Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Raw Story)   Warren: We're in this mess because Washington has ignored the middle class for a generation   (rawstory.com) divider line 43
    More: Interesting, middleclass, Rachel Maddow  
•       •       •

2088 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Nov 2013 at 12:27 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-11-21 12:40:14 PM  
12 votes:

Tomahawk513: We know, Warren, we know.  But how do we fix it?


1. Tax capital gains over x amount (whatever can be agreed upon) as normal income.
2. Vastly reduce the Pentagon operating budget and bolster social safety nets.
3. Raise the minimum wage.
4. End subsidies for industries that don't need them (esp. energy companies)
5. Re-institute Glass-Steagall separation of commercial and investment banks.
6. Heavy fine and penalize companies that employ tax shelters.
7. Create jobs by boosting domestic infrastructure spending.

Probably many more, but these would be a great start.
2013-11-21 12:36:13 PM  
7 votes:

LucklessWonder: She's not wrong. 2016 posturing?


She was saying this sort of thing before she was even elected, and sincerely means it.

Calling this "posturing" is like telling Doug he's trying too hard to be fashionable when the trending style just happens to switch to the sweatervest that's the only piece of clothing in his wardrobe.
2013-11-21 12:36:00 PM  
6 votes:
Not ignored. Actively worked to eliminate. It's an important distinction.
2013-11-21 12:41:29 PM  
5 votes:

Tomahawk513: We know, Warren, we know.  But how do we fix it?


If you look at what she's been up to while in office, it's holding corporations accountable for crimes.  If you want a serious answer, that's more than just just gestures: bring capital gains taxation into alignment with income taxation, especially as far as progressive taxation goes.
2013-11-21 12:32:52 PM  
5 votes:
This lady should keep saying things, somebody needs to speak for the human people, my friend.
2013-11-21 12:42:49 PM  
4 votes:
Ingnoring? Stop with the euphamisms. The rapist can't ignore the rape victim when he committing the act. The wolf isn't ignoring the sheep when he is feeding on it. They were very focused on us.
2013-11-21 12:47:59 PM  
3 votes:
If by ignore you mean intentionally fark over.

The free trade agreements that allowed the obscenely wealthy to move all the manufacturing jobs out of the United States without facing financial penalties for trying to moved finished goods into the US for sale didn't just happen.

Look back at the articles about the fight to grant China permanent Most Favored Nation trading status:

The power of the new China lobby was evident in Beijing last March
7, when more than 100 representatives of major U.S. firms held
their annual conference under the auspices of the U.S.-China Business
Council. Delivering his first major speech since taking office
just weeks before, U.S. Ambassador James Sasser told them that
the Clinton administration was counting on aggressive pressure
from business to secure renewal of MFN status for China. "[Sasser]
also suggested that CEOs make personal calls on Congress when
they wish to relay their concerns on major China-related issues,
such as MFN," reported the China Business Review,
the bimonthly magazine of the U.S.-China Business Council. "Nothing,"
he said, "makes an impression on a member of Congress like
a visit or phone call from a CEO from the member's district or
state."

Of course, the Fortune 500 companies that comprise the U.S.-China
Business Council-led by Boeing, Motorola, Caterpillar, AT&T,
and the American International Group (AIG)-hardly needed Sasser's
encouragement. They have been working the halls of Congress intensely
since the 1972 opening to China by President Nixon. Lured by the
prospect of 1.2 billion low-wage workers and eager consumers,
America's corporate elite have done a fine job unofficially representing
the Chinese government in Washington.


The corporate elite and their political lapdogs worked very, very hard to screw over the nation.
2013-11-21 12:38:50 PM  
3 votes:

BMFPitt: I much prefer this perceived "mess"


You hear that, the economy is doing fine everybody! Middle class is doing fine! We can move onto other things!
2013-11-21 12:38:39 PM  
3 votes:

BMFPitt: I much prefer this perceived "mess" to the widespread poverty that Senator Warren would impose on us.


The sad thing is that there are people who actually believe this. Not you, of course, but people.
2013-11-21 03:34:08 PM  
2 votes:

liam76: BMFPitt: That would be nice. Now please tell me your plan for increasing disposable income that doesn't just involve discouraging investment and putting up barriers to hiring.

A more progressive tax scheme that cuts otu loopholes above certain incomes will nto discourage you from investing.

Nobody is going to say, "well since I used to pocket 88% of the 10 million I got a year from investing, and now I only pocket 50% of it, I guess I no longer want to bother making money".


But they might say "Well, that has a 20% chance of working and making me 10X, and a 80% chance of me losing all my money.  And at 88%, that gets me a 76% return, and at 50% taxes, I break even, so why bother?'

And for things that are between 20% and 11% success rates, well, they're now guaranteed losers, and so they don't get funded.  And you've just ensured that a LARGE portion of the new businesses that would've gotten founded don't, which means that those businesses don't employ lots of people, etc, etc, etc.

Oh, and you'll have more taxes.

tcftakingnote.typepad.com

/And yes, I'm aware that this is a sign of horrific inequality as capital became cheaper than labor, but.
//And assuming that I'm reading this right, Did Saint Reagan [/sarcasm] raise cap. gains tax rates and Clinton drop them down?
2013-11-21 02:57:10 PM  
2 votes:

paygun: meyerkev: So Farking the Rich becomes "Fark Me" really fast.

Screwing the rich means they have less money to contribute to Republican campaigns.


As a white male making more than the median income and significantly more than the welfare cutoff, I vote for Democrats, but I acknowledge that I'd be better off under the sane Republicans.

I also acknowledge that about 2/3rds of my extended family is better off than their parents and the other third is doing at least OK.  However, I must acknowledge that this was largely due to the fact that their family could pay for private school (and would drive an hour every morning to get them to private school), but couldn't pay for new clothing, and forced them to get jobs at the age of 11.  Fantastic way to end up valuing hard work and the value of a dollar.

I also acknowledge that socialism doesn't work long-term.  Make sure that no one starves*, make sure that no one's deliberately poisoning the rivers, and other than that, let the capitalists have their head because that'll grow the economy faster and produce lower unemployment.  I'm looking at Europe and yeah, they're more equal, but they also have lower labor participation, higher unemployment, and lower overall incomes (PPP).  They're more mobile, but I'd love to know how much of that is "more equal + guaranteed pay raises with the right pieces of paper means that you'll just move up naturally".

And I'm just not seeing the revolution.  Yes, the 1% has way too much farking money, but we put a couple of people into the (very bottom of the) 1% through sheer hard work and a bit of luck.  It's not impossible.  And even if you fail, absolute worst case, you're pulling in $20K/year (Midwest.  So that's $100K NYC) after taxes and alimony and being lower middle class with a 3BR apartment, a decent used car, the ability to borrow your brother's boat, and football on Saturdays and Sundays.  And that was a couple of deliberate choices on his part because he wanted to spend more time with his kids (And as one of those kids, thanks Dad).  The French Revolution was all about "There is literally no food because Malthus".  Yeah, the estate thing was a thing, but it was a Malthusian Famine.**  When a retired teacher can own 3 houses and 8 cars, I just don't see it.

* Rule 1: No one starves, Rule 2: Work always pays, Rule 3: After that, it's on you.
** And that whole "Let them eat cake" thing was a) Made up, b) A VERY out of touch thing to say, had it been true.  King put a price ceiling on the price of bread (after women stormed Versailles), which meant that wheat was more expensive than bread could support.  So the bakers weren't making bread because they literally couldn't afford it, and the saying was more like "Since there is no bread (because our price ceiling made things unprofitable), why not have the bakers use (even more expensive) cake instead of bread?".  Stupid and out of touch, but something that I could see a random central planner saying.
2013-11-21 01:35:58 PM  
2 votes:

UrukHaiGuyz: Tomahawk513: We know, Warren, we know.  But how do we fix it?

1. Tax capital gains over x amount (whatever can be agreed upon) as normal income.
2. Vastly reduce the Pentagon operating budget and bolster social safety nets.
3. Raise the minimum wage.
4. End subsidies for industries that don't need them (esp. energy companies)
5. Re-institute Glass-Steagall separation of commercial and investment banks.
6. Heavy fine and penalize companies that employ tax shelters.
7. Create jobs by boosting domestic infrastructure spending.

Probably many more, but these would be a great start.


It would be a good start but seeing as we are suggesting stuff that will never happen.

8.  A windfall profit tax to pay for the Iraq War.  Middle/lower classes supported the war with their blood, tears and sweat, a tax on the rich at least paying for the war they wanted would seem to be fair.

9. Federal Elections Regulator enforcing both de-gerrymandering, fair voting rules and sensible campaign reform

10.  A minimum tax of 30% any income over $1M regardless of deductions.

Actually what you said, would be more than enough to balance the budget.  What I am proposing would result in additional revenue for investment in the future (education, research, job training).
2013-11-21 01:04:56 PM  
2 votes:

cchris_39: It looks to me like the middle class lives a lot better today than they did in the 60s and 70s.

Maybe we were lower middle class. Shrug.


The technological conveniences are better and cheaper, but real purchasing power has declined over the last few decades, as wages have been stagnant or fallen relative to inflation.
2013-11-21 01:02:32 PM  
2 votes:

BlastYoBoots: DROxINxTHExWIND: Ingnoring? Stop with the euphamisms. The rapist can't ignore the rape victim when he committing the act. The wolf isn't ignoring the sheep when he is feeding on it. They were very focused on us.

That's not a good analogy or assumption.

Sure, there are Randites who actively detest the poor, and would spit on them even after witnessing the extent of their struggle and suffering. However, there are a whole lot more rich people who exist in an epistemic bubble, too insulated from the plight of the poor to begin to empathize. They simply don't know, and only speak with those who confirm their biases or are too frightened of their power to outright tell them they're wrong.

In other words, a wolf is guaranteed to be seeing and focusing on the food it kills and eats. This is more like a voracious patron of a restaurant demanding "More! More ground meat burgers, please!", chewing and splattering grime over his bib whilst blissfully unaware that the animals being slaughtered in the back to supply his meal are actually people just like him, except when he's sometimes unaware or unbelieving of the fact that there's slaughter at all.

But of course, to preserve this illusion, there have to be Randite leaders in the movement: Restaurant staff and management, in the analogy, who understand the supply and demand for human flesh and heartlessly, intentionally seek to deliver it for profit. But they're not the majority. Just facilitators.


I totally disagree. This was not done accidentally. We were just like the carcass of a sheep with rich wolves battling over who got to take the biggest bites out of us. They stole our money by robbing the treasury. No bid contracts to their military interests as they sold us fear. Privitization of entire government functions, including the war. Privatization of the prison system and the push for mandatory sentencing. We had and have entire industries who are picking at our carcass with officials in the government who facilitated it.
2013-11-21 12:43:20 PM  
2 votes:

BMFPitt: Cletus C.: BMFPitt: I much prefer this perceived "mess" to the widespread poverty that Senator Warren would impose on us.

That will not go over well. Unless you light a candle at the altar of Her Holiness, you're asking for trouble here.

I get in trouble here for posting any number of benign, uncontroversial things that cause the fans of Blue Team or Red Team some butthurt. So why shy away?


I think I see the problem.
2013-11-21 12:40:36 PM  
2 votes:

BMFPitt: I much prefer this perceived "mess" to the widespread poverty that Senator Warren would impose on us.


Like the widespread poverty in the likes of Sweden and other sociamalist Eurocommidises?

/oh wait
2013-11-21 12:40:15 PM  
2 votes:
She could make an interesting veep choice.
2013-11-21 12:32:45 PM  
2 votes:
Obvious tag out working a second job at Walmart?
2013-11-21 12:30:35 PM  
2 votes:
The middle class bought it hook, line and sinker. They pushed for their own gutting. "Free Market" capitalism was always crony capitalism. Financializing the entire economy along with a push for privatization and personal responsibility will end in cat food for everyone but a minor select fraction of a percent.
2013-11-21 12:30:24 PM  
2 votes:
Where's the obvious tag?
2013-11-21 12:30:01 PM  
2 votes:
global3.memecdn.com
2013-11-21 12:29:14 PM  
2 votes:
I'm afraid the middle class is gone.  This is supposed to be people with disposable income.  Most people however are leveraged to their eyeballs in debt just to keep up with what was supposed to be a middle class lifestyle.
2013-11-21 12:08:03 PM  
2 votes:
Cue the idiots and the Indian references!
2013-11-21 08:17:29 PM  
1 votes:

Sum Dum Gai: meyerkev: But they might say "Well, that has a 20% chance of working and making me 10X, and a 80% chance of me losing all my money.  And at 88%, that gets me a 76% return, and at 50% taxes, I break even, so why bother?'

Your math is flawed, because the initial principal is not taxed, only your profits  - you never just "break even" unless your pre-tax earnings are also 0%.

If I invest $10,000 and sell my investments for $11,000, I pay tax on $1,000.

Basically, if you turn a profit before taxes, you always turn a profit after taxes as well.  If you lose money before taxes, you always lose money after taxes as well (you can defer some of your losses against other years' earnings, but you can't use the tax system to recoup your full loss).

That's why a marginal income tax system works - the business strategy that gives you the highest possible pre-income tax earnings gives you the highest possible post-income tax earnings, as well - regardless of what the actual tax rates are (as long as all marginal rates are below 100%).


Good point.  Let's do the math.

Assume either 10x return or complete failure (which is a simplification, but it makes the math easy and the point is still the same)

return is: ODDS * (1 + 9 * (1 - TAX_RATE))

20% odds, 12% taxes = 1.784 or 78% return
20% odds, 50% taxes = 1.1 or 10% return
10% odds, 12% taxes = .892 or 11% loss
10% odds, 50% taxes = .55 or 45% loss

And since the current capital gains rate in the USA is 23.8% (20% + 3.8% Medicare taxes), and CA has another 13.3%:
20% odds, 37.1% taxes = 1.3322 or a 33% gain
10% odds, 37.1% taxes = .6661 or a 33.3% loss

The general point still applies, and you CAN write off some investment losses from the losses to make up for the gains which I'm not accounting for, but still.

There's a bunch of businesses that employ people that got funded because a VC thought the odds of making money were greater than the odds of losing it.  Change the tax code, change those odds, a bunch of marginal companies don't get funded, and a bunch of people don't get employed (and a bunch of founders don't become VC's when their bets pan out and they become multi-multi-millionaires).
2013-11-21 02:00:58 PM  
1 votes:

UrukHaiGuyz: A big part as well was the erosion of union rights, and policies that favor Wall Street. Automated jobs aren't coming back, which is why it's more important than ever to ensure livable pay for low skill workers, while doing everything we can to make education cheaper and better.


A bit part of the erosion of union rights stem from the loss of union power.  The unions derive their power from the fact that they have a commodity that is hard to replace.  With automation a union worker is easier to replace thus lower power.  I think you are dismissing the skills of the union workers had during the union boom in the 40-50-60s by stating their skill sets are on par with a maybe service and definately retail.
2013-11-21 01:57:37 PM  
1 votes:
Ok.

Stop wailing about "walls along main street" or similar every time someone wants to build more housing.  Because right now, a non-lead paint/non-asbestos apartment is going for about $5K/month.  So if you'd like to raise my salary by $80K (taxes suck) so that I can afford that, I'd really appreciate it.  Or you can make it so that a non-lead paint, non-asbestos apartment doesn't cost $5K/month by building more farking housing.  And then you'll finally have the density (and property tax base) to coat the Bay in mass transit instead of farking Caltrain/VTA light rail/BART to nowhere and then I'll stop biatching about the traffic because I can get from Any Point A to Any Point B in a "pass the laugh test" timeframe.

And stop biatching every time someone suggests adding a lane to the freeways (or honestly, just fixing the bottlenecks so that we can use the lanes we've got). Morning rush hour starts at 5:30 and evening Rush hour goes from 3PM to 8 PM, and that's just wrong.  And more importantly, it means that moving 1 mile closer to the train station costs $500/month for the lead paint/asbestos people, and $3000/month for the non-lead paint/asbestos people because the ONLY way to get around is via train and private corporate shuttle.

/I'd also add "Repeal the proposition system" because that functionally turns into "Fark the middle class by shipping all their money to poor people and the pet projects of rich people".
//I'd be with you on "Fark the rich" except that "Fark the rich" means "Fark my boss who pays my salary" and "Fark the VC's who funded this company and wouldn't have bothered because the risk calculation would have changed".  So Farking the Rich becomes "Fark Me" really fast.  There's a reason why EU unemployment is historically about 10% and US unemployment is around 6%.
2013-11-21 01:53:24 PM  
1 votes:

DROxINxTHExWIND: BlastYoBoots: DROxINxTHExWIND: Ingnoring? Stop with the euphamisms. The rapist can't ignore the rape victim when he committing the act. The wolf isn't ignoring the sheep when he is feeding on it. They were very focused on us.

That's not a good analogy or assumption.

Sure, there are Randites who actively detest the poor, and would spit on them even after witnessing the extent of their struggle and suffering. However, there are a whole lot more rich people who exist in an epistemic bubble, too insulated from the plight of the poor to begin to empathize. They simply don't know, and only speak with those who confirm their biases or are too frightened of their power to outright tell them they're wrong.

In other words, a wolf is guaranteed to be seeing and focusing on the food it kills and eats. This is more like a voracious patron of a restaurant demanding "More! More ground meat burgers, please!", chewing and splattering grime over his bib whilst blissfully unaware that the animals being slaughtered in the back to supply his meal are actually people just like him, except when he's sometimes unaware or unbelieving of the fact that there's slaughter at all.

But of course, to preserve this illusion, there have to be Randite leaders in the movement: Restaurant staff and management, in the analogy, who understand the supply and demand for human flesh and heartlessly, intentionally seek to deliver it for profit. But they're not the majority. Just facilitators.

I totally disagree. This was not done accidentally. We were just like the carcass of a sheep with rich wolves battling over who got to take the biggest bites out of us. They stole our money by robbing the treasury. No bid contracts to their military interests as they sold us fear. Privitization of entire government functions, including the war. Privatization of the prison system and the push for mandatory sentencing. We had and have entire industries who are picking at our carcass with officials in the government who facilitated it.


I agree that all this happened, and I agree that rich wolves were at the head of it all!

I just think you're underestimating how well a few wolves can lead a massive consuming horde, like how the mouth and teeth are only parts of a larger organism full of benign cells. The majority of rich participants in this robbery DON'T necessarily know what they're doing! Just look at the Fix The Debt initiative and how it's full of misled rich, literally blind to the facts regarding our deficit's decline and incredibly surprised when shown. The fact that they don't understand the issues, however, doesn't make the bite of their money sting less as it tears into the rest of us.

Many of the endeavors you're referring to as the context of a larger conspiratorial drive against the middle class are, in fact, the natural sum of capitalism operating in a decentralized fashion across a whole bunch of moving parts. The CEO of a Fortune 500 company doesn't necessarily come up with a plan to devour all his workers' pensions: he doesn't HAVE to. All he does is buy into the rush to juice his publicly traded stock until he can cash it in for more money than God (try the link, it's a very enlightening read on the incentives), and promote this culture within their company as the stockholders clamor for returns. Then it's the job of Manager X to cut costs to goose his department's grosses, Lawyer Y to restructure pensions, Lobbyist Z to get rid of a pesky roadblock, like poor workers punching open and draining the blood of slaughtered cattle... all without necessarily knowing what the other hands are doing, and without needing any exact direction from the CEO. He didn't have to TRY to rob his wealth unjustly from the workers and consumers surrounding his company. He just naturally provided that incentive structure.

But there ARE devious, horrible groups bent on milking lesser people nationwide for the sake of the rich and powerful at large. ALEC, Murdoch's media empire, the Republican leadership, they almost religiously fight for a larger piece of the pie for the wealthy, sacrificing the middle class on the altar of the idea that the rich DESERVE more privilege than anyone else, deserve to be revered. And this responds to a desire of the rich TO be revered, to feel special enough to justify how they could be seeing so much more success and wealth than anyone else, the need of them to believe that it wasn't just "luck". But in essence, THEY're being fooled by this propaganda as well! You call them masters who are serving life-stealing Kool-Aid to the masses, but once you recognize who the leaders are (those of Murdoch and Koch fare) and exclude them, you interview the rich and sometimes find, surprisingly, that they've been drinking the same exact Kool-Aid. They've been misinformed by the same machine that serves their interests.

A Corporation as a whole can often fit the medical definition of psychopathy in its actions, but don't let that blind you to the fact that it's made of moving parts largely oblivious to the bigger picture. A short gust of breath can help to draw forth a storm. That's the shape of the movement against the middle class. The doublethink you see in the Republican faction is flawed: unlike Orwell's 1984, a ruling party desiring of power can't truly believe, truly understand, BOTH that power is their primary goal and that they serve the interests of all, because many in the Republican Party succumb to the paradox of doublethink such that they flip to one definition or the other, revealing it in their attitudes and actions as it breaks down (like McConnell's "make him a one term president" mission, or Rand Paul's genuine surprise that the deficit had shrunken when corrected). They misinform themselves, and perfect doublethink is unsustainable.

The movement against the middle class is certainly as dangerous as you believe, but in missing how simultaneously ignorant of *its own mission against the middle class* this movement can be over the majority of its participating poor AND rich, you are in fact UNDERestimating how dangerous and difficult to stop it really is!!! You can't reason with a machine to stop its devouring of others when, in many ways, it doesn't even realize it's doing so in the first place.

So, in that way, it's MORE powerful and unstoppable than you imagine. However, with the power of this decentralized motive and action comes a glimmer of hope, a vulnerability: If there are fewer groups and middlemen actually *guiding* this movement, genuinely and maliciously committed to "eating the poor" and serving them up to the rich, perpetuating this delusion, well... That means that however unlikely, it's still possible to "cut off the head" of the movement. Imagine if Murdoch's media empire collapsed overnight and didn't resurface, for instance, and how it's absence would rattle the nation's information and priorities.

The difficult part about this is how little the smaller victories matter. If you only get rid of one restaurant owner, another will take his place: there will always be someone willing to profit off the serving of human flesh.
2013-11-21 01:45:09 PM  
1 votes:

cchris_39: The idea of a middle class with disposable income AND access to easy credit............it's just, impossible.


Why? If wages had kept pace since the 70's, minimum wage would be over $10 right now, with higher paying jobs adjusted upwards correspondingly. There's no reason other than a lack of political will wages overall shouldn't be much higher than they currently are.
2013-11-21 01:31:11 PM  
1 votes:

GoldSpider: You know who else rode a populist message of change into the White House and expected the rest of their party to fall in line lockstep?


Theodore Roosevelt?
2013-11-21 01:30:29 PM  
1 votes:

Tomahawk513: We know, Warren, we know.  But how do we fix it?


How about requiring businesses to treat all employees the same in regards to employment 'contracts'. If you run a business where you just 'need' to have an employment contract to get that CEO candidate you are swooning over that includes a massive golden parachute clause regardless of how the company performs, require all employees have employment contracts that offer some sort of compensation upon 'separation' (regardless of cause of course, just like the CEOs)... yea, sure, we don't expect the peons to get millions, but if they can get a few months salary (and collect unemployment of course), they may not be as completely screwed as they are today.  Or maybe companies won't want to give those kinds of contracts to the minions... so, sorry execs, no golden parachutes for you. Maybe they'll try running the companies a little better and since they won't have to pay out millions when execs leave, the companies might have enough money to retain some of the serfs.

/meh, just spit-ballin' here
2013-11-21 01:21:30 PM  
1 votes:
Those who create demand, the consumers, are the actual job creators. Those who are very good and very efficient at siphoning off more from the economy than they put in are not.
2013-11-21 01:15:57 PM  
1 votes:

cchris_39: UrukHaiGuyz: cchris_39: It looks to me like the middle class lives a lot better today than they did in the 60s and 70s.

Maybe we were lower middle class. Shrug.

The technological conveniences are better and cheaper, but real purchasing power has declined over the last few decades, as wages have been stagnant or fallen relative to inflation.

I still don't remember anybody actually having "disposable income".

Nobody had credit cards either. Just the Sears card.

Everybody getting credit cards, all the women going to work, and college for everyone at skyrocketing prices ended that era.


The whole culture surrounding credit cards has changed drastically too.  At one point, society viewed credit cards as things poor people used because they didn't actually have any real money, so they'd buy it now and put off paying for it until later.  Now, however, credit cards are viewed as good investments.  Regularly paying your bill results in a higher credit score, which makes it easier and cheaper to borrow money in the future.
2013-11-21 01:06:23 PM  
1 votes:

sweetmelissa31: Politicians do like to talk about the middle class a lot. It's just that "Middle class" in conservative-speak means "Top .01%," just like "small-business owner" means "multinational corporation."


"Middle class" for both parties always means the same thing. Whoever they are talking to at the time.
2013-11-21 12:58:54 PM  
1 votes:

Tomahawk513: UrukHaiGuyz: Tomahawk513: UrukHaiGuyz: Tomahawk513: We know, Warren, we know.  But how do we fix it?

1. Tax capital gains over x amount (whatever can be agreed upon) as normal income. Agree
2. Vastly reduce the Pentagon operating budget and bolster social safety nets. Agree, but very gradually
3. Raise the minimum wage. Agree
4. End subsidies for industries that don't need them (esp. energy companies)
5. Re-institute Glass-Steagall separation of commercial and investment banks. Agree
6. Heavy fine and penalize companies that employ tax shelters.
7. Create jobs by boosting domestic infrastructure spending. Farking boatloads of this. Bullet-traings everywhere.

Probably many more, but these would be a great start.

I really want someone who will vastly overhaul the Tax System. It should be simple and efficient, and primarily based on income tax. I'd also like to see a corporate revenue (not profit) tax that would be applicable if the sum of all compensation paid to the highest earner is greater than x times the lowest earner.

I like that idea in theory, but in practice I think you'd just see CEO's being payed in stock as a workaround. It only works if you include language in the legislation to count the monetary value of all forms of compensation to calculate the highest earner income.

Yes sir, exactly.  The sum of all forms of compensation, whether it's a bonus, stock options, salary, healthcare, the whole package.


Haha, problems solved.

I think Warren is a harbinger of a new breed populist left politician I hope to see a lot more of in the near future. American attitudes are rapidly shifting away from the trickle-down tripe we've been fed the last few decades. Here's hoping.
2013-11-21 12:52:25 PM  
1 votes:

Pinner: DROxINxTHExWIND: Ingnoring? Stop with the euphamisms. The rapist can't ignore the rape victim when he committing the act. The wolf isn't ignoring the sheep when he is feeding on it. They were very focused on us.

Rapist is ignoring the victim and focusing on their own pleasure.
Wolf is ignoring the sheep, and focusing on other wolves trying to get in on the meal.


Except for when the rapist is holding the victim down...trying to keep them quiet...the rapist doesn't get pleasure from the sexual act, he gets it from the power of being in control.
All of the wolves are focused on the sheep or they would just fight each other and nothing would get eaten. You must not have cable.
2013-11-21 12:48:16 PM  
1 votes:

CPennypacker: BMFPitt: Cletus C.: BMFPitt: I much prefer this perceived "mess" to the widespread poverty that Senator Warren would impose on us.

That will not go over well. Unless you light a candle at the altar of Her Holiness, you're asking for trouble here.

I get in trouble here for posting any number of benign, uncontroversial things that cause the fans of Blue Team or Red Team some butthurt. So why shy away?

Well aren't you the rugged individual


People with no opinion, and nothing better to do than spew bile in the name of "devil's advocacy", are going to save the world, didn't you know?

Just as soon as everyone else shuts up.
2013-11-21 12:46:34 PM  
1 votes:
I'm not sure ignored is the word here. I mean--it fits--but it seems more like favored the wealthiest classes instead of ignoring the middle class. The middle class in itself is ripe for being ignored being what they are: generally self sufficient, but not enough financial capital to really be a force to influence any politicians.

Maybe ignored is the right word...
2013-11-21 12:46:00 PM  
1 votes:

BMFPitt: No, they are doing quite badly. I want someone who will stop making it worse.


Do you have someone in mind?
2013-11-21 12:45:21 PM  
1 votes:

DROxINxTHExWIND: Ingnoring? Stop with the euphamisms. The rapist can't ignore the rape victim when he committing the act. The wolf isn't ignoring the sheep when he is feeding on it. They were very focused on us.


Rapist is ignoring the victim and focusing on their own pleasure.
Wolf is ignoring the sheep, and focusing on other wolves trying to get in on the meal.
2013-11-21 12:44:58 PM  
1 votes:

BMFPitt: I much prefer this perceived "mess" to the widespread poverty that Senator Warren would impose on us.


twinkletoesforall.files.wordpress.com

"Hey, guys... get a load of this. This guy thinks he knows what widespread poverty is!"
2013-11-21 12:44:00 PM  
1 votes:

super_grass: The more people sound off about MUH MIDDLE CLASS, the more it sounds like an arbitrary construct designed for the cold war golden era that never existed.

But Washington does have its head in the wrong place.


I'd always suspected the republican agenda really is to return feudalism.
2013-11-21 12:43:38 PM  
1 votes:

BMFPitt: Cletus C.: BMFPitt: I much prefer this perceived "mess" to the widespread poverty that Senator Warren would impose on us.

That will not go over well. Unless you light a candle at the altar of Her Holiness, you're asking for trouble here.

I get in trouble here for posting any number of benign, uncontroversial things that cause the fans of Blue Team or Red Team some butthurt. So why shy away?


Well aren't you the rugged individual
2013-11-21 12:42:29 PM  
1 votes:
Historically, ever increasing disparity of wealth ends up in either economic catastrophe or social upheaval.
I suppose it could work out differently for us, this time.
Or, not.
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report