies" themselves don't use. Most companies have their own security, remove their own snow & trash.

All she is doing is echoing the class warfare sentiment of Obama that there are some that don't pay their fair share. She gets paid $400k at Harvard to teach one course?
Reply to this comment
by Yak01 October 10, 2011 5:03 PM EDT
Today's "liberalism" is really another word for "socialism" and is antithesis of classical liberalism which was based on the philosophy of limited government, rule of law, due process and individual liberty.

It amazes me that today's liberal eagerly entrusts government (led by individuals) to do what is right while just as eagerly is skeptical and distrustful of the individual, business and religious institutions to do what is right.

Society is greatest when the sum of its parts is greater than the limits that that society puts on its self. However, abdicating your liberty for a "social contract" means abdicating future input to those that you entrusted it to.
Reply to this comment
by nicl0126 October 10, 2011 3:50 PM EDT
you can disagree with her progressive principles, but her logic is solid. very few entrepreneurs contribute more than a trivial portion to the overall infrastructure that makes launching a business in America the easiest place on the planet to make money. The accumulation of wealth must be throttled, or we will end up with 19th century oligarchs, and that only works for a while. The Transcontinental railroad was built with public funds, but a handful of men got really rich signing contracts and not contributing much more. How close to that model do we want to be as a country.
Reply to this comment
by agns111 October 10, 2011 11:32 AM EDT
The concept "if we give to the common cause, we will profit from it even more" is too sophisticated to uneducated people. They don't understand the word "SYNERGY" and the only thing they can get is "mine is mine and I am gonna to keep it".
Reply to this comment
by agns111 October 10, 2011 9:30 AM EDT
Yes!!! She got an excellent point. By the way, don't we teach our children to share? Why.... so that they will not grow up for savages. Only educated people can understand why we should share. Attitude it is mine and I will keep it, is a very primitive one. Those who think this way do not understand that if they share, they will profit even more, however in an indirect way. They don't know what the word "SYNERGY" means.
Reply to this comment
by DonnyBGoode October 8, 2011 9:32 PM EDT
Check out my YouTube video debunking Warren's claims....give it a fair watching and comment please.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_oLAzGr3Uc
Reply to this comment
by agns111 October 10, 2011 11:35 AM EDT
The concept "if we give to the common cause, we will profit from it even more" is too sophisticated to uneducated people. They don't understand the word "SYNERGY" and the only thing they can get is "mine is mine and I am gonna to keep it".
by vandude88 October 8, 2011 4:18 PM EDT
She is insinuating that the builder of that factory had nothing to do with paying for the infrastructure that made that factory possible. If that person had been me her statements are false.
I pay federal, state and local taxes so I helped pay for those roads. I pay quite a bit in property taxes which go to the school system so I helped pay for educating those workers. There again my taxes go to paying for fire and police protection. That's my "social contract".
Reply to this comment
by agns111 October 10, 2011 11:36 AM EDT
The concept "if we give to the common cause, we will profit from it even more" is too sophisticated to uneducated people. They don't understand the word "SYNERGY" and the only thing they can get is "mine is mine and I am gonna to keep it".
by nicl0126 October 10, 2011 3:46 PM EDT
you can disagree with her progressive principles, but her logic is solid. very few entrepreneurs contribute more than a trivial portion to the overall infrastructure that makes launching a business in America the easiest place on the planet to make money. The accumulation of wealth must be throttled, or we will end up with 19th century oligarchs, and that only works for a while. The Transcontinental railroad was built with public funds, but a handful of men got really rich signing contracts and not contributing much more. How close to that model do we want to be as a country.
by MoRacker1 October 6, 2011 1:37 PM EDT
Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual).
Reply to this comment
by MoRacker1 October 6, 2011 1:21 PM EDT
I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
Reply to this comment
by agns111 October 10, 2011 11:37 AM EDT
The concept "if we give to the common cause, we will profit from it even more" is too sophisticated to uneducated people. They don't understand the word "SYNERGY" and the only thing they can get is "mine is mine and I am gonna to keep it".
See all 538 Comments
.

Follow Political Hotsheet

Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook
  • Building You a Better Morning

  • CBS This Morning

    "CBS This Morning," anchored by Charlie Rose, Gayle King and Erica Hill, airs weekdays from 7 to 9 a.m. ET and at the same time in other time zones.
    Learn more...