GOP dirty little secret: corporate subsidies are Middle Class Tax Increases

[editec]

The proof is in the pudding.

Are the poor (lowest 20%) better off then they were in the 60s?

Are the middle class (21% - 80%) better or worse off than they were in the 60s?

ARe the affluent and wealthy (81-99%) better or worse off than they were in the 60's?

How about the top 1%? Better or worse off than they were in the 60s?

How about the national economy?

Better or worse off?

Perhaps if we can at least find some common understanding of how the various classes are doing that might be at least a START to deciding who needs help.

And if we could possibly not get into a BLAME GAME, that might also advance the discussion, too.

FWIW, I think the POOR are marginally better off thanks to the social safety net we've build.

I think the working middle class breaks down into three segements:

the working poor 21%-40% who are MUCH worse off than they used to be;
the TRUE middle 40-60% who are marginally worse off than they were;
and the upper middle 61-80%) who are slightly better off.​

The top 20% are obviously better off with the majority of better-off-ness going mostly to the wealthiest of that upper income backet.

Anyone disagree with this thumbnail assessment of how Americans are doing by class?

 

[Full-Auto]

Oil subsidies are a GOP stealth-tax on the middle-class. Gawd forbid the rich..... errr..... job-creators are asked to contribute

Stealth tax?

So we eliminate what makes them competitive with other countries, the prices rise.

How does that tax work again?

Ummm.....thats why we're not paying the true price for oil. It is being subsidized by the taxpayer whilst Exxon posted the largest corporate profit ever

Only if you think in terms their money is government money. When they send checks from the treasury. Alert everyone.

They are an international business so the attempt to sensationalize the topic was not missed.

 

[Intense]

The proof is in the pudding.

Are the poor (lowest 20%) better off then they were in the 60s?

Are the middle class (21% - 80%) better or worse off than they were in the 60s?

ARe the affluent and wealthy (81-99%) better or worse off than they were in the 60's?

How about the top 1%? Better or worse off than they were in the 60s?

How about the national economy>

Better or worse off?

HMMM....

Smart Phones, Internet, Global access in Communication and Information, HD TV's, A/C, Metro Cards, Mass Transit, Food Everywhere. Access to World Wide Goods, how about you tell me.

 

[editec]

The proof is in the pudding.

Are the poor (lowest 20%) better off then they were in the 60s?

Are the middle class (21% - 80%) better or worse off than they were in the 60s?

ARe the affluent and wealthy (81-99%) better or worse off than they were in the 60's?

How about the top 1%? Better or worse off than they were in the 60s?

How about the national economy>

Better or worse off?

HMMM....

Smart Phones, Internet, Global access in Communication and Information, HD TV's, A/C, Metro Cards, Mass Transit, Food Everywhere. Access to World Wide Goods, how about you tell me.

All really cool things, but not exactly an offset to those who are going broke, In.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Oil subsidies are a GOP stealth-tax on the middle-class. Gawd forbid the rich..... errr..... job-creators are asked to contribute

Do you have any idea what ending oil subsidies and raising corporate tax rates on big oil would do to the price of gasoline and home heating oil?

Taxes are a cost of doing business, just like labor, utilities and raw materials. The cost of doing business is passed on to the consumer multiple times.
Not only do you pay more for energy, but you pay more for food, clothing, even software and internet as they pass increased energy costs to their customers.

Forget it, brother.......Like their beloved Obama, they are completely economically stupid.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Saying "failed" idea doesn't make for a "failed" idea.

So what are the Republican Ideas. Give us a list. You know it will be a short one.

ROFLMAO, you mean like how you guys constantly say the rights ideas are failed?

You want a list? We have given it over and over and over. You just want to ignore it and spend more money.

Myths of the Free Market

Our own economy grew faster when we abandoned the laissez faire of the 1920s and early 1930s for the proto-socialist policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt. It has become increasingly sluggish as we have moved back to a purer free market. Data of the past few decades show that our GNP and productivity growth have lagged those of our trading partners, who have mixed economies characterized by moderate government intervention.

The U.S. has come closer to laissez faire than most other countries, especially since the Reagan Administration. If free market policies are the best economic policies then we should have experienced the most robust growth in the world during this period. But this has not happened. We have been outstripped by our trading partners.

Table 1: Average Annual Growth in Real GNP per Capita

Country / 1980-1994 / 1985-1994
South Korea* 7.72% / 8.17%
Thailand* 5.81% / 7.74%
Taiwan* 6.20% / 7.07%
Peoples’ * 6.46% / 5.83%
Indonesia* 3.26% / 4.40%
Ireland 3.08% / 4.11%
India* 3.07% / 3.00%
Japan 2.88% / 2.78%
Spain 1.98% /2.65%
Italy 1.62% /1.89%
Belgium 1.48% /1.88%
Austria 1.58% / 1.74%
Netherlands 1.29% / 1.73%
United Kingdom 1.79% / 1.72%
Germany 1.56% /1.70%
Denmark 1.99% / 1.61%
Norway 2.09% /1.58%
Australia 1.54% /1.47%
United States 1.52% / 1.32%
Switzerland 0.84% / 0.80%
France 1.31% / 0.12%
Sweden 0.81% / 0.06%
Canada 0.86% /-0.73%
U.S.S.R.* -2.64% / -5.05%

How fast would our economy have grown if we had not just wiped out the entire manufacturing base of the rest of the world during WWII?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I feel like I just walked in on a Kool-Aid Party at Jones-town. Somebody please hail me a cab.

OK, you're a cab.

 

[oreo]

Seems to be one of the GOP's "dirty little secrets" they forget to mention. When you give money to the top 12 largest US corporations and to oil companies, that money comes from the middle class. It's a "tax increase" on the middle class.

When Republicans wanted the government to clean up after BP because it was an "accident", they were working to shift the cost to the middle class.

On Morning Joe, Paul Ryan lied again and again. First, new jobs do NOT come from "small business", they come from "new business". Besides, Republicans saying they support small business is BS. They never have and never will. They only supports large business and corporations. You only need to follow their policies to know that. Because corporations are people my friend.

Another lie, if someone's tax rate is 14% and you close the loopholes, their rate is NOT 25%. Only now, they are paying more of the 14%. But it's STILL 14%.

This Republican "Let 'em Die" Party with the fringe on top, is no friend to the middle class. Their policies, no matter how well they word them are intended to squeeze what ever they can from America to feed a few wealthy elite. They fail under close scrutiny or examination.

Dean is at it again-- States--

"New jobs comes from new business not small business??????"-- 9 out of 10 NEW business's FAIL within the 1st YEAR. That is an historic FACT.

Most new small business companies start out with mom and pop being the only ones working it--until revenue aka (sales grow) and then they will hire someone.

Small business people are the driving engine of this economy--but these small business people need to be in business for two years-(showing a PROFIT)--before a bank will even look at them)--for a small business loan--to expand and grow their business.