Why do Liberals hate the rich and powerful?

[Kathryn]

Ultra - I see your point and you're probably right.

And MBall -

If you make that much, then I have to wonder why you'd be hurting within 6 weeks of losing a job. Together, my wife and I make less than a third of what Obama would consider wealthy, and I've been out of a job (well, working part time at Petco) for 4 weeks now, and we're doing OK. Sure, we don't have kids, but we're not even close to getting near that tax bracket either.

Well, I don't know enough about your situation to comment much, and you don't know enough about mine either, so I'll give you a little more insight. I didn't say we'd lose our house after 6 weeks, or get our vehicles repossessed. I said we'd be HURTING. Let me clarify - we would have to make some serious (and probably painful) adjustments to our lives, and there would be stress in our marriage - I think regardless of income bracket, if your income takes a big hit, your lifestyle has to be adjusted and you'll experience stress in your relationships. We are both middle aged and both were divorced before. Divorce takes a big hit on your financial stability and we're in the process of rebuilding that. We have an aggressive savings plan because we don't believe that SS will be around when we really need it. We don't want to tap into our core savings.

And of COURSE if I lost my job, I would take a job anywhere I had to - including a part time job like yours. In fact that sounds pretty nice.

As for the "middle option" where you don't pay in more and don't get more - sorry, but this isn't my first rodeo. I do NOT believe Obama when he says only the very wealthy (those making over $250,000 a year) will be taxed more. During his campaign that number went from $250,000 to $200,000 to $150,000 - and the final figure was about $100,000!!!

There are not enough people in the United States who make over $250,000 a year to raise taxes on, to make up the difference with the OBSCENE "stimulus plan" figures out there.

No on begrudges you that. No one wants you to have to change your lifestyle. That's why I question whether you'd even be hurt by the higher taxes on "wealthy people". Either you're living beyond your means or you wouldn't have to pay more taxes.

No - YOU may not begrudge me. YOU amy not want me to have to change my lifestyle. That doesn't mean that others don't. There are plenty of people out there who would assume that because I have more than others, I should share my wealth - with the people THEY think I should share with, rather than the people I already DO share with.

Point is - if you make as little as you say you do, you will qualify for some serious deniro under Obama's plan. I won't. I will be paying more and getting less. That's called a redistribution of wealth. Simply put (and sorry for making this personal, but it IS personal to each of us) - you get the money I earned. I am subsidizing your lifestyle - whatever that lifestyle is. Personally I would prefer to share my wealth with people and causes of my own choosing. No offense meant. I'm sure you're a nice person. Frankly, I'd rather give my money to my own kids and grandkids, and to my own church and local causes.

Thanks for not begrudging my lifestyle or wanting me to change it - why would you? It's your cash cow.

 

[blackout]

I don't begrudge anybody anything.

I WISH I had lots of money.
Not for a nicer lifestyle,
but for basic necessities for my kids,
(braces)
and a little extra enrichment for them...
(acting lessons/workshops)
and so I could get a big SIMPLE home
with lots of rooms for all the people
I love on the net who are hurting
and alone.
We could all just be a family of misfits.

I personally wouldn't care how much money
they took from me in taxes.
It's intrinsically worthless after all.

I AM tired of this nuclear family model though.
Seperating people into these little economic "units".
2 grown ups are not enough for most people to support and raise kids anymore.
and certainly not by any "American" model/standards.
I would gladly welcome more adults to pull together with.

Unless I manage to recover my health
and find some notable success with my musical ability/talent
we're screwed.
For some reason health difficulties seem to plague me.

 

[Alceste]

Simply put (and sorry for making this personal, but it IS personal to each of us) - you get the money I earned. I am subsidizing your lifestyle - whatever that lifestyle is. Personally I would prefer to share my wealth with people and causes of my own choosing. No offense meant. I'm sure you're a nice person. Frankly, I'd rather give my money to my own kids and grandkids, and to my own church and local causes.

Thanks for not begrudging my lifestyle or wanting me to change it - why would you? It's your cash cow.

You do realize, I'm sure, that this is the exact same argument that has been used by working class socialists since the advent of Marxism. "Why should I subsidize the lifestyle of the wealthy by allowing them to have the bulk of the proceeds of my labour?"

I think that just illustrates how important it is that we make our collective decisions regarding what the government should or shouldn't do based on reason rather than resentment of whomever seems to benefit most from any proposed changes.

Of course everyone feels their own resentment is "reasonable", but I use reason in the context of empirical research into the a wide range of economic models and their respective benefits / costs to society.

Taking such factors into consideration, you will realize that the US is lagging far behind the rest of the developed world in measurable terms such as the gap between rich and poor, quality of life, life expectancy, infant mortality, literacy, homelessness... the list goes on and on.

As much as YOU resent the poor for the possibility they may have their standard of living raised to some level that approaches Canada, France, the UK, Norway, Germany, the Netherlands etc, the real cost of the working class subsidizing the lifestyles of the rich in the US is measured in lives, i.e. deaths relating to untreated illnesses, whereas the cost of the rich subsidizing the poor is measured in a minor reduction in luxury purchases, i.e. two cars instead of three.

If you think your spare car is more important than some sick baby's life, continue to resent socialism.

 

[Kathryn]

As much as YOU resent the poor for the possibility they may have their standard of living raised to some level that approaches Canada, France, the UK, Norway, Germany, the Netherlands etc, the real cost of the working class subsidizing the lifestyles of the rich in the US is measured in lives, i.e. deaths relating to untreated illnesses, whereas the cost of the rich subsidizing the poor is measured in a minor reduction in luxury purchases, i.e. two cars instead of three.

I don't resent someone bettering their own lifestyle. I don't resent helping others better their lifestyle - I just prefer to choose who I help.

Free enterprise works. Socialism on a large scale does not work. I lived in Europe for several years. The "glory days" of their socialism experiment (the 1960s - 70s) are long past, and reality has set in. Socialism only works in small, homogenous societies where people have similar work ethics, beliefs, goals, etc. Rampant and uncontrolled immigration has depleted Europe's coffers and their societies are crumbling and bankrupt in general.

If you think your spare car is more important than some sick baby's life, continue to resent socialism.[/quote]

I don't have a spare car. I have a five year old car that I drive to my full time job every day. My husband has a six year old truck.

And my daughter is adopting a baby in a few weeks - a baby we will welcome and nurture. I raised her to put her money where her mouth is.

 

[Kathryn]

I don't know why the quote thing messed up on that post! LOL

 

[Alceste]

Kathryn, where in Europe did you live? You are the first American who has lived abroad who has ever suggested things are better in the US, so I would be very interested to hear more about your experience. What was your situation in Europe? What works better for you in the US? What aspects of the European system did you feel could have been solved by American-style (i.e. unregulated, untaxed) capitalism?

 

[Alceste]

I don't have a spare car. I have a five year old car that I drive to my full time job every day. My husband has a six year old truck.

Wampus and I share one ten year old car and both work full time, so we would consider one of your vehicles "spare", especially if letting go of it could potentially save a life.

 

[dawny0826]

Ultra - I see your point and you're probably right.

And MBall -

If you make that much, then I have to wonder why you'd be hurting within 6 weeks of losing a job. Together, my wife and I make less than a third of what Obama would consider wealthy, and I've been out of a job (well, working part time at Petco) for 4 weeks now, and we're doing OK. Sure, we don't have kids, but we're not even close to getting near that tax bracket either.

Well, I don't know enough about your situation to comment much, and you don't know enough about mine either, so I'll give you a little more insight. I didn't say we'd lose our house after 6 weeks, or get our vehicles repossessed. I said we'd be HURTING. Let me clarify - we would have to make some serious (and probably painful) adjustments to our lives, and there would be stress in our marriage - I think regardless of income bracket, if your income takes a big hit, your lifestyle has to be adjusted and you'll experience stress in your relationships. We are both middle aged and both were divorced before. Divorce takes a big hit on your financial stability and we're in the process of rebuilding that. We have an aggressive savings plan because we don't believe that SS will be around when we really need it. We don't want to tap into our core savings.

And of COURSE if I lost my job, I would take a job anywhere I had to - including a part time job like yours. In fact that sounds pretty nice.

As for the "middle option" where you don't pay in more and don't get more - sorry, but this isn't my first rodeo. I do NOT believe Obama when he says only the very wealthy (those making over $250,000 a year) will be taxed more. During his campaign that number went from $250,000 to $200,000 to $150,000 - and the final figure was about $100,000!!!

There are not enough people in the United States who make over $250,000 a year to raise taxes on, to make up the difference with the OBSCENE "stimulus plan" figures out there.

No on begrudges you that. No one wants you to have to change your lifestyle. That's why I question whether you'd even be hurt by the higher taxes on "wealthy people". Either you're living beyond your means or you wouldn't have to pay more taxes.

No - YOU may not begrudge me. YOU amy not want me to have to change my lifestyle. That doesn't mean that others don't. There are plenty of people out there who would assume that because I have more than others, I should share my wealth - with the people THEY think I should share with, rather than the people I already DO share with.

Point is - if you make as little as you say you do, you will qualify for some serious deniro under Obama's plan. I won't. I will be paying more and getting less. That's called a redistribution of wealth. Simply put (and sorry for making this personal, but it IS personal to each of us) - you get the money I earned. I am subsidizing your lifestyle - whatever that lifestyle is. Personally I would prefer to share my wealth with people and causes of my own choosing. No offense meant. I'm sure you're a nice person. Frankly, I'd rather give my money to my own kids and grandkids, and to my own church and local causes.

Thanks for not begrudging my lifestyle or wanting me to change it - why would you? It's your cash cow.

Again, I thank you. You've managed to express what I've been wanting to express in another thread but couldn't find the correct words...

 

[Magic Man]

Have you ever lived in Europe by the way?

Only for about a month a few years ago, in France. My degree is in French.

As for the "middle option" where you don't pay in more and don't get more - sorry, but this isn't my first rodeo. I do NOT believe Obama when he says only the very wealthy (those making over $250,000 a year) will be taxed more. During his campaign that number went from $250,000 to $200,000 to $150,000 - and the final figure was about $100,000!!!

There are not enough people in the United States who make over $250,000 a year to raise taxes on, to make up the difference with the OBSCENE "stimulus plan" figures out there.

When did it go down below $250,000? The last I ever saw, that's the number that was given. Sure, it's possible that he could lower the number, but I'm not talking about if he lowers the number. That's a slippery slope argument. Obviously, it should only go so low. Anyway, even if he did, my wife and I together would still be well under the $100,000 bracket, although I don't think it should necessarily go that low.

I think you underestimate the amount of people who make that much money here. It's also not just about how many people make that much, but about how many of them make considerably more than that. Even if there are only 500,000 people who make $250,000+ a year, the average income of that group is probably more in the neighborhood of 4-6 million a year.

No - YOU may not begrudge me. YOU amy not want me to have to change my lifestyle. That doesn't mean that others don't. There are plenty of people out there who would assume that because I have more than others, I should share my wealth - with the people THEY think I should share with, rather than the people I already DO share with.

Well, sure, but I'm not concerned with them. No one here who is supporting Obama and his plan is begrudgin you that stuff.

Point is - if you make as little as you say you do, you will qualify for some serious deniro under Obama's plan. I won't. I will be paying more and getting less. That's called a redistribution of wealth. Simply put (and sorry for making this personal, but it IS personal to each of us) - you get the money I earned. I am subsidizing your lifestyle - whatever that lifestyle is. Personally I would prefer to share my wealth with people and causes of my own choosing. No offense meant. I'm sure you're a nice person. Frankly, I'd rather give my money to my own kids and grandkids, and to my own church and local causes.

See, now you're exaggerating. You're not subsidizing my lifestyle. It's not like I'll be paying any less, and since I have medical coverage already along with a roof over my head, and the other necessities along with a few minor luxuries. I personally won't benefit at all from rich people paying more taxes.

I'm srue you would rather share your money with your family and all, and you're welcome to do that if you make enough. However, I'm talking about sharing it with the whole country to make it a place where your children and grandchildren can be happy and educated. Either way it benefits them.

Thanks for not begrudging my lifestyle or wanting me to change it - why would you? It's your cash cow.

As I just showed, it's not my cash cow, and you're probably not even in the tax bracket that would get hit. Even if you are, it doesn't benefit me. It benefits people who can't afford insurance at all.

 

[Kathryn]

Wampus and I share one ten year old car and both work full time, so we would consider one of your vehicles "spare", especially if letting go of it could potentially save a life.

Believe me, if we could make it with one car, we would. However, my husband works about 70 hours a week in a three state area so that's not realistic for us.

If you're interested in saving a life, maybe you could be foster parents or adopt a child - or donate your time to a crisis pregnancy center. I am sure that most Americans could do more to "save a life," - you and me both. But to suggest that I'm choosing NOT to save a life by keeping my five year old car to drive to work is a bit far-fetched. I'm working to support my family.

 

[blackout]

Everybody is so wonderful and entitled doing what they're doing, aren't they.

Gotta get that fair share and look nice and righteously acceptable while doing it.

Whatever. You got stuff? Enjoy it. You want 5 cars? So what!
Go for it. Get what you want! Don't apologize.
You work hard for what you have? You have a great job/career?
You think you "deserve" what you have. Good for you.
Or maybe you just got it all handed to you. Who really cares?
It makes NO difference to me where your money came/comes from.
Don't play it down. Don't list your charities.
I hate that word "charity". Sorry Charity. :sorry1:
gawd forbid I should ever become someone's %10 "conscience appeasement".

Thanks no, please don't bother.
I'd rather do without.

 

[Kathryn]

Pardon me for being so bent out of shape about the tax issue - unlike some people in here, I am not getting a tax "return" (funny how some people get more tax "RETURNED" to them than they paid in!- REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH). My family is about to have to write a big fat check to Uncle Sam, for him to redistribute to someone else. That's AFTER we've already paid about a third of our income in taxes.

Please understand that the first ten days of every month, every penny that my family earns goes to taxes. Maybe it's the same in your family - maybe not. Just trying to put a little perspective into this.

So I get a little touchy when the topic of tax INCREASES comes up. To answer someone's question here - Obama and Biden BOTH lowered the definition of "wealthy" to under $150,000 a year just prior to election. Not sure what the stimulus package defines it as - as far as I know, no one's read the damn thing yet in order to tell us.

I'm not poor-mouthing - I know I have a comfortable life and I am very grateful for it. God's been good to us - PLUS I've worked my butt off. Both my husband and I come from working class families who instilled a strong work ethic in us.

We are also lucky enough to live in the greatest country in this world, in my opinion. My husband has worked in over 45 countries and lived in Scotland and Africa. I have lived in Germany and Japan and have also traveled extensively. When we say that based on what we've observed and experienced, the United States has the most credible system of government and the best opportunities in the world - we can say that with certainty.

This nation is far from perfect, but it's not the miasma of misery that so many people would have us believe.

I've seen socialism first hand, and I'll admit - it has some good points. But overall, it's a system that has fatal flaws. I want no part of it.

 

[Kathryn]

Kathryn, where in Europe did you live? You are the first American who has lived abroad who has ever suggested things are better in the US, so I would be very interested to hear more about your experience. What was your situation in Europe? What works better for you in the US? What aspects of the European system did you feel could have been solved by American-style (i.e. unregulated, untaxed) capitalism?

You think that life in America is unregulated and untaxed? I don't believe that's accurate, nor would I espouse such a system. Taxes and regulations are needed in society - I'm not opposed to either, in moderation.

I lived in Germany for three years. I lived there immediately following the fall of communism. I traveled extensively throughout Eastern Europe and saw first hand the devastating effects of communism on those countries.

I also saw the pros and cons of social democracy at work in Central Europe. Democratic socialism works OK in small, closed societies, where the majority of people have similar backgrounds, beliefs, work ethics, goals, etc. But Europe has had massive immigration from all over the world in the past 40 years - groups of people who have much higher birthrates, and who are disadvantaged in their new country because of lack of family ties, language barriers, etc. They flock to Europe because of the system of democratic socialism - they know they can get free healthcare, free rent, free food, free education, etc. Hardly any questions asked.

This huge influx of large and extended families into small groups of small families has created massive problems economically for France, Germany, Belgium, Austria, England, etc. The shrinking number of ethnic europeans who now must support a growing number of poor immigrants has crippled their economies.

If you think the US is in a recession - we've got nothing on most European countries, who are struggling more than we are right now.

I have some close friends who live are Belgian. They have been trying for years to move permanently to the US because they are so unhappy with the political and socioeconomic situation in Central Europe. The man is an international banker. In spite of the problems here in the US, he is emphatic in his belief that we are more equipped to overcome a recession than any of the European countries. This man speaks five languages - he could live anywhere - but he wants to live here.

I know this doesn't PROVE anything to you - but you asked my perspective so there it is.

 

[Smoke]

Hey Father_Heathen; you can pull all the historically revised crap you want - no other President in the US has tried to so fundamentally change the United States' core values than Obama has with "Private Sector income caps" and "nationalized health care".

There are so many things wrong with that statement that I hardly know where to begin, but the bizarre assertion that our current bloated and inefficient healthcare system represents one of our country's "core values" may be the most bizarre aspect of it.

 

[blackout]

I just love the way "God's been good" to some people...
and not others.

Kathryn I would happily send you my own pittance of a rebate
but my kids all need cavities filled and general cleanings...
and the dentist isn't working free this month.
(and my savings account is no more than a whopping $200 in the positive)

Perhaps next year?
You're at the top of my list.

I really hate to see people slighted.

 

[Kathryn]

I just love the way "God's been good" to some people...
and not others.

Violet - God is good, all the time, whether we understand His ways or not. This is my belief. My faith has been tested (and I am sure will be tested again). My life hasn't always been easy or comfortable. In fact, I've had my share of tragedy as well as daily grind. But my belief system includes this: "All things work together for good, for those who love God and are called according to His purpose." I held tightly to this belief when my life was falling apart - and that faith has been a lifesaver for me. I couldn't have gotten through some patches of my life without it.

Kathryn I would happily send you my own pittance of a rebate
but my kids all need cavities filled and general cleanings...
and the dentist isn't working free this month.
(and my savings account is no more than a whopping $200 in the positive)

There was a time in my life when I was a single mom with four kids receiving absolutely ZERO child support, and working full time -with no college degree and no company benefits. PLEASE do not assume that I can't empathise with your struggle - BEEN THERE DONE THAT.

Biggest rebate I ever got was about $300. At that point in my life the very idea of having ANYTHING in savings was laughable. I went nearly a year of my life with just $25 a week for groceries - hey, it was tight but we made it. I used my rebate to buy new tires so I could get to work.

I don't assume to understand your state of mind or every little thing about your situation, and I'm not judging you (though you seem very eager to judge me), I'm just telling you this in the hope that you will understand MY perspective - I really have had some difficult times financially - and emotionally - in my life.

But I refuse - absolutely REFUSED - to allow those events to make me a bitter woman. It would have been easy to become bitter, but I don't like bitter people, and I think that mindset would have diminished my effectiveness as a mother, and my attractiveness as a woman.

Perhaps next year?
You're at the top of my list.

Violet, there's no inherent nobility in being poor or needy. I hate to say this, but you're proving my point. I'd much rather my giving be to someone who might possibly appreciate it, rather than to someone who resents the good fortune and prosperity that I have slowly earned over the years. What do you want me to do - apologize for working to put my life back together again, and actually being successful at it?

Isn't it a common goal to better our lives? Isn't that one of your goals, for you and your children? Why are you angry that I've had some success with that?

See, that's exactly why I determined not to become bitter -it's a waste of energy - energy that I preferred ot direct toward putting my life back together again. Bitterness and hostility would have perhaps made me make less positive decisions.

I really hate to see people slighted.

I do too - but I'm being sincere when I say that, rather than sarcastic.

 

[blackout]

YOu don't get it Kathryn.
What I'm 'reacting' to.
It's not what you... or I ...
"have" or "don't have".

and I'm not bitter in the least about how I "compare" to others.
I'm just one of many millions in similar circumstances...
and aparantely with more to come as things get worse for everyone.

sometimes people have... sometimes they don't...
bills, taxes and everything easy come easy go.

I get tired of hearing people whine about it is all.
It's not attractive.

If you feel you are entitled to MORE money,
go and make more money I guess?
(it's all just a numbers game anyway. )

Is anyone out there "banking on" a "fair" world system?
lolol
Chin Up!

~Violet~

 

[blackout]

Kathryn,

I'm sorry honey,
if it seems that I have singled you out.

I'm just tired of hearing everyone freak out
about what they don't have, what they are entitled to,
what should be theirs, how it's all not fair.

And then when people who actually do HAVE
complain that they don't have more...
well my sympathies run low.
Sorry. I'm all out I guess.

You know, it all sucks...
and the problem is not "who is in office" this year
or what the tax bill is...

the problem is we as a mass people
allow a handful of banking families
to literally MAKE money from NOTHING
backed by nothing but the tradition of usurpery of a family name
and we PAY THEM INTEREST for it.... oiy
and allow them to run the whole damn world from behind the scenes.

So WHAT do we all expect.

Until the masses pull together...
this planet will continue to be one of slaves
run and ruled by a handful of elite.

This "he... she ... has more than me!
he... she ... took what's mine!
I'm entitled to it!" BS...
is exactly what keeps the human race
perpetually divided.

Sorry if I took my annoyance out on you.

Really it's best if we all just deal with the hand we are dealt,
and help one another by pulling together.
But I know, people really don't WANT to pull together....
and to be fair...
most of us are so resourced/stressed out...
we have very little left to even pool together with anyone else.

and who actually trusts anybody besides....

So there you go.
They win. We lose.
We are a people with no VISION of our own.
But why b*tch and complain and whine about it all.
It's so futile.

~Violet~

 

[Alceste]

You think that life in America is unregulated and untaxed? I don't believe that's accurate, nor would I espouse such a system. Taxes and regulations are needed in society - I'm not opposed to either, in moderation.

No, I suppose I meant relatively unregulated and untaxed when compared to other western nations, but I didn't say so. My bad!

I would like to know, though, if you believe in taxes and regulation "in moderation", what do you think those taxes should pay for, and what should be regulated?

Me, I have no objection at all if my taxes are used to feed the hungry or provide for sanitation, water management, public transport networks (including roads) universal education and health care, but deeply resent the use of my tax dollars for war and corporate welfare. I believe pollution, the guardianship of people's savings and pensions and the cost of housing should be regulated, but freedom of speech, association and substance use / abuse should not.

This huge influx of large and extended families into small groups of small families has created massive problems economically for France, Germany, Belgium, Austria, England, etc. The shrinking number of ethnic europeans who now must support a growing number of poor immigrants has crippled their economies.

With respect, most (informed) English people I meet recognize these immigrants are actually driving the economy. For example, I live in rural England, and all the food producers I know would be delighted to hire ethnic "locals" to pick potatoes, but the ethnic locals are not willing to work for the wages and working conditions the Eastern Europeans accept. They would prefer to look for work that pays a living wage, living with their parents while drawing unemployment benefits. (These are benefits that immigrants, myself included, do not have access to. In fact my working visa has "no access to public funds" stamped boldly across the face of it). Without the access to cheap Eastern European labour, the UK economy would collapse. (Faster).

If you think the US is in a recession - we've got nothing on most European countries, who are struggling more than we are right now.

Hmmm.... I would try to respond to this, but all I'd be doing is repeating what this guy said, and pointing out that if China gives up on you guys, all bets are off.

The man is an international banker. In spite of the problems here in the US, he is emphatic in his belief that we are more equipped to overcome a recession than any of the European countries. This man speaks five languages - he could live anywhere - but he wants to live here.

I am not surprised "international bankers" want to live in America right now, while the government is mortgaging the future of six generations to finance the excesses of the banking sector. Do little kids want to live next door to Santa Claus?

 

[The Voice of Reason]

There are so many things wrong with that statement that I hardly know where to begin, ...

You do realize that you could apply that statement to almost every post offered by Investocracy so far, don't you?