War on The Rich: Dumbest Idea in History of Man

[RKMBrown]

RKM, how's this new format working out for ya?? LMAO. You haven't been drinkinghaveya?

New format's fine for me. Course I use filters to remove all the extra BS.

I drink all the time, don't you?

 

[Dad2three]

And the cut and paste propaganda continues in the war you cannot win against the enemy you'll never defeat. Democrats, able to get the most unqualified man in the history of the presidency elected and re-elected, able to secure majorities and supermajorities in both houses of congress, can ram through massive tax increases without any republican votes... but you can't win the war on the rich. In spite of all your efforts, in spite of having all the good little socialist warriors out there posting propaganda and lamenting the virtues of Marxism, the war is as dismal as it has ever been. The rich just keep on getting richer.

Oh the humanity... Occupiers in every major city, sit ins and protests galore, news media in your back pocket cheering you on, activist courts packed with your minions, powerful labor unions backing your play, 47% of the dependent class in your corner... and yet... the rich keep on getting richer, year in and year out, as your war efforts FAIL miserably. ...Poor shmucks!

Got it, YOU believe in MYTHS AND FAIRY TALES


The Myth of Democratic Super Majority.

One of the standard Republican talking points is that the Democrats had a filibuster-proof, super majority for two years between 2008 and 2010. This talking point is usually trotted out when liberals complain that the Republicans filibustered virtually every piece of legislation proposed by Obama or the Democrats during Obama’s presidency. The implication is that Democrats had ample opportunity to pass legislation and that the reason they didn’t pass more legislation doesn’t have anything to do with the Republicans.

It is also used to counter any argument that Republican legislation, (passed during the six years of total Republican control,) has anything to do with today’s problems. They claim that the Democrats had a super majority for two years and passed all kinds of legislation, (over Republican objection and filibuster,) that completely undid all Republican policies and legislation, and this absolves them from today’s problems.

The Truth is that the Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 60 working days during that period, insufficient time to undo even a small portion of the legislation passed during six years of Republican control. Here are the details:

 

[Dad2three]

Why is it that the whiners here refuse to see any but the most extreme examples of success?

There are many many people who start with little who rise substantially above their circumstances.

Certainly rising from the bottom 20% to the top 20% is success is it not?

Considering that to be in the top 20% of earners one only has to make about 70K a year why is it you people all seem to think that it's impossible?

The myth of the American Dream

The American Dream is supposed to mean that through hard work and perseverance, even the poorest people can make it to middle class or above. But it's actually harder to move up in America than it is in most other advanced nations.

It's easier to rise above the class you're born into in countries like Japan, Germany, Australia, and the Scandinavian nations

America s economic mobility myth - Dec. 9 2013


Harder for Americans to Rise From Lower Rungs

But many researchers have reached a conclusion that turns conventional wisdom on its head: Americans enjoy less economic mobility than their peers in Canada and much of Western Europe. The mobility gap has been widely discussed in academic circles, but a sour season of mass unemployment and street protests has moved the discussion toward center stage.

Former Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, a Republican candidate for president, warned this fall that movement “up into the middle income is actually greater, the mobility in Europe, than it is in America.” National Review, a conservative thought leader, wrote that “most Western European and English-speaking nations have higher rates of mobility.” Even Representative Paul D. Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican who argues that overall mobility remains high, recently wrote that “mobility from the very bottom up” is “where the United States lags behind.”

Liberal commentators have long emphasized class, but the attention on the right is largely new.

“It’s becoming conventional wisdom that the U.S. does not have as much mobility as most other advanced countries,” said Isabel V. Sawhill, an economist at the Brookings Institution. “I don’t think you’ll find too many people who will argue with that.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/u...ise-from-lower-rungs.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

[Boss]

Yada Yada Yada... you fucktards are getting a TON of mileage out of that OP-ED, aren't you?

The Truth is that the Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 60 working days during that period...

Which happens to be 60 more fucking days than Republicans have EVER had a filibuster-proof majority in the entire history of Congress! It also happens to be the third time in history the Democrats have had a filibuster-proof majority, which is three times more than the Republicans have had.

 

[initforme]

Of course its difficult to move up. It always has been. But one can do it with a college education. Without its a lot tougher and means working longer for what is generally a bad company or lousy boss.

 

[Contumacious]

The American Dream is supposed to mean that through hard work and perseverance, even the poorest people can make it to middle class or above. But it's actually harder to move up in America than it is in most other advanced nations.



http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/u...ise-from-lower-rungs.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

[HenryBHough]

The NEW American dream?

A subsidized house.
An Obamaphone
Subsidized TV cable
Subsidized Internet
Minimum two free meals per day for each kid in indoctrination
An unrestricted EBT card

What a dream!

Of course it all depends on enough people being nuts enough to keep working to pay for your free stuff. So far you're winning.

So far.

 

[initforme]

Well as one who has worked his whole life until retiring from the god forsaken American rat race..

1). Subsidized house? Not where I live
2). Obamaphone? Not where I live
3). Subsidized TV cable? Not where I live
4). Internet? Not where I live
5). Kids in indoctrination? Not where I live
Where do you live? Where I live

1). People working full time barely survive because employers are too cheap to pay decent wages
2). Never heard of an obamaphone
3). Free TV? Heck most here have rabbit ears...
4). Internet? I don't know about this one
5). Public schools here are flourishing as far as doing a good job despite being attacked and forced to cut funding year in and year out. They are winning despite the rants of those who whine indoctrination and cry about having to pay for it.

 

[Dad2three]

40 hours a week, 51 weeks a year (ok to get a week off?) = 2040 hours worked. 70,000$ gross income divided by 2040 hours = $34.31 per hour.

And you say there are "lots" of jobs out there paying 34 bucks an hour. Where are they for the person with the high school education? I know some people that would really like to make 34 dollars an hour. Even 24 an hour.
Hell, 14 an hour for some I know would be great.

What's your company pay per hour? You hiring?

I don't know any engineers that make less than 70k. I don't know many managers that make less then 70k. I don't know many professionals that make less than 70k. For that matter even high school teachers end up making 70 with tenure. IMO one would have to try really hard to not get to the point where they are making 70k. Really really hard to find excuses to not get into a position to make 70k.

You may not feel rich earning $35,000 a year, but you're in the top half of taxpayers. Make $70,000, and you earn more than 75 percent of fellow taxpayers.

How Your Income Stacks Up - Yahoo Finance

 

[Dad2three]

Yada Yada Yada... you fucktards are getting a TON of mileage out of that OP-ED, aren't you?

The Truth is that the Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 60 working days during that period...

Which happens to be 60 more fucking days than Republicans have EVER had a filibuster-proof majority in the entire history of Congress! It also happens to be the third time in history the Democrats have had a filibuster-proof majority, which is three times more than the Republicans have had.

Got it, so you don't refute the FACT that the Dems had a super majority for less than 60 days, AS the Dubya/GOP economy was imploding

But they could've forced their way into ANYTHING? LOL

GOP always have the ConservaDems from the South..


From 2009-2010, Senate Republicans blocked some 375 House bills from ever even reaching a vote.


In shocking displays of partisanship, Republicans actually blocked votes on bills that would fund states’ efforts to help low-income children attain access to critical eye examinations (the Vision Care for Kids Act) or help treat elder victims of psychological or physical abuse (the Elder Abuse Victims Act). The GOP’s historic abuse of the filibuster culminated in Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) having to use the historic nuclear option to end cloture votes on presidential nominees.

The Cavalier Daily RUDGLEY Republican obstructionism

 

[Dad2three]

Of course its difficult to move up. It always has been. But one can do it with a college education. Without its a lot tougher and means working longer for what is generally a bad company or lousy boss.

COMPARED TO OTHER NATIONS, IT'S MORE DIFFICULT IN THE US THAN CANADA OR WESTERN EUROPE!


The Myth of Bootstrapping TIME.com

The American Myth of Social Mobility Howard Steven Friedman

 

[initforme]

"In shocking displays of partisanship, Republicans actually blocked votes on bills that would fund states’ efforts to help low-income children attain access to critical eye examinations (the Vision Care for Kids Act) or help treat elder victims of psychological or physical abuse (the Elder Abuse Victims Act). The GOP’s historic abuse of the filibuster culminated in Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) having to use the historic nuclear option to end cloture votes on presidential nominees."

Well that money is better in the hands of rich corporate cronies than in the hands of kids...

 

[Dad2three]

The NEW American dream?

A subsidized house.
An Obamaphone
Subsidized TV cable
Subsidized Internet
Minimum two free meals per day for each kid in indoctrination
An unrestricted EBT card

What a dream!

Of course it all depends on enough people being nuts enough to keep working to pay for your free stuff. So far you're winning.

So far.

Contrary to "Entitlement Society" Rhetoric, Over Nine-Tenths of Entitlement Benefits Go to Elderly, Disabled, or Working Households

Moreover, the vast bulk of that 9 percent goes for medical care, unemployment insurance benefits (which individuals must have a significant work history to receive), Social Security survivor benefits for the children and spouses of deceased workers, and Social Security benefits for retirees between ages 62 and 64. Seven out of the 9 percentage points go for one of these four purposes.

Contrary to Entitlement Society Rhetoric Over Nine-Tenths of Entitlement Benefits Go to Elderly Disabled or Working Households mdash Center on Budget and Policy Priorities



Red States Mostly Welfare States Dependent On Blue States But Likely Too Uninformed to Know
Red States Mostly Welfare States Dependent On Blue States But Likely Too Uninformed to Know




Among the 254 counties where food stamp recipients doubled between 2007 and 2011, Republican Mitt Romney won 213 of them in last year’s presidential election, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data compiled by Bloomberg. Kentucky’s Owsley County, which backed Romney with 81 percent of its vote, has the largest proportion of food stamp recipients among those that he carried.

Food Stamp Cut Backed by Republicans With Voters on Rolls - Bloomberg

 

[Boss]

I just scroll by oversized text.

 

[Boss]

Yada Yada Yada... you fucktards are getting a TON of mileage out of that OP-ED, aren't you?

The Truth is that the Democrats only had a filibuster-proof majority for 60 working days during that period...

Which happens to be 60 more fucking days than Republicans have EVER had a filibuster-proof majority in the entire history of Congress! It also happens to be the third time in history the Democrats have had a filibuster-proof majority, which is three times more than the Republicans have had.

Got it, so you don't refute the FACT that the Dems had a super majority for less than 60 days, AS the Dubya/GOP economy was imploding...BLAH BLAH BLAHH...

I don't need to refute anything, ass munch. All you're little op-ed does is WHINE because you only had a supermajority for 60 days... Oh boo-fucking-hoo!! Republicans have NEVER had a supermajority... N-E-V-E-R!

Got it, skippy?

Now, in spite of you having full control of both houses and the white house for two years, and and pretty much 'parliamentary' control of Congress for the past 6 years with a Democrat president, and a sobbing Johnny Boehner... with all the thousands of pages of new regulations and burdens you've placed on businesses and the so-called "rich people" you're at war with... all the breathless rhetoric... all the copy-n-paste op-eds... getting rid of those terrible Bush Tax Cuts... There are twice as many billionaires as before you started!

Oxfam s New Report Number Of Billionaires Has Doubled Since The Crash - Forbes

Looks like your anti-capitalist war on the rich is only causing the rich to get richer!

Dumbest Idea in the History of Man!!

 

[Skull Pilot]

Why is it that the whiners here refuse to see any but the most extreme examples of success?

There are many many people who start with little who rise substantially above their circumstances.

Certainly rising from the bottom 20% to the top 20% is success is it not?

Considering that to be in the top 20% of earners one only has to make about 70K a year why is it you people all seem to think that it's impossible?

The myth of the American Dream

The American Dream is supposed to mean that through hard work and perseverance, even the poorest people can make it to middle class or above. But it's actually harder to move up in America than it is in most other advanced nations.

It's easier to rise above the class you're born into in countries like Japan, Germany, Australia, and the Scandinavian nations

America s economic mobility myth - Dec. 9 2013


Harder for Americans to Rise From Lower Rungs

But many researchers have reached a conclusion that turns conventional wisdom on its head: Americans enjoy less economic mobility than their peers in Canada and much of Western Europe. The mobility gap has been widely discussed in academic circles, but a sour season of mass unemployment and street protests has moved the discussion toward center stage.

Former Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, a Republican candidate for president, warned this fall that movement “up into the middle income is actually greater, the mobility in Europe, than it is in America.” National Review, a conservative thought leader, wrote that “most Western European and English-speaking nations have higher rates of mobility.” Even Representative Paul D. Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican who argues that overall mobility remains high, recently wrote that “mobility from the very bottom up” is “where the United States lags behind.”

Liberal commentators have long emphasized class, but the attention on the right is largely new.

“It’s becoming conventional wisdom that the U.S. does not have as much mobility as most other advanced countries,” said Isabel V. Sawhill, an economist at the Brookings Institution. “I don’t think you’ll find too many people who will argue with that.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/u...ise-from-lower-rungs.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Small minds believe they can't achieve

 

[Skull Pilot]

Of course its difficult to move up. It always has been. But one can do it with a college education. Without its a lot tougher and means working longer for what is generally a bad company or lousy boss.

One can do it without a college education.

I know builders, plumbers and electricians that make 70K a year or better.

And why is the default always working for someone else? You can work for yourself you know.

 

[Boss]

"In shocking displays of partisanship, Republicans actually blocked votes on bills that would fund states’ efforts to help low-income children attain access to critical eye examinations (the Vision Care for Kids Act) or help treat elder victims of psychological or physical abuse (the Elder Abuse Victims Act). The GOP’s historic abuse of the filibuster culminated in Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) having to use the historic nuclear option to end cloture votes on presidential nominees."

Well that money is better in the hands of rich corporate cronies than in the hands of kids...

Here's what Democrats do, they come up with some stupid idea of how to bilk businesses or industry, how to redistribute some wealth or punish a class, then they camouflage it with a cute and innocent title.. "Save the Orphan Kittens Act" And when Republicans reject the ruse, they run around claiming shit about Republicans being horrible people who want orphan kittens to die!

Now what initforme (appropriate moniker, btw) is really saying here is, the Democrats have attempted to do this SO many times and failed, that Harry Reid is now openly violating the rules of the Senate to "get things done." You see, with the Democrats, if you can't win by the rules you change them, and if you can't change them, you ignore them.

 

[zeke]

40 hours a week, 51 weeks a year (ok to get a week off?) = 2040 hours worked. 70,000$ gross income divided by 2040 hours = $34.31 per hour.

And you say there are "lots" of jobs out there paying 34 bucks an hour. Where are they for the person with the high school education? I know some people that would really like to make 34 dollars an hour. Even 24 an hour.
Hell, 14 an hour for some I know would be great.

What's your company pay per hour? You hiring?

I don't know any engineers that make less than 70k. I don't know many managers that make less then 70k. I don't know many professionals that make less than 70k. For that matter even high school teachers end up making 70 with tenure. IMO one would have to try really hard to not get to the point where they are making 70k. Really really hard to find excuses to not get into a position to make 70k.

You don't read and comprehend very well rkm. If you did, you would have seen that I wrote "person with the high school education". Do you now see where I wrote that?

And of the group you mentioned all making 70k a year, I swear I do believe that those position require a college education. Engineers, teachers, managers? and professionals (whatever they are).

Are there more high school graduates in American than there are college graduates? Why yes there are.
Are there lots of jobs paying 70k for high school grads? Not any more.

 

[zeke]

Hey Boss,. saw you whining about how the Republicans haven't had a filibuster proof majority. Ever.

But you now what Boss, at the time the Repubs had a majority, the Dems in Congress were willing to work with Repubs to pass needed legislation. I think they called it "compromising".

Something the Republican assholes in Congress that people like you elected have no idea what that is.

Bring back the pork. At least shit got done.

Be that as it may, lets say you Rethugs win the Senate. You are going to find out just how effective that super majority bullshit combined with a filibuster really is when it comes to bringing the Congress to a standstill. You may hate Reid. But he is the best parliamentarian in the Congress. He will tie your "majority" in knots.