McCain: Middle-Class Tax Cut is 'Welfare'

[Heracles 417]

I can golf for free however much I like, have as much coffee as I like, get a free haircut, buy free books, eat free at a restaurant, spend free nights in a hotel. So evidently some people are making good decisions, others are not. And not just financially. Their entire life is marred with stupid choices. You and them have something in common, if your negativity is so much focused on blacks and gangsters, or those who rightfully criticize white people when necessary (mostly as a lesson of the past which evidently still hasn't been learned today) as much as they are.

Yeah I don't really need freebies.

"My friends live in Santa Monica".

There you have it, folks.

Yes I ask them about the area. After all they do have a handful of houses there.

[IAMX 3,055]

I can golf for free however much I like, have as much coffee as I like, get a free haircut, buy free books, eat free at a restaurant, spend free nights in a hotel. So evidently some people are making good decisions, others are not. And not just financially. Their entire life is marred with stupid choices. You and them have something in common, if your negativity is so much focused on blacks and gangsters, or those who rightfully criticize white people when necessary (mostly as a lesson of the past which evidently still hasn't been learned today) as much as they are.

Yeah I don't really need freebies.

"My friends live in Santa Monica".

There you have it, folks.

Yes I ask them about the area. After all they do have a handful of houses there.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I hear what you are saying and know that attitude is a huge part of America's problem. People can call me racist all they like but the reality is that people who come from a culture who has not been prosperous in 4,000 years, is not simply going to generate wealth overnight, or even in one generation for that matter. Or become doctors, engineers, scientist lawyers tomorrow. EG white trash. But at the same time doing nothing will never ever help the situation. The first step though comes in the form of attitude. They have to want to be a doctor, lawyer, skilled tradesman, legitimate business owner etc first. That is the most critical step and the first step. Without this you have nothing. This is where I disagree with clowns like SVRT, Six and Maviwaro who think this is not important and a pat on the head will do. Plus blaming history for their perils.

Actually, there was a time in recent history when large parts of the Black population were prosporous and thriving, even in segregation. The first woman millionaire in th US was a Black woman. Being a product of elite private schools and upper class neighborhoods in the city, I was surrounded by upper class Black professionals of all stripes. Two major things happened to break down their upward trajectory - the emergence of a belief that prosperity (being bourgeois) was selling out to White ambitions, leaving the less well off brothers behind, something to be ashamed of. The other was the policy decision to substitute the government for a father by creating a welfare system that required men to abandon their families if they had no work.

Living this history and seeing first hand its resulting destruction makes me resist welfare as a solution to class division. Most recipients here will not see it as a means to pull themselves up, that has not been our experience. They will feel it is their right, for too many are all about rights, but not much for responsibility or consequences. For the most part, we are a shortdsighted folk due to the fact that our government has long overstepped its enumberated limits to indulge in social engineering, to no good end. Obama offers more of the same.

I apologize for the typos. I'm not using an English keyboard.

Edited October 19, 2008 by Virtual wife

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Question to the Right Wingers - if the wages of the majority of working Americans has been stagnent over the last decade, while the top income earners salaries have significantly increased, is that not, by your definition, a redistribution of wealth? That increase in wealth among the top earners came from somewhere, and as exampled in the recent financial crisis, are not necessarily compensatory for how well a company is doing.

Good point.

[rebeccajo 14]

Consider this: He has a secretary and a cleaner because he creates jobs and takes risks. How much of a payroll is his secretary supporting? How much of the success or failure of the business she works for is her responsibility ?

And he deducted their salary from his gross income before he paid a dime of taxes.

I'd also daresay that if Mr. Buffet is so busy that he needs a secretary and a cleaner, then part of the success or failure of his business depends on them.

I'm sick to my eyeballs of hearing how LUCKY americans are to have been GIVEN jobs by entrepreneurs. This is where the concepts of welfare in this country differ amongst the classes. The wealthy think they have provided for the middle class by descending from above to GIVE jobs - to PROVIDE for the middle class. That's welfare in their opnion and apparently the middle class should be grateful for it.

[rebeccajo 14]

Question to the Right Wingers - if the wages of the majority of working Americans has been stagnent over the last decade, while the top income earners salaries have significantly increased, is that not, by your definition, a redistribution of wealth? That increase in wealth among the top earners came from somewhere, and as exampled in the recent financial crisis, are not necessarily compensatory for how well a company is doing.

PWNED.

[rebeccajo 14]

I hear what you are saying and know that attitude is a huge part of America's problem. People can call me racist all they like but the reality is that people who come from a culture who has not been prosperous in 4,000 years, is not simply going to generate wealth overnight, or even in one generation for that matter. Or become doctors, engineers, scientist lawyers tomorrow. EG white trash. But at the same time doing nothing will never ever help the situation. The first step though comes in the form of attitude. They have to want to be a doctor, lawyer, skilled tradesman, legitimate business owner etc first. That is the most critical step and the first step. Without this you have nothing. This is where I disagree with clowns like SVRT, Six and Maviwaro who think this is not important and a pat on the head will do. Plus blaming history for their perils.

Actually, there was a time in recent history when large parts of the Black population were prosporous and thriving, even in segregation. The first woman millionaire in th US was a Black woman. Being a product of elite private schools and upper class neighborhoods in the city, I was surrounded by upper class Black professionals of all stripes. Two major things happened to break down their upward trajectory - the emergence of a belief that prosperity (being bourgeois) was selling out to White ambitions, leaving the less well off brothers behind, something to be ashamed of. The other was the policy decision to substitute the government for a father by creating a welfare system that required men to abandon their families if they had no work.

Living this history and seeing first hand its resulting destruction makes me resist welfare as a solution to class division. Most recipients here will not see it as a means to pull themselves up, that has not been our experience. They will feel it is their right, for too many are all about rights, but not much for responsibility or consequences. For the most part, we are a shortdsighted folk due to the fact that our government has long overstepped its enumberated limits to indulge in social engineering, to no good end. Obama offers more of the same.

I apologize for the typos. I'm not using an English keyboard.

Let me get this straight.

You're trying to sell the argument to us that those very people you grew up with - "black professionals of all stripes" - broke their OWN trajectory? That those EXACT people did not continue to see their fortunes prosper?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Consider this: He has a secretary and a cleaner because he creates jobs and takes risks. How much of a payroll is his secretary supporting? How much of the success or failure of the business she works for is her responsibility ?

And he deducted their salary from his gross income before he paid a dime of taxes.

I'd also daresay that if Mr. Buffet is so busy that he needs a secretary and a cleaner, then part of the success or failure of his business depends on them.

I'm sick to my eyeballs of hearing how LUCKY americans are to have been GIVEN jobs by entrepreneurs. This is where the concepts of welfare in this country differ amongst the classes. The wealthy think they have provided for the middle class by descending from above to GIVE jobs - to PROVIDE for the middle class. That's welfare in their opnion and apparently the middle class should be grateful for it.

Exactly. Wealth is not created in a vacuum as even Bill Gates, one of the wealthiest persons in the world, acknowledges. Without a progressive tax policy, what happens is an ever more concentration of wealth into a small percentage of the population, and no one here can deny that with money comes power. We've seen already, elements of an oligarchy in this country, which eats away at our democracy. If someone in this country is bringing in a salary that is more than 95 percent of the population, they are an elite class, with power and privilege that most of Americans will never have. When ordinary hard working Americans are struggling to put bread on the table, let alone provide health care for their family and a roof over their head, the last thing this country needs is to continue giving the biggest tax breaks to the top 5 percent, which both Bush and now McCain support. That's as elitist as you can get.

Edited October 19, 2008 by Jabberwocky

[NickD 203]

We certainly were a socialistic country, going back years with the IRS, the tax rate for the super rich was as high as 90%, it's down to around 11% now, middle class is certainly paying a much higher rate. Teddy started this when he learned Carnegie has more money than the US Treasury.

Why don't these guys talk about our history? Or were they playing video games instead of going to class?

One president, 100 senators, 435 representatives, and 9 supreme court justices, not very many, we should be asking, who owns them. With over 90% of the people in this country controlling less than 10% of the cash, not really hard to figure that out.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

We certainly were a socialistic country, going back years with the IRS, the tax rate for the super rich was as high as 90%, it's down to around 11% now, middle class is certainly paying a much higher rate. Teddy started this when he learned Carnegie has more money than the US Treasury.

Why don't these guys talk about our history? Or were they playing video games instead of going to class?

One president, 100 senators, 435 representatives, and 9 supreme court justices, not very many, we should be asking, who owns them. With over 90% of the people in this country controlling less than 10% of the cash, not really hard to figure that out.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Consider this: He has a secretary and a cleaner because he creates jobs and takes risks. How much of a payroll is his secretary supporting? How much of the success or failure of the business she works for is her responsibility ?

And he deducted their salary from his gross income before he paid a dime of taxes.

I'd also daresay that if Mr. Buffet is so busy that he needs a secretary and a cleaner, then part of the success or failure of his business depends on them.

I'm sick to my eyeballs of hearing how LUCKY americans are to have been GIVEN jobs by entrepreneurs. This is where the concepts of welfare in this country differ amongst the classes. The wealthy think they have provided for the middle class by descending from above to GIVE jobs - to PROVIDE for the middle class. That's welfare in their opnion and apparently the middle class should be grateful for it.

Exactly. Wealth is not created in a vacuum as even Bill Gates, one of the wealthiest persons in the world, acknowledges. Without a progressive tax policy, what happens is an ever more concentration of wealth into a small percentage of the population, and no one here can deny that with money comes power. We've seen already, elements of an oligarchy in this country, which eats away at our democracy. If someone in this country is bringing in a salary that is more than 95 percent of the population, they are an elite class, with power and privilege that most of Americans will never have. When ordinary hard working Americans are struggling to put bread on the table, let alone provide health care for their family and a roof over their head, the last thing this country needs is to continue giving the biggest tax breaks to the top 5 percent, which both Bush and now McCain support. That's as elitist as you can get.

Shame on both of you for not being grateful for whatever the elite chose to let trickle down on you.

We certainly were a socialistic country, going back years with the IRS, the tax rate for the super rich was as high as 90%, it's down to around 11% now, middle class is certainly paying a much higher rate. Teddy started this when he learned Carnegie has more money than the US Treasury.

Why don't these guys talk about our history? Or were they playing video games instead of going to class?

One president, 100 senators, 435 representatives, and 9 supreme court justices, not very many, we should be asking, who owns them. With over 90% of the people in this country controlling less than 10% of the cash, not really hard to figure that out.

Please, no facts and no sense. They don't deal well with either.

[britty 1]

I'm sorry but it just so happens that I am in agreement with Buffet on this issue. I get what he says. I also don't consider myself a teat sucker - I work for a living. And I know that the company is making a profit on my contribution. If anything, it's the company sucking on my teat. But who am I arguing with? You're so ignorant it's ridiculous.

No one is holding a gun to your head to make you work there. If you don't like the company using your labor to make a profit, you are free to leave. The fact is, companies are free to withhold from employees the opportunity to ply their labor and earn wages if business conditions aren't favorable to them. As long as you don't control your own means of production, you are a teet sucker. Call me ignorant, but I'm not in the position of having that as my only choice to earn a living. You may feel superior, but, if you can't understand that, you remain vulnerable to business forces, and that makes you a pawn no matter how you cut it. Ignorant or not, I don't have that problem.

What exactly makes you think that working where I work is my only means of earning a living? Maybe I enjoy doing what I am doing. That might be a rare thing these days but it still exists. I ain't sucking nobody's damn teat - much less in a publicly owned company. I'd be sucking hundreds of thousands of teats seeing that that is how many owners the company I work for has. The executives, on the other hand, don't own the place - not even close. They're employees of the same owners that I work for. So, we're kinda sitting in the same boat. And hence, they don't deserve any more of a break than I do or I any more of a break than the guy that works for me and so on.

What other streams of income do you have to rely on other than being an employee? Do you own real assets that create passive wealth for you? Do you have a profitable business? If that teet was pulled away, would you have immediate means upon which to fall back on?

The reason why the rich pay less in tax is because they create wealth and jobs, and are rewarded for it by communities and governments who want their ingenuity to benefit their constituancy in a symbiotic relationship. You don't do that, so you ride the tide. In this country, you have a choice to be a teet sucker or to be the teet. Don't blame the teet for you being at the wrong end of it.

VW - you are wasting your time. Its easier to accept that some people just don't get it.

[rebeccajo 14]

VW - you are wasting your time. Its easier to accept that some people just don't get it.

Oh, we get it, britty. We get it.

We get that you think the middle class should be beholden to the upper class. We get that you think if it weren't for entreprenuership, the rest of the world would starve.

What you don't get is the upper class needs the middle class too. They need them to expand their wealth.

And you don't get that the middle class doesn't mind helping the upper class with that goal. They don't mind working for a fair living and they don't mind seeing the deserved success of those who employ them.

What the middle class does mind is when entreprenuers start thinking that they are ENTITLED to both the sweat off the backs of the middle class AND a tax structure that puts their expansion above the expansion of the well-being of the electorate.

Just exactly how much trickle-up welfare does the upper class need anyway? It seems to me their hands are further out than the most abusive welfare recepient.

Edited October 19, 2008 by rebeccajo

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

VW - you are wasting your time. Its easier to accept that some people just don't get it.

Oh, we get it, britty. We get it.

We get that you think the middle class should be beholden to the upper class. We get that you think if it weren't for entreprenuership, the rest of the world would starve.

What you don't get is the upper class needs the middle class too. They need them to expand their wealth.

And you don't get that the middle class doesn't mind helping the upper class with that goal. They don't mind working for a fair living and they don't mind seeing the deserved success of those who employ them.

What the middle class does mind is when entreprenuers start thinking that they are ENTITLED to both the sweat off the backs of the middle class AND a tax structure that puts their expansion above the expansion of the well-being of the electorate.

Just exactly how much trickle-up welfare does the upper class need anyway? It seems to me their hands are further out than the most abusive welfare recepient.

What some people don't get is that it takes a strong foundation and a solid structure to hold a roof. If you keep making the roof heavier at the expense of the structure underneath, the roof will come crashing down. We're at the point where that structure is crumbling. The question now is whether to fix the structure from the bottom up or from the top down. Common sense dictates that you start re-building at the foundation and then work your way up. Anything put on the top now without first strengthening what holds the top on top is only going to accelerate the structure's demise. It's quite simple but a certain ideology is bent on ignoring some of the simplest facts of life.

Edited October 19, 2008 by Mr. Big Dog

[Sofiyya 1,687]

VW - you are wasting your time. Its easier to accept that some people just don't get it.

You are right, Britty. I know I'm wasting my time here. It is no accident that the educational system in this country turns out worker bees for the elite and that their mentality is geared toward being victims of "the system" who need saving by some omniscient leader.

Not only do they not get it, they actually believe that Obama will save them from what they see as their unwilling subjugation. Ha! He will change things alright, but he won't make it better for them. There is a distinct difference between the rich and those who serve them, and much of it is in their way of thinking. If you think like a victim, you will remain a prisoner of your thoughts.

Even socialism has upper classes. Does anyone here ever wonder why so many globalist elites, like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, are for Obama? They are the same people who introduced outsourcing and HB visas to exploit cheap labor at American's expense. I'll give you a hint, it's not because they want to be equalized with the unwashed masses . . .