Sweep!

[Mac6yver]

All I can say is, Thank God! Finally we will see some help for the middle class.

 

[utdbear]

I'm middle class, and the best thing thats happened to me is to see a lower number withheld on my W-2s. Doubt Democrats are going to do anything to keep that low.

 

[Charlie V]

I'm middle class, and the best thing thats happened to me is to see a lower number withheld on my W-2s. Doubt Democrats are going to do anything to keep that low.

That's a problem -- only focussing on one number.

A couple pennies off the W2 doesn't make up for the many dollars added to the deduction line where they take out for health insurance, then the amount we pay at the pump which, while lower than a few months ago is still much higher than under our previous President. Then if one looks at their wages and they haven't gone up, as in my case, or they have gone down as is the case with my wife who was also unemployed for several Bush years, then the "good thing" is not so great any more.

And then, you look at the National Debt (as well as the spending deficet) and you realize the country is spending more than it's budgetted and is also accumulating massive debt, that little reduction on your W2 is going to have a big cost while the nation's credit cards are charging up trillions of dollars and we wage an incredibly expensive war in Iraq on that debt. All so that the "middle class," if he's lucky, gets a reduction of a few dollars, while the mega-rich get huge windfalls, the vast majority of the benefit.

I'd like to see a shift to reduce middle class taxes but restore tax fairness, rolling back the tax breaks for the rich in order to pay the national debt. But I'm not, as a certain Republican once said, an economic girly man. To me, an economic girly man is one who is afraid of a little taxation to benefit the country. I'm patriotic. It's not all about me. I care about my country, and I'm willing to see an increase in tax if it will benefit future generations and my country. It was once said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." Now, it's said, "The best thing that's happened to me is a lower number on my W-2." The best thing that could happen to me is the betterment of my fine country, the raising of the standard of living for the common people, the reduction of violence and war, better relations with people, and lower future debt to be paid by future generations. If that costs a few dollars on my W2, that's fine with me -- I'm not an economic girly man.

Charlie

 

[KCDAD]

That's a problem -- only focussing on one number.

A couple pennies off the W2 doesn't make up for the many dollars added to the deduction line where they take out for health insurance, then the amount we pay at the pump which, while lower than a few months ago is still much higher than under our previous President. Then if one looks at their wages and they haven't gone up, as in my case, or they have gone down as is the case with my wife who was also unemployed for several Bush years, then the "good thing" is not so great any more.

And then, you look at the National Debt (as well as the spending deficet) and you realize the country is spending more than it's budgetted and is also accumulating massive debt, that little reduction on your W2 is going to have a big cost while the nation's credit cards are charging up trillions of dollars and we wage an incredibly expensive war in Iraq on that debt. All so that the "middle class," if he's lucky, gets a reduction of a few dollars, while the mega-rich get huge windfalls, the vast majority of the benefit.

I'd like to see a shift to reduce middle class taxes but restore tax fairness, rolling back the tax breaks for the rich in order to pay the national debt. But I'm not, as a certain Republican once said, an economic girly man. To me, an economic girly man is one who is afraid of a little taxation to benefit the country. I'm patriotic. It's not all about me. I care about my country, and I'm willing to see an increase in tax if it will benefit future generations and my country. It was once said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." Now, it's said, "The best thing that's happened to me is a lower number on my W-2." The best thing that could happen to me is the betterment of my fine country, the raising of the standard of living for the common people, the reduction of violence and war, better relations with people, and lower future debt to be paid by future generations. If that costs a few dollars on my W2, that's fine with me -- I'm not an economic girly man.

Charlie

The price at the pump... let's see... how many type 5 hurricanes hit major metropolitan areas under Democrat leadership during Clinton's administration?????
Oh.. nevermind, that was Bush's fault.
How many new oil refineries were built in the Clinton Administration????
Nevermind, that's Bush's fault.
How many new areas of exploration were developed during Clinton's 8 years in office????
Nevermind that's Bush's fault.
How many foreign trade deals were passed between 1992 and 2000 to expand the economies in the two largest polulated areas of the world to increase their demand and abiltity to purchase oil on the world market naturally driving up prices????
Nevermind that's Bush's fault too.
Fuel efficiency standards, the "explosion" of SUVs and large trucks guzzliing fuel... nevermind.

Sorry, I don't want to confuse anyone with the big picture.

 

[Charlie V]

Nevermind, that's Bush's fault.

Exactly, I'm glad you're finally seeing things my way!

Care to join the dance party?

Charlie

 

[Guttermouth]

The price at the pump... let's see... how many type 5 hurricanes hit major metropolitan areas under Democrat leadership during Clinton's administration?????
Oh.. nevermind, that was Bush's fault.
How many new oil refineries were built in the Clinton Administration????
Nevermind, that's Bush's fault.
How many new areas of exploration were developed during Clinton's 8 years in office????
Nevermind that's Bush's fault.
How many foreign trade deals were passed between 1992 and 2000 to expand the economies in the two largest polulated areas of the world to increase their demand and abiltity to purchase oil on the world market naturally driving up prices????
Nevermind that's Bush's fault too.
Fuel efficiency standards, the "explosion" of SUVs and large trucks guzzliing fuel... nevermind.

Sorry, I don't want to confuse anyone with the big picture.

I hope Clinton didn't cause too great an increase in the price of tissues. Could be a huge problem for some.

 

[KCDAD]

All I can say is, Thank God! Finally we will see some help for the middle class.

Quick question for clarification... What is your idea of the middle class? Income? Wealth? Occupation?

 

[KCDAD]

I hope Clinton didn't cause too great an increase in the price of tissues. Could be a huge problem for some.

Nice response... on topic, relevant, insightful, informed and instructive... are you a teacher?

 

[JustOneWay]

Nice response... on topic, relevant, insightful, informed and instructive... are you a teacher?

Looks more like something a sage would say

 

[KCDAD]

Looks more like something a sage would say

a leaf of sage, maybe.

 

[utdbear]

That's a problem -- only focussing on one number.

A couple pennies off the W2 doesn't make up for the many dollars added to the deduction line where they take out for health insurance, then the amount we pay at the pump which, while lower than a few months ago is still much higher than under our previous President. Then if one looks at their wages and they haven't gone up, as in my case, or they have gone down as is the case with my wife who was also unemployed for several Bush years, then the "good thing" is not so great any more.

And then, you look at the National Debt (as well as the spending deficet) and you realize the country is spending more than it's budgetted and is also accumulating massive debt, that little reduction on your W2 is going to have a big cost while the nation's credit cards are charging up trillions of dollars and we wage an incredibly expensive war in Iraq on that debt. All so that the "middle class," if he's lucky, gets a reduction of a few dollars, while the mega-rich get huge windfalls, the vast majority of the benefit.

I'd like to see a shift to reduce middle class taxes but restore tax fairness, rolling back the tax breaks for the rich in order to pay the national debt. But I'm not, as a certain Republican once said, an economic girly man. To me, an economic girly man is one who is afraid of a little taxation to benefit the country. I'm patriotic. It's not all about me. I care about my country, and I'm willing to see an increase in tax if it will benefit future generations and my country. It was once said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." Now, it's said, "The best thing that's happened to me is a lower number on my W-2." The best thing that could happen to me is the betterment of my fine country, the raising of the standard of living for the common people, the reduction of violence and war, better relations with people, and lower future debt to be paid by future generations. If that costs a few dollars on my W2, that's fine with me -- I'm not an economic girly man.

Charlie

The problem is, is that it's not a 'few dollars'. It's around 1000 dollars per year. Now if I can keep my 1000 dollars, I can invest in a mutual fund averaging 12% return, and in 25 years I'll have ~72,000. dollars. Wouldn't you agree that is more than 'a few dollars'? Taxes aren't the problem, spending is, and we have to spend less, especially on domestic entitlement programs.

 

[JustOneWay]

a leaf of sage, maybe.

Did you actually come up with this one all by yourself?

 

[KCDAD]

Did you actually come up with this one all by yourself?

I googled it

 

[noparty]

I think when you fill an administration with former executives of an industry and that same industry then happens to consistently post record-breaking profits, you're liable to arouse suspicions.

 

[Guttermouth]

The problem is, is that it's not a 'few dollars'. It's around 1000 dollars per year. Now if I can keep my 1000 dollars, I can invest in a mutual fund averaging 12% return, and in 25 years I'll have ~72,000. dollars. Wouldn't you agree that is more than 'a few dollars'? Taxes aren't the problem, spending is, and we have to spend less, especially on domestic entitlement programs.

Problem with your argument is, I haven't heard any Democrats calling for a middle class tax increase. That was a Republican bogeyman put out for the elections. What they are calling for is elimination of tax cuts for the top wage earners.

In reality, the middle class problem is that wages have been flat in comparison to inflation and the cost of living for a very long time. As a middle class worker, this is clear to me. My situation is not improving. My cost are outstripping my pay gains making my real income progressively less every year. That is what is of concern to the middle class in general. Add to that the fact that we have had huge gains in productivity and the alarm bells get louder. Wherre are those gains going? To the wealthy.

The benefits of economic growth are going to the wealthy. The average CEO makes more on his first day of work than the minimum wage worker makes in an entire year. The average CEO salary is 800 times that of the minimum wage worker.

This is aside from all of the other problems with current policy including having no labor standards for foreign-made goods, related trade deficits, and national debt. Your $1000.00 isn't in danger, and if it was, it would be nothing in relation to the big picture.

 

[chalice_thunder]

I think when you fill an administration with former executives of an industry and that same industry then happens to consistently post record-breaking profits, you're liable to arouse suspicions.

I'm with ya.

I paid $2.68 per gallon on Monday, the day before the election.

I noticed it dropped a penny on election day.

Then on Wednesday, it was $2.71; Thursday, $2.77, and this morning I filled up at $2.83 per gallon.

I wonder if Big Oil wants to punish us for removing their cronies???

 

[noparty]

I'm with ya.

I paid $2.68 per gallon on Monday, the day before the election.

I noticed it dropped a penny on election day.

Then on Wednesday, it was $2.71; Thursday, $2.77, and this morning I filled up at $2.83 per gallon.

I wonder if Big Oil wants to punish us for removing their cronies???

I was pretty suspicious when the prices started dropping right before the election. Then Saddam's conviction seemed a little too conveniently timed. Then Britney dumped K-Fed, completing the trifecta and I thought for sure the Repubs had it in the bag. In their defense, they never seemed to exploit those things to get votes.

And yeah, I figured the oil prices would go back up after the election regardless of who won.

 

[Charlie V]

The problem is, is that it's not a 'few dollars'. It's around 1000 dollars per year.

Without having checked my own tax numbers, I know for a fact that my increases in health insurance premium paycheck deductions alone are more than $1,000 per year, and that's not even counting the increases in the costs of doctor visits, medications etc.

And I haven't even gotten to the gas and other costs which have increased.

Charlie

 

[KCDAD]

Problem with your argument is, I haven't heard any Democrats calling for a middle class tax increase. That was a Republican bogeyman put out for the elections. What they are calling for is elimination of tax cuts for the top wage earners.

Who are the top wage earners? Those figured by actual dollars earned or top percentage wise? Do we set an arbitrary dollar figure or go after a fixed percentage? What about those that have no income but have a boat load of wealth they live off? Are we trying to tax earned income or wealth? We should probably begin with what is the purpose of taxes, that is to punish or discourage activity, or to feed the insatiable government hunger for $ and power?

 

[utdbear]

Problem with your argument is, I haven't heard any Democrats calling for a middle class tax increase. That was a Republican bogeyman put out for the elections. What they are calling for is elimination of tax cuts for the top wage earners.

In reality, the middle class problem is that wages have been flat in comparison to inflation and the cost of living for a very long time. As a middle class worker, this is clear to me. My situation is not improving. My cost are outstripping my pay gains making my real income progressively less every year. That is what is of concern to the middle class in general. Add to that the fact that we have had huge gains in productivity and the alarm bells get louder. Wherre are those gains going? To the wealthy.

The benefits of economic growth are going to the wealthy. The average CEO makes more on his first day of work than the minimum wage worker makes in an entire year. The average CEO salary is 800 times that of the minimum wage worker.

This is aside from all of the other problems with current policy including having no labor standards for foreign-made goods, related trade deficits, and national debt. Your $1000.00 isn't in danger, and if it was, it would be nothing in relation to the big picture.

The thing is, is that I don't really give a rats behind what the Democrats call for, I give a rats behind about what they DO, and what they DO, is raise taxes across the board, for programs that are useless. Are the Republicans better? Maybe, maybe not, but at least I know they're against social entitlements, and so I'll vote against those every time. I make 32,000 per year, so I'm by no means rich, but I do not hold it against my CEO that he makes much more, I see it as a goal that I can attain if I work hard enough. Stats show that 70 percent of millionaires are first generation. I want to be part of that stat, and I'm going to be part of that stat, and it's wrong for me to pay a 40 percent penalty for wanting to achieve greatness.