I am a Wharton grad. I am fiscally conservative. I support Obama, and it's logical. Bush has been much more fiscally liberal than Clinton was. Nationalization of our banks a few weeks ago is actually Socialism by definition. Obama mouthing "spread the wealth around," in a moment of loose lips is much less Socialist than Bush's bank bailout, and rolling back the tax cuts will cost less than Bush's No Child Left Behind and the two wars, of which the former not only failed but was an unprecedented increase in government spending. Look at a chart of federal govt spending over the last 15 years, and you can see who the Socialist is by those standards -- it's Bush. I would have voted for McCain if I believed he would remain true to his theoretically conservative ideology, but Bush demonstrated that ideological words mean absolutely nothing -- McCain might have turned out much more leftist than Obama, and I believe he probably would have.

as a student at Penn, I take personal offense to this poorly planned and disgusting letter. I am here not because of the triumphs of capitalism and the free market, but rather through the generosity of the school, scholarship donors, and our federal government. I have seen first hand the people most hurt by greed, capitalism, and the "free market". I voted for Obama because I agree with his compassion towards all levels of society and because I believe that giving more money to those who are already wealthy isn't even close to fair, equitable, or morally right. And you are wrong....schools of business will always be around because of people like you...focused more on your money and personal gains than compassion for your fellow humans. P.S. what is so wrong with the Left? i mean, the Right got us into 2 wars, economic meltdown, foreclosures left and right.....and you're trying to say that the Left is full of bad guys? take a step back and see yourself the way the rest of the world sees the Right...bigoted, greedy, selfish, and the party of the past.

The comments by Jack Weiss are laughable. As a tax attorney and the wife of a doctor in New York, we are shocked at how ridiculous some criticisms of Obama are. We proudly support Obama; he is intelligent and his plans are actually pretty good. Don't let the taglines of someone like Jack Weiss scare you. They are ridiculous. My father, now deceased, who happened to be a Republican and tax attorney, always said to us, it is important for EVERYONE to have some level of economic stability, or else you'll have a revolution on your hands. The ones at the top can't have stability if there is instability below. Let's face it, the real beneficiaries of Obama is the middle class, and this country can't survive without a strong middle class. The ones who seem to be the most upset that we know about the election are the ones who made $10 million a year on Wall Street. Poor babies. They now have to sell their Hamptons house and their Manhattan apartment. They are the minority, and weren't really helping anyone but themselves anyway. Get real. Feel good about helping the middle class, because without a strong middle class, we are ALL in trouble.

The great thing about America is how an uneducated back-woods hillbilly like Mr Weiss can have a daughter attend a great institution like Penn. I look forward to the day his generation has died out, and all Americans have enough sense to think for themselves.

Wow, Weiss...You're a fucking idiot. Strap on a pair and quit bitching.

Yeah, our plummeting stock market, failing banks, and massive-scale housing crisis- all caused by deregulated "free market capitalism" is really something for the world to be envious of. Luckily for the rest of us, the shit you and your fellow right-wing cronies spew now is nothing but hot air- we can actually get to work fixing this disaster people like you have created. Lonely over there?

[QUOTE id="b5347865-bd27-43cc-9838-b6b17e7a9048"]as a student at Penn, I take personal offense to this poorly planned and disgusting letter. I am here not because of the triumphs of capitalism and the free market, but rather through the generosity of the school, scholarship donors, and our federal government. I have seen first hand the people most hurt by greed, capitalism, and the "free market". In response to your comment regarding scholarships and capitalism: the reason that the school and the scholarship donors can be so generous is precisely because of the "triumphs of capitalism and the free market." Where do you think the scholarship money (and tax money) comes from?? It comes from people whose success was only possible because of the opportunities created in a capitalist system. Perhaps you had better not be so quick to use the word greed -- if the scholarship contributers had not been so "greedy" ( or do you mean, motivated to be successful?) maybe they would not have been so generous.

Thank you for speaking up, Jack Weiss. Hasn't anyone else thought of the upper class who worked hard for their money? Under Obama, there is no incentive to work hard, because "the real beneficiaries of Obama is the middle class". Being a high school student, I seem to have no reason to do well in school, as Obama plans to pay for everything in my middle-class society.

While I won't take the time to respond to all the questionable assumptions in Mr. Weiss's letter, I have to challenge the notion that those at the high end of the income spectrum "earned" what they have. Those folks on Wall Street who were bailed out by the government earned their salaries by making very poor and, in some cases, fraudulent decisions about loans and other financial instruments. Similarly, we have seen CEO's walking off with multi-million dollar severance packages when their management of a company led to poor, even disasterous results. It's one thing to incent people to perform well - it's far different when they are paid for failure. The fact is that there has already been a redistribution of wealth in this company over the past two decades from the middle class to the wealthiest .5% of the country. Why didn't you whine about that socialistic redistribution Mr Weiss?

Weiss and "Just another Student" are typical examples of the mindless drones that have been brainwashed by the republican party, fox news, and Rush Limbaugh. The idea that this obama is socialist is laughable to anyone who has actually paid attention to what the man has said.

To Mr. Weiss: thank you for standing up, speaking your mind and having the courage to present a dissenting opinion in a hostile political atmosphere. Fortunately for all of us, the whining liberals above cannot silence you, and I find their attempts to silence dissenting opinions despicable and scary (That includes you, Mike M who seems to so hate Fox News despite it being only non-biased, nonpartisan cable news channel). Three Points: 1) Individuals earn their money (or lack thereof) in this society. While I truly feel sorry for individuals who have been fired because of the economy (and feel that a sensible joblessness package should be given those actively seeking another job), it is not for others to condemn someone else making money. If you don't like money, feel free to give yours away, but don't try to take away someone else's. 2) Take comfort in knowing that you are not alone in disapproving of Obama's policies. Almost half the country voted with you. Don't pay any attention to commenters trying to isolate you. 3) No, neither the Republican Party nor its adherents have, "died out" (thank you, Joe Stalin), nor are they in any danger of extinction. Due to unfavorable political climate and frankly a president who abandoned his core conservative principles, we have lost the battle, but we have not, and will not, lose the war (metaphorically speaking). And no, I am not wealthy. Neither is my family. But I do believe in an individual's right to keep what they earn, and to give it charities at their discretion and pleasure (and indeed a far greater virtue is earned through individual, voluntary charity than through paying mandatory taxes). So don't even try to attack my comments on that front. And finally for those of you who despise the wealthy or feel that they aren't contributing their share to society, consider the following statistics: in general (averaging years), the top 1 percent of taxpayers, pay 34.3 percent of all federal income taxes. The top 5 percent pay 54.4 percent, the top 10 percent pay 65.8 percent, and the top 25 percent pay 83.9 percent.

Good to see that there are also drones who've been brainwashed by the New York Times, MSNBC, NPR, the Democratic Party and, of course, Obama.

Bravo to Penn Parent Jack Weiss. Most students at Penn are beneficiaries of the capitalist system that created wealth their parents are using to pay for a Penn education. And those on financial aid are also beneficiaries of the wealth created by capitalism because of the contributions we make to Penn. The students who voted for Obama may be idealistic, but also naive about the way the world really works. The goal should be creation of weath, not redistribution of wealth.

I don't know why people are harping on this "redistribution of wealth" idea. Check out how the tax breakdowns actually work: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html If you've ever taken any kind of economics class, I think you'd realize it's pretty ridiculous to give the biggest tax cuts to the most wealthy, and give the smallest tax cuts to the poor (who need it the most). The republican tax plan is just cruel.

Mr. Weiss, I am amazed by your fundamental misunderstanding of basic economic theory. Obama is NOT raising taxes, merely urging Congress to let the Bush tax cuts expire a year early to return tax levels back to those of the Clinton administration. The key word there is expire, because the tax cuts were not passed as permanent changes to our tax code. If you understand anything about classical economics, you know that when tax cuts are not made permanent, people realize effects from a tax cut now will be cancelled out by a tax raise later. But let's talk about that last point. About having "no incentive to achieve." Was there an incentive to achieve during the Clinton administration? Most evidence suggests there was. Unemployment fell to its lowest levels in 30 years and the unemployment rate held below 5 percent for 40 consecutive months. Inflation dropped to its lowest rate since the Kennedy administration. GDP growth averaged 4% per year and the economy grew for 116 consecutive months, the most ever in history. Over 22.5 million jobs were created, 92% of which were in the private sector. The poverty rate declined to 11.8%, despite massive welfare reform that decreased welfare recipients by 53%. Upon exiting office, the United States had amassed a $237 billion surplus, the most in the history of the country. Contrary to what Republican propaganda has brainwashed half the country into believing, supply-side economics do not work in practice. In fact, there is zero evidence suggesting that trickle down economics do just that. Since 1980, there has been a massive transfer of wealth from the poorest Americans to the richest Americans. In 1980, the top 1% controlled 30% of the total wealth. Today, the top 1% controls 40% of total wealth. If you look closely at the Bush tax cuts, you'll also find that the top .1% of earners, the 350 American households who earn more than $87 per year, pay the same tax rate, 22%, that those who earn between $50,000 and $75,000 pay. If that isn't wealth redistribution, I don't know what is. Mr. Weiss, I hope this wasn't too much information for you to digest. I'll admit I somewhat admire you Republican types, being able to stand in the face of significance evidence and shrug it all off as lies made up by the liberal media. That takes courage. But there is a reason 2/3 of voters with graduate degrees support liberal economic policies. If you put some thought into it, I bet even you can see the light. Sincerest apologies, D. Baggerson

The mere fact that so many students are working so hard in Wharton and other classes completely underminds your argument sir. These are some of the most devestatingly rational individuals in the world who don't seem a bit worried that the possible tax increases under this President will ultimately ruin their incentive to earn. Your argument is conservative dogma that needs to be discarded if you ever hope to see your favored public policy adopted again in America. What was true in the 80s is not true today.