In case you have not noticed it yet, the deficits (which by their very existence are directly responsible for the National Debt) have been decreasing slowly but steadily since 2009. These same deficits are projected to become lower than the average of the deficits of the eight years of the GW Bush administration by the time president Obama leaves the presidency in 2016. Then the deficits are slated to get down to somewhere near zero by the year 2020 if nothing else interferes with the current projections of most economists. However, after that they could start back up if there are no moderate changes made to entitlement programs and defense spending. From what I have read this is not a direct result of either congressional or White House policies, but a result of natural economic changes in the country. But, it is happening, although perhaps more slowly than many would like.
I think he is trying to say that somehow the rich got an unfair advantage in the economy. The way I see it, anyone that saved some of what they made and invested it in the stock market is doing pretty well now.
My wife and I aren’t rich but we always set aside 10% to 20% of our income each year and invested in a diversified portfolio. We took a hit like everyone else when the stock market dropped but it came back and we are better off now then before the crash because we snapped up some really good bargains as people sold in a panic.
I live in the midwest and I’m not blind to the change in jobs available but I don’t see any shortage of work for people who work hard and invested in themselves through education and work experience.
The game isn’t rigged. The economy has always telegraphed that it will favor those who continue to increase their jobs skills, live within their means, and save for a rainy day. All the virtues that conservatives encourage lead to a situation that the progressives claim only occurs through being lucky.
The point of the strip is based in reality, so it’s no wonder Harley doesn’t get it. The benefits of Obama’s economic recovery have gone only to the richest 7%. The lower 93%, including the middle class and poor, lost a lot in housing values, and as the recovery has continued (with the stock market reaching record highs) the 93% have had their earnings and savings trickle away. There is a class war in America, and the rich have been winning for over 30 years. It does not bode well for the future. The expiration of the Bush tax cuts on the very rich was a step in the right direction, but it’s the ONLY step. The vast cuts and sequester vastly outweigh it with the damage to the country and its citizens.
Working hard and saving is not how most Americans get rich. Having a rich daddy is much more common. Didn’t you see the GOP’s celebration of “entrepreneurship” where they gave an award to the Koch brothers?
@ARodney – Let’s use your 93% for a moment. I haven’t checked the BLI of late but I’m pretty sure I am part of the 7 and not the 93.
What do you claim has been done to you that you feel you are under siege. I and most of the people with whom I associate make our living by going to work.
Are we accused of warfare because we spend less in local stores and more at Amazon?Are we accused of warfare because we reject a tax model that robs us of the fruits of our labor so that it can be distributed to those who can’t or won’t find a job?Are we accused of warfare because we are still doing well while others aren’t – Because we made better decisions?
It seems to me that the warfare is being waged by the “have nots” who vote for politicians that want to raise my taxes not to pay off the debt or to create infrastructure and security but to hand it out as largess in the form of: Welfare, Medicare, Foodstamps, Unemployment benefits, Free Phones, Social Security Disability and a host of others.
You didn’t get YOURS. I get that. But I have to ask – Do you really believe you are in your situation because “DA MAN” was holding you down? Or are you willing to be an adult and recognize the choices you made that put you in your current situation. And I challenge you to be more of an adult and start considering what you can change to put yourself on a better path.
I don’t know anyone that was born with a silver spoon in their mouth. And I don’t know anyone that didn’t make mistakes. In my experience what separates the successful from the unsuccessful is the willingness to learn from a mistake and make different decisions the next time.
It isn’t class warfare to say “I’m tired of seeing all my tax dollars go out as handouts.” It is Class warfare to assume that everyone doing well is there because they got an unfair advantage.
No, the rich got there by either inheriting, or profiting from tax loopholes. And you can’t tell me that some CEO works any harder than a single mother working two menial jobs and raising a family without the help of a nanny…
Some of us are not saying that we should punish the rich, but instead should make it easier for the less-well-off to do better. One way to do this would be to make health care truly available to everyone. Another would be to improve employability by getting rid of worthless drug laws, especially concerning marijuana.
I think we can all agree that the amount of time, energy, and effort expended on work can have very little impact on income. I think this is where people have problems with “the rich”. It’s not always about conscious choices.
@Nantucket – Those CEOs with their salaries that you decry have to answer to a board of directors that think they are worth that much. You show a woefully small knowledge of how corporations work. And I applaud any CEO that can get the same productivity from 5 workers that he got yesterday from 6. It shows that he is focusing on the bottom line and making his company more valuable (creating wealth for his shareholders).
My wife and I started our careers with $100 (literally between us but worked hard and scrimped and saved so that we could send our kids to college without them having to incur debts. And Still I think I WAS born on third base because my parents taught me: The value of the dollar, the value of hard work, and the wisdom to choose wise investments.
I work with people who were born into poverty but lifted themselves up using the same formula: Thrift, discipline, and hard work. I don’t look down on anybody because of the amount in their bank account. But I do look down on those who claim that they didn’t get a fair shot and therefor they are entitled to use the power of the federal government to loot the wealth of others. I sneer at those that think that by virtue of being born into America that they are somehow better judges of how the Koch brothers or Bill Gates, or Paris Hilton should distribute their wealth. Whether you do it with a gun or you use the Government’s tax authority, looting is morally wrong. You aren’t entitled to the wealth created by others.
Yes people have bad breaks and I see it all the time. I still judge a person by how they rise above their misfortune. You apparently judge them by how much you can loot from them.
The wealthy have the funds to make the laws to benefit them. If those laws happen to benefit others not so well off, then great, but the laws are going to be made anyway. And NO, I do not have the answer (even if there is one), but then neither does anyone else that posts on such forums as this one! Just keep on trucking, and hope for the best!!!
@lafayette – Check out my previous post. My wife and I wouldn’t be where we are today without good parents that taught us how to live within our means. I don’t claim that we created our life in a vaccuum.
But to carry your discussion line forward I have also helped many others. My wife and I contribute our time, money and knowledge to many worthy causes in the community as well.
What I resent is an attitude amongst some that they are entitled to Take from the rich because they don’t think they got treated fairly in the economy. The looting mentality.
@I Play One – I agree with you that we should make it easier for the poor to lift themselves out of poverty. Where you and I disagree is how that should be done. I also agree that we should do away with many of the drug laws along with a lot of other “morality” laws that repress one group to make another group happy.
Where you and I disagree is how making it easier should be done:
You suggest giving them all free health care – Again you would have to take that money from somewhere and it would be an effective transfer of wealth from one group to another.
I would argue the best way to help those less fortunate to lift themselves out of poverty is to stop transferring wealth to them and start using that money, instead, to improve infrastructure that will make our workers more competitive in the global market. Better: Roads, Communications Systems, reduced government red tape, streamline regulatory processes. All of those things would make CEOs consider creating more jobs in this country rather then someplace else.
And before the Tree huggers come out of the forest to scream you want to poison our rivers and air – I don’t advocate doing away with regulations but streamlining and clarifying the regulations in place so that you don’t have to go through 12 government agencies to start a business or create jobs.
Now, these are only the official number, and the actual are at least somewhat more admittedly. But the difference was far more under the Bush administration as the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan were NEVER paid for out of the official budget, especially during those six years when that administration also had a Republican majority in Congress. Those very high cost useless wars were paid for by “Supplemental Funding” bills introduced and passed by the Republican Congress, and signed into law by GW Bush. One of the main reasons why the deficits were so high early in president Obama’s administration is that he stopped that dishonest practice and placed ALL of the costs of these wars into the official federal budget. And one of the reasons why the deficits have been going down is that under president Obama’s administration these wars have been winding down. Let us hope that he does not get us involved in another Middle Eastern stupidity in Syria, at the very least!
By the way FYI the current deficit is now projected to be even less by the years 2017 (the last year that the official deficit will be under the Obama administration) that the official average of the GW Bush administration. Further projections show that the deficit could actually be either approaching zero, or actually zero itself by the year 2020 to 2024. After that , if we do not have some kind of moderate changes to both the entitlement programs and defense spending, they could go up again.
Sooooo. if you had some actual constructive and moderate suggestions about that particular future problems, then I would be happy to listen to you. But, in the meantime, how about getting away from the likes of conservative extremists such as Rush Limbaugh and FAUX NEWS for awhile…….
You must be like Romney’s campaign staffer who said "We’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.” Show us real numbers or admit you lied.
The deficit is increasing more slowly than GDP. Much like a mortgage, where you can afford a bigger mortgage if your income increases, we can run a larger dollar amount of deficit as long as GDP increases faster than the deficit.
Actually, most of the rich in this country got there by raping the land, either in the present generation or those past. This method is becoming rapidly deadly. Studies have shown that, if the public lands of the United States were rented at market price rather than at the ultra-low prices forced on the government by its corporate owners, NONE of the oil, gas or coal companies would be making a profit right now… and if those market rates were distributed to the citizenry of this country (who rightfully owns those public lands) on a per capita basis the way England or Alaska do with the natural resource rights that they sell, we’d be able to guarantee a modest but liveable basic income for everyone in the country. But that would mean the wealthy couldn’t steal it all, so they can’t let us do that. Someday people will realize it’s our land and not theirs, and they will be in serious trouble.
Pocket: A story reported locally today, but not anywhere nationally I could find, about fast food workers (in NY?) who were given their wages on a debit card, with fees for transactions, and a “lack of use” penalty, which effectively put wages below minimum wage. Don’t know if the employer was pinching pennies, or if he was convinced by a banker that this would be “good for the employees as well as the bottom line.” There’s a lawsuit, of course. I don’t blame them.
“Debt is Debt try to pay it off with you Percentage.”I guess it’s too hard for you to understand my point. For someone making $75,000 a year, a $1000 a month mortgage (should) be perfectly affordable. For someone making $15,000 a year, that $1,000 would be ruinous.You could at least find a chart that is adjusted for inflation. It’s still a steep slope, but the interesting thing is it shows the two Presidents who did the most damage were Reagan & Bush. Last time I checked, they were not trying to deal with an economy on the brink of a major depression.I suppose you want to go back to that tiny amount from 1900, as well as the complete rollback of the safety net. Let the oligarchs rule again & let the peons go back to dying around age 46. That takes care of our Social Security budget quite efficiently. It’s not really the dollar amount, it’s getting our future debt back in line with GDP. Our current, ongoing disaster is that our economy is growing without producing many jobs or gains in income for working class Americans.
The rich always drive the economy into a ditch when they get another tax break. They do not spend the extra money they receive from tax breaks, they hoard it. It is a gift they received but didn’t work for unless you call lobbying (buying) politicians work. In the 50’s the marginal tax rate for the wealthiest was 90% and the economy hummed along at 5% growth. In the 60’s the rich got a small break and the economy slowed down. Then Reagen gave them an unbelievable tax break and the economy went into the worst recession in 50 years. The Clinton raised the tax rate for the rich and the economy flourished. Bush again gave the rich a tax gift and they drove the economy into the ditch, yet again. Now Obama is trying to even the playing field and the economy is doing better.
This is simple cause and effect. High taxes on the rich means the economy improves because the government then spends the tax money on work for Americans. Low taxes on the rich means the economy crashes and they send their money off-shore where American workers get no benefit.
@Hawthorne – I really have to take exception with your claim that when the tax structure was different we didn’t have this kind of rampant poverty.
I was in High School in the 80s when Reagan took office and working in a local grocery store. There were plenty of people coming in back then with Food Stamps, Federal Government Welfare and SSDI checks. Most of them that came in to our store were able bodied and capable but they had convinced one government agency or another that it was cruel to expect them to work. I don’t know from what environment you were raised but in a small town everybody knows everybody else’s business whether they want to or not.
Regan was a Hero for taking many of those lazy shiftless people off the backs of hardworking taxpayers. He gets a bad rap from the progressives for being so mean but he recognized that no man can have a sense of self worth while excepting a handout from the government.
@All Progessives – (You know who you are)The posts above are Rife with people who claim that corporations are taking advantage of the workers and I say you are full of crap.
I am not a single annecdote of success in America. I go to work every day with thousands like me who invested in our future and now make a good living by working hard for our employer.
Workers are worth the wealth that they create for their business whether they are self employed or working for a mom and pop shop or working for a giant faceless corporation.
Is the owner of a company who puts in 80 – 100 hours a week in his business being taken advantage of by himself? NO!!! He is doing what it takes to keep his business moving forward and creating wealth.
Globalization is here to stay. You and I and everybody else must compete in a global market with workers who are happy to work long hours for less money then the average McDonalds worker in the US earns.
I’m like Thomas Jefferson in that I find that the harder I work the more good luck I seem to have. And I see that in my business, my community, in the schools my children attend. I’m really tired of you dismissing any success story as a one off annecdote.
The jobs are out there. If you want to earn a good living go to North Dakota. If you are willing to work hard you can get a job before your luggage comes down the carousel. Get an advanced degree – Unemployment amongst those with advanced degrees is less then 4%. Develop a skill that is in high demand.
If you won’t do that – At least recognize what your asking of the people who pay the taxes that fund your welfare, unemployment, ssdi, whatever. You are asking the government to enslave the workers to pay for your freebies. You are asking the workers to give up some of the fruits of their labours (voluntarily or involuntarily) so you won’t have to work. You can call it an entitlement, or your right, or your due but the GOVERNMENT DIDIN’T CREATE THAT WEALTH. THEY TOOK IT FROM SOMEONE WHO EARNED IT AND GAVE IT TO YOU.
Read Atlas Shrugged. Essentially the producers and the thinkers in this society have figured out how NOT to give up all of their earnings to the takers. And we are getting better and better at it. Jobs are going overseas because the governments there are less likely to steal from the producers. Atlas is shrugging Now!!!
OmqR-IV.0 almost 11 years ago
I don’t count 99 folks in that circle…
frodo1008 almost 11 years ago
In case you have not noticed it yet, the deficits (which by their very existence are directly responsible for the National Debt) have been decreasing slowly but steadily since 2009. These same deficits are projected to become lower than the average of the deficits of the eight years of the GW Bush administration by the time president Obama leaves the presidency in 2016. Then the deficits are slated to get down to somewhere near zero by the year 2020 if nothing else interferes with the current projections of most economists. However, after that they could start back up if there are no moderate changes made to entitlement programs and defense spending. From what I have read this is not a direct result of either congressional or White House policies, but a result of natural economic changes in the country. But, it is happening, although perhaps more slowly than many would like.
Mephistopheles almost 11 years ago
This one really troubles me too.
I think he is trying to say that somehow the rich got an unfair advantage in the economy. The way I see it, anyone that saved some of what they made and invested it in the stock market is doing pretty well now.
My wife and I aren’t rich but we always set aside 10% to 20% of our income each year and invested in a diversified portfolio. We took a hit like everyone else when the stock market dropped but it came back and we are better off now then before the crash because we snapped up some really good bargains as people sold in a panic.
I live in the midwest and I’m not blind to the change in jobs available but I don’t see any shortage of work for people who work hard and invested in themselves through education and work experience.
The game isn’t rigged. The economy has always telegraphed that it will favor those who continue to increase their jobs skills, live within their means, and save for a rainy day. All the virtues that conservatives encourage lead to a situation that the progressives claim only occurs through being lucky.
Stay in school kids!!!!
ARodney almost 11 years ago
The point of the strip is based in reality, so it’s no wonder Harley doesn’t get it. The benefits of Obama’s economic recovery have gone only to the richest 7%. The lower 93%, including the middle class and poor, lost a lot in housing values, and as the recovery has continued (with the stock market reaching record highs) the 93% have had their earnings and savings trickle away. There is a class war in America, and the rich have been winning for over 30 years. It does not bode well for the future. The expiration of the Bush tax cuts on the very rich was a step in the right direction, but it’s the ONLY step. The vast cuts and sequester vastly outweigh it with the damage to the country and its citizens.
ARodney almost 11 years ago
Working hard and saving is not how most Americans get rich. Having a rich daddy is much more common. Didn’t you see the GOP’s celebration of “entrepreneurship” where they gave an award to the Koch brothers?
Mephistopheles almost 11 years ago
@ARodney – Let’s use your 93% for a moment. I haven’t checked the BLI of late but I’m pretty sure I am part of the 7 and not the 93.
What do you claim has been done to you that you feel you are under siege. I and most of the people with whom I associate make our living by going to work.
Are we accused of warfare because we spend less in local stores and more at Amazon?Are we accused of warfare because we reject a tax model that robs us of the fruits of our labor so that it can be distributed to those who can’t or won’t find a job?Are we accused of warfare because we are still doing well while others aren’t – Because we made better decisions?
It seems to me that the warfare is being waged by the “have nots” who vote for politicians that want to raise my taxes not to pay off the debt or to create infrastructure and security but to hand it out as largess in the form of: Welfare, Medicare, Foodstamps, Unemployment benefits, Free Phones, Social Security Disability and a host of others.
You didn’t get YOURS. I get that. But I have to ask – Do you really believe you are in your situation because “DA MAN” was holding you down? Or are you willing to be an adult and recognize the choices you made that put you in your current situation. And I challenge you to be more of an adult and start considering what you can change to put yourself on a better path.
I don’t know anyone that was born with a silver spoon in their mouth. And I don’t know anyone that didn’t make mistakes. In my experience what separates the successful from the unsuccessful is the willingness to learn from a mistake and make different decisions the next time.
It isn’t class warfare to say “I’m tired of seeing all my tax dollars go out as handouts.” It is Class warfare to assume that everyone doing well is there because they got an unfair advantage.
Grow Up!!!
magicwalnut Premium Member almost 11 years ago
No, the rich got there by either inheriting, or profiting from tax loopholes. And you can’t tell me that some CEO works any harder than a single mother working two menial jobs and raising a family without the help of a nanny…
I Play One On TV almost 11 years ago
Some of us are not saying that we should punish the rich, but instead should make it easier for the less-well-off to do better. One way to do this would be to make health care truly available to everyone. Another would be to improve employability by getting rid of worthless drug laws, especially concerning marijuana.
I think we can all agree that the amount of time, energy, and effort expended on work can have very little impact on income. I think this is where people have problems with “the rich”. It’s not always about conscious choices.
Mephistopheles almost 11 years ago
@Nantucket – Those CEOs with their salaries that you decry have to answer to a board of directors that think they are worth that much. You show a woefully small knowledge of how corporations work. And I applaud any CEO that can get the same productivity from 5 workers that he got yesterday from 6. It shows that he is focusing on the bottom line and making his company more valuable (creating wealth for his shareholders).
My wife and I started our careers with $100 (literally between us but worked hard and scrimped and saved so that we could send our kids to college without them having to incur debts. And Still I think I WAS born on third base because my parents taught me: The value of the dollar, the value of hard work, and the wisdom to choose wise investments.
I work with people who were born into poverty but lifted themselves up using the same formula: Thrift, discipline, and hard work. I don’t look down on anybody because of the amount in their bank account. But I do look down on those who claim that they didn’t get a fair shot and therefor they are entitled to use the power of the federal government to loot the wealth of others. I sneer at those that think that by virtue of being born into America that they are somehow better judges of how the Koch brothers or Bill Gates, or Paris Hilton should distribute their wealth. Whether you do it with a gun or you use the Government’s tax authority, looting is morally wrong. You aren’t entitled to the wealth created by others.
Yes people have bad breaks and I see it all the time. I still judge a person by how they rise above their misfortune. You apparently judge them by how much you can loot from them.
still the mom almost 11 years ago
Love the comment in the corner
frodo1008 almost 11 years ago
The wealthy have the funds to make the laws to benefit them. If those laws happen to benefit others not so well off, then great, but the laws are going to be made anyway. And NO, I do not have the answer (even if there is one), but then neither does anyone else that posts on such forums as this one! Just keep on trucking, and hope for the best!!!
I Play One On TV almost 11 years ago
Either I didn’t make my point well, or you missed it. I apologize in either case.
Mephistopheles almost 11 years ago
@lafayette – Check out my previous post. My wife and I wouldn’t be where we are today without good parents that taught us how to live within our means. I don’t claim that we created our life in a vaccuum.
But to carry your discussion line forward I have also helped many others. My wife and I contribute our time, money and knowledge to many worthy causes in the community as well.
What I resent is an attitude amongst some that they are entitled to Take from the rich because they don’t think they got treated fairly in the economy. The looting mentality.
Mephistopheles almost 11 years ago
@I Play One – I agree with you that we should make it easier for the poor to lift themselves out of poverty. Where you and I disagree is how that should be done. I also agree that we should do away with many of the drug laws along with a lot of other “morality” laws that repress one group to make another group happy.
Where you and I disagree is how making it easier should be done:
You suggest giving them all free health care – Again you would have to take that money from somewhere and it would be an effective transfer of wealth from one group to another.
I would argue the best way to help those less fortunate to lift themselves out of poverty is to stop transferring wealth to them and start using that money, instead, to improve infrastructure that will make our workers more competitive in the global market. Better: Roads, Communications Systems, reduced government red tape, streamline regulatory processes. All of those things would make CEOs consider creating more jobs in this country rather then someplace else.
And before the Tree huggers come out of the forest to scream you want to poison our rivers and air – I don’t advocate doing away with regulations but streamlining and clarifying the regulations in place so that you don’t have to go through 12 government agencies to start a business or create jobs.
frodo1008 almost 11 years ago
Do not like dealing much in facts, now do you? Here are the official federal deficits for the last few years:
Obama DeficitsBush DeficitsFY 2014*: $744 billionFY 2009†: $1,413 billionFY 2013*: $973 billionFY 2008: $458 billionFY 2012: $1,087 billionFY 2007: $161 billionFY 2011: $1,300 billionfor more years click here.FY 2010: $1,294 billion
Now, these are only the official number, and the actual are at least somewhat more admittedly. But the difference was far more under the Bush administration as the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan were NEVER paid for out of the official budget, especially during those six years when that administration also had a Republican majority in Congress. Those very high cost useless wars were paid for by “Supplemental Funding” bills introduced and passed by the Republican Congress, and signed into law by GW Bush. One of the main reasons why the deficits were so high early in president Obama’s administration is that he stopped that dishonest practice and placed ALL of the costs of these wars into the official federal budget. And one of the reasons why the deficits have been going down is that under president Obama’s administration these wars have been winding down. Let us hope that he does not get us involved in another Middle Eastern stupidity in Syria, at the very least!
By the way FYI the current deficit is now projected to be even less by the years 2017 (the last year that the official deficit will be under the Obama administration) that the official average of the GW Bush administration. Further projections show that the deficit could actually be either approaching zero, or actually zero itself by the year 2020 to 2024. After that , if we do not have some kind of moderate changes to both the entitlement programs and defense spending, they could go up again.
Sooooo. if you had some actual constructive and moderate suggestions about that particular future problems, then I would be happy to listen to you. But, in the meantime, how about getting away from the likes of conservative extremists such as Rush Limbaugh and FAUX NEWS for awhile…….
dairyman23 almost 11 years ago
You must be like Romney’s campaign staffer who said "We’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers.” Show us real numbers or admit you lied.
Uncle Joe Premium Member almost 11 years ago
The deficit is increasing more slowly than GDP. Much like a mortgage, where you can afford a bigger mortgage if your income increases, we can run a larger dollar amount of deficit as long as GDP increases faster than the deficit.
danketaz Premium Member almost 11 years ago
the rich got there by ripping off those who work hard and save. sadly, something the 99% can’t figure out.
PocketNaomi almost 11 years ago
Actually, most of the rich in this country got there by raping the land, either in the present generation or those past. This method is becoming rapidly deadly. Studies have shown that, if the public lands of the United States were rented at market price rather than at the ultra-low prices forced on the government by its corporate owners, NONE of the oil, gas or coal companies would be making a profit right now… and if those market rates were distributed to the citizenry of this country (who rightfully owns those public lands) on a per capita basis the way England or Alaska do with the natural resource rights that they sell, we’d be able to guarantee a modest but liveable basic income for everyone in the country. But that would mean the wealthy couldn’t steal it all, so they can’t let us do that. Someday people will realize it’s our land and not theirs, and they will be in serious trouble.
edward thomas Premium Member almost 11 years ago
Pocket: A story reported locally today, but not anywhere nationally I could find, about fast food workers (in NY?) who were given their wages on a debit card, with fees for transactions, and a “lack of use” penalty, which effectively put wages below minimum wage. Don’t know if the employer was pinching pennies, or if he was convinced by a banker that this would be “good for the employees as well as the bottom line.” There’s a lawsuit, of course. I don’t blame them.
Uncle Joe Premium Member almost 11 years ago
“Debt is Debt try to pay it off with you Percentage.”I guess it’s too hard for you to understand my point. For someone making $75,000 a year, a $1000 a month mortgage (should) be perfectly affordable. For someone making $15,000 a year, that $1,000 would be ruinous.You could at least find a chart that is adjusted for inflation. It’s still a steep slope, but the interesting thing is it shows the two Presidents who did the most damage were Reagan & Bush. Last time I checked, they were not trying to deal with an economy on the brink of a major depression.I suppose you want to go back to that tiny amount from 1900, as well as the complete rollback of the safety net. Let the oligarchs rule again & let the peons go back to dying around age 46. That takes care of our Social Security budget quite efficiently. It’s not really the dollar amount, it’s getting our future debt back in line with GDP. Our current, ongoing disaster is that our economy is growing without producing many jobs or gains in income for working class Americans.
Crash Casey almost 11 years ago
The rich always drive the economy into a ditch when they get another tax break. They do not spend the extra money they receive from tax breaks, they hoard it. It is a gift they received but didn’t work for unless you call lobbying (buying) politicians work. In the 50’s the marginal tax rate for the wealthiest was 90% and the economy hummed along at 5% growth. In the 60’s the rich got a small break and the economy slowed down. Then Reagen gave them an unbelievable tax break and the economy went into the worst recession in 50 years. The Clinton raised the tax rate for the rich and the economy flourished. Bush again gave the rich a tax gift and they drove the economy into the ditch, yet again. Now Obama is trying to even the playing field and the economy is doing better.
This is simple cause and effect. High taxes on the rich means the economy improves because the government then spends the tax money on work for Americans. Low taxes on the rich means the economy crashes and they send their money off-shore where American workers get no benefit.
Wake up
Mephistopheles almost 11 years ago
@Hawthorne – I really have to take exception with your claim that when the tax structure was different we didn’t have this kind of rampant poverty.
I was in High School in the 80s when Reagan took office and working in a local grocery store. There were plenty of people coming in back then with Food Stamps, Federal Government Welfare and SSDI checks. Most of them that came in to our store were able bodied and capable but they had convinced one government agency or another that it was cruel to expect them to work. I don’t know from what environment you were raised but in a small town everybody knows everybody else’s business whether they want to or not.
Regan was a Hero for taking many of those lazy shiftless people off the backs of hardworking taxpayers. He gets a bad rap from the progressives for being so mean but he recognized that no man can have a sense of self worth while excepting a handout from the government.
Mephistopheles almost 11 years ago
@All Progessives – (You know who you are)The posts above are Rife with people who claim that corporations are taking advantage of the workers and I say you are full of crap.
I am not a single annecdote of success in America. I go to work every day with thousands like me who invested in our future and now make a good living by working hard for our employer.
Workers are worth the wealth that they create for their business whether they are self employed or working for a mom and pop shop or working for a giant faceless corporation.
Is the owner of a company who puts in 80 – 100 hours a week in his business being taken advantage of by himself? NO!!! He is doing what it takes to keep his business moving forward and creating wealth.
Globalization is here to stay. You and I and everybody else must compete in a global market with workers who are happy to work long hours for less money then the average McDonalds worker in the US earns.
I’m like Thomas Jefferson in that I find that the harder I work the more good luck I seem to have. And I see that in my business, my community, in the schools my children attend. I’m really tired of you dismissing any success story as a one off annecdote.
The jobs are out there. If you want to earn a good living go to North Dakota. If you are willing to work hard you can get a job before your luggage comes down the carousel. Get an advanced degree – Unemployment amongst those with advanced degrees is less then 4%. Develop a skill that is in high demand.
If you won’t do that – At least recognize what your asking of the people who pay the taxes that fund your welfare, unemployment, ssdi, whatever. You are asking the government to enslave the workers to pay for your freebies. You are asking the workers to give up some of the fruits of their labours (voluntarily or involuntarily) so you won’t have to work. You can call it an entitlement, or your right, or your due but the GOVERNMENT DIDIN’T CREATE THAT WEALTH. THEY TOOK IT FROM SOMEONE WHO EARNED IT AND GAVE IT TO YOU.
Read Atlas Shrugged. Essentially the producers and the thinkers in this society have figured out how NOT to give up all of their earnings to the takers. And we are getting better and better at it. Jobs are going overseas because the governments there are less likely to steal from the producers. Atlas is shrugging Now!!!