Please explain why you Republicans support the wealthy over your own middle class?

[eflatminor]

Call it whatever you want, it's unconstitutional, ineffective and financially unsustainable. So, as yet ANOTHER solar panel company goes bankrupt with taxpayer money...just this morning...let's have a look at what your approach to government meddling in business has wrought:

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

Hey, almost $133,000 of debt PER TAXPAYER...and you call ME extreme?!

[/QUOTE]It's also not unconstitutional. No one claimed it was sustainable. It's a booster shot for the economy, not a permanent condition. Like a war, like disaster relief, it's a treatment for a crisis. And government spending in a crisis does stimulate the economy. This is not a theory, it's observable reality.

Your ideas are extreme. You have every right to be an extremist, it's a free country. [/QUOTE]

If true, then the economy should be rocking following the biggest stimulus in the history of the world.

Not unconstitutional? Please point to the enumerated power that gives the federal government the power to invest taxpayer money in the industries of the President's choosing.

Lastly, how will you be paying your share of the debt, the $133,000 YOU owe? Can you answer that question or will just dump on the next generation the bill for your largess? Now THAT would be extreme!

 

[Uncensored2008]

You're truncating the quote from Smith, Uncensored. You are leaving off a sentence.

ROFL

"Wealth of Nations" is over 1,300 pages, I'm leaving off far more than a sentence. What I posted is relevant to your false claim, and refutes it.

Such is the nature of citations.

It's also not unconstitutional. No one claimed it was sustainable. It's a booster shot for the economy, not a permanent condition. Like a war, like disaster relief, it's a treatment for a crisis. And government spending in a crisis does stimulate the economy. This is not a theory, it's observable reality.

The observable reality is that Keynesian stimulus is a failure. Never has the generated activity exceeded the principle infused. Dumping cash into an economy and creating an equivalent in activity is no great feat, nor of any use. What you cannot demonstrate is the reverberations of the multiplier effect generating five and six times the activity of the capital infused, as Keynes postulated would occur.

Your ideas are extreme. You have every right to be an extremist, it's a free country.

His ideas are mainstream among those with a grasp of macro-economics.

Just like these guys.

Rdean is a proven liar, do you really want to throw in with him?

 

[George Costanza]

Please explain Americans why you Republicans support the wealthy over your own middle class?

I could never understand why the misguided mouthpieces in the Republican Party continue to make excuses for the top 1% wealthiest while dissing their own in the middle class. Cowards and Traitors, the bunch of ya. While the middle class is trying to unite against the wealthiest, some in the middle class are playing the Benedict Arnold role - all in the name of the Grand Ol' Party.

Shameless Cowards - the lot of you

-----

Well, MiddleCl-Ass, another mis-informed post!

1. The glaring error in your post is the underlying idea that there is a 'rich' class in this nation.
No such class exists in an ongoing basis...merely as a snapshot in time.

"More than three-quarters of those working Americans whose incomes were in the bottom 20 percent in 1975 were also in the top 40 percent of income earners at some point by 1991, says Sowell."
Source: Thomas Sowell, "How Media Misuse Income Data To Match Their Preconceptions," Investor's Business Daily, January 12, 2010.
For text:
How Media Misuse Income Data To Match Their Preconceptions - Investors.com

2. When all sources of income are included -- wages, salaries, realized capital gains, dividends, business income and government benefits -- and taxes paid are deducted, households in the lowest income quintile saw a roughly 25% increase in their living standards from 1983 to 2005. (See chart nearby; the data is from the Congressional Budget Office's "Comprehensive Household Income.") This fact alone refutes the notion that the poor are getting poorer. They are not.

The data also show downward mobility among the highest income earners. The top 1% in 1996 saw an average decline in their real, after-tax incomes by 52% in the next 10 years.
America is still an opportunity society where talent and hard work can (almost always) overcome one's position at birth or at any point in time. Perhaps the best piece of news in this regard is the reduction in gaps between earnings of men and women, and between blacks and whites over the last 25 years.
http://online.wsj.com/public/article...536934297.html

3. There's a lot of income mobility in America, so comparing poor families today with the poor families of 10 years ago can be misleading because they're not the same families. Every year hundreds of thousands of new immigrants and the young enter the workforce at "poor" income levels. But the CBO study found that, with the exception of chronically poor families who have no breadwinner, low-income job holders are climbing the income ladder.
The Poor Get Richer - WSJ.com

4. Over half of the poor earning at or near the minimum wage are between the ages of 16 and 24. As Sowell wryly notes, “these individuals cannot remain from 16 to 24 years of age indefinitely, though that age category can of course continue indefinitely, providing many intellectuals with data to fit their preconceptions.”
An Independent Mind by Daniel J. Mahoney, City Journal 18 June 2010


Wise up, and stop gobbling up the Left-wing propaganda....Simp.

I call bull shit! Of COURSE there is a "rich" class in America. Who are you trying to snow here? You can do anything you want with staistics, and this post of yours is a classic illustration of that truth.

You know damn well who the Rich are. They are the people with a lot of money, a lot of property, a lot of income and a lot of possessions. And they don't tend to "come and go." Far from it. There are wealthy families in this country who have been miserably wealthy since the 1920's and who are wealthier today than they were then.

On a more realistic basis, run to your statistics source there and find out how many folks are bringing home more than $250,000.00 per year. And, while you are at it, check and see how many of those folks vote Democratic.

 

[George Costanza]

Rdean is a proven liar, do you really want to throw in with him?

Really? Prove it. Link me to anywhere where Rdean has "lied." Remember now, you can say anything you want by way of OPINION. That is not lying - that is merely stating an opinion. Lying is INTENTIONALLY mis-stating a FACT. MISTAKENLY mis-stating a fact is not lying.

Show me where RDean has ever INTENTIONALLY mis-stated a fact. If you can, I will respect your post here where you call him a "proven liar." If not, well, that would kind of make YOU a "proven liar," now wouldn't it?

I'm waiting . . .

 

[Uncensored2008]

Really? Prove it. Link me to anywhere where Rdean has "lied." Remember now, you can say anything you want by way of OPINION. That is not lying - that is merely stating an opinion. Lying is INTENTIONALLY mis-stating a FACT. MISTAKENLY mis-stating a fact is not lying.

Show me where RDean has ever INTENTIONALLY mis-stated a fact. If you can, I will respect your post here where you call him a "proven liar." If not, well, that would kind of make YOU a "proven liar," now wouldn't it?

I'm waiting . . .

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ver-your-own-middle-class-40.html#post4344197

Read it stupid.

rdean is a proven liar.

 

[SAT]

If true, then the economy should be rocking following the biggest stimulus in the history of the world.

Not if the stimulus was inadequate when compared to the problem.

Not unconstitutional? Please point to the enumerated power that gives the federal government the power to invest taxpayer money in the industries of the President's choosing.

That's a phony characterization of the stimulus.

Lastly, how will you be paying your share of the debt, the $133,000 YOU owe? Can you answer that question or will just dump on the next generation the bill for your largess? Now THAT would be extreme!

I'm the one looking out for them. Always have been. Always will be.

You're truncating the quote from Smith, Uncensored. You are leaving off a sentence.

ROFL

"Wealth of Nations" is over 1,300 pages, I'm leaving off far more than a sentence. What I posted is relevant to your false claim, and refutes it.

Such is the nature of citations.

You are leaving off a relevant sentence.

The observable reality is that Keynesian stimulus is a failure. Never has the generated activity exceeded the principle infused. Dumping cash into an economy and creating an equivalent in activity is no great feat, nor of any use. What you cannot demonstrate is the reverberations of the multiplier effect generating five and six times the activity of the capital infused, as Keynes postulated would occur.

But we do see multipliers.

Food stamps offer best stimulus - study - Jan. 29, 2008

His ideas are mainstream among those with a grasp of macro-economics.

Not from what I've seen. He's willing to destroy the US economy and pretending it's for the chirren.

 

[SAT]

The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.[15]

Progressive tax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That doesn't make Smith a socialist. It's just common sense.

 

[Foxfyre]

Sorry guys but you are misrepresenting what Adam Smith said. He was not supporting a progressive tax, and it would be against his entire economic philosophy to support a progressive tax.

What he supported was a proportional tax; i.e. a flat tax. The rich man with $100,000 in income pays 10% or $10,000. The poor man with $10,000 in income pays $1,000. He was opposed to the rich man paying the same AMOUNT as the poor man as he thought the rich man owed more to society. But he was not saying the rich man pay a higher percentage but rather pay the same percentage proportionately as all others.

People on the left sometimes accuse us of misrepresenting Adam Smith who, they say, was in favour of progressive taxation and certain other state interventions. On his (rather excellent) blog, David Friedman has convincingly refuted this error. An extract:

"The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state." (Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations)

Taxation in proportion to revenue isn't progressive taxation, it's proportional taxation—in modern terminology, a flat tax. The quote not only isn't evidence for the claim, it's evidence against it—important evidence, since it is the first of the maxims of taxation with which Smith introduces his discussion of possible taxes.
Adam Smith and progressive taxation

 

[eflatminor]

Not if the stimulus was inadequate when compared to the problem.

Ah! The "We just didn't spend enough" argument? Where have I heard that one before. Have another look at that debt clock, please.

Not unconstitutional? Please point to the enumerated power that gives the federal government the power to invest taxpayer money in the industries of the President's choosing.
That's a phony characterization of the stimulus.

I was referring to subsidies and loans for the oil, solar and many other industries. Solyndra? However you define the stimulus, it isn't within the confines of the law of the land. But I'm sure you know what's best?

Lastly, how will you be paying your share of the debt, the $133,000 YOU owe? Can you answer that question or will just dump on the next generation the bill for your largess? Now THAT would be extreme!
I'm the one looking out for them. Always have been. Always will be.

And there you have it. A lefty looks reality straight in the face and says "If you'd only do as I say, everything would be grand", as though they have a pocketful of magic beans. The Libertarian of course, does not believe he knows what's best for anyone but him and his family. When society after society throughout history collapsed after facing this kind of debt and expansive influence beyond their borders, you're sure you know what's best. The hubris is overwhelming.

 

[eflatminor]

The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.[15]

Progressive tax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That doesn't make Smith a socialist. It's just common sense.

That's a blatant misrepresentation of Smith and you damn well know it. He advocated the rich should pay a higher amount of tax revenue than the poor man, not a higher percentage.

More importantly and despite all your bitching about tax cuts for the rich, they wealthy in this country continue to pay an increasing percentage of the overall tax burden, whatever the rate, whatever the loophole. But of course, they got richer...and we can't have that!

It will NEVER be enough for you people.

 

[SAT]

Saying that you've heard before that the stimulus was too small is not a rebuttal.

It's a whine.

There is nothing unconstitutional about a stimulus bill. You do realize that we've had numerous stimulus bills before, right? So did it suddenly become unconstitutional, or are you the first to notice it?

And there you have it. A lefty looks reality straight in the face and says "If you'd only do as I say, everything would be grand", as though they have a pocketful of magic beans. The Libertarian of course, does not believe he knows what's best for anyone but him and his family. When society after society throughout history collapsed after facing this kind of debt and expansive influence beyond their borders, you're sure you know what's best. The hubris is overwhelming.

If you keep tripping over your own feet like this, you're going to get seriously hurt.

A few minutes ago, you wanted me to think of the children. Now you're claiming that we shouldn't think of the children.

Pick a lane and stay in it.

 

[eflatminor]

Saying that you've heard before that the stimulus was too small is not a rebuttal.

It's a whine.

There is nothing unconstitutional about a stimulus bill. You do realize that we've had numerous stimulus bills before, right? So did it suddenly become unconstitutional, or are you the first to notice it?

And there you have it. A lefty looks reality straight in the face and says "If you'd only do as I say, everything would be grand", as though they have a pocketful of magic beans. The Libertarian of course, does not believe he knows what's best for anyone but him and his family. When society after society throughout history collapsed after facing this kind of debt and expansive influence beyond their borders, you're sure you know what's best. The hubris is overwhelming.

If you keep tripping over your own feet like this, you're going to get seriously hurt.

A few minutes ago, you wanted me to think of the children. Now you're claiming that we shouldn't think of the children.

Pick a lane and stay in it.

I never stated to "think" of the children, I'm suggesting you should not meddle in the lives of those yet to be born...as though you haven't fucked things up enough for the living. I want to live within my means, pay my own way in life and burden no one. Your type is quite the opposite.

Just because previous stimulus bills were also unconstitutional, that doesn't make this one suddenly legal...and yes, I've stood against such government meddling long before Obama.

 

[Photonic]

Maybe because nobody ever got a job from a poor person?

Wealthy individuals are a byproduct of a free and prosperous society. Deal with it.

Oh ok, perhaps you would care to explain the "byproduct" of middle eastern princes?

 

[oreo]

The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.[15]

Progressive tax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That doesn't make Smith a socialist. It's just common sense.

The top 10% in this country already pay 67% of the entire federal tax base--and the top 1% pay 45% of the 67%. There are only 220 thousand Americans out of 310 million Americans that even make 1 million per year.

You could confiscate every single penny they have and it wouldn't even put a scratch into the 14.7 trillion in red ink now--with another 64 trillion in unfunded liabilities for social security and medicare.

1 billion dollars $100.00 bills stacked on pallets.

1 trillion dollars $100.00 bills stacked on pallets.

Now do you really believe that the wealthy in this country can contribute 78 of the above trillion dollar chart?--

It's the government SPENDING stupid. That's the PROBLEM.

 

[editec]

Please explain why you Republicans support the wealthy over your own middle class?

They're loyal?

Just a guess, of course.

The fact is that historically speaking, deposed KINGS usually found their greatest support in the non-urban peasant classes.

And if we look at voting patterns we see that the GOP's greatest support comes from non-urban middle class.

I suspect that can be explained by the fact that there is a significant diffference between urban poverty and non urban poverty.

When societies fail, they usually start to fail in their urban areas.

 

[midcan5]

Republicans are driven by ideology and not any sense of reality. When rigid concepts, rather than flexible thought guide you, there is always the appearance of misplaced values. Consider the ten Pavlovian dogs - no criticism of dogs meant - who raised their hands like puppets over the 10% tax question during the debate and you must realize no thinking was involved. Allow me to list an old post with a slight edit on their thinking. The task to make republicans thinking citizens is similar to convincing a child to eat healthy. Ideas are welcome.

This is a list of concepts and ideas that arrange the way a republican thinks about a number of topics. The list includes items that are positive and negative and often it is the degree to which something is believed or used that determines the way they understand any of the issues that face us as Americans. They serve as categories that allow easy classification without thinking or reasoning. If they thought or reasoned they would be liberals.

You believe taxes are bad
You believe a government that taxes is bad
You believe Unions are bad
You believe giving tax cuts to those who ship jobs overseas is good
You believe people on welfare are cheaters
You believe welfare is bad
You believe CEOs making 100 million are getting paid fairly
You believe minimum wage is too much
You believe millions of dollars of compensation for the rich is good
You believe helping the poor is bad
You believe government contracts for the rich are good
You believe anyone without a job isn't looking
You support small business but not the Small Business Administration
You support small business but give dividend relief to the large corporations
You support small business but tax breaks go to the top 3%
You support small business but you shop at Walmart
You support small business but you buy foreign products
Government is a bad thing but the military industrial complex is a good thing
Regulation is bad but bailing out failed corporations is good
You talk Jesus and the power of religion but vote more corporate power
You talk family values but vote more corporate power
You talk less government but support more corporate power
You talk honesty but support more corporate power
You believe in a domino theory of actions
You believe in the slippery slope of morals
You believe the liberalism that founded American democracy is now wrong
You protest against so called cultural elitism not corporate greed
You protest against abortion not lack of education and funding
You protest against evolution not the inequality of wages
You protest against atheism not poor living conditions
You have to believe a few cells is a person but bombing living people is fine
A few cells is a person but executions are fine
A few cells is a person but executing retarded people is fine
A few cells is a person but supporting medical research that could save lives is bad
A few cells is a person but the child that dies every minute doesn't matter
A few cells is a person but food supports are bad
A few cells is a person but sex education about it is bad
A few cells is a person but condoms are bad
We invaded Iraq because it was a threat to us
We invaded Iraq because they didn't follow UN resolution 1441
We invaded Iraq because they didn't allow UN inspectors
We invaded Iraq because Saddam was a bad man
We invaded Iraq to free the Iraqi people
We invaded Iraq to form a democracy in the middle east
You believe education is good but don't support it
You believe education is a good thing but we don't need public schools
You believe education is a good thing so long as they teach your values and religion
You say 'leave no child behind' but make sure the rich get further ahead
You impose 'No Child' laws but let the states pay for it
You say 'compassionate' but cut back support for food for children
You say 'compassionate' but withdraw aid for after school programs
You say 'compassionate' but weaken international laws that protect children
You believe it's ok to be armed but one ounce of pot is a jail sentence
You believe it's ok to be armed but medical marijuana is bad
You believe it's ok to be armed but song lyrics should be banned
You believe it's ok to be armed and those who aren't are out of touch with reality
You believe it is ok that women do not have the same rights as men
You believe women should be quiet and in the background
You believe women are ok but you hate Hilary
You support women but close the Office for Women's Initiatives
You support women but remove medically accurate information from the web
You believe tariffs are bad unless you are a corporate farmer
You believe tariffs are bad unless it helps win votes
You believe free trade is fine so long as it doesn't affect your corporate contributors
You believe affirmative action is bad but connections are ok
You believe global warming is myth
You believe pollution is not an issue
You believe the environment will take care of itself
You believe we must roll back the New Deal
You believe interfering in the lives of gays is proper
You believe interfering in the lives of those who choose to die is proper
You believe government is bad unless it enforces your values
You believe government is bad unless it is bails out corporations
You believe government is bad unless it builds more prisons
You believe creating laws that impose on personal freedoms is good
You believe that what another citizen is doing in their bedroom is your concern
You believe if it is not something you believe in then it is wrong
You believe you support the military
You believe you support the military while you cut back their benefits
You believe you support the military while you close VA hospitals
You believe you support the military while you send them to war with no plan
You believe you support the military while your candidates never served
You believe creationism is good science
You believe Evolution is just a theory
You believe media is liberal
You believe Limbaugh is right on
You believe Hannity is right on
You believe Coulter is right on
You believe Savage is right on
You believe Ingram is right on
You believe the WSJ editorial page is right on
You believe Fox is fair and balanced
You believe media is liberal
You believe Bush is a common man even though he has never worked nor served
You believe Cheney is a common man even with a 55 million paycheck
You believe the republicans represent the common man while the corporations support them
You believe liberal or elitist is bad
You believe some people are bad because of the coffee they drink
You believe some people are bad because they read
You believe some people are bad because they have traveled
You believe people are bad because of the car they drive
You believe people are bad because they honor dissent in America
You believe it is not honesty and hard work but culture that defines us
You believe it is not honesty and hard work but religion that defines us
You believe it is not honesty and hard work but political affiliation that defines us
You must believe as you believe in nothing else that your opponent's ideas are bad
You must never concede that your opponent has a valid point you must repeat that
You must finally raise your partisanship to an ideology that you believe as a child believes
You believe you do not reason
You believe you do not think
You believe

]The scariest thing about the new right is the power it has on many. They do not question the assumptions it makes, they start at the top of this list and they find there truths that should not be questioned. An irony of this is the pieces by themselves are not always negative it is rather the combination of all working together that are a threat to our individual and economic freedoms.

 

[editec]

I'm impressed with the amount of work that must have gone into this list.

Looks fairly accurate, too.

A quick study of it suggests that every belief that Midcam credited as being "conservative" can be found right here on this very board penned by a conservative.

Some of the final items on the list aren't really descrbing conservative beliefs, though.

They are really Midcan's thoughts about conservatives.

Those probably don't belong on this list.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Not if the stimulus was inadequate when compared to the problem.

It was the biggest stimulus in history, yet not big enough?

Are you sure you've thought this through?

That's a phony characterization of the stimulus.

In what way?

I will grant Lord Keynes this much, the "stimulus" was not a representation of Keynesian economics. The "stimulus" was farce, a raping of the public treasury on behalf of well connected looters. Keynes never suggest that $30 billion paid into CALPERS (California Public Employee Retirement System) would stimulate an economy - yet that is where one chunk of Obama's payouts to his supporters went.

In reality, Porkulus was nothing more than payouts by the administration to supporters, open graft. Keynes never claimed that looting the treasury to bribe supporters with graft would stimulate an economy. Keynesian economics does not work, but what Obama and his band of fascists engaged in has nothing to do with Keynesian economics.

Nixon, Ford and Carter are the great Keynesians, and examples of what an utter failure Keynesian economics is. Obama is a different breed, he practices crony capitalism which is rightly identified as fascism.

You are leaving off a relevant sentence.

Then feel free to post the portion you think I have omitted.

But we do see multipliers.

Food stamps offer best stimulus - study - Jan. 29, 2008

That doesn't even attempt to claim that the porkulus created a multiplier effect. One element of food stamps is they MUST be spent, they cannot be saved or invested.

When Obama paid billions to bail out Union Pension plans, that had zero impact on the economy.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'm impressed with the amount of work that must have gone into this list.

She plagiarized it from a hate site.

Looks fairly accurate, too.

You mean, it supports your prejudice.

A quick study of it suggests that every belief that Midcam credited as being "conservative" can be found right here on this very board penned by a conservative.

Yawn.

Some of the final items on the list aren't really descrbing conservative beliefs, though.

They are really Midcan's thoughts about conservatives.

Midcan isn't the author of the list.

Those probably don't belong on this list.

Hate sites use a shotgun approach.

 

[Photonic]

I'm impressed with the amount of work that must have gone into this list.

She plagiarized it from a hate site.

Looks fairly accurate, too.

You mean, it supports your prejudice.



Yawn.

Some of the final items on the list aren't really descrbing conservative beliefs, though.

They are really Midcan's thoughts about conservatives.

Midcan isn't the author of the list.

Those probably don't belong on this list.

Hate sites use a shotgun approach.

The sad bit is, is that much of that is pretty much dead on.