Class Warfare!!

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,779
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
Republicans are good at code word and slogans designed to divide and conquer. The term "class warfare" is deliberately designed to put in the minds of people some imaginary battle between so-called "haves" and "have-nots".

Problem being, those who imagine themselves as being among the haves, historically rally around "causes" (if I may associate so noble a word with so base a notion) that benefit them to no end because in reality they are NOT, sort of like how masses of poor Southerners rallied around "the Cause" to preserve their "way of life"... a way that most of them personally never benefited from.

In like fashion, even though MOST Americans fall into that "class" of people who have the most to lose from the Republican plan, they imagine themselves to be of the other class (the wealthy) if for no other reason than to disassociate themselves from those of lesser means.

It's really a connivingly clever if disingenuous means of MAKING class warfare out of something that is not, unless you consider 1% of the population worthy of being characterized as such.

Still many will buy into the con and run out to support conservative candidates who really couldn't give a flying fuck about them. They're out there trying to stick it to some imaginary "those people" even after they come to the realization that they too are among "those people".

But hey, not every day one gets to fuck themselves, eh?
 
Last edited:

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
341
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Thats why I wasted the time to say "federal income taxes"

Well.........with those on minimum wage salaries paying the taxes I did mention --- just how much of their $7.25 per hour wage do you think they SHOULD have to pay in Federal Taxes??? As you well know --- the reason a lot of people DON"T pay FIT is that they don't earn ENOUGH in a graduated income tax system!
 
D

deleted213967

Guest
Well.........with those on minimum wage salaries paying the taxes I did mention --- just how much of their $7.25 per hour wage do you think they SHOULD have to pay in Federal Taxes??? As you well know --- the reason a lot of people DON"T pay FIT is that they don't earn ENOUGH in a graduated income tax system!

If we in the US are indeed so :tragedy: dirt poor that half the citizenry cannot do its "fair share" to support the federal government, shouldn't we downgrade ourselves to "Third World" position and live within our modest means?


 

Upperdown

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2011
Posts
198
Media
0
Likes
21
Points
163
Really? I'm suggesting that it is no more unfair that people pay different tax rates than that they get different pay rates. There is no justification for the wild difference in pay rates which currently exist. Those with the power to do so have given themselves huge pay rises.


There absolutely is justification.

Wildly different pay rates aren't a new invention, and they existed in every country that tried to be "fair."

Some skills are not in demand, some skills are. I work around a lot of software developers. Your average man off the street cannot walk in and write the software we need. Thus, they get paid $65/hour. They had to invest heavily in themselves in order to get their job.

On the other hand, just about anyone off the street can empty our trash, thus they get paid $10/hour. There was no investment in themselves, no dilligent creation of skills; you just walk up, pick the can up, empty it, and set it down. Easy. There are FAR more people capable of only emptying the trash than there are of coming up with software solutions.

School is out.
 

Upperdown

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2011
Posts
198
Media
0
Likes
21
Points
163
Well.........with those on minimum wage salaries paying the taxes I did mention --- just how much of their $7.25 per hour wage do you think they SHOULD have to pay in Federal Taxes??? As you well know --- the reason a lot of people DON"T pay FIT is that they don't earn ENOUGH in a graduated income tax system!

Personally, I think they should have to pay nothing in income taxes. They should only have to pay taxes when they decide to purchase items. That way there is a built in incentive to be more frugal with your money if you have none. The taxes on food, gas, ect would contribute minimally to the areas of defense, police, ect.

What a world we would live in if they said "we have too many people saving too much." In stead, the government forces peoples money from them, then forces them to rely on the government to get it back. Quite literally, the mob came up with half the ideas the government implimented. Couldn't even do their own dirty work.
 

2_fister

Sexy Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2011
Posts
380
Media
49
Likes
59
Points
173
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Republicans are good at code word and slogans designed to divide and conquer. The term "class warfare" is deliberately designed to put in the minds of people some imaginary battle between so-called "haves" and "have-nots".

Problem being, those who imagine themselves as being among the haves, historically rally around "causes" (if I may associate so noble a word with so base a notion) that benefit them to no end because in reality they are NOT, sort of like how masses of poor Southerners rallied around "the Cause" to preserve their "way of life"... a way that most of them personally never benefited from.

In like fashion, even though MOST Americans fall into that "class" of people who have the most to lose from the Republican plan, they imagine themselves to be of the other class (the wealthy) if for no other reason than to disassociate themselves from those of lesser means.

It's really a connivingly clever if disingenuous means of MAKING class warfare out of something that is not, unless you consider 1% of the population worthy of being characterized as such.

Still many will buy into the con and run out to support conservative candidates who really couldn't give a flying fuck about them. They're out there trying to stick it to some imaginary "those people" even after they come to the realization that they too are among "those people".

But hey, not every day one gets to fuck themselves, eh?

well said.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Some skills are not in demand, some skills are. I work around a lot of software developers. Your average man off the street cannot walk in and write the software we need. Thus, they get paid $65/hour. They had to invest heavily in themselves in order to get their job.
And supposing they were unable to invest in themselves because daddy did not have enough money to send them to college. Is that fair?

On the other hand, just about anyone off the street can empty our trash, thus they get paid $10/hour. There was no investment in themselves, no dilligent creation of skills;
Really? they didnt spend 20 years learning to walk, balance, get strong? How many 50 year olds in the population could really stop working in their office and survive spending their day emptying trash? I'd say to you the great majority of the population is incapable of doing this job.

There are FAR more people capable of only emptying the trash than there are of coming up with software solutions.
true. Why? In the Uk there has been a great increase in university education in recent years, yet there remain skills shortages. Lots of money spent on educating people but not about subjects which would allow them to make money. How did this happen? Had those people been taught programming then there would be more of them than dustmen and they should be paid accordingly. Oh...maybe that is why they were not trained? It suits software engineers not to train new software engineers?
 

liberalcynic

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Mar 23, 2007
Posts
249
Media
6
Likes
431
Points
393
Location
Sydney (New South Wales, Australia)
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
If we in the US are indeed so :tragedy: dirt poor that half the citizenry cannot do its "fair share" to support the federal government, shouldn't we downgrade ourselves to "Third World" position and live within our modest means?

As it so happens, that is exactly the current Republican agenda.
 

Upperdown

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2011
Posts
198
Media
0
Likes
21
Points
163

Upperdown

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2011
Posts
198
Media
0
Likes
21
Points
163
And supposing they were unable to invest in themselves because daddy did not have enough money to send them to college. Is that fair?
Jealousy rears its ugly head.

There was a time, that is before the government decided to guarantee loans for college, that people worked their way through school. I personally know several developers that are self taught. If you talk to developers they will tell you that 90% of their education was a complete waste of time. They learned by doing, over and over and over. They worked really hard to get where they are but, your hate, greed, and jealousy won't let you see that. For some reason they work really hard to figure out Agile, and you deserve the fruits of their labor. You don't, its theft. You know what I used to do? Unclog toilets. My parentd didn't have money to put me through school so I attended a satalite campus of a crappy school that was very cheap. I later moved to a community college, then a university. At no time was my tuition so I high that I couldn't pay for it by working at my toilet unclogging job. To ice the cake for you: I unclogged rich peoples toilets. Yep, at a resort. Out of the 300+ employees I worked around every day, I was the only one I knew that was going to college. The rest just wanted to sit on their ass.

Really? they didnt spend 20 years learning to walk, balance, get strong? How many 50 year olds in the population could really stop working in their office and survive spending their day emptying trash? I'd say to you the great majority of the population is incapable of doing this job.
This is a typical liberal tactic: add things that are completely irrelevant. If someone creates a standard of living that is too high to be supported on a minimum wage job, then loses their high paying job, they have to change thier standard of living. This, in no way, has a bearing on if they would be capable of doing the job. Your red herring was pointless.

The fact stands, the mass majority of the population can empty trash.

true. Why? In the Uk there has been a great increase in university education in recent years, yet there remain skills shortages. Lots of money spent on educating people but not about subjects which would allow them to make money. How did this happen? Had those people been taught programming then there would be more of them than dustmen and they should be paid accordingly. Oh...maybe that is why they were not trained? It suits software engineers not to train new software engineers?
Are you joking? This must be sarcasm.

Those people chose their majors. Just like in the United States there is a major shortage of quality developers (one reason they go to India). Yet, we still have people majoring in absolutely worthless majors like political science, sociology, western history, ect. Why?
1) Engineering, chemistry (which pays like crap unless you get a doctorate), software development, finance, ect are hard. Its much easier to be lazy, as we reward lazy in this society.

2) the government created moral hazard by guaranteeing the loans, subsidizing colleges, and running campaigns that say "go to college, get rich."

3) Colleges actively mislead students into believing that worthless majors have viable career paths. Why? Money, of course. College kids are like baby duckies walking around with massive, government guaranteed, credit lines.
 
3

302259

Guest
Are you saying that the left doesn't worship at the alter of the Democrats? That they don't have an agenda that is passed down from the 'elites'?

By "bat shit crazy" you mean "doesn't share my outlook"?
No he means bat shit crazy, mitt romney doesn't share my outlook
 

Calboner

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Posts
9,024
Media
29
Likes
7,717
Points
433
Location
USA
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Concerning "bat-shit crazy": William Kristol, The Weekly Standard, September 23, 2011:
THE WEEKLY STANDARD’s official reaction to last night’s Republican presidential debate: Yikes.

Reading the reactions of thoughtful commentators after the stage emptied, talking with conservative policy types and GOP political operatives later last evening and this morning, we know we’re not alone. Most won’t express publicly just how horrified—or at least how demoralized—they are. After all, they still want to beat Obama—as do we. And they want to get along with the possible nominee and the other candidates and their supporters. They don’t want to rock the boat too much. But maybe the GOP presidential boat needs rocking.

The e-mails flooding into our inbox during the evening were less guarded. Early on, we received this missive from a bright young conservative: “I'm watching my first GOP debate...and WE SOUND LIKE CRAZY PEOPLE!!!!”
In fairness, the "bright young conservative" doesn't say that the Republican presidential candidates are crazy, just that they sound as though they are.
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
^ Anyone who didn't know they are 'bat shit' crazy after they threatened to put the world's largest creditor in default last month must be living in a cave. They are all loons because the base has all gone over the cliff with a rabid hatred of Obama and his wife just as they did with Bill and Hillary.
 

Upperdown

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2011
Posts
198
Media
0
Likes
21
Points
163
Concerning "bat-shit crazy": William Kristol, The Weekly Standard, September 23, 2011:
In fairness, the "bright young conservative" doesn't say that the Republican presidential candidates are crazy, just that they sound as though they are.

I couldn't care less if some people are so closed minded that they think others, who don't agree with them, sound "crazy." Which, by the way, means absolutely nothing. How crazy does this sound: We'll raise taxes and improve the economic output of our country. Not only is that impossible, it is horrifically stupid. But, is it crazy? No. Its guided by political agenda. Maybe I've just spend a lot more time following these issues than the people on this board, but I don't even think the liberals are crazy. They are just horribly, horribly, horribly misguided and indoctrinated.
 

B_enzia35

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Posts
863
Media
0
Likes
16
Points
53
Location
Texas
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
The Sugar Act during the colonial times lowered taxes on molasses. Can you imagine what happened?
*hint, tax revenue went up. Oh drat, that was the answer. Not that liberals would have come up with it.
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,237
Media
213
Likes
31,759
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
The Sugar Act during the colonial times lowered taxes on molasses. Can you imagine what happened?
*hint, tax revenue went up. Oh drat, that was the answer. Not that liberals would have come up with it.
Do you actually believe that lowering taxes will raise revenues?
How much EXTRA revenue have the Bush Tax Cuts brought in over the years they've been in effect?
 

Klingsor

Worshipped Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Posts
10,888
Media
4
Likes
11,638
Points
293
Location
Champaign (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
80% Straight, 20% Gay
Gender
Male
The Sugar Act during the colonial times lowered taxes on molasses. Can you imagine what happened?
*hint, tax revenue went up. Oh drat, that was the answer. Not that liberals would have come up with it.

It's not that simple. The Sugar Act was implemented in 1764 in the expectation of a much greater demand for molasses and rum, sparked by the aftermath of the French and Indian War and the new acquisition of Canada. With that surge in demand, tax revenues would have increased even without the act's passage.

Also, the act cut taxes in half, but also provided for greater enforcement of collections. (If you're willing to make a similar tradeoff today--i.e., eliminate individual and corporate loopholes--I might consider your plan.)

It's ironic that you choose the Sugar Act as your exemplary case, since it was very unpopular in the colonies and was part of that growing resentment against British rule that eventually led to the American Revolution.

Finally, what's really interesting is that you have to go all the way back to colonial times to support your Laffer Curve argument.