Jump to content

Presidential Race (Respector Edition)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

OK then, how much money/income qualifies one to be upper class?

 

If you make more than 3 times the median income of your geographical location you are considered upper class. Where did I get that number? I made it up.

 

96% of all Americans make less than 200K.

 

There is no envy, no spite of those who make 200K or more. It is just that this group is not the middle class. This whole argument has never been for me who is rich, who is poor, it is about how Romney views Americans and the middle class. It is an understanding of the most important economic group in the country. Mitt Romney does not have that. Otherwise he wouldn't be bent on increasing taxes and cutting programs for the middle class, in favor of more tax breaks and for the wealthiest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I never sold my first house that I paid 50k for, and never had three kids and never had to pay the cost of raising them and sending them off to college I would be a very wealthy man today based on my income. But as you make a little more each year and as you sell your two bedroom home to upgrade to accommodate five people, and you pay college tuition and higher property taxes and utility bills and cable bills and everything else that gets more expensive as you live your life, what you make really becomes irrelevant if your life style stays the same. That's why over the last 35 years despite my combined income rising from 25K a year to just under 200k still means I am middle class. I still have loans to pay, taxes to pay and bills to pay. Yeah, my house is paid off, but hey, I've been paying a mortgage for 30 years. The fact that inflation destroys the value of your dollar means your life style is still middle class if you make 150-200k per year. It took me over thirty years to get there but my standard of living is still the same. It is all relevant. You youngsters will be more than doubling your incomes over the next10-15 years but your standard of living will be the same if not worse. Yesterdays 25k is today's 100k. Inflation since 1977 can be calculated at 280%. See for yourself...

 

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

 

By the way, happy Constitution Day...

 

http://www.fff.org/b...g2012-09-17.asp

Link to post
Share on other sites

All of this back and forth proves that class does matter. It effects people and how they see the world.

 

Obama has no claim on poverty. But he also can't be criticized for trumpeting the belief that social services are all money wasted on lazy poor people. When you start promoting that perspective your wealthy background is up for examination.

 

Perhaps Obama's time as a community organizer allowed him to access the reality that personal choice is not the only factor in a persons wealth, or lack thereof.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am interesting in hearing Jules, bleedorange, tweedling, etc. regarding this:

 

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/09/17/161313644/leaked-video-purports-to-show-romney-discuss-dependent-voters

 

Are you still considering voting for this gentleman? Wait, I already know the reply. "Just like the blog says, "It's all politics". He's just saying what that group wants to hear".

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am interesting in hearing Jules, bleedorange, tweedling, etc. regarding this:

 

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/09/17/161313644/leaked-video-purports-to-show-romney-discuss-dependent-voters

 

Are you still considering voting for this gentleman? Wait, I already know the reply. "Just like the blog says, "It's all politics". He's just saying what that group wants to hear".

Yep. I'm sure there are moments in Obamas day where he leans to whatever group he's speaking in front of....or person for that matter. I'm not sure how damning this will be for Romney but it is ugly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am interesting in hearing Jules, bleedorange, tweedling, etc. regarding this:

 

http://www.npr.org/b...ependent-voters

 

Are you still considering voting for this gentleman? Wait, I already know the reply. "Just like the blog says, "It's all politics". He's just saying what that group wants to hear".

 

Here is the thing on this. Romney was talking about the election. His job is to win the presidency, so he does not need to worry about these 47% who are never gonna vote for him. With that being said, he did disparage that group. Essentially calling them lazy and looking for government handouts. That is pretty horrible thing to say.

 

This compounded with the previous thing we have been talking about (the 200K middle class), again shows his insensitivity and disregard for the working poor and middle class.

 

Is that substantially different from Obama's condescending comments about people clinging to guns and religion 4 years ago?

 

I think it is. Obama never said it wasn't his job to worry about those people. He was stating that people who have lost jobs cling to guns and religion "as a way to explain their frustration." I don't want to defend the quote that then candidate BO made (IMHO a dumb thing to say), but it is different then Romney's comments. BO did not callously disregard a huge segment of the population as Romney did. He was trying to explain what these people where feeling.

 

Apparently there is more in that video. I read (but I can't find it now) that Romney said he would have a better chance of winner if he was a Latino. Now, that is something that would truly derail this campaign.

 

It will be interesting how this plays out in the media, including the publicity wing of Romney campaign (Fox News), and if it will sway the polls in any way. Right now huffingtonpost has Obama winning 316 to 206 (with 16 undecided).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently there is more in that video. I read (but I can't find it now) that Romney said he would have a better chance of winner if he was a Latino. Now, that is something that would truly derail this campaign.

 

it's at around 2:30 into the video here... http://www.huffingto..._n_1829455.html

 

he says: "My dad, as you probably, know was the governor of Michigan and was the head of a car company. But he was born in Mexico ... and, uh, had he been born of, uh, Mexican parents, I'd have a better shot at winning this, but he was unfortunately born to Americans living in Mexico. ... I mean I say that jokingly, but it would be helpful to be Latino."

Link to post
Share on other sites

it's at around 2:30 into the video here... http://www.huffingto..._n_1829455.html

 

he says: "My dad, as you probably, know was the governor of Michigan and was the head of a car company. But he was born in Mexico ... and, uh, had he been born of, uh, Mexican parents, I'd have a better shot at winning this, but he was unfortunately born to Americans living in Mexico. ... I mean I say that jokingly, but it would be helpful to be Latino."

 

Such a strange thing to say. Was he basing his desire to be Latino on the rich history of Latino presidents we've had? Or wait, not Latino presidents, but Latino party nominees? Or wait, not Latino party nominees, but Latino candidates? Or wait...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Romney can't get his pandering nonsense straight. From NPR:

 

"In fact, while Romney seemed to say that the president will draw most of his support from those who pay no income taxes, a Tax

Foundation map highlighting the 10 states with the highest percentages of "non-payers" shows most are Republican territories:

— Alabama

— Arkansas

— Florida

— Georgia

— Idaho

— Louisiana

— Mississippi

— New Mexico

— South Carolina

— Texas"

 

For the most part, those are the poorest states. So most of the poorer, non-income tax paying voters there, will vote for Mitt Romney against their own interest and regardless of the fact that he insulted them as lazy bums.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So Mitt held a press conference last night to explain his comments. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/17/mitt-romney-47-percent_n_1892227.html. He doesn't necessarily apologize for them, he just says they weren't "elegantly stated."

 

For all the GOP's harping on PBO about being the "teleprompter and chief" it seems that anytime that Mitt doesn't have one in front of him he is later going back on those statements. He has not shown critical judgement or restraint in his comments, unless they are carefully spelled out.

 

At this point we all can agree that Mitt's candidacy is a mess and it has been from the beginning. From the primary he is the candidate no one really wanted, but everyone got. The whole tax return issue is so ridiculous. He seems so feckless in what he has to say, really talking out of both sides of his mouth (ie the car bailout thing). He hasn't presented a clear vision of what he wants to do, rather just vague ideas (yes I know Hope and Change, but this ain't 2008). Anytime he has tried to look presidential it has backfired on him (Europe trip, Embassy statement). He has been a disaster.

 

I mean come on, with an economy that we are in a GOP candidate should be destroying PBO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did he say anything untrue?

 

In just the video that came out? How about that 47% of Americans are victims, lazy and looking for government handouts. Or the fact that Americans would vote for if he was a Latino.

 

Or just through out the campaign in general?

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/09/14/13865583-chronicling-mitts-mendacity-vol-xxxiv?lite

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I never sold my first house that I paid 50k for, and never had three kids and never had to pay the cost of raising them and sending them off to college I would be a very wealthy man today based on my income. But as you make a little more each year and as you sell your two bedroom home to upgrade to accommodate five people, and you pay college tuition and higher property taxes and utility bills and cable bills and everything else that gets more expensive as you live your life, what you make really becomes irrelevant if your life style stays the same. That's why over the last 35 years despite my combined income rising from 25K a year to just under 200k still means I am middle class. I still have loans to pay, taxes to pay and bills to pay. Yeah, my house is paid off, but hey, I've been paying a mortgage for 30 years. The fact that inflation destroys the value of your dollar means your life style is still middle class if you make 150-200k per year. It took me over thirty years to get there but my standard of living is still the same. It is all relevant. You youngsters will be more than doubling your incomes over the next10-15 years but your standard of living will be the same if not worse. Yesterdays 25k is today's 100k. Inflation since 1977 can be calculated at 280%. See for yourself...

 

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

 

By the way, happy Constitution Day...

 

http://www.fff.org/b...g2012-09-17.asp

 

I understand and sympathize with your argument, particularly about inflation, but the median household income in the U.S. is $50,000 -- and obviously, many of these households have three kids (or more), and all the other costs you list. So if you are middle class at just under $200K, what does that make the average household, which makes less than a third of your income?

 

I grew up in an environment where most families were making the equivalent of $150-$250K and everyone thought they were middle class, even if they were living a lifestyle that would be unfathomable for today's average middle class American -- owning a large home, overseas vacations, kids' college paid for, substantial retirement savings, etc. These things, which boomers take for granted, are now largely out of reach for their children, despite the younger generation being better educated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not what he said.

Yes it is.

"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what...These are people who pay no income tax."

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...