Exactly.
What a surprise that in the dust of the worst financial crisis since the depression we're still having problems. Must be Obama's fault.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Bloomberg News: Obama has failed to stop middle class slide he blamed on Bush.
- Thread starter Grandluxe
- Start date
Exactly.
What a surprise that in the dust of the worst financial crisis since the depression we're still having problems. Must be Obama's fault.
Quote from Ricter:
Of course, all efforts to move money back into middle-class hands are labeled "socialistic". (Which they are, even if they do use individualistic methods.)
Look at Table 1 of this document and tell me where it is wrong, if it is wrong:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr172.pdf
That table says that if you make less than $135K, you are, on net, getting more in government benefits than you pay in taxes.
That means that everyone in the "middle class", with some possible exceptions in places where average incomes are high due to cost-of-living, like NYC or San Fran, gets money redistributed to them already.
The whole "the middle class is being ripped off by the current tax system" appears to be a fraud.
Now, if you want to debate whether Table 1 is factually correct, that's a reasonable debate. If Table 1 is correct, then the middle class is already benefiting from wealth redistribution pretty nicely. If you want to say they should get more, that's also a somewhat reasonable debate, although at that point my first question would be "Why? What have they done to deserve it?" I know they might want it, but wanting something and deserving something are two different things.
Quote from futurecurrents:
Exactly.
What a surprise that in the dust of the worst financial crisis since the depression we're still having problems. Must be Obama's fault.
So persuade enough people that Obama needs to have a 6,8 or 10 year term to fix everything. Then, amend the Constitution to make it happen. There are very clear processes built into our system of governance to mitigate the problems you imply Obama is having.
Don't want to be asked to deliver results in the timeframe you are allotted to deliver them, i.e. 4 years? Don't volunteer for the job.
Do you people even think through the most basic and obvious objections to the points you spew? All of your complaints spring from flawed premises about what is and isn't possible in a constitutional republic. Don't like it? Go back to wherever your ancestors came here from. Trust me, you will not be missed.
That is compelling argumentation.
I have not even clicked on the table... and I would say this is the best post on this subject I have seen... ever.
I have not even clicked on the table... and I would say this is the best post on this subject I have seen... ever.
Quote from logic_man:
Look at Table 1 of this document and tell me where it is wrong, if it is wrong:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr172.pdf
That table says that if you make less than $135K, you are, on net, getting more in government benefits than you pay in taxes.
That means that everyone in the "middle class", with some possible exceptions in places where average incomes are high due to cost-of-living, like NYC or San Fran, gets money redistributed to them already.
The whole "the middle class is being ripped off by the current tax system" appears to be a fraud.
Now, if you want to debate whether Table 1 is factually correct, that's a reasonable debate. If Table 1 is correct, then the middle class is already benefiting from wealth redistribution pretty nicely. If you want to say they should get more, that's also a somewhat reasonable debate, although at that point my first question would be "Why? What have they done to deserve it?" I know they might want it, but wanting something and deserving something are two different things.
In your absence while people were not re-posting you nonsense I had forgotten how stupid you are.Quote from Ricter:
Of course, all efforts to move money back into middle-class hands are labeled "socialistic". (Which they are, even if they do use individualistic methods.)
Getting people (the middle class) into jobs and better jobs so they can move up and improve their lot in life isn't socialism dumb ass. Socialism is what you and your savior Obama want to do by channeling vast national resources to the bottom 49% who don't and won't work but would rather have Obama drop down the government's hind tit so they can suck on it.