Thread: The class warfare argument

If someone's making the class warfare argument, my response would be "It's about time we turned the tables."

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

So how many jobs did the Democrats create when they had the White House, The house of Representatives and the Senate? Why weren't they taxing the rich man more then?

I am too lazy, but you can find those stats online surely. Start with FDR and include Ike as he was no conservative. Tax rates on the rich was 91 per cent. And we created the largest most prosperous middle class in world history. But that was a different economic model, from the Democrats no less. So how's the Repub model working out with unsound banks, offshoring, free trade, etc. Sure ain't helping to build or substain a middle class, and more are in poverty. But Cons can't see it. Because they don't look.

Originally Posted by Danny

Upon further reflection I think it's brilliant political strategy. He is forcing the GOP to defend millionaires and billionaires which will be politically damaging to them.

So basically he's passing the buck.

Which is to say, there's nothing new about this "brilliant" new PR plan.

But the American people have seen through this guy and his never ending succession of blame-laying strategies, which is why he went from a 65% approval rating down to 44%.

What America wants, and what President Obama needs to do to reverse his trend toward disapproval, is to actually DO something rather than blame his inability to do anything on the Republicans.

Yet he continues to blame...

What's that term they use to describe doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?

Originally Posted by Danny

Obama's announced "Buffet Rule" took me by surprise. I initially thought this would be fodder for the GOP to hit him with "class warfare arguments". Upon further reflection I think it's brilliant political strategy. He is forcing the GOP to defend millionaires and billionaires which will be politically damaging to them.

Of the polls I've seen a vast majority say the rich should be asked to contribute more toward deficit reduction and certainly if there are medicare cuts involved. Also since a tax on incomes of 1M plus affects 0.3% of the population, who the heck to the GOP think they are pandering to when they cry class warfare? How many voters are they expecting to win over?

I think Obama has realized the GOP are not going to allow one single more job to be created under his watch and its time to draw some hard lines that will be a) popular with his base b) make sense economically. Just getting something done is useless to him now because nothing will get done. No "going in 50% on crappy GOP ideas" as Bill Maher put it.

Give em hell Barry!

It's not so much an "argument" as a statement of fact. This is, by definition, class warfare.

Originally Posted by Danny

Obama's announced "Buffet Rule" took me by surprise. I initially thought this would be fodder for the GOP to hit him with "class warfare arguments". Upon further reflection I think it's brilliant political strategy. He is forcing the GOP to defend millionaires and billionaires which will be politically damaging to them.

No, he's not. If Mr. Obama wants to target millionaires and billionaires he should propose a new tax targeting people based on their net worth. The current proposal snags many more victims in its net.

Originally Posted by fishjoel

It's not so much an "argument" as a statement of fact. This is, by definition, class warfare.

Yeah. "Warfare" against o.3% of the population. The other 99.7% are to believe that this is a terrible, terrible thing. "OMG, the libs are pushing for CLASS WARFARE!!!". LOL, durr, most of us are on the same team.

Originally Posted by Jefe

Yeah. "Warfare" against o.3% of the population. The other 99.7% are to believe that this is a terrible, terrible thing. "OMG, the libs are pushing for CLASS WARFARE!!!". LOL, durr, most of us are on the same team.

While there may well be reason to be "at war" with a percentage of the population the reason for going to war should really be something better than "because they have something I want". Shouldn't it?

Originally Posted by lutherf

While there may well be reason to be "at war" with a percentage of the population the reason for going to war should really be something better than "because they have something I want". Shouldn't it?

Isn't that why most wars are fought?

Originally Posted by Jefe

Yeah. "Warfare" against o.3% of the population. The other 99.7% are to believe that this is a terrible, terrible thing. "OMG, the libs are pushing for CLASS WARFARE!!!". LOL, durr, most of us are on the same team.

And when the same type of lopsided majorities were against gay marriage?

Looked at from that perspective, this is a naked attempt at making a wedge issue.

Also as much of these proposed increases reach down to 200k (or less) it falls on the top 10% and that is the group that already, today, pay most of the taxes.

I will remind everyone that 47% of tax filers pay no Federal INCOME TAX, and of those, 20% actually get more back than they ever paid in.

Alternate Minimum Tax?

How about a Alternate Minimum Tax?

Originally Posted by C-B-M

You know what's hilarious? This is another demonstration of Obama going full-on liberalism. His solution to the problem is "tax the rich," right? Which has never been done before, right? So when this doesn't work, he'll just have another press conference and go "I blame the Republicans" and then propose raising taxes on the rich and government spending on infrastructure and teachers and give the obligatory fierce look across the television. What a genius. It's like you have a problem and you hold a brainstorming session and he immediately raises his hand and goes "continue doing what we're doing." If he had ever been in any private business, someone would have immediately either fired him or slapped him across the face.

Why don't you check out what the debt was when the rich were taxed at the 93% rate, or the 70% rate.

Here I'll do it for you, the total debt was less than a trillion.

What happened when we abandoned "tax the rich"?
Here, I'll do it for you, the debt grew to over 14 trillion.

So why is it so hard to go back to doing what worked, after 30 years of "low taxes for the rich" has failed to produce what the GOP said it would produce?

The bright spot in that 30 year period came after (wait for it)
taxes on the rich got raised.

Then taxes on the rich got cut, and here we are in shit city.