OT: Relax There's No Conspiracy to Destroy the Middle Class

14 comments

• Dougster

  •

  9 years ago

  A couple other questions to those who think there is a conspiracy to "destroy the middle class": If there was don't you think it would have happened already? Do you really think the 1% of the rich are oblivious to how many entrepreneurs, scientists, etc. rise up out of the middle class? What sense would it make to destroy the middle class and cut off their own prosperity? I believe in some countries their 1% is quite willing to do net harm to themselves just for the sake of having all the power. In the US, our history shows that our top 1% is quite aware that their own prosperity is dependent on how well the other 99% of the population is doing. It's more about money from them, then just power for power's sake.
• Tiredtraveler

  •

  9 years ago

  The uber rich do not pay much in taxes. The extremely wealth like Kennedys, John Kerry, Warren Buffet, Nancy Pelosi, Dick Lugar, Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, Harry Reid all pay less the 15% in taxes because they all get special perks and exemptions. Of course they are all in favor of higher taxes because they know it will not effect them. It is the entrepreneurs that pay most of the taxes because when you make millions per week like the ultra rich you can afford to buy special favors and move your income around the world. It is the guy who makes $125,000 before expenses that get crucified by the tax code because he is considered a 1% by the IRS and therefore is to be punished for success. Obama has just proposed a massive new tax increase that will lower the brackets and add another top tax increase. Your talk of entrepreneurs is incorrect since for the first time 1946 the number of business closings is higher than the number of start ups. A survey of new businesses and potential start up sight government fees, taxes and regulatory interference from all levels of government. All of their start up money is going to pay off the government.
• Dougster

  •

  9 years ago

  Tiredtraveler: "he extremely wealth like Kennedys, John Kerry, Warren Buffet, Nancy Pelosi, Dick Lugar, Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, Harry Reid all pay less the 15% in taxes because they all get special perks and exemptions. " It's most because their income comes from dividend and capital gains which are, and always have been taxed at a much lower rate that regular income. There's a few reasons for this: the money is already taxed when it is earned by the corporation, so it's to avoid double taxation; governments want their to be incentives for people to invest, since it is investment that stimulates the economy; (related to previous) there is more risk involved in investment than earning wages or collect interest on "risk free" investments, so it makes sense they get taxed at lower rates.
• skibum609

  •

  9 years ago

  America, all of it, is being destroyed by legal and illegal immigration. Less than 2/3 of the people who are living here actually qualify as Americans, and yes some are legally citizens, like the d bag in the White House, who is less American than his sick Islamic name suggests.
• Josh43

  •

  9 years ago

  @Skibum: Okay, I get it. One hysterical, bigoted , rant after another with no content. Congrats -- you get my vote for the most repulsive posts on TUSCL. @Dougster: I sort of enjoy the optimism you project in your posts and I also appreciate the entrepreneurs and scientists that make America a great place. Good point. However phrasing this as a "conspiracy" of the 1% against the middle class is something that you invented. Accumulation of wealth into the hands of a few rich families happens more as a natural force when you have unbridled capitalism. There's no conspiracy of any kind. When return on wealth is greater than economic growth, wealth accumulates at the top. The view on the left is that we don't want to return 18th century Europe where wealth is controlled by a few rich families who can manipulate policy and elections. And that's where we're going. Six of the top ten wealthiest Americans come from two families - the Kochs and the Waltons who INHERITED their wealth. Not to be a broken record, but the Koch's are so rich and influential that they are able to raise more money than the ENTIRE Republican party in the last election. I can't believe that doesn't bother you. I wish I felt as optimistic as you do.
• Tiredtraveler

  •

  9 years ago

  In actuality the Koch Brothers helped their father build the company. The company became worth much more after his death because of the brothers. The Walton fortune was built very recently and the old man has not been gone that long. His liberal Harvard educated kids are the ones who implemented the by everything overseas mantra that permeates WalMart today. The Koch Brothers have donated more to charity than they have for politics and their donations pale in comparison to Heintz , Gates, Zuckerberg, and others donating to the Dems. Democrats out spent Republicans in the last 4 election by a wide margin. Obama outspent McCain by more than 2 to1 and Romney by 3 to 2. Do not get me wrong I think capital gains taxes are to high and savings interest should not be taxed at all to encourage saving. Taxes are to high on everyone and business taxes are oppressively high and that is why it forces companies to move production overseas. I read an article about an Indiana company that make medical devices that cancelled construction contracts (paid the cancellation penalties)to expand its plant in Indiana because of the medical device tax. I was more profitable to pay off the contracts here, build a facility and produce the product in Germany because of the tax. Because the product is built and sold in Europe the tax would not apply. The CEO was quoted as saying that even though wages and benefits in Germany were much higher than here and he would have to train the workforce from scratch it was still better for the companies health. So instead of Indiana getting 500 to 700 more jobs that pay north of $25 per hour (PLUS ALL THE SUPPORT JOB IN TRANSPORTATION AND SUPPLIERS) they went to Germany because of a direct action by the criminals in DC.
• JamesSD

  •

  9 years ago

  I don't think there's a conspiracy to destroy the middle class. I do think it's kind of like poor people in Argentina. It's too bad there are poor people in Argentina. I'm not going to do anything about it. I'm pretty indifferent really. In general the wealthy in the US want the tax code to benefit them. The middle class feels the same. So do poor people. We all agree we need roads and a military and courts. We don't agree exactly who should pay what share. Conspiracy to destroy? Nah. Indifference and coordinated tax code lobbying efforts? Yup.
• Josh43

  •

  9 years ago

  "Democrats out spent Republicans in the last 4 election by a wide margin. Obama outspent McCain by more than 2 to1 and Romney by 3 to 2. " ------------------------------------------------------------------ @Tired: Who cares? You're missing the point entirely. In 2016, a few hundred donors led by the Koch's will outspend the entire budget of either party in the last election. That's insanity! The campaign finance rules which started in 2010 are polluting the political system.
• Dougster

  •

  9 years ago

  Hmmm, I thought I cleared that one with SJG. He told me it was something more active than just a natural tendency of unregulated capitalism to degenerate into feudalism (which I happen to agree is exactly what would happen). I happen to believe, however, that most of the 1% sees the need for regulation. I'd be surprised if more than a handful of them are Randroids, although some might cite her when trying to achieve their political aims (e.g. the Koch brothers). I'm not sure what the problem with inherited wealth is. Yeah, there are some people who inherit wealth and their head gets swollen because of it, but I think people should be able to pass along wealth to their families or whomever they want if they choose it. Still no sure why you guys think the tax code is unfair. Can you give some concrete examples. If anything it seems very progressive, and that people who have substantial portions of their income due to capital gains and dividends are being taxed too much, due to the fact that the money gets taxed in the corporation as well. That just makes it an allusion that the rich have lower tax rates for anyone who only spends under a minute thinking about.
• Dougster

  •

  9 years ago

  Regarding the amount of money the Cock Brothers spend. I think a bigger problem is that the masses don't have any means of evaluating a message beyond, "gee, keep hearing this must be true". Given that's a fact, however, should their be limits on how much individuals and corporations can donate? I haven't thought enough about that one to have an opinion yet. (I kind of like the fact that it makes what the masses things predictable, which is good for speculation, but is it fair? Does it lead to the best society for a utilitarian POV?)
• Holdem2

  •

  9 years ago

  You want an example of the tax code being unfair? Take a lower middle class family just getting by with a couple kids and two income at $15/hr in a nice home. They pay a butt-load in income taxes property taxes etc. Some other family consists of a single mom smoking crack and having babies with every guy who lives with her for a couple months. Since she is single and has many dependents she gets money every month for free while not working. Free housing. Free phone. Free utilities. Free healthcare. Free food. Free daycare. Etc. She doesn't work but the responsible family with two low paying jobs pay taxes and she gets money and lives with only a slightly less standard of living. Not fair!
• JamesSD

  •

  9 years ago

  I don't care about contribution limits. I just favor transparency.
• Josh43

  •

  9 years ago

  "I kind of like the fact that it makes what the masses things predictable, which is good for speculation" ------------------------------------------------------- ...and you have the gall to criticize Dugan for caring only about his own gratification. Shameful, really.
• deogol

  •

  9 years ago

  "Hmmm, I thought I cleared that one with SJG. He told me it was something more active than just a natural tendency of unregulated capitalism to degenerate into feudalism (which I happen to agree is exactly what would happen). I happen to believe, however, that most of the 1% sees the need for regulation." Yes, long enough that regulation is against up and comers. There are whole books on using regulation to form a monopoly or oligopoly. Whether it is extending copyright, increasing fees and costs to prevent new businesses (Obamacare anyone), or submarine patents on the obvious that causes court (there is a Texas court famous for this.) There are a lot of bullshit regulations being put in place.