debeda

Good post

straightUp Loc: California

Well, there wasn't much "opinion" in that last post. It was mostly statistics I've taken from government sources such as this... https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-gross-collections-by-type-of-tax-and-state-irs-data-book-table-5 which shows which states contribute the most to federal revenue and as I stated the population numbers came from the 2010 U.S. census. That may not matter to you and of course you can always dispute the government sources. But just to be clear, whether the data is accurate or not I am just passing them on... they are not my "opinion".

And... the idea that anyone who v**es on a federal issue is affecting everyone else in the country should be obvious logic to anyone by the simple fact that the federal government presides over the entire nation.

P Lightfoot Loc: DEPLOYED ON STATION

Please leave now and take a lot of friends with you now is not soon enough
TRUMP 2020. 2024 SEMPER FI

Cherokee38 Loc: Atlanta

Did you ever stop and think one of the reasons we are behind in education is i******s. Teachers teach to the middle of their classes. Being less prepared for those classes drops the middle in standards. Look at what we pay teachers we are not attracting the best but those who are willing to accept less. Lack of parental support is another reason.

debeda

Most of your stuff is opinion. Most of the "news" and "studies" out there are opinion, too

debeda

AGREED P Lightfoot!!

straightUp Loc: California

Your argument is self-defeating. I suggested that people on the right are less inclined to see what's happening because of their obsessive hatred toward liberals. You say that's a wild assumption then go on to talk about the hatred liberals have for Trump. LOL


Well, this point is under much debate these days and I think that's because the concept of a middle class is so nebulous. There isn't even a consensus on what defines the middle-class in the first place and there are so many aspects and tangents to choose from that you can conjure up almost ANY statement about the "middle-class" and have some substance involved. So, I don't pay any attention to discussions about the middle-class anymore because I have found it to be such a d******e category. It's no wonder politicians are always ranting about the "middle-class" is being destroyed or how the "middle-class" is "moving up".

I think I have a much more realistic way of looking at this. To me, there are only two classes in America that can be defined by solid lines. Those who have to work for a living and those who don't. Using this model, everyone knows exactly where they are without any complex calculations or ambiguity but more importantly, it reveals a lot more about Trumpian politics that shifty discussions about the "middle-class" tend to obscure.

If you actually look at the laws the Republicans have been passing over the last three years, you will find an unprecedented pattern of reducing or eliminating worker protection rights, some of which have been in place since 1935. There is also a drastic cut back in facilities and funds allocated to help those in the working-class that don't have jobs. These issues don't get a lot of attention right now because the economy has been growing at an even clip since since 2013 and as they say, when sea level rises all boats rise with it, but what's going to happen when the economy crashes again like it did the last time we had a Republican in the White House? What's going to happen when the American workers find that those safeguards they relied on in the past are gone? Then what?

At the same time, the laws Trump and the Republicans are passing gives a very clear advantage to the investor class (the class that doesn't have to work for a living because they have enough money to sustain themselves on their investment returns). When you use terms like middle-class you blur the distinction because many in the middle-class do have sustaining investments while others do not, so these laws don't line up with the distinctions you make.

So, this is what concerns me and many others... It's NOT about hating Trump or "class envy" or any of those other misguided, psuedo-Marxist stereotypes. And it's not about "here and now" either. We don't give Trump much credit for the current state of the economy anyway because he hasn't really done anything to change it. It was booming when he came to office and the momentum has carried through his entire term so far. But economists are starting to point to the stress cracks just like they did in 2004, 2005 and 2006 when Republicans like McCain were denying there is anything wrong with our economy - even though foreign sovereign funds were already bailing out the banks even then.


Why would I think that? Because I'm a liberal and according to Republican fairy tales all liberals are c*******t? Well, THIS liberal, like most, believes in meritocracy and I don't think our incomes should be regulated by anyone, with the only exception being that there should be a minimum wage to keep hard working people above the poverty line.

So when you find a law being sponsored by the Democrats that says everyone should move up at the same rate, let me know. Until then I will assume it's just another one of those r****ded
"liberals are c*******t" rants.


I don't think it should be enforced by government if that's what you're asking. And as a entrepreneur myself who took the risk of leaving my safe job to co-found a business that created 28 jobs I can tell you that your description of a middle-class and a seperate entrepreneurial class is naive as hell. Most entrepreneurs are small-business owners that still have to work for a living which puts them on the same side of the recent Republican laws as their employees.

On the other side of those laws that favor the investor class you have very few actual business owners taking risks. Most of that class are very wealthy people that invest in businesses without taking much risk at all. It's a mistake to see one of these people invest a million and blubber over how they are taking some huge risk when chances are they can lose that million and not be affected because they have another 250 million invested elsewhere.

Again the term "middle-class" is blurring the distinction between those who Trump is helping and those who he is screwing.


That's a blatant lie. The lowest wage earners pay 10%. So if you make a dollar you pay 10 cents. For crying out loud look up the tax-brackets published by the IRS, they're not a secret.


There will always be an incentive to start a new business. I did it out of passion not from some calculated estimate on how much I would make. As for the rates... I don't really care. In fact I don't believe in income tax so for me it's a moot point.


Well, we think he's currently the greatest threat to 95% of the American people. But let me explain a difference between what I said and what you are suggesting. When I say the Republicans are huffed up on what old geezers are saying I am referring to a form of social engineering that's been ongoing to about 50 years and targets "liberals" as an entire demographic, not a reaction to one specific person based on specific actions that person has taken.


He hasn't done any of those things. Like I said the economy has been expanding since 2013 and not even the rate of that expansion has changed much. Presidents don't drive the economy, producers and consumers do. A president only gets involved when the economy is in crisis and the government has to interfere. That hasn't happened since Trump took office. But what HAS happened is that we lost more jobs than we gained. If you're being swayed by that stupid 3.5% unemployment number think again, because that number only counts the people claiming unemployment benefits. The actual jobless rate is 37%, which is higher now than it was when Trump took office, but neither Trump nor Fox will tell you that for obvious reasons. Finally, the recent spikes in the stock market means more to day traders than it does to 401K accounts which are long term. All that matters to a 401K is what the stock values are when you retire, anything in the meantime is utterly meaningless.


Yes, many of them are. I know about five of them personally who regret v****g for him.


Yeah, I know some of those people to, but I've come to realize through conversation that they are happy for reasons Trump has nothing to do with. Did you KNOW that the economy was already booming when Trump took office? Did you know there's such a thing called momentum? I don't know that many of the Trump supporters out there understand that. All they know is that right now, their employers are doing well and Trump happens to be in office.


T***h often has little to do with e******ns.


Seem the last thing the Democrats dished out was the booming economy that you folks want to credit Trump for.


eehhh - I'm going to disagree with that one. ;)

straightUp Loc: California

Why? You can't handle us? LOL

straightUp Loc: California

No debeda, opinions are not news.

Look, I know Fox won that famous case in court that says news doesn't have to be true, but journalistic integrity is still a thing and papers like the NYT for the most part curate a solid reputation on that. Facts go in the news. Opinions file under commentary.

debeda

That's correct, opinions are not news. It's also correct that sources that claim to be news sources should distinguish what is actual fact and what is commentary. Most don't. That being said, its daggone difficult to find any "news" anymore......