|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Sept 8, 2013 12:26:39 GMT
First and foremost we need to point out that this isn't an Obama Adminstration problem per se as it really began under the former Bush Adminstration and, in reality, even before that. Of course the problem is certainly getting worse in recent years starting in the final years of the Bush Adminstration and the current Obama Administration.
At the same time while the middle class is disappearing the rich are getting richer.
Not only do we need to address equitable taxation of the wealthy that have the lowest tax burden relative to income in the United States (addressed in other threads) but also the fact that the Federal Reserve is funding the growth in the wealth of the very rich while, with artifically low interest rates, it is literally stealing the income from millions of middle class American retirees that aren't receiving fair market value for the secure investments of their capital in financial instruments like T-Bills that are paying less than 1/3rd of what they should be paying in interest.
It's time for Americans to wake up to the fact that our government and the Federal Reserve are behind the collapse of the middle class in America. Both favor the wealthy over the worker and it's time for those fiscal policies to end.
|
|
|
|
Post by iolo on Sept 11, 2013 12:47:35 GMT
Very many Americans use 'middle class' simply to mean 'having a middle income' (between?) and assuming that makes people a 'class' when they don't see themselves as such, or act as such. Put it much more simply: the Americans who do any work are being robbed ragged by their capitalist masters, who have pretty well destroyed their unions, vastly increased the number of people in prisons, vastly increased the spy-apparatus and build up a sort of right-extremist horde of weirdoes, hugging their guns and waiting to be hurled against any form of democracy ('liberalism'). I think it will be very difficult to wake some of these persons up if they haven't noticed what's happening even yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Sept 11, 2013 13:52:47 GMT
Very many Americans use 'middle class' simply to mean 'having a middle income' (between?) and assuming that makes people a 'class' when they don't see themselves as such, or act as such. Put it much more simply: the Americans who do any work are being robbed ragged by their capitalist masters, who have pretty well destroyed their unions, vastly increased the number of people in prisons, vastly increased the spy-apparatus and build up a sort of right-extremist horde of weirdoes, hugging their guns and waiting to be hurled against any form of democracy ('liberalism'). I think it will be very difficult to wake some of these persons up if they haven't noticed what's happening even yet.
It is true that both Democrats and Republicans have abandoned classic liberalism as the foundation for government in the United States.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brewskier on Sept 12, 2013 4:51:43 GMT
The Middle class is a threat to the socialist/progressive movement. People are less likely to take part in the peasant's revolt when they have decent jobs, a mortgage, and a family at home. Progressivism has been at war with the middle class (while pretending to advocate for the middle class), in the hopes of making everyone desperate and angry enough to take part in the revolution that they want. This was all part of Marx's vision, and Obama's policies have been working to achieve that end.
If you think things are bad now, just wait until the majority of the country can no longer find a full time job and has to take 2-3 McJobs just to pay the rent. We can thank Obamacare and the Democrats. First Bill Clinton sent our manufacturing base to China, and now this.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Sept 12, 2013 11:57:36 GMT
The Middle class is a threat to the socialist/progressive movement. People are less likely to take part in the peasant's revolt when they have decent jobs, a mortgage, and a family at home. Progressivism has been at war with the middle class (while pretending to advocate for the middle class), in the hopes of making everyone desperate and angry enough to take part in the revolution that they want. This was all part of Marx's vision, and Obama's policies have been working to achieve that end. If you think things are bad now, just wait until the majority of the country can no longer find a full time job and has to take 2-3 McJobs just to pay the rent. We can thank Obamacare and the Democrats. First Bill Clinton sent our manufacturing base to China, and now this.
From the Republican side we have advocacy for preferential treatment of the wealthy in our tax codes where the super-wealthy have the lowest tax burden relative to income in the United States and they're benefiting enormously from this.
As noted in the OP the balance of the 5% of growth in American wealth is going to the other top 4% of wealthy Americans as the workers in America are actually earning less.
The demise of the Middle Class and the American Dream is predominately reflective of crony capitalism in the United State that is overwhelmingly supported by Republicans based upon a fundamental lie. Republicans falsely state that investors create jobs but this is false. Investors overwhelmingly invest in the secondary markets and none of this money benefits corporations (except investment firms). A purchase of Boeing stock, for example, on the stock market doesn't provide a single dime of revenue to Boeing for capital investments. It merely lines the pocket of the prior owner of the stock.
The top 5% of income earners in America have the lowest tax burden relative to income in the United States. A person earning minimum wage has a much higher tax burden relative to income than a person earning millions of dollars per year. It is a fact that needs to be addressed and I've done that in the Libertarianism forum with two threads where one addresses federal taxation and the other addresses state taxation which is far more draconian for low and middle income earners.
But this is, as noted, a bipartisan issue because Democrats and Republicans are both supporting crony capitalism that is resulting in the destruction of the American Dream and the Middle Class in the United States.
|
|
|
|
Post by iolo on Sept 12, 2013 12:13:17 GMT
Very many Americans use 'middle class' simply to mean 'having a middle income' (between?) and assuming that makes people a 'class' when they don't see themselves as such, or act as such. Put it much more simply: the Americans who do any work are being robbed ragged by their capitalist masters, who have pretty well destroyed their unions, vastly increased the number of people in prisons, vastly increased the spy-apparatus and build up a sort of right-extremist horde of weirdoes, hugging their guns and waiting to be hurled against any form of democracy ('liberalism'). I think it will be very difficult to wake some of these persons up if they haven't noticed what's happening even yet.
It is true that both Democrats and Republicans have abandoned classic liberalism as the foundation for government in the United States.Capitalists seldom bother with organising the mugs - they let their servants do that for them. |
|
|
|
Post by iolo on Sept 12, 2013 12:18:04 GMT
The Middle class is a threat to the socialist/progressive movement. People are less likely to take part in the peasant's revolt when they have decent jobs, a mortgage, and a family at home. Progressivism has been at war with the middle class (while pretending to advocate for the middle class), in the hopes of making everyone desperate and angry enough to take part in the revolution that they want. This was all part of Marx's vision, and Obama's policies have been working to achieve that end. If you think things are bad now, just wait until the majority of the country can no longer find a full time job and has to take 2-3 McJobs just to pay the rent. We can thank Obamacare and the Democrats. First Bill Clinton sent our manufacturing base to China, and now this. In terms of any useful political description, the middle class is that very small minority who are neither working for the capitalists or exploiting the labour of others. Peasants are a class pretty well extinct in advanced capitalist countries. How much Marx have you read, how recently? |
|
|
|
Post by niff on Sept 13, 2013 13:31:08 GMT
We must accept the fact that the geo-economy has changed. Sometimes the most seemingly simplistic explanation is the correct one.
It was inevitable that China and India would wake up and realize they had billions of half-starving people who were willing to do anything and be paid anything to prevent literal starvation. China: "This communist utopia' isn't working out so well. Apparently now every one wants to live like a 'Westerner'.
Suddenly millions of 'good paying jobs' were being performed by people delighted to make two bucks a day cranking out blue jeans. This is still the case. Yes yes times will change and the poor saps will be demanding three bucks a day but it will be decades before it costs the same to make the same quality blue jeans in China as it does in the US. By that time the 'middle class' will be long gone.
Homeostasis exists in the global economy just the same as in a plant leaf. The US had untold wealth in the beginning. This meant that any one with or with out an 'education' could prosper if they were willing to get up and go to their factory job. The unions screwed that up just at the time when manufacturing jobs were headed overseas.
As for the 'rich' that's what they are. How they got rich and how they are staying rich is beside the point. There's always been 'rich' people. A lot of them created the environment for a 'middle class' to exist. Whinning about why the 'rich' don't want their wealth 'redistributed' is useless. If you were filthy rich and a bunch of 'takers' wanted you to hand over your money would you? Correct. You'd be moving your money some where where Obama couldn't get his hands on it.
Nothing will ever 'make America great again'. Nothing. The party's over. Remember when every one had a few credit cards? Those pieces of plastic were/are the economic 'canary in the coal mine'. Credit cards are headed the way of the dodo bird in 'middle class' homes.
To sum up then. The geo-economic 'perfect storm' happened. China and India woke up just as the unions 'maxed out' their strong-hold on big business. Image being a union leader sitting at the negotiating table with a lamp manufacturer: "Manufacturer. We don't think we interested in negotiating with you anymore Bill. We've decided to move the company to Mambi. Say hello to Helen and the girls". At the same time the 'information age' meant the earth became flat economically. Mix in millions of illegals willing to work for peanuts or go on food stamps and you've got what you've got.
Check out some Youtubes of what poverty looks like in rural China today. That's what parts of the US will look like in a decade. Or you can check out parts of Detroit.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Sept 13, 2013 13:56:24 GMT
We must accept the fact that the geo-economy has changed.
The proposal does include an exemption from taxation for the first $50,000 of income from income taxes that everyone, rich and poor alike, would receive. It also dedicates the FICA/Payroll taxes on the first $50,000 in income to private investment accounts that build personal wealth and would lead to the privatization of "Social Security" where personal wealth accumulation eliminates the need for government welfare being provided by both the Social Security and Medicare welfare programs we have today.
Additionally I've also addressed State taxation in the same forum where low income workers have up to 14-times the tax burden relative to income when compared to high income individuals would be address based upon a "consumption tax with prebates" similar to what FairTax.org proposed for federal taxes. The difference being that the US Constitution doesn't allow a consumption tax while most state taxes are based upon consumption taxes (e.g. sales and/or property taxes).
The proposals I've made don't take anything from the wealthy per se because they only remove their preferential tax treatment that has always been unfair and based upon crony capitalism. In short if the wealthy are taxed the same as everyone else that is not a "take-away" from the wealthy but instead just a leveling of the playing field.
The proposals would also re-establish the middle class in America because they generate personal wealth for the individual as opposed to dependency on government welfare.
Simply addressing our tax codes can restore the Middle Class in America.
|
|
|
|
Post by niff on Sept 13, 2013 15:05:01 GMT
You are not addressing the FACT that in order for there to be a thriving 'middle class' there MUST be jobs which pay an income large enough to support the 'middle class' life style.
You must understand that when millions of 'middle class' jobs left they would never return. Once 'Mr. Lee' got the contract to make blue jeans for Wally-Mart do you really think he is just going to let it go?
You are discussing the result of what happens in a Capitalist system. Simply rearranging the chairs on the Titanic by 'redistributing the wealth' is never going to bring a single job back from Mr. Lee's factory.
The argument that if only every one made 100K a year serving fries is not realistic. All that model does is drive up the price of the fries. It's like playing with Monopoly money. Every one's a multi-millionaire.
|
|
|
|
Post by iolo on Sept 14, 2013 12:27:00 GMT
I've never quite understood what 'middle class' means in the US (and, increasingly, alas, here). It seems to mean 'any persons with an income between such arbitrary points as I choose to establish', and to have nothing to do with people's view of themselves or with what they are likely to do, so it seems a pretty useless noise to me. WORKING class, on the other hand, means 'working for a wage rather than living off property/capital and potentially able to overthrow the system that exploits them'. You might disagree with that idea, but it enables us to some extent to influence and predict behaviour as people are more or less brainwashed, whereas this 'middle' notion is just noise, surely?
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Sept 14, 2013 13:13:47 GMT
I've never quite understood what 'middle class' means in the US (and, increasingly, alas, here). It seems to mean 'any persons with an income between such arbitrary points as I choose to establish', and to have nothing to do with people's view of themselves or with what they are likely to do, so it seems a pretty useless noise to me. WORKING class, on the other hand, means 'working for a wage rather than off property/capital and potentially able to overthrow the system that exploits them'. You might disagree with that idea, but it enables us to some extent to influence and predict behaviour as people are more or less brainwashed, whereas this 'middle' notion is just noise, surely?
I would rely more on the understanding of the American Dream where, based upon the growth of wealth in American, each generation should be able to expect an improved standard of living when compared to their parents. When we study the distribution of wealth in America where 90% of the people are losing ground economically and cannot expect to have a higher standard of living when compared to their parents then the American Dream is lost. Only those in the top 10% are benefiting from the creation of new wealth in America over the last ten years based upon economic studies while the bottom 90% are actually losing their percentage of wealth related to the existing wealth in America.
There is obviously something wrong with this picture.
I also agree with the proposition that it's the "workers" that create the wealth and not the investors which is why I oppose the fact that the "investors" receive preferential tax treatment under our laws. An investor pays less than 1/2 of the taxes on the same income when compared to a worker in the United States. In fact, as I pointed out (somewhere) in 2011 I paid twice as much in federal taxes alone relative to my income when compared to a person with over 200-times my income (i.e, in a comparison between my taxes and Mitt Romney's that he publically disclosed).
How can it possibly be fair for me to pay twice as much in federal taxes relative to income (while I'm creating the wealth of America) when compared to someone else (that didn't create any actual wealth) and had over 200-times more in income?
The workers of America are unquestionably getting screwed because of our tax policies that under-tax the wealthy investors while over-taxing the workers and it is the tax codes that are primarily responsible for the loss of the American Dream for 90% of Americans as the "middle class" is evaporating before our eyes.
Before any other potential action needs to be taken the first thing that needs to be done is to change the laws so that those that can afford to pay taxes are the one's paying the taxes and that everyone has the identical tax burden relative to income for their taxable income. That is what I've proposed in my "tax" threads in the Libertarianism forum.
|
|
|
|
Post by niff on Sept 14, 2013 13:54:55 GMT
The 'middle class' is indeed evaporating. The reason is the 'good paying jobs' the middle class used to have have left for India and China. And they will never be coming back.....ever.
Grumbling about the tax laws is like pointless. A very small percent of tax payers pony up about 94% of the income tax revenue. About 50% of potential tax payers don't pay a nickel in income tax.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Sept 14, 2013 14:29:13 GMT
The 'middle class' is indeed evaporating. The reason is the 'good paying jobs' the middle class used to have have left for India and China. And they will never be coming back.....ever. Grumbling about the tax laws is like pointless. A very small percent of tax payers pony up about 94% of the income tax revenue. About 50% of potential tax payers don't pay a nickel in income tax.
The statement that the top income individuals pay the 94% of all forms of federal income taxes is false. FICA/Payroll taxes, that equal 15.3% of gross income of the person, are a federal income tax. Note that the "Payroll" tax is merely a tax on unreported income of the worker and is based upon the "reportable" gross income of the worker. FICA/Payroll taxes equal about 35%-40% of all Federal income tax revenues and wealthy investors have contributed next to nothing to this taxation as investments are not subjected to FICA/Payroll taxes. Very few investors pay 15.3% of their gross income in federal taxes while a minimum wage worker pays these taxes that are withheld from every single paycheck.
I actually looked up the tax codes and will provide an example of the disparity in taxation when we compare earned income to unearned income. A small business owner with a $100,000 net income pays about $35,000 in federal taxes on their income while an investor with $100,000 pays 10% or less in total federal taxes. Even Mitt Romney, with over $22 million in income only paid about 14% in federal taxes in 2011 according to his tax disclosure during his presidential bid. Under the current "Capital Gains" tax loophole a US citizen can literally have $100 million in annual income and pay zero in federal taxes if they shelter it in an offshore paper corporation.
When addressing state taxation it was documented that in WA state, where I live, a low income worker has 14-times the tax burden relative to income when compared to a high income individual.
Do the wealthy pay more per person in dollars in taxes? Absolutely but they can afford to pay more and they should not have a lower tax burden relative to income than those that earn less, EVER! Certainly those that have below average income cannot be expected to carry the tax burden of America because they can't afford it. The proposition that people living in poverty should be responsible for a higher tax burden relative to income that those with incomes above the average income is illogical and cannot be supported by any argument.
|
|
|
|
Post by niff on Sept 15, 2013 12:58:05 GMT
That's some fancy foot work.
I never suggested that anyone living in "poverty" should pay a nickel in taxes.
The fact is there will always be "wealthy" people in any society. How they got their wealth and what they do with it ought to be their business. I'd have thought a Libertarian would agree.
Rearranging the tax code to take more money from the wealthy and 'redistribute' to those less wealthy isn't going to solve anything in the long run visa vi the lose of a healthy 'middle class'.
Your ironic phrase "transition to a more service based economy" is code for: "The middle class who used to enjoy a relatively comfortable secure life are now faced with the fact that the only jobs going are low paying ones that do not allow our family to take the annual trip to Disneyland anymore. Instead that money has to go on food/rent/gas. And God help us if the wife ever gets laid off from her $12 an hour job." This is the 'new reality' for millions of people. Now they are working at Wendy's and they want to be paid the same wage as they used to get at the job they lost b/c the business moved to Mambi.
Bottom line: The US economy is in a race to the bottom. In a decade the 'wealthy' will still be wealthy. The members of the 'middle class' will be a very small club. Eighty percent of workers will be scratching along..........like the populations of second-world countries have for ever.
The part that secretly 'galls' so many Americans is they've been brought up believing in 'American Exceptionalism' and that 'other' people in 'other countries' really aren't smart enough to attain what every American has a right to. Namely a home, a new car every couple of years, a 'good paying' secure job (thanks to the union) and a trip for the family at Christmas. It's been all a warm fuzzy dream. But after about two hundred years it's 'waky waky' time.
|
|
