NationStates Jolt Archive

An Action Item: If you've been paying any attention at all these last few weeks you'll know that the GOP, taking immediate advantage of newly expanded majorities in the House and Senate, has launched an all-out legislative war on America's middle class.
We can of course expect the upper-class tax breaks to become permanent; the White House has been organizing nationwide tours to promote the idea that the Social Security program must be cut back and privatized; Greenspan has been carted out to "speak on his own behalf" about the dangers of deficits (hmm, ya think?) and how that means we must follow the specific anti-middle-class proposals of the Bush Administration; and limitations on bankruptcy via the "Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act" seek to allow the credit and lending industries extra protections for usurious practices, at the expense of middle class Americans targeted by those companies.

Simultaneously, Santorum's (R-PA/VA) minimum wage proposals seek to reduce the number of American companies which are even required to follow minimum wage laws, and to allow companies to force workers to work more than 40 hours per week on a regular basis with no overtime pay. In the very shallow background, tort reform is being pushed in an effort to limit the liabilities of companies manufacturing dangerous products, and the liabilities of the insurance industries in paying out those claims.

All this coming on the heels of curiously stalled investigations into companies such as Enron, which according to now-public taped phone conversations intentionally caused power outages in major west-coast cities -- threatening American lives -- in order to force higher overall utility prices. Add pricefixing charges on the part of Halliburton and other high-profile energy and defense contractors, other ongoing charges against corrupt corporate practices nationwide, and even the investigation into Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) for soliciting (and even strongarming) illegal campaign contributions, and it's not hard to see where the chips are falling in this new Congress.

It's no accident that these proposals are all coming up at once; they represent rollbacks in consumer protection, corporate regulation, and criminal culpability that die-hard Republicans have been wanting for a long time, but only now have the confidence and numbers to move forward on. Regulatory agencies are finding funding cut and enforcement abilities curbed. This steady stream of legislative actions seeks to increase the taxes and decrease the legal protections for middle class and other working Americans, while providing loopholes and exemptions protecting wealthy Americans from those same laws.

But how do we describe this new class warfare to the general public? What overall name can we give this Republican attack, such that less-informed Americans will immediately understand what we're talking about? Corporatism is too stuffy and obscure a word, though it fits the movement goals perfectly. Class Warfare is so gauche; we've been trained by Republicans that something only counts as class warfare if the lower classes fight back.

I'm partial to The New Contract On America. But I want to hear other suggestions as to what to call this new many-headed Republican attack on working-class America. What framing can Democrats or liberals provide that can be repeated ad nausem, on all the news channels, and used in all the op-eds? Is there a major news outlet that would air it? Something that average Americans will immediately understand, and respond to?

I have no idea. This place just keeps getting shittier every month.

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

its only class warfare when the democrats call them on it.

And it's only genocide when people find out about it!

Right, because the middle class relies on minimum wage? The "tax cut for the upper class" was given to all classes and tort reform is a long time coming and will do little more than deflate the income of lawyers? Like privatizing social security helps all Americans.

The proposals you've called "anti-middle class" are nothing of the sort.

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

its only class warfare when the democrats call them on it.

So it's not "Class Warfare" to charge the top 1% of Wage Earners 50% of the taxes collected, but it IS "Class Warfare" when they get a break on that percentage?!?!

What, aren't you Liberals going to be happy until the top 1% are paying ALL of the Taxes so you can live off what THEY have earned?!?!

Give me a BREAK!

Regards,
Gaar

You really think that's how it is, huh?

Except that I hear people who make $150,000 a year calling themselves middle class. The median income is around $32,000, which means someones confused.

So it's not "Class Warfare" to charge the top 1% of Wage Earners 50% of the taxes collected, but it IS "Class Warfare" when they get a break on that percentage?!?!

What, aren't you Liberals going to be happy until the top 1% are paying ALL of the Taxes so you can live off what THEY have earned?!?!

Give me a BREAK!

Regards,
Gaar

i didnt say that did i

i implied that it IS class warfare but the republicans wont admit it

perhaps the democrats wont either but thats a different thread.

Except that I hear people who make $150,000 a year calling themselves middle class. The median income is around $32,000, which means someones confused.

I hear people who make 500k a year calling themselves middle class. Middle class is a very vague term that really doesn't mean much. That aside class warfare does exist in this country and it is as said earlier against the upper class.

So it's not "Class Warfare" to charge the top 1% of Wage Earners 50% of the taxes collected, but it IS "Class Warfare" when they get a break on that percentage?!?!

What, aren't you Liberals going to be happy until the top 1% are paying ALL of the Taxes so you can live off what THEY have earned?!?!

Please tell me where you got these figures. I'm very curious.

I'm not sure how long I can stay online. My computer hasn't liked NS forum lately. It keeps sticking and I have to go back and reenter NS to change pages.

If you earn no less than $5000/year under the povery line then you are middle class, otherwise I'm lower lower class.:(

I hear people who make 500k a year calling themselves middle class. Middle class is a very vague term that really doesn't mean much. That aside class warfare does exist in this country and it is as said earlier against the upper class.
Middle class comprises about 90% of the people in the US, with 5% on either end. It's mainly because of the income flexibility that you can see in the US. I know a guy whose dad went from 170 thousand dollars a year, to nil a year for four years, and then got another job for 80 thousand a year. Americans are very flexible with the jobs they hold, and therefore with the income they receive.

Please tell me where you got these figures. I'm very curious.

I'm not sure how long I can stay online. My computer hasn't liked NS forum lately. It keeps sticking and I have to go back and reenter NS to change pages.

This one paints a decent overall picture

http://www.taxfoundation.org/prtopincome.html

This one is questionable, well, you know why.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/top_50__of_wage_earners_pay_96_09__of_income_taxes.guest.html

Please tell me where you got these figures. I'm very curious.

Ok, so my 1% figure is a bit off...

Perhaps just a bit of "research" on your part may do some good BEFORE you complain about such things?

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=RNWE,RNWE:2004-48,RNWE:en&q=Top+1%25+wage+earners+U%2ES%2E+pay+taxes

http://garyrutledge.com/AmFedGov/misc_govt_facts.htm

http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/#Head-4.htm

Top 50% of Wage Earners Pay 96.03% of Income Taxes

The share of total income taxes paid by the top 1% fell to 33.89% from 37.42% in 2000. This is mainly because their income share (not just wages) fell from 20.81% to 17.53%. However, their average tax rate actually rose slightly from 27.45% to 27.50%.

The share of total income taxes paid by the top 1% fell to 33.89% from 37.42% in 2000. This is mainly because their income share (not just wages) fell from 20.81% to 17.53%. However, their average tax rate actually rose slightly from 27.45% to 27.50%.

In other words...

They make 17.53% of the total earnings in the U.S. and are charged 37.42% of the Total Tax burden in this country or over TWICE the percentage of what they earn.

You think that is fair?

Now, while I agree that they should take on more of the burden since they have done so well, I hardly think we should Bitch at them and say they should be doing more just because they are doing well.

Regards,
Gaar

This one paints a decent overall picture

http://www.taxfoundation.org/prtopincome.html

This one is questionable, well, you know why.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/top_50__of_wage_earners_pay_96_09__of_income_taxes.guest.html

I didn't look at the second one because I don't believe anything he says. The other sight is interesting, but some of it doesn't seem to make sense. A couple of stats are very different from other stuff I've read, so I'd like to look around a bit before I decide how seriously I take their claims.

Middle class comprises about 90% of the people in the US, with 5% on either end.

only because americans are delusional about class, and living off of their credit cards.

Please tell me where you got these figures. I'm very curious.

I'm not sure how long I can stay online. My computer hasn't liked NS forum lately. It keeps sticking and I have to go back and reenter NS to change pages.
To start out with, here (http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdoc.cfm?index=5746&type=1) is a link to the effective tax rates, between 2001 and 2014.

Now, having addressed that, here (http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/pub/irs-soi/01in01ts.xls) is, (MS Excel alert!) from the IRS itself, a breakdown on how much (actual $$ and percentage-wise,) the top 1, 5, 10, 20 and 50 percent pay, in total tax revenues collected.

anyone whose not superwealthy and votes GOP has to be one of historys biggest suckers and anyone who is superwealthy and votes GOP are selfish loathsome bottomfeeding maggots who put their own greed above societys best interest

Class warfare? Peasant revolts against nobles in the 14th century is class warfare. Debating the top marginal tax rate is NOT.

with apologies to Al Franken

In other words...

They make 17.53% of the total earnings in the U.S. and are charged 37.42% of the Total Tax burden in this country or over TWICE the percentage of what they earn.

and yet somehow they still wind up owning over 32% of the total wealth in society.

and the top 50% own something on the order of 97% of the total wealth (most of that also skewed heavily towards the top)

Top 50% of Wage Earners Pay 96.03% of Income Taxes

How much of that comes from the top .0001%?

anyone whose not superwealthy and votes GOP has to be one of historys biggest suckers and anyone who is superwealthy and votes GOP are selfish loathsome bottomfeeding maggots who put their own greed above societys best interest

All you swallowed your tonic properly. And who invented the Internet? Al Gore? *pats your head* Goood Boy, here's a treat.

and yet somehow they still wind up owning over 32% of the total wealth in society.

and the top 50% own something on the order of 97% of the total wealth (most of that also skewed heavily towards the top)

Wrong. Flat out wrong. Lies.

The top 50% own 97.2% damnit, 97.2%!

Top 1% = 32.7%
Next 4% = 25.0%
Next 5% = 12.1%
Next 40% = 27.4%
Bottom 50% = 2.8%


How much of that comes from the top .0001%?

If by that you mean the top 1%

37.42% of all taxes are paid by the top 1%.

Cheers.

Wrong. Flat out wrong. Lies.

The top 50% own 97.2% damnit, 97.2%!

haha


Top 1% = 32.7%
Next 4% = 25.0%
Next 5% = 12.1%
Next 40% = 27.4%
Bottom 50% = 2.8%

what's even more sad is that if you take that bottom 50%, and shift the richest of them into the next set up (so that you are looking at the bottom 40% instead), they have less than 1% of the total wealth.

Bitchkitten, if you're a Democrat, you're not allowed to use the phrase, "class warfare," because the Democrats officially replaced that with the word "racism" decades ago. Any populist worth his salt who said that what really mattered was "class differences" was run out of town by Democrats on a rail.

Now that we all suddenly are regaining consciousness concerning class, it's not something that Americans are familiar with. The Democratic Party convinced us long ago that the only people with the problems usually attributed to "class" are people of a different race.

Ironic, isn't it? The party that wanted to unmask race and remove race from the national consciousness has enshrined it as a false politico-economic symbol from which they cannot escape.

and yet somehow they still wind up owning over 32% of the total wealth in society.

and the top 50% own something on the order of 97% of the total wealth (most of that also skewed heavily towards the top)
Perhaps this would be a bit different if so many Americans didn't go into debt to purchase depreciating assets. You just mentioned credit cards yourself. If you have more liabilities than assets, you have no wealth, no matter how shiny the rims on your Yukon are. What I'm saying is that many of those who have 0 or negative wealth are entirely to blame for that fact and live a somewhat comfortable life so long as they can keep their job. Although, I admit I'm not really sure how these figures were arrived at.

Like privatizing social security helps all Americans.

Is this statement ironic? I can't tell.

In other words...

They make 17.53% of the total earnings in the U.S. and are charged 37.42% of the Total Tax burden in this country or over TWICE the percentage of what they earn.

You think that is fair?



Of course it is fair. They have *shitloads* of money. Half a shitload is still a shitload. They don't *need* the money to buy a second yacht or a third condo. Whereas the 1 million (random figure plucked from air - insert correct figure if you can be bothered) people whose taxes would have to go up by 3 dollars (another rfpfa) each to fill in the gap would miss the money, because they wouldn't be able to afford food.

All you swallowed your tonic properly. And who invented the Internet? Al Gore? *pats your head* Goood Boy, here's a treat.
Do you get commissions whenever you praise the GOP and insult pro-Democrats?

What framing can Democrats or liberals provide that can be repeated ad nausem, on all the news channels, and used in all the op-eds? Is there a major news outlet that would air it? Something that average Americans will immediately understand, and respond to?

Hmmmm...

Democrats want the average American to win.

Republicans want the corporations to win.


I'm guessing that the average American will understand this.

I'm astonished whenever I hear complaints about Bush and the Republicans in congress cutting spending. The only legitimate complaint in that regard is that the cuts are highly over-rated and often fictional. In order to really make me happy Bush would have to fire entire agencies. He's doing nothing of the sort. Also, federal labor laws are blatantly unconstitutional and stupid. I have only mild support for loosening them, but would strongly support completely trashing them. Some people want to work more than 40 hours a week, still others would be willing to work for less than current minimum wage (think unskilled felons with drug addictions). Even if you disagree that they're not stupid, no case can be made for their constitutionality. If you want such laws, go to your state legislature.

Hey Cows, the same could be said of you albeit in reverse, so quit bitching.

Democrats want the average American to win.

Republicans want the corporations to win.
Alright, now who's buying lock, stock, and barrel into dummicrat propaganda. Guess which parties' elected reps are about 40% richer than the other. Tip: It ain't the GOP.

Hey Cows, the same could be said of you albeit in reverse, so quit bitching.
Please go ahead and point out when I sit around praising, explictly, the Democrats position and bashing anyone who disagrees

Alright, now who's buying lock, stock, and barrel into dummicrat propaganda. Guess which parties' elected reps are about 40% richer than the other. Tip: It ain't the GOP.
Which is technically irrelevant, hell it could even be used to say the Democrats are better people than the Republicans: a group of people richer than the Republicans who are for taxing the rich more?

Which is technically irrelevant, hell it could even be used to say the Democrats are better people than the Republicans: a group of people richer than the Republicans who are for taxing the rich more?
That would be because the tax system in this country can't touch their wealth. Most of it is squirrelled away in places that income tax can't touch. So really they are for taxing the up and coming rich who are generally getting there by doing actual work, rather than inheriting sources of wealth that are for the most part untouchable.

That would be because the tax system in this country can't touch their wealth. Most of it is squirrelled away in places that income tax can't touch. So really they are for taxing the up and coming rich who are generally getting there by doing actual work, rather than inheriting sources of wealth that are for the most part untouchable.
Oh yeah, so they are taxing all the people achieving the "American Dream": Work all your life and get rich? Oh yeah, there are SOOOOO many of those. There are other taxes besides income tax

Alright, now who's buying lock, stock, and barrel into dummicrat propaganda. Guess which parties' elected reps are about 40% richer than the other. Tip: It ain't the GOP.

Look through my post history before pulling shit like that on me, please. :)

Oh yeah, so they are taxing all the people achieving the "American Dream": Work all your life and get rich? Oh yeah, there are SOOOOO many of those. There are other taxes besides income tax
True, but you don't exactly hear them advocating for changing those taxes do you? No, they sit and concentrate on the income tax because it won't affect them. And as for up and coming rich i suppose you could toss my dad in that category since he started out as a kid working on a farm and playing for it's polo team. Finished high school but never went to college. Worked for PCI and Westinghouse. Then worked for E.H. Wachs until he left because of certain dubious business practices. Now he owns his own business. So yeah, he's one of those nonexistant up and coming rich.

Of course it is fair. They have *shitloads* of money. Half a shitload is still a shitload. They don't *need* the money to buy a second yacht or a third condo. Whereas the 1 million (random figure plucked from air - insert correct figure if you can be bothered) people whose taxes would have to go up by 3 dollars (another rfpfa) each to fill in the gap would miss the money, because they wouldn't be able to afford food.

Yeah, they should HAVE to GIVE IT to you because you weren't able to get what they have gotten!?!?

It has nothing to do with the fact that you sit at Home all day and post on the Internet while they are out working their asses off EARNING that money, you DESERVE some of it because they are so well off, right?!?!

Typical.

Regards,
Gaar

see.both partys are evil.
instead of income tax we should use wealth taxes!

see.both partys are evil.
instead of income tax we should use wealth taxes!
Why do you say that? Wealth taxes would discourage saving and low risk investment.

Bitchkitten, if you're a Democrat, you're not allowed to use the phrase, "class warfare," because the Democrats officially replaced that with the word "racism" decades ago. Any populist worth his salt who said that what really mattered was "class differences" was run out of town by Democrats on a rail.

Now that we all suddenly are regaining consciousness concerning class, it's not something that Americans are familiar with. The Democratic Party convinced us long ago that the only people with the problems usually attributed to "class" are people of a different race.

Ironic, isn't it? The party that wanted to unmask race and remove race from the national consciousness has enshrined it as a false politico-economic symbol from which they cannot escape.

Depends on what you mean by Democrat. I generally vote for Democrats, because I view them as the lesser of two evils. But I consider them Republican-lite. If the Green Party ran in Oklahoma, I'd vote for them. And I'm not aware of any Democrats that think all classism is racism.