DraconisRex Posted December 16, 2002 Report Share Posted December 16, 2002 Go here. In the list of articles, click on the link (6th right now) with this thread's name. It will ask you for your year of birth and zip code. Then read the article. What do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven Posted December 16, 2002 Report Share Posted December 16, 2002 Well, it's about time. Unfortunately that article is rather blatantly biased. They say how the poor pay more of there income in sales tax, well sure, that's because they buy more taxable items, and let me assure you that the wealthy pay a much larger amount of sales tax, just not a larger percent of there income. Yet somehow this is unfair, because after all, taxes should always favor the poor. Now, maybe I'm missing something here, but wealthy people pay property taxes (bleh!), disgustingly tiered income taxes that are enough to make you weep, they pay more money total in just about every single tax no matter what the percentage is, and yet the poor are the ones who need tax breaks. Its rubbish, just because someone makes a dreadfully small amount of money doesn't free them from paying there fair share of taxes. I'm not expecting this kind of taxing to generate any considerable amount of income, that's just not going to happen, but the principle of the matter stands. Poor people pay to little taxes, especially income taxes, and it's about time it changed. By the way, have a look at some of the other stuff this Dionne Jr. character has written of late, it's simply repulsive, not to mention wildly inaccurate and blatantly leftist propaganda. Seriously bleh! [ 12-16-2002, 10:54 AM: Message edited by: Dragon Lady ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epsilon 5 Posted December 16, 2002 Report Share Posted December 16, 2002 I ddin't read it all (not interested) but ... quote:Unfortunately that article is rather blatantly biased. ... of course it is! it's an editorial, not an article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotharr Posted December 17, 2002 Report Share Posted December 17, 2002 heh heh.... As of....about now.... Richest 20% of families 84% of wealth 47.2% of income Second 20% 11% of wealth 15.6% of income Third 20% 5% of wealth 15.6% of income Fourth 20% 1% of wealth 9.9% of income Fifth 20% (also known as those unmotivated scum who refuse to work ) >1% of wealth 4.3% of income From 1980 to 2000 mean income levels adjusted for inflation. +/- 1000 Top 20% 100,000 to 140,890 + 48.2% Second 20% 60,000 to 71,200 +21.9% Third 20% 41,500 to 46,200 +14.7% Fourth 20% 29,000 to 31,500 +9.7% Last 20% 11,000 to 11,300 +2.6% (Data from US census Bureau) Oh yes it is such a penalty to be rich...because we all know there are enough jobs to go around that pay 200,000 a year...er...wait... People just don't REALIZE how HARD it is to thrive in the "free market" with 84% of the national wealth...buying politicians....owning the democratic process has never been so dreadfully boring darling...really.... [ 12-16-2002, 09:08 PM: Message edited by: Lotharr ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2002 Report Share Posted December 17, 2002 You forget one little fact there Lothar. Anyone that makes LESS then $30,000 a year, pay less then 4% of the TOTAL income taxes. Did you get that? Here, let me give you a clue, because I see that you are Clueless. quote: Only The Rich Pay Taxes Top 50% of Wage Earners Pay 96.09% of Income Taxes October 23, 2002 The IRS has released the year 2000 data for individual income tax returns. The numbers illustrate a truth that will startle you: that half of Americans with the highest incomes pays 96.09% of all income tax. This nukes the liberal lie that the rich don't pay taxes. The top 1%, who earn 20.81% of all income covered under the income tax, are paying 37.42% of the federal tax bite. *Data covers calendar year 2000, not fiscal year 2000 - and includes all income, not just wages, excluding Social Security Think of it this way: less than four dollars out of every $100 paid in income taxes in the United States is paid by someone in the bottom 50% of wage earners. Are the top half millionaires? Noooo, more like "thousandaires." The top 50% were those individuals or couples filing jointly who earned $26,000 and up in 1999. (The top 1% earned $293,000-plus.) Americans who want to are continuing to improve their lives - and those who don't want to, aren't. Here are the wage earners in each category and the percentages they pay: Top 5% - 56.47% of all income taxes; Top 10% - 67.33% of all income taxes; Top 25% - 84.01% of all income taxes. Top 50% - 96.09% of all income taxes. The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.91% of all income taxes. The top 1% is paying more than ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! And who earns what? The top 1% earns 20.81% of all income. The top 5% earns 35.30% of the pie. The top 10% earns 46.01%; the top 25% earns 67.15%, and the top 50% earns 87.01% of all the income. The Rich Earned Their Dough, They Didn't Inherit It (Except Ted Kennedy) The bottom 50% is paying a tiny bit of the taxes, so you can't give them much of a tax cut by definition. Yet these are the people to whom the Democrats claim to want to give tax cuts. Remember this the next time you hear the "tax cuts for the rich" business. Understand that the so-called rich are about the only ones paying taxes anymore. I had a conversation with a woman who identified herself as Misty on Wednesday. She claimed to be an accountant, yet she seemed unaware of the Alternative Minimum Tax, which now ensures that everyone pays some taxes. AP reports that the AMT, "designed in 1969 to ensure 155 wealthy people paid some tax," will hit "about 2.6 million of us this year and 36 million by 2010." That's because the tax isn't indexed for inflation! If your salary today would've made you mega-rich in '69, that's how you're taxed. Misty tried the old line that all wealth is inherited. Not true. John Weicher, as a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank, wrote in his February 13, 1997 Washington Post Op-Ed, "Most of the rich have earned their wealth... Looking at the Fortune 400, quite a few even of the very richest people came from a standing start, while others inherited a small business and turned it into a giant corporation." What's happening here is not that "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer." The numbers prove it. Of course this was written and talked about on Rush Limbaugh, but ALL the pertinent facts are from the IRS. Got a clue now Lotharr? Geez, your classwar rhetoric really pisses me off, because you haven't got a clue what you are talking about. You wanna know the part that really pisses me off that tells me that you just don't have a clue? When I starte working, I was in the poorest 20%, then I moved up to that 2nd 20%, then I moved up into that next 20%, and you know something, I just might make it to the next step as well. The people I work with, ALL went through those stages as well. Getting the picture yet Lotharr? The bottom 20% of income earners, of that 20%, only 2% have been there more then 5 years. Of the 20% that were poor 5 years ago, 18% have moved up, and fresh NEW income earners have moved into that lowest 20% to replace them, and as that 18% move into the next higher bracket, new workers will replace them in those lower income brackets. Got a CLUE yet? THat is the way it is in a free enterprise, capitalist society, yeah, there are 20% that are poor, but only 2% of that 20% STAY that way. Get some facts man, your propaganda is getting OLD!!! [ 12-16-2002, 10:24 PM: Message edited by: Jaguar ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotharr Posted December 17, 2002 Report Share Posted December 17, 2002 You'll forgive me if I'm not impressed by a biased case study and a rant from a right wing mouthpiece....so sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2002 Report Share Posted December 17, 2002 Well, forgive me if I don't respect the "facts" of a left wing socialist who has been brainwashed by the public school system in believing the biggest load of crap that I have ever heard. Sorry, but I am in a real crappy mood tonight and your BS has sent me over the edge. Propaganda from a left wing lunatic is just that, LUNACY. Go find facts, and then we'll talk, but so far you are just full of BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotharr Posted December 17, 2002 Report Share Posted December 17, 2002 Ahhh yes the biased left wing who uses facts from the Census Bureau Well write your republican reps and ask them to hide facts.it sure wont be a revolutionary idea in those rankswho knowsthey might even tell you that theyve bent reality more then you know Heh heh....when reason fails..turn to nonsense...hey if it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2002 Report Share Posted December 17, 2002 Yes, and when we look at the census Bureau in 10 years, the people that were in the bottom 18% will have moved up 2-3 levels, and only 2% will be where they were before, and the people that are in the bottom 20%, except for the 2% that are still there will be new to the workforce. God, no critical thinking skills at all, NONE. Never thought that I'd see the day when someone could be so brainwashed that when presented with facts they would hold so tightly to their views. Well, what do I expect from someone that refuses to learn. or doesn't know how.... Let's make this as explanatory as we can, shall we? Wouldn't want to be misunderstood. We will say 20 people out of 100 are what you call the poor. of that 20, in 5 years, 18 of them will have moved into a higher bracket. 2 of those 20 will still be there. at the next census, 18 of those 20 will be new to that income bracket, either from bad choices and moving down, or from new workers making their way up. Do you understand yet? There are only 2 out of 100 who are the PERMANENT poor, this is most likely by choice, or lack of ambition. 18 out of that 20 will have worked their way out of it. I know where those facts come from Lotharr, but I know the true economic impact of those numbers, where obviously you do NOT. [ 12-16-2002, 11:24 PM: Message edited by: Jaguar ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven Posted December 17, 2002 Report Share Posted December 17, 2002 Well said Jaguar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommanderJohnson Posted December 17, 2002 Report Share Posted December 17, 2002 You know, the one question I want to see if the next Presidential election when some Democrat rants about the Republicans advocating tax cuts for the "rich" and not for the "working class" or "working people", I want Bush to ask "What exactly MAKES someone part of this "working class" and what makes someone part of the "rich"?" I'd laugh my ass off cause the whole set of rhetoric is arbitrary and the democrats would automatically alienate a large porition of the voters with their answer. Jag's right. People, for the MOST PART (barring physical or mental disability, criminal records, etc) get to where they are due to the amount of work they put into it. The rich should not be punished for their hard work, especially when the "rich" in political terms is NOT just the multi-millionaires of corporations (like the left would have you believe through their rhetoric). The rich are people, as proven by Lotharr's statistics, that make about $140,000 a year. I'm pretty sure i'll be making close to that after about 10-20 years in the work force, and I sure don't see why I should be forced to pay more taxes because someone who refuses to do work decides to stay at around $12,000 income. And just a side rant on public schools. They are bastions of liberal propoganda. It's really sad now that I think back to when I went to them and I constantly got bombarded with "help everyone" rhetoric and all of the posters on the walls of the school about everyone deserving help from everyone else. Not quite 1984, but it's still unnerving. Also, in response to calling Jaguar a "right-wing mouthpiece", I think that's rather unfair. He has worked his way up through various income levels and jobs. Not to mention his service in the military was not some cushy commissioned officer's job (which is what privileged "right-ring mouthpieces" would have ). He's been there, he's worked inside America's system, and he sees that it works, which gives his statements a lot more credibility than abstract numbers that are constantly flouted by the main stream media that don't make any logical sense and don't hold up to CRITICAL ANALYSIS. Jag offers a unique and personal perspective on America's system in direct relation to the capitalist system. I sure don't (not enough life experience...I can just critically and historically analyze comments), and most of Jag's critics on this board certainly don't. There are still neo-Marxists and Communists sprouting their propoganda and their "utopian" views of the world. Contrary to advocating those illogical beliefs, people should take back and look at historical facts. People achieve through work. They always have. The Constitutional system set up by the United States solved almost all problems with oppressive governments that existed for over 1800 years prior to it. The more power the government gets (by exerting control over welfare and "helping" everyone out) the less it benefits the nation and the more opressive it becomes. Now, here's a wild idea that's based on no fact or established theory, but is just as legitimate as most of the utopian stuff advocated here. Ever think that maybe, just maybe, the "rich" and ambitious are going to get sick of the government taking their money disproportionately and there will be a revolution by the "rich class"? I'm thinking that one day, all of the people who actually WORK for their money are going to get sick and tired of it being given to the lowest 20% that don't work that they are just going to eliminate them or do away with all of the programs or deport them. And that view is a lot more likely than the "worker's revolution" advocated by some on these boards. Unlike in Russia, MOST OF THE POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES WORKS AND STIVES AND IS REWARDED FOR IT. If the minority that doesn't could do anything against "The system" they would have just used the effort to work. Ok, my post has probably gotten really confusing and convoluted, and i'm half asleep. So i'll stop now. Feel free to point out any stupidity or lack of logic in my post. I'm REALLY tired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotharr Posted December 17, 2002 Report Share Posted December 17, 2002 quote: We will say 20 people out of 100 are what you call the poor. of that 20, in 5 years, 18 of them will have moved into a higher bracket. 2 of those 20 will still be there. at the next census, 18 of those 20 will be new to that income bracket, either from bad choices and moving down, or from new workers making their way up. YouÔÇÖre just wrong. Income does not facility vertical mobility, wealth does. So unless youÔÇÖre in the upper 40% you can expect to little to no wealth generation. You always seem to want more time...you always seem to have facts that are inaccurate or do not address fundamental issues. One day you may realize that there are just not enough jobs for everyone and that the majority of poor people are guiltily of nothing save the accident of birth. Your story of economic salvation is not grounded history or current realities. Technology is voiding more jobs than it is creating. Capital migration (jobs) is moving over seas to remain competitive. That's blue collar and white collar....what is cheaper? Paying for a computer scientist to come live in America or just take the jobs to them? The Republicans will continue to pass laws that funnel wealth back into the hands of the wealthy and keep labor disorganized. Polarize wealth, eviscerate the middle class, and generally destabilize society....they can't help it, that's the nature of fat cat politics. When the majority of people who are used to being consumers fall off the tread mill they will take a very hard look at what they believe and who is telling them to believe it.... Well anyway it should be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Trotter Posted December 17, 2002 Report Share Posted December 17, 2002 Touche, Lotharr as usual you are a voice of reason in a sea of right wing blather. Kudos. Decades after McCarthy they are still waving the communism-flag and attempting to smear by association all who don't go along blindly with thier Gordon Gekko pseudo-voodoo economics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven Posted December 17, 2002 Report Share Posted December 17, 2002 quote: YouÔÇÖre just wrong. Income does not facility vertical mobility, wealth does. So unless youÔÇÖre in the upper 40% you can expect to little to no wealth generation. Well darling, wealth certainly doesn't hurt, but you hardly need to be in the upper 40% to save money, it's just that so many people would rather buy what they want now then save for the future. I don't mind though, makes it easier for those of use with intelligence. Furthermore, wealth is not the only thing that facilitates vertical mobility, ambition, intelligence, and a good education (which is easy enough to get if you have ambition and intelligence) are big factors as well. quote: you always seem to have facts that are inaccurate or do not address fundamental issues. And you're the master of accurate and unbiased information presented in such a manner so as not to appear to be other then what it is? I think not. quote: One day you may realize that there are just not enough jobs for everyone and that the majority of poor people are guiltily of nothing save the accident of birth. Darling, the majority of the people are guilty of failure, incompetence, bovine stupidity, and poor economic decisions. Of course how much money you're born to makes a difference, but plenty of people manage without being rich to begin with, and plenty of others go down the tube no matter what. quote: Technology is voiding more jobs than it is creating. But it's also advancing our standard of living. If you're so object to technology then I'm sure you can find a cave somewhere to live. quote: Capital migration (jobs) is moving over seas to remain competitive. That's blue collar and white collar....what is cheaper? Paying for a computer scientist to come live in America or just take the jobs to them? Well darling, what can I say; it's often a better economic decision to move to other countries, though I believe this is more for cheap labor then anything else. The government likes to regulate, and to control, and to make things difficult to do business. That's peachy, because companies no longer have to put up with that if there is a better regulatory environment elsewhere. It's what Jaguar would call voting with your feet. quote: The Republicans will continue to pass laws that funnel wealth back into the hands of the wealthy and keep labor disorganized. Polarize wealth, eviscerate the middle class, and generally destabilize society....they can't help it, that's the nature of fat cat politics. Yes darling, they're polarizing wealth and eviscerating the middle class, which is why your lovely statistics show that even the bottom 20% economically are making more money now then they were in the past, after inflation. At least try and appear consistent. quote: When the majority of people who are used to being consumers fall off the tread mill they will take a very hard look at what they believe and who is telling them to believe it.... Bah! Nonsense, I believe we have already covered that humans are complacent, bovine, and not all that hard to shove around. It's repulsive, but it's the truth for the majority of our population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romale Posted December 26, 2002 Report Share Posted December 26, 2002 I just wana share my personal story real quick. i am from a poor family, my grandparents were rich but my dad managed to waste all there money. my mom busts her ass of everyday, despite being poor most her life she never giving up and has her own business doing laser hair removal, its hard to make money because of overhead, but she's finaly on the right track and will post a profit in 5 months. the point being, she busted her ass off and is getting somewere, my first job was a grocery store bagger 6.00/h my second job was at officemax 7.50/h and then at 18 i joined the army. my wealth shot up dramaticly from this. while military doesn't make mutch, you dont haft to spend the money you make, your housing/food is taken care of and you get payed plenty as long as you dont have a family. what im getting at is everyone makes choices in life, and those choices govern how your life turns out. i foolishly was a democrat until a few years ago, when i started talking to x green berret that got me to enlist in the army. he proved to me as does my own history prove to me, that if you stay poor, its because you choose to stay poor, my mother is proving to me that if you work hard enough you can get somewhere, and for those people who lack the intelligence or the drive, the military needs as many stupid people as it needs smart people, they make the choice not to take hold of something that will set you on your feet and get you on your way to sucess, when i leave the army i will be making about 120k doing what i do here in the civilian world. You want me to feel sorry enough for lower 20% of people to take all the tax burdon away from them, so people like me and my mother who have busted my ass to get somewhere in life can pay for them? no sir. i refuse to work hard and bust my ass everyday so someone else doesn't haft to. being an enlisted member of the army aint easy. i've worked for 2 weeks straight getting 2 hours of sleep every other day while im outside its snowing on me and im freezing. but my personal suffering and adaptness at doing my job garuntees me a pay check now, and a good paycheck when i leave. i will not pay more because other people are to lazy to do what i have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romale Posted December 26, 2002 Report Share Posted December 26, 2002 p.s. Drive on and Always Forward! "You can't say that civilization don't advance, however, for every [new] war, they kill you in a new way. - Will Rogers -WW I: Chemical Warfare. -WW II: Nuclear Warfare. -Korean War: Poison tipped bullets. -Vietnam War: Punted bullets (bullets spin though the air like a punted football. You get hit in the foot, it'll come out your mouth). -Operation Desert Storm: Bunker Busters (Who wants to be trapped 50 feet underground, and if you dig deeper, our bombs just get better.) And Precision Munitions that go through windows, smoke stacks, and doors. Not to mention video camera on them so we can see the little people running away and their faces. Operation Enduring Freedom: UAV's armed with hellfire missiles. Operation Anaconda: Bombs that miss you, but create an avalanche that either kill you or trap you in your cave. Next war: Something clever, I wish we could use AT4's on people though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotharr Posted December 26, 2002 Report Share Posted December 26, 2002 quote: i foolishly was a democrat Me too. Then I realized they are the more destructive and underhanded partner of corporate dominance and economic injustice. It shouldn't come as any surprise that almost every member of congress is a millionaire. quote: what im getting at is everyone makes choices in life, and those choices govern how your life turns out So all those workers who have had there jobs outsourced and can no longer find work, made that choice. The thousands of workers who have had their future destroyed by profiteering executives made that choice as well. There are reasons why people can bust their butts their whole life and come away with squat. It is called stratification in conjunction with the real fact of finite market opportunity, resting solidly upon an opportunity base enhanced or narrowed by the accident of birth. It is hard to come to terms with a system that exists to promote a small group of haves at the expense of the larger group of have-nots.and for good reason. It would betray a fundamental moral deficiency in the America some have come to believe is the pinnacle of human egalitarian accomplishment and the true source of light in a dark world. However, the only way to endorse this position is to deny morality (as some can do with a system of logic that, like all beliefs, is at some point based on faith alone) or to demonize the disposed. The best way to do this is by generating, promoting, and echoing sentiments on the false nature of choice and (in my opinion) forcing an unrealistic shift of responsibility from those who control, profit, and engineer a system to those who have to survive in it. Another good way to believe this is to say that human social and economic development is at an end.and this belief is certainly not a strong position given the nature of history. So you can say simply that choice and responsibility is in the hands of the individual and walk away.but not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 26, 2002 Report Share Posted December 26, 2002 quote: So you can say simply that choice and responsibility is in the hands of the individual and walk away.but not me. When you finally realize that that is the ONLY choice without being a tryant or destroy the nation, then we will know that you have finally grown up and taken responsibility for yourself. When you realize that the only person that can actually help you is you, then you will have made progress. Until then, you will continue to be frustrated, angry, and keep telling the government to steal from the rest of us to make your poor bleeding heart feel better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raven Posted December 27, 2002 Report Share Posted December 27, 2002 Ok darling, I've heard about how evil capitalism and elitism are, about all the horrible things done to the working class who are defenseless against it, and about how the media is supporting this. Great, so, assuming that your beliefs are correct, what do we do about it? As in do, rather then just complain about economic injustice (whatever that means) and such not. Socialism doesn't work, that's self evident if you're paying attention. Socialist methods of achieving your ideals are inherently flawed, they bring ruin to the economy that supports them, and if there are too many social programs they will bring the economy into a collapse. Whenever you start talking about whatever it is you're talking about (you never seam to suggest anything, rather you assure us that the people will figure out what is happening one day and somehow correct it) Jaguar brings up all the problems socialism causes. And what do you do? I don't know, but I don't recall ever seeing you respond. So my question for you, my challenge if you will, is to suggest something that would work. Not that would be nice if it did work, not that is theoretically possible, but something that would actually work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotharr Posted January 3, 2003 Report Share Posted January 3, 2003 quote: When you finally realize that that is the ONLY choice without being a tryant or destroy the nation, then we will know that you have finally grown up and taken responsibility for yourself Jag you live in a surreal fantasy world overflowing with opportunity and justice.but that reality is reserved for only those who can afford it. We have new and improved tyrants that are bent on controlling the conditions of our democratic process. The truth of this reality is all around us you only have to look. quote: When you realize that the only person that can actually help you is you, then you will have made progress. Until then, you will continue to be frustrated, angry, and keep telling the government to steal from the rest of us to make your poor bleeding heart feel better. People can help each other utilizing a variety of methods. People can steal from each other and use the same methods. The notion of theft I am currently angry with is the industrial political alliance that believes success is only for the upper twenty percent. I feel that owning the democratic process, raising campaigning costs to the level of the absurd, and pretending this is some how legitimate or American is a totalitarian distortion and fully tyrannical in nature. You consider yourself a constitutionalist without recognizing the nature of tyranny, understanding history, or having any consideration to notions of change. This of course means that you are, in your thinking, the one farthest from the ideals of the people who fought a revolution with the rights of people and ideas of economic justice in the front of their minds. When you grow up and realize that two centuries of change will bring new challenges perhaps you will be able to focus your good intentions upon the real threats to liberty and personal freedom that are slowly dismantling the document you claim to cherish. quote: Socialism doesn't work, that's self evident if you're paying attention By work you mean exist and by attentention you mean history? The nature of capitalism is always changing does that mean it isn't working? I haven't even really started studying history much but I know there is a bit more to "not working" than your oversimplified statement would have one believe. quote: Jaguar brings up all the problems socialism causes. And what do you do? I don't know, but I don't recall ever seeing you respond. What can I say? His responses are propaganda. The issues are complex and I am still learning about them. I think that socialism is just and capitalism is effective at generating immediate results. In the long run will that be enough? I don't think so. The fact is that after 1980 with free market dominance, third world growth has stalled. All around the world today people are trying to resist the sacking of their countries by free market profiteers. Here in America the rich are growing richer and the jobs are moving overseas. Our military has dominated industrial planning resulting in our core capital goods infrastructure being shot to hell. Heath care costs soar and our noble CEO's are falling over themselves to become super rich but just end up damaging our economy. What can I say? Free market capitalism is here....but will it stay? I don't think so. It would seem that this relatively new system is not off to a good start. quote: So my question for you, my challenge if you will, is to suggest something that would work. Not that would be nice if it did work, not that is theoretically possible, but something that would actually work. How do you define work? I believe that "actually working" depends on who you ask. For a "working" system where a small group profits and a vastly larger group is impoverished read the UN development report and exult the free market. I would further suggest that with colonialism certain areas have gained wealth and prospered at the expense of others. This is capitalism and while it works for some it sure doesn't for others. So darling you want to know what we do. We organize, educate, and take the power back of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 26, 2003 Report Share Posted January 26, 2003 Just for the hell of it, I am going to revive this thread with a VERY interesting article from the Washington Times. Argue these facts Lothar, they are the same ones that I have been repeating and repeating and repeating, that you have claimed are propaganda. Whoops, you're wrong again. quote: Class warfare said not to be working for Democrats Washington Times | 1/26/03 | Donald Lambro The White House and its Republican allies say they do not believe the Democrats' class-warfare attacks against tax cuts for upper-income earners carry the political firepower they once did. Even some Democratic officials argue that such attacks by their party's leaders, pitting lower- to middle-income groups against the rich, do not work and have not worked for several election cycles. Economists who have been advising the White House and Republican leaders say President Bush and his strategists no longer fear Democratic assertions that across-the-board tax cuts mostly benefit the wealthy. They have concluded that the tactic has little or no effect on most voters. "There is much greater confidence in dealing with class warfare now than there was, say, 10 or 12 years ago. There is a sense now that this is not the biggest threat to the president's tax-cut plan," said economist Dan Mitchell of the Heritage Foundation, who has sat in on some Republican strategy sessions on Capitol Hill. "Most Republicans on the Hill recognize the need to address the issue, but there is the feeling that economic growth trumps class warfare because we have a bigger investor class now," he said. "The size and boldness of the president's tax cuts, especially the dividend-tax elimination, is indicative of this new confidence." Pollsters, too, say the long-used tactic of Democrats does not work in an era of upwardly mobile middle-income earners and two-income couples, many of whom believe they will be climbing into higher tax brackets, brackets Mr. Bush also wants to bring down to boost investment, economic growth and the number of jobs. "The Democrats are dead wrong about class warfare. Remember, 66 percent of likely voters in a general election are investors. They have a vested interest in making sure that the stock market is sound and corporations healthy," pollster John Zogby said. Mr. Zogby said his polls in Iowa recently found that class warfare is "the kind of red meat that could help Democratic presidential candidates in the Iowa party caucuses next year among hard-core Democrats. But if you are looking for a winning national strategy, you have to go beyond your base, and this strategy is no way to do it." White House advisers who have been monitoring how Mr. Bush's tax-cut proposals are playing among lawmakers in their states and districts are finding that "there is more concern about how the tax cuts will affect the federal deficit and state revenues but little mention about the wealth factor," said a key economic adviser to the administration. Even so, the Democrats have been flogging the class-warfare issue for all it's worth since Mr. Bush announced his proposals to accelerate his income-tax rate cuts for all taxpayers this year and end the taxation of investor dividends. "Never in the field of economics have so few been given so much at the expense of so many," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, New York Democrat, said last week. House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said Mr. Bush's economic-stimulus plan is an attempt "to boost the economy with tax cuts that focus on the wealthy." Former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo said Mr. Bush was "going to give all the money to the rich." "If it looks like a tax cut for the rich, if it walks like a tax cut for the rich, it is in fact a tax cut for the rich," said Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, a Democratic presidential contender. But even some Democrats are saying that such class-warfare rhetoric is a turnoff for voters who do not like pitting class against class. "Superficially, you'd think that the old rich-versus-poor class argument would work. But I think it has been proven over the last several election cycles that voters just don't respond to it," said Jim Pederson, the Democratic state chairman of Arizona. Several factors have led to the White House's increasing confidence that old populist attacks against the rich will not have much of an effect in the coming legislative battle over Mr. Bush's tax-cut stimulus plan. Democratic campaign committees spent millions of dollars on TV ads attacking Republican tax policies in last year's elections, only to see Republicans strengthen their House majority and retake the Senate. This election mandate emboldened the president to double the size of the tax-cut package he was considering, advisers say. The success of earlier tax battles that favored upper-income groups, especially the estate-tax repeal in the president's 2001 tax cuts, also showed that the Democrats' class rhetoric has lost much of its political punch in recent years, strategists say. "The way the 'death-tax' debate developed and matured showed Republicans that you can beat class warfare," Mr. Mitchell said. "When people started working on 'death-tax' repeal five or six years ago, most of us were remotely optimistic about how this issue would play out." "With the top 1 percent reaping an enormous percentage in benefits, this was an issue tailor-made for the class-warfare argument. But the American people responded to the moral argument that we shouldn't double-tax people because they die," he said. Another factor, says John Cogan, an economist at the Hoover Institution and a close adviser to the White House, is the dramatic demographic changes that have occurred in the U.S. economy. "Americans are very mobile incomewise, and they are very optimistic about their future. The income data shows that many of them climb the income ladder quickly and incomes continue to rise, pushing people into higher income-tax brackets," Mr. Cogan said. "With 50 percent of Americans now owning stock, and with 10 million retirees getting much of their income from stock dividends, the old class-warfare demagoguery against the rich does not work anymore," he said. Do you catch that? UPWARDLY MOBILE..... Did you get that? UPWARDLY MOBILE!!!! There, I repeated it and bolded it in the article, do you get it yet? I love capitalism!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotharr Posted January 27, 2003 Report Share Posted January 27, 2003 Me too. I love that 66% of 40% that give a crap about anything. Honestly...I could care less. The fact is voter participation is in decline. When millionaire democrats try to sound off with anything resembling class dissatisfaction, the legions of now upper income journalists should, and do, take aim and get their kills. I think Bush is the best thing since sliced cheese and the Democrats should go home to their estates and shut the hell up. What you present are not facts. Misrepresentation and hopeful speculation defines media. You can believe whatever you want but when the truth comes out it usually hurts. The funny thing is I was just listening to a African American R senator (I really should know his name) define what the Republican party needs to do to be successful in the future.it wasnt pretty.they will have to cater to ethnic groups most disenfranchised by their policies.bye bye suckaa take the democrats with you.. Anyway, I missed you man..did you read the book by Robert Coren that talks about a man named Boyd who got Stormin Normins plans thrown out in favor of maneuver warfare used in Gulf I yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now