How does envy and hate towards "rich" people..

[The T]

I understand the Obamas had an adjusted gross income of 5.5 million in 2011 is that not conisdered rich anymore?

>$250,000...didn't you get the memo from Obama and the Democrats?

Dam so Obama is one of the 1% has anyone told occupy Wall Street? If they still exist that is.

What do the zombies care as long as Obama has voiced support for them...? That's all they want to hear...they don't care what he does above that.

 

[Toro]

Helping to solve your own problems.....I have to say I am kind of shocked at some of the hateful comments from some people towards people that are rich. Also I am puzzled by how some are selective in who they have decided to dislike, like the Romneys......So If I am to understand it correctly, it is fine to dislike a rich republican, while the same people don't have any problems with rich people like the Kennedys..

How does wanting to end the Bush Tax cuts and treat the capital gains as income equal envy and hate?

It doesn't. We should end the Bush tax cuts.

But wanting to end tax breaks for corporate jets is blatant class warfare.

 

[PoliticalChic]

This country is quickly becoming a plutocracy and only those who blindly use patriotism as a disguise will deny it. Slowly but surely middle class workers are having their rugs pulled out from under them and neither party is innocent. My kids have zero to look forward to no matter who is elected. This has been rightly instilled in them by me.

Middle class is doing just fine....

And yet, here is median household income (at 50% boundary):
1979: 44,481
2010: 49,445, or 11% increase

... and poorest household of the top 5%
1979: 124,540
2010: 180,810, or 45% increase

http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/p60-239.pdf

As you can see, the incomes grew much faster at the top, resulting in rising inequality. And virtually all rise in per capita incomes for the past 30 years went to the richest households.

Some folks are hard to fool...

....then, there's you..



1. The charge is that there has been very little change in the average real income of American households over a period of decades. And there is proof of that: income adjusted for inflation rose by only 6% from 1969 to 1999…stagnation? There it is: simple proof for the simple mind… never mind.

a. You see, it is also true that the average real income per person rose by 51% over that same period!!! http://www.census.gov/prod/3/98pubs/p23-196.pdf

b. The explanation? Changes in the average number of persons per household was declining over that period! It also varies with racial and ethnic groups and with income brackets.

c. Income comparisons using household statistics are far less reliable indicators of standard of living than individual income data.


2. The increases in income is partially responsible for the decreasing size of households, as it enables more to live in their own separate homes.

a. Take as an example, a low income household whose income increases above the poverty level. As a result, the family relieves overcrowding by having some members move to their own dwelling. Better? Well, the Lefties will now count the two resulting households as an increase in the number of ‘families’ in poverty! Starting to get it?

b. But in high income families, the “rich,” household size is often the explanation for increased income. With 39 million in households in the lowest 20% vs. 64 million in the households with the top 20% of earnings, it’s easy to see the reason for the disparity. But wait! The number of workers in those households is even more telling! The top 20% had 19 million heads of households who worked, compared to fewer than 8 million in the bottom 20%! See Sowell, “ Economic Facts and Fallacies, “ chapter five, and Income Inequality: How Census Data Misrepresent Income Distribution

c. Further, the educational backgrounds and skills of the two quintiles are far from comparable.


Wise up.

 

[AquaAthena]

Helping to solve your own problems.....I have to say I am kind of shocked at some of the hateful comments from some people towards people that are rich. Also I am puzzled by how some are selective in who they have decided to dislike, like the Romneys......So If I am to understand it correctly, it is fine to dislike a rich republican, while the same people don't have any problems with rich people like the Kennedys..

Nothing more than misery loves company. There is a reason that proverb has been around for so long.

And as to the wealth of Democrats, et al., that is fine, for it is they who who will be voting in favor of their, or theirs, entitlement programs....

 

[The T]

Helping to solve your own problems.....I have to say I am kind of shocked at some of the hateful comments from some people towards people that are rich. Also I am puzzled by how some are selective in who they have decided to dislike, like the Romneys......So If I am to understand it correctly, it is fine to dislike a rich republican, while the same people don't have any problems with rich people like the Kennedys..

Nothing more than misery loves company. There is a reason that proverb has been around for so long.

And as to the wealth of Democrats, et al., that is fine, for it is they who who will be voting in favor of their, or theirs, entitlement programs....

...By design of the Statists.

 

[francoHFW]

There is only "hate" for greedy, oblivious(?) rich pubs who pander to the rich and screw with the nonrich- tax cuts for the bloated rich, destroy Medicare/aid etc etc....

So the richest's wealth grows 273% under Voodoo while everyone else and the country suffer...-gee, what to do? LOL!

And we thank them for the SECOND Pub Great Depression, and the longest, stupidest wars EVER!

 

[Dr.House]

Maybe it seems selective because.....this might be a shocker to you......that democrats don't in fact hate rich people. It's a nice strawman that educated republicans have convinced their uneducated base to parrot (*ahem, someone has a fitting Avatar). But if Democrats are supposed to "hate" rich people but yet you can name rich people they don't seem to "hate", then maybe your hypothesis is off. Maybe it's the policies that favor rich people that liberals don't like.

Does Warren Buffet hate himself? Of course not, but he speaks out constantly about the policies that favor rich people such as himself. No one hates anyone. Turn off your tv/radio and use your brain for once.

I've seen letters to the editor expressing hate for the rich. A poster on this very forum referred to the "filthy rich." -- Criticizing Romney because he's rich, his wife because she did not work outside the home. I have turned off my TV - the MSNBC that is, yes, because is THERE, NOT Fox where I have heard this expressed.

Ok, and? I've seen people on this very site spew hatred for poor people. So does that mean all conservatives hate the poor now?

Link?

 

[PoliticalChic]

There is only "hate" for greedy, oblivious(?) rich pubs who pander to the rich and screw with the nonrich- tax cuts for the bloated rich, destroy Medicare/aid etc etc....

So the richest's wealth grows 273% under Voodoo while everyone else and the country suffer...-gee, what to do? LOL!

Rumor has it you don't know how to spell 'Republicans.'

Lots of your posts seem to indicate it......

....any truth to the rumor?

 

[uscitizen]

Neither does those who "worship" those with money help things.

And the correct spelling is Rebuttlickens.

 

[Trajan]

Helping to solve your own problems.....I have to say I am kind of shocked at some of the hateful comments from some people towards people that are rich. Also I am puzzled by how some are selective in who they have decided to dislike, like the Romneys......So If I am to understand it correctly, it is fine to dislike a rich republican, while the same people don't have any problems with rich people like the Kennedys..

How does wanting to end the Bush Tax cuts and treat the capital gains as income equal envy and hate?

It doesn't. We should end the Bush tax cuts.

But wanting to end tax breaks for corporate jets is blatant class warfare.

no we shouldn't and as far as private jets go, lets check on Buffetts tax outlook when it hits close to home;

from am impeccable source




Buffett's belabored secretary has become such a ubiquitous gambit in the tax debate that she was invited to attend the president's State of the Union address as an honored guest. Buffett's pleading with Congress to hike his tax rate has grown so incessant that Republicans routinely suggest the Omaha billionaire should simply, as New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie put it, "write a check and shut up."

But when a Buffett company had a chance to tackle both problems, it chose to do the opposite. And it spent handsomely on K Street to get it done.

Berkshire Hathaway-owned NetJets Inc. spent more than $2.5 million on a squadron of lobbyists who successfully crafted tax legislation to benefit a handful of private jet companies, according to a HuffPost analysis of lobbying disclosure records.

The Federal Aviation Administration Modernization and Reform Act passed in February after wending its way through Congress over much of the last decade. The bill provides a broad overhaul of national aviation, which includes improving runway safety standards and funding aviation safety research. The bill also advances NextGen, a program to replace the aging radar system with GPS, which the FAA says will reduce delays, accidents and air pollution.

The key tax provision at issue was part of legislation aimed at modernizing the infrastructure of the aviation industry. The law carved out fractionally owned private jets from commercial jets, meaning that companies like NetJets will pay lower taxes over the next four years than they do today. According to the lobbying disclosure records, NetJets spent more than $1.5 million lobbying to win that specific provision alone.

The NetJets effort will deprive the government of roughly $25 million in annual revenue over the next three years due to a provision that benefits the fractional aviation industry, which allows individuals and companies to buy a share of a private aircraft, like a time-share. In 2010, according to the company's CEO, NetJets controlled 70 percent of the fractional jet market share. Seventy percent of $25 million is $17.5 million. In March 2011, Buffett noted that NetJets claims a market share five times bigger than its closest competitor.

more at-
Warren Buffett Company: Please Hike Cut Our Taxes

 

[francoHFW]

There is only "hate" for greedy, oblivious(?) rich pubs who pander to the rich and screw with the nonrich- tax cuts for the bloated rich, destroy Medicare/aid etc etc....

So the richest's wealth grows 273% under Voodoo while everyone else and the country suffer...-gee, what to do? LOL!

Rumor has it you don't know how to spell 'Republicans.'

Lots of your posts seem to indicate it......

....any truth to the rumor?

No. I make a distinction between greedy, myopic, mega rich Pubs, and their bought off or just plain clueless dupes like you. LOL! Read the book...

 

[PoliticalChic]

Neither does those who "worship" those with money help things.

And the correct spelling is Rebuttlickens.

Stuff like that is only funny when it makes sense....

 

[PoliticalChic]

There is only "hate" for greedy, oblivious(?) rich pubs who pander to the rich and screw with the nonrich- tax cuts for the bloated rich, destroy Medicare/aid etc etc....

So the richest's wealth grows 273% under Voodoo while everyone else and the country suffer...-gee, what to do? LOL!

Rumor has it you don't know how to spell 'Republicans.'

Lots of your posts seem to indicate it......

....any truth to the rumor?

No. I make a distinction between greedy, myopic, mega rich Pubs, and their bought off or just plain clueless dupes like you. LOL! Read the book...

No, really....can you spell it?

As a dyslexic, I bet you got lousy grades- but never knew it.

 

[Valox]

Because the most uber wealthy cannot do this without the aid of the government. Hence, why the pay K-Street millions of dollars to lobby on their behalf.

I hate corporatism, political favoritism, and crony capitalism. However, right wing extremists think this is class warfare and the uber rich has the right to buy out our government.s

Then they accuse us class warfare when you point out their love affair of corporatism. This is another reason why most Republican hate Ron Paul. Republicans hate a fair and balanced playing field.

 

[uscitizen]

We have the best government that money can buy. You gamble and lose you become too big to fail and get bailed out by the masses.

Hey I thought the big guys made the big bucks for taking the big risks?
What risks?
How many of the finiancial CEO's got fired?

 

[The T]

We have the best government that money can buy. You gamble and lose you become too big to fail and get bailed out by the masses.

Hey I thought the big guys made the big bucks for taking the big risks?
What risks?
How many of the finiancial CEO's got fired?

I know ONE CEO that IS going to be fired for mismanagement and Class Warfare.

 

[francoHFW]

CEO...who?

 

[Cowman]

I'm surprised at how many people think that rich people are automatically better than the rest of us on account of their money.

 

[The T]

I'm surprised at how many people think that rich people are automatically better than the rest of us on account of their money.

NO one is saying that but Statists as YOU.

 

[snakedoc]

I'm surprised at how many people think that rich people are automatically better than the rest of us on account of their money.

I'm surprised at how many people think rich people are evil because there rich go figure.