1 comment? Try several years of hairy skidmarks with liberal arts degrees (at best) marching around with we are the 99% posters. No where else in the world, NO WHERE, do the poor have such a sense of entitlement. That's what is really disconcerting, and what created such a litigious culture leading to countless malpractice suits and the ****ed up medical system. I deserve a Lexus, not a ******* Kia, for organizing apples and cans of Drano all day long. You ignore national defense spending, the government using fear mongering to rule while they have troops in every country in the world (lol), a culture of waste, decadence and semi automatic gun holstering to PROTECT MY RIGHTS, countless other issues... but are more interested in sucking funds from the rich? Shows how little pride they have in who they are. The irony is 25 years ago, Gordon Gekko said the exact same thing during a time of great prosperity in America. It's the top 1% that make all the decisions for the rest of the sheep, that's the beauty of capitalism. Brains and talent rise to the top in a democracy. Capitalism is a game, just like chess. Are you going to sacrifice your queen for your opponents pawn?
Next to nothing ??? Lol, where do you get the gall from? Where do you peasants get this entitlement from? Is it reality television?? Keep in mind, as you go higher up the income bracket, most that money is diversified into investments that generate more money. Investment income is taxed far lower than earned income. Just because the 250-500k crowd pays a higher percentage than the multimillionaires, they're still paying 35%+. And there's no legal escape by going overseas, as US citizens who make more than 92k are taxed very well. Compare that to the Europeans who can relocate to havens like Monaco and Dubai and pay nothing in income taxes to their host or original nation. Cost of living is high, of course, but it's all going towards your lifestyle, not holding up the inhabitants of the ghetto who are pumping out 8-10 babies that they cannot provide for. The extremely wealthy philanthropists have pledged to donate 50%+ of their money to CHARITIES... noble causes... medical research... not to prop up first world losers with nothing to offer the world except internet memes.
It is obvious what he meant to say. However I am sure that it will be used by Team Obama to their advantage. What I find interesting is that finally, after 40 years, the Dems have learned to play dirty politics as well as the Republicans. It leaves the Republicans a little aimless now. Obama is playing class warfare, and there is an element of jealousy of the wealth. However, should the ultra rich not pay more? They are paying less than they have in 80 years. Will it solve every problem? No, but it will weaken the strangle hold the top .005% have on this country, which is running this country into the ground.
Due to my good looks, I have no party affiliation. Politics is a shamockery for the ugly and unintelligent. It's no different than an Orthodox Christian punching a gay and saying I did it because I'm an Orthodox Christian, and it is the Orthodox position. You're all losers in the end for buying into it. http://funancials.biz/democrats-are-richer-than-republicans/ Yes, the source is weak and his methods are not conclusive. Ntm the cost of living is higher in liberal states like NY and Cali. But this whole tax the rich and everything will be better fallacy shld not be the drawing point of one party. How about looking at ourselves and the govt, improving that, instead of demanding helping hands from cheap, sleazy politicians who want to squeeze the most intelligent and talented members of society?
As someone who's firmly in the middle class, I have never thought that the rich shouldn't deserve what they get. After all, no one said life should be fair. If someone is smart enough or lucky enough to make/inherit millions and billions of dollars, kudos to them. They have the resources and brains to make the system work for them, great. I don't, so I lug along and only nod at whatever the government tell me to do. That said, you're making it sound like the rich are somehow contributing to society more than others based on the fact that they're rich. Which of course is BS. The rich people ask for handouts from the government all the time. Each time they spend millions of dollars lobbying, they're getting ten times or hundred times more back through favorable policies. The last time I've managed to lobby anything from the government that favored me was... let me see... NEVER.
Because we have an economic system that draws it's strength from promoting high standard of living for a majority of people, rather than the world historical standard of having an elite class and a majority underclass. It's the broaden base of well being that give us economic and political stability. It allows for excellence to rise from a larger sample of the population where merit can compete with entitlement. You have to define it to defend it and legislate for it, most obvioulsly in determining progressive tax rates.
Every time Mitt opens his mouth, he reveals just how out of touch with working class Americans he really is.
It isn't obvious what he is saying. Either he is stupid as 96% of the population does not make up the middle class or he is so out of touch with America he thinks being in the 90%tile is the middle class.
Or he just said what he meant and both parties believe in a clumsy way. If the whole statement is looked at through non-partisan glasses, it's pretty easy to see that he thinks middle class goes up to about $250k, which is exactly the same as what Obama and the entire Democratic party argue as well.
If you look at the current tax code I would say between 47-147 is middle class. Obama is a pretty shady guy too, but Romney takes the cake.
I cannot wait for the debates. Obama is going to obliterate Mitt. Biden could be higher than Rush on an Oxycontin binge and still prove that Ryan doesn't belong anywhere near the White House.
Looking at the IRC to determine what middle class and wealthy are is a very bad idea. The entire debate is about how to define wealthy for the purpose of reforming the IRC. Besides, the notion that a single parent with a couple of kids making 148k a year is wealthy is just laughable. Are they comfortable? Sure. Less so on the west coast and the northeast, but comfortable. Are they wealthy? Hardly.
Successful members of society have higher aptitudes than the working class who blindly process data or instructions for the sole purpose of survival. I am much more comfortable with the govt catering to them instead of regressing and catering to the demands of people who don't know how the world works. Why are football QB's worth more than punters? Why are LeBron's worth more than Scalabrine's?
Wealth is all relative. To the teacher making $40,000 a year or waitress making $30,000 a year, a single parent making $148,000 a year is wealthy because they make 3.5-5X as much. The issue is whether someone making $148,000 should be taxed at a higher rate and how much higher a rate.
Yeah, both parties will define the "middle class" higher. Otherwise you are part of the dreaded "rich" who needs to be taxed more, and neither party wants to lose votes by putting the number too low. I think a lot of the attempts to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the rich had cutoffs around 200-250k. And 250k in places like NY I think is legitimately middle class to some extent.
