Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

CLASS WARFARE: Sides are hard to distinguish

Letter by Suzi Loya, Gig Harbor on Dec. 13, 2011 at 2:41 pm with 256 Comments »
December 13, 2011 4:34 pm

I’m confused about the class warfare that many people say is coming. I get the definition of poverty: a family of four with a yearly income of less than $25,000. But does $30,000 per year make you middle class? I think you would still be poor if you lived in parts of California instead of Georgia.

So, who is the middle class? My friend inherited $2 million but reports an earned income of only $35,000 to maintain her husband’s military benefits. Is she the enemy?

My Social Security, plus a small state teaching pension, amount to about $25,000 per year. However, I do have a stock portfolio. Am I the enemy?

My younger husband earns a six-figure income. Is he friend or foe?

If class warfare is inevitable, I need to know on which side of the barricades to stand.

Leave a comment Comments → 256
  1. sandblower says:

    Less than $250K per year for two makes them middle class economically as long as they are also above the poverty level. It is a somewhat flexible thing anyway.
    You shouldn’t be confused and it is only the extreme right that is interested in promoting the differences as class warfare. I love my rich friends.

  2. took14theteam says:

    And $250,000.01 makes them the “evil” rich according to BHO and the blower.

  3. concernedtacoma7 says:

    The $250k is based on the government’s need for revenue, not what defines ‘rich’.

    If you make $250k, you are not lighting cuban’s with c-notes. You are paying a ton of taxes. You are not flying to Europe on your Gulfstream to shop in Milan. You might be paying for your child’s higher education without gov’t assistance.

  4. taxedenoughintacoma says:

    Ms. Suzi and all that post here.

    I am a cancer survior and here to say that if you and your family are healthy, you are wealthy.

    Steve Jobs was worth Billions and a cancer cell killed him and his billions could not save him. If you are healthy you are rich.

  5. IMO – Taxedenough is right, money is only one aspect of what makes people truly wealthy.

    How much makes money makes one rich:

    Previous studies show people usually gave a number that was twice their current income.

    However a January ’08 poll by the WSJ of households earning $500,000 per year showed that:
    22% said $1 million;
    45% said $5 million;
    25% said $25 million;
    8% said $100 million;


  6. whitman411 says:

    The key here is EARNINGS. How much do you EARN? If you EARN then you are not rich. The truly rich don’t earn, their investments earn.

  7. Suzi, you stand on the side of the barricades that you feel right standing on.

    If you think, like many do on these blogs, that everyone’s current state of wealth or poverty is a direct result of how hard they worked and ONLY how hard they worked, then you stand on the side of the un-intelligentsia, or more simply stated the morons with blinders on.

    If you know that sometimes in life you can work your butt off and still, because of a series of bad breaks you still end up on the dirty end of the stick, and maybe because some of the other people got a lot of lucky breaks that maybe they can share a little to help out those in need of help, then stand on my side of the barricade. Because, the fact is, in this America some of those lucky breaks the fortunate ones got came as a result of less fortunate people working their butts off in the service sector or armed forces, and the rich guys were able to gain the benefit of that work for themselves, so truly they owe it to others to share their good fortune.

    bobcat1a said it a lot better on the GINGRICH blog, on Dec 13, 2011 AT 8:56 PM as follows:

    ““my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God’s side” -A Lincoln
 “American Exceptionalism” is all about being on God’s side (whether you believe in a literal God or not). That means we should remember that “thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” The love of money is the root of all evil. If a child anywhere goes to bed hungry while you dine on caviar and champagne (figuratively), you have sinned, not against some God but against your own humanity.”

    So Suzi, why not try standing on our side of the barricade, and if you can help someone out who may need a little help, then maybe you can do that to if you can.

  8. BTW Suzi, it has absolutely NOTHING to do with how much money you have or make. It has to do with what you do with that money. If you horde it and use it only to make your little world better for yourself and no one else, you are on The Dark Side of the Force. If you can share a little of what you have to make the whole world around us a little better, then you are a Jedi!

  9. Wow, muckibr. You are one of the most depressed people I have ever seen on here. If you really believe that life is so negative like you posted above, you my friend, need help.

    I could not imagine viewing life from such a negative perspective.

  10. alindasue says:

    What muckibr was saying in so many words is essentially, “Sometimes bad things happen even to good people.” He’s responding to the many who seem to claim that “anybody who is low income isn’t working hard enough”. He is saying that more important than what “class” you are in is your attitude, especially your attitude towards those who through little fault of their own are having a hard time financially.

    There’s nothing negative about that.

  11. concernedtacoma7 says:

    What right do you have to judge a law abiding citizen who decides his taxes are enough charity?

    Have you no pride?

  12. blakeshouse says:

    concerned: There is no pride on the lefties side. All they do is complain and beg for what everyone else has. They have no concept of self reliance. self responsibility or any of the other factors that made this country the greatest on the face of the earth. The idea of govt dependence is all that matters and the “evil rich” are the ones who are keeping the socialist utopia from fruition.. In other word a complete destruction of the country that was founded 200+ yrs ago. Heaven help us all if the neo marxists can stuff the ballot boxes to facilitate another four yrs of the socialist in chief!!!!!!

  13. I believe that the people who are accused of being “lefties” are those who believe that you “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

    Whereas those who profess narrow minded self-serving stands, such as the comments above by concerned… and blakes…, believe in the idea of “do it to others before they do it you.”

    The so-called lefties are more in-tune with the old 90s notion of “WWJD?” While the others are along the lines of “It’s all mine, mine, mine! All mine!!! And you can’t have it!”

    The “classes” in this class warfare are not the rich vs. the un-rich, but rather the difference between the selfless vs. the selfish.

    All of the major religions teach us to be selfless and altruistic. To be otherwise is to be seduced by the darker side of human nature. We are our brother’s keepers. It’s not acceptable in any civilized society to simply kick a man or woman while he or she is down, especially when you have the means to help. To hurt those in need of help is not only unjust, but sinful.

  14. redneckbuck says:

    My wife and I bring home about 125k. We feel rich! We are willing to be the bad guys. You see, if you can point the finger at a group of people that you beleive are the bad guys you will feel better about yourself……Hitler did this. The left is attempting to dehumanize a group of people because of their bank account.

  15. Every time you guys can’t fight an argument with a logical honest alternative, you bring out HITLER! Is your case so lame that you must invoke Adolf Hitler because you have no other valid argument to make. Using Hitler is a gutless response.

  16. My income exceeds the figures Obama has decided as making someone wealthy. I have 4 children, pay over 3,000.00 a month in child support and have 13 employees. Obama thinks I’m rich and that I should be paying MORE in taxes???? LOL, I live in a modest home, drive an 8 year old truck(only commuting vehicle). Yeah, I have one motorcycle, and a modest boat, one a 2002 model, and one a 2004 model. And I’m saving for my childrens college educations, as I of course won’t be having the other taxpayers provide for their education. I AM NOT RICH! I AM NOT WEALTHY! I already pay far in excess of the state median income in federal income taxes, and Obama thinks I don’t pay enough in taxes? This man has elevated class warfare to a whole new level. He is a socialist period. There is no question, at least the liberal morons are embracing their political philosopy versus pretending like it is something different than socialism.

  17. LarryFine says:

    I hear you Suzi. Depending how penny-wise, spend thrift, and how much you planned ahead, will ultimately play a role in your status as a villian.

  18. But Redneck you are always pointing your finger at the evil unions (especially the double evil public employee unions, and the double plus evil teachers unions).

    So is it the finger pointing or the target of the finger pointing that is bad?

    Tmell – If you are not rich Blame Yourself – then go find a better tax accountant. Then have one of your kids explain the difference between progressives and socialists. You might find it illuminating.

  19. redneckbuck says:

    Obama is class warfare, that is the only chance he has of re-election. He figures that if the portion of citizens that pay no taxes, currently 47%, are threatened with the thought of paying their fair share he will garner their votes. Funny how some people’s votes can be bought!

  20. TMell — 250k? obama’s “buffet rule” has proposed that if you make over a million in a year, then you should pay the same tax rate as the middle class.

  21. i>You see, if you can point the finger at a group of people that you beleive are the bad guys you will feel better about yourself……Hitler did this. The left is attempting to dehumanize a group of people because of their bank account.

    So…you are pointing at the “left” in an attempt to be like Hitler?

  22. jellee – the tax rate is 35% for someone making 250k, 500k, a million, 2 million a year…. the tax rate is the same for all wages.

    If you invest short-term the tax rate is your wages tax rate. It is on the IRS Form 1040.

  23. suzi – be on neither side of the barricade. It is just a smaller percentage of the whole that chooses sides.

    As far as class warfare, consider your position. You and your husband have earned the money you make. You are under no obligation to provide the government with more than the agreed upon rate. The government is obligated to manage it finances in the most responsible manner considering the amount of funding it receives.

    Consider the choices you and your husband made to earn the income you do. I a willing to be $10,000.00 that they were a series of sound choices consistently made over a period of time. I would also double-down and state that when a choice went poorly or the situation turn poorly, you and your husband assessed the situtation and made the best possible choice moving forward to at least minimize loss and then move ahead.

    Enjoy your life, you earned it.

  24. qq – well it is 33% if you make 250k…but i digress.
    you are not being honest.
    income taxes rates and corporate tax rates, capital gains rates, inheritance tax rates. marginal tax rates.
    the point is effective tax rates.
    if my only income is wages income, then i am not afforded the opportunity to be taxed at those lower rates (i.e. capital gains), as are my wealthier counterparts.

  25. qq.. writes: “I a willing to be $10,000.00″

    when I think he/she meant to write: “I am willing to bet $10,000.00″

    Stealing your lines from Mitt Romney now hey qq…?

    Well, I’d be willing to wager that Suzi’s friend who inherited the $2 million didn’t have to worry about making any choices good or bad. Sometimes good things happen to people, just as sometimes bad things happen to people, and sometimes when those things happen to people the people have no choice but to accept it.

    That’s all I’m saying, is that just working hard and making good decisions and choices does NOT always get you the rewards you seek. Sometimes you can do all that and still come out with a loss rather than a gain. Life is like that.

    You can’t always control the outcome. Thinking you can only makes you a naive fool.

  26. jellee – thanks, I wasn’t sure where the 35% cut off was, but you get my point on that… moving on.

    Yes, there are different tax rates for different sources of income. That is the current tax system. Effective tax rate as you explain does nothing more than muddy the already muddied waters.

    If your income is wages then yes, you will be taxed at the income tax rate.

    When you invest money, you are investing money that has already been taxed is one issue. And two the money invested is placed at risk so their is a possibility of loss of capital. It shoudl be treated differantly

    If you are talking about fairness. You do have the opportunity to make the same type of investment as your wealthier counterparts. Do you choose not to? Make choices sir.

  27. He is a socialist period.

    A “socialist period”…..wondering what that would be….never imagined that punctuation marks were divisible into political sects.

  28. When my wife makes me go to the market to pick up some tampons, am I having a socialist period?

  29. Mucky – somebody is dead to have inherited the money… bad for them, good for the person who inherited the money. With that money they have choices to make. Make good consistent choices and the money will last. Make a stupid choice and the money will dwindle. It really is that simple.

    I never said ‘just’ and making good decisions and choices may not always get you the rewards you seek but it sure does make the possibility of that happening all the more real for a person.

    Sometime, after checking for a green light you get hit by a bus… life is indeed like that.

    You can’t always control the outcome but you can control the opportunity for a good outcome. To not do so leaves you at the whim of others…

    I think I finish my half-full glass of Pepsi…

  30. qq — again you are not being honest.
    If I am a ceo, then i pay myself $1 in wages, then i defer the rest of my income to stock. I cash out the stock and –presto-chango– lower tax rates for me!
    Once again, this is a tax rate that is only accessible if you have disposable income.
    Poor people,by very definition, do not have disposable income.

  31. how exactly is effective tax rate … the actual tax rate you pay … muddied?

  32. qq98411, For folks in the higher tax brackets, the capital gains rate is only 15% for most capital gains. The same for qualified dividends.

    The capital gains rate needs to be changed. I don’t think the huge wealth disparity is good for the county.

  33. Spiderweb says:

    It’s not coming Suzi, it’s here…various groups have already chosen “sides”….

    Apparently that large thing sitting above our shoulders isn’t sufficient to overcome the ancient biological imperatives.

    Very sad

  34. jellee – you stock options are at risk, run the company well and you are rewarded with a higher stock value which in turn yeilds a higher tax revenue to the IRS. Run the company poorly and you get a lower stock value and in turn the IRS gets a lower amount of revenue.

    You know we are comparing apples to oranges, right and their is no solution except for a flat tax or a socialist type state on this. Unless you got a better idea?

    Poor – yes, alot of things are not readily available to you when you are poor. Disposable income and the opportunity to claim capital gains are but two.

    A vehicle may be available to you in the form of a used Geo Metro. Where as a rich person may be able to buy a new BMW. Yes, that is life.

    The key here is to make some moves to stop being poor. IT really is that simple.

  35. pawl – long term vs short term… come on guys muddied waters

  36. qq… wrote, “Sometime, after checking for a green light you get hit by a bus… life is indeed like that.”

    Not exactly on point as to the specifics of this debate, but nonetheless I am glad to see that qq… is FINALLY admitting that sometimes bad things happen to good people that are out of their ability to control. That can happen to their careers and finances as well. Glad to see you are finally coming around to REALITY!!!

  37. jellee – are you going to correct pawl on 15% and higher tax brackets. It is not true.

    15% is the lower brackets long term, 25% higher brackets long-term.

    Your effective tax rate for short-term capital gains.

  38. qq… wrote: The key here is to make some moves to stop being poor. IT really is that simple.”

    Tell us, if it is so simple then, what are those specific moves to “stop being poor”? Please be SPECIFIC.

    Come on qq… I know you can do it! Tell us! After all, “It really is that simple.” RIGHT?

  39. aislander says:

    Actually lefties are “in tune” with WWJMYD: what would Jesus MAKE you do? The answer to that is nothing–it’s all voluntary. Not with lefties, though. Force is their custom…

  40. aislander… SSSHHHHUSH!

    qq.. is about to tell us all how to STOP BEING POOR!

    It’s supposed to be REALLY SIMPLE!

  41. redneckbuck says:

    I am a member of the evil employee unions I speak of. I see their evil practices from the inside. As a Physics teacher at a public high school I see the Liberal factories that our social studies program has become.

  42. redneck… SSSHHHHUSH!

    qq.. is about to tell us all how to STOP BEING POOR!

    He said it is REALLY SIMPLE!

  43. aislander says:

    1)Stay in school
    2)Get a job–any job
    3)Get married after age twenty-two
    4)Don’t have children until you ARE married
    5)Don’t have children until you finish school, have a job, and are well into your twenties
    6)Avoid substance abuse

    Someone who does all those things will avoid permanent poverty.

    Oh, and 7)Avoid paying one more penny in taxes than you absolutely must

  44. aislander, while waiting for the big reveal from qq… I just wanted to tell you that Jesus doesn’t Make Us Do anything. We have free will from God. So we can do what we want to, even if it is the wrong thing. Jesus would just like us to do the right thing instead.

    redneck… This is a school day isn’t it? What are you doing on this blog? You should be teaching your kids, or preparing lesson plans or grading papers or something. Please stop wasting my tax dollars typing nonsense on this blog and do the job we are paying you the big bucks to do.

    qq… Come on man, you have the opportunity to end all Class Warfare right here, right now. Just tell us all How To Stop Being Poor! Then, everyone can be rich, and we will only have one class, and there will be no more class warfare. It’s SIMPLE right?

  45. So! ailander and qq… are one in the same? Are they kardnos?

    aislander, seriously, go back to the little table, and let qq… speak for himself. Your list is silly. None of what you listed will stop a person from being poor.

    qq… will soon reveal how SIMPLE it is to STOP BEING POOR!


  46. redneckbuck says:

    At lunch there Muckibr!!!!!

  47. No sir, we still disagree. I never said that random acts don’t happen, I just dont put the same weight on them as it appears you do.

    Careers and finances are but two areas where I would put a very low weight to the randomness of life.

  48. aislander says:

    We don’t have free will from lefty taxation and social engineering. I personally try to follow certain precepts but I am not so egotistical as to use the force of government to take the property of others to make EVERYBODY follow those precepts…

  49. qq98411, also you don’t pay employment taxes on capital gains and dividends.

    ” you stock options are at risk, run the company well and you are rewarded with a higher stock value which in turn yeilds a higher tax revenue to the IRS. Run the company poorly and you get a lower stock value and in turn the IRS gets a lower amount of revenue.”

    So pay them with cash.

  50. slugoxyz says:

    Wait a minute. I have no idea which side of the barrier I stand on. I don’t feel rich. I have a mortgage, car payments, a modest portfolio and two college age kids that have done well to pay their own way (with some help). I certainly don’t feel like a 1%. Be that as it may, the 1% should not be forced to share their wealth directly. They help the 99% by hiring and building and expanding. That isn’t greed but rather trickle down. When we can force people to be charitable than it isn’t really charity is it? It then becomes either tax or government theft (which usually precedes revolution doesn’t it?) Where does forced charity stop? Because when will the poor be satisfied? When does a person trained to hold their hand out stop holding their hand out? We’ve trained them to depend on the charity of others. That’s bad enough. Should we train them to take other people’s good fortune now? Furthermore, while “bad breaks” may account for some misfortune, my high school football coach always said that we make our own breaks. Should a smart person who creates a business, thinks of an idea that no one else thought of, build a successful business share equally with the people they hire? If that were the case, why bother with innovation, invention, creativity etc? Why bother with hard work at all if everyone automatically deserves an equal share? If you don’t like capitalism, America is not the place for you. The American Dream is really about capitalism isn’t it? A person can come here (or start here), work hard, be smart and create riches for themselves and their family. They don’t have to share unless they want to. That’s what we have taxes for. Under a Liberal President, more of those taxes go to handouts. Under a Conservative President, more money goes to the businesses that create jobs for the less than rich. Are we forcing morality on people? If we are, I would probably tell the folk on “that” side of the barrier to work a little (or a lot) harder or think a lot smarter and as Coach said, get to making their own breaks. I’m not a fan of tax loopholes but I’m not a fan of punishing the more successful. If everyone paid what they were supposed to (from the bottom all the way to the top) we probably would have enough. Let’s start there. Rather than tear down this capitalist republic, why don’t we try making it work like it’s supposed to?

  51. Get a job–any job

    Minimum wage increasingly lags poverty line

    Can’t just be “any job”.

  52. This whole meme about it being unclear who is “rich” (scare quotes are necessary) is just the same obfuscatory tactics that were perfected by Tobacco.

    If it is unclear for you I suggest you read what Buffett wrote. Anyone earning a million or more a year in Capital Gains is rich.

  53. Rather than tear down this capitalist republic, why don’t we try making it work like it’s supposed to?

    Which is exactly what many (I would venture to say “most”) of those who sympathize with the Occupy folks want.

    What the banks have been doing isn’t Capitalism the way it is supposed to work.

  54. aislander says:

    It doesn’t matter, beerBoy, WHERE the minimum wage is with respect to the poverty line–which ignores all the programs meant to mitigate poverty, by the way–the point is to get on the ladder. You can’t reach the chandelier from the first rung, but you’re on your way there.

    Some people climb higher than others, but life isn’t fair. You just have to play the odds, and the odds say that the vast majority of entry-level workers don’t stay entry level for their entire working lives…

  55. aislander says:

    beerBoy writes: “What the banks have been doing isn’t Capitalism the way it is supposed to work.”

    What the government has been doing isn’t allowing capitalism to work the way it is supposed to work.

    It’s time to jettison this de facto corporatism that is a large part of our current economy…

  56. slugoxyz you say “I have no idea which side of the barrier I stand on. I don’t feel rich.” and “I certainly don’t feel like a 1%.” and also “I would probably tell the folk on “that” side of the barrier to work a little (or a lot) harder or think a lot smarter and as Coach said, get to making their own breaks.”

    So why haven’t you taken your coach’s advice, made your own breaks and become one of the 1%ers? Seriously! Tell us your story. Why aren’t you rich?

    By the way, all evidence proves that Trickle Down Economics, doesn’t trickle down.

    But, there is hope!

    qq… is about to share with us all how SIMPLE it is to just STOP BEING POOR!

    So stay turned to this blog for qq…’s big reveal!

  57. “Government is the name we give to the things we choose to do together.”

  58. How do i express what I would want us to do together? With my wallet? Or with my vote? What should be more powerful?

  59. LarryFine says:

    Aislander, nice work.

  60. Redneck – Do you remember the pictures of John Boehner on the House floor passing out checks from the Tobacco Lobby? Funny who some people’s votes are so easy to buy.

    If you see evil and do nothing you support evil. After all Deeds Speak Loader that Words.

    Qq – “tax rates the same for all wages” that is a flat tax, BUT Federal Income is a progressive tax where in the tax rates go up as income goes above certain values.

    Suzi – also consider that one side of the barricade thanks people in the lower income brackets don’t pay enough and want to raise your taxes.

    And you friend with the $2 mill is a felony tax cheat. If you had the mores of the Newt you would report her and claim a nice reward.
    Jeilee – as a CEO you can also have the Company buy you a car, and pay for your house and vacations. Unlike the rest of us who have to pay for these things out of our own pockets.

  61. qq… Where are you?

  62. Rpots think the CGT should be ZERO Percent to stimulate the economy and spur job growth.

    ‘run the company well’ = right wing real speak forget America and American Workers, send those jobs overseas”

    “muddy the water” = right wing real speak for that is an inconvenient fact that must be discredited at all costs.

    Muckibr – according to Rpots the first step is to take a bath, the second step is to get a job.

    Making up new talking points are we? A quick web search for WWJMD produced no hits.
    But we do have free will from Right Wing taxes and Social Engineering? Excuse me while I take a phone call from Santa.
    So you are:
    Pro-Choice because you don’t thank government should tell women what to do?
    And oppose the Keystone Pipe Line which would require the government to take private property and turn it over to the Cooperation building the
    Slugo – the right economic / jobs plan is based trickle down – making the rich richer stimulates the economy and creates jobs. And it works – sort of. It stimulates economies and creates jobs overseas and increases unemployment here, which makes Obama and the Dems look bad.
    Don’t let the rights fool you – they do not believe in capitalism either, or there would be not government subsides and tax breaks going to supposedly profitable business.

  63. Rollo_Tomassi says:

    “Jeilee – as a CEO you can also have the Company buy you a car, and pay for your house and vacations.”

    True, but these perq’s are not completely free, The IRS counts them as income and taxes the recipient accordingly.

  64. xring, I don’t know what “Rpots” are. But I do know that since Newt Gingrich uttered the words that the Occupy people should get a bath then get a job, the Republican/conservative automatons have been parroting those same words as if they were their own. Sad that they cannot think for themselves and come up with their own lines.

  65. slugoxyz: you say “I have no idea which side of the barrier I stand on. I don’t feel rich.” and “I certainly don’t feel like a 1%.” and also “I would probably tell the folk on “that” side of the barrier to work a little (or a lot) harder or think a lot smarter and as Coach said, get to making their own breaks.”

    So why haven’t you taken your coach’s advice, made your own breaks and become one of the 1%ers? Seriously! Tell us your story. Why aren’t you rich?

    By the way, all evidence proves that Trickle Down Economics, doesn’t trickle down.

    But, there is hope!

    qq… is about to share with us all how SIMPLE it is to just STOP BEING POOR!

    So stay turned to this blog for qq…’s big reveal!

  66. concernedtacoma7 says:

    “If it is unclear for you I suggest you read what Buffett wrote. Anyone earning a million or more a year in Capital Gains is rich.”

    Do you have any idea how small the number of people who fall in this category is?

    Taxing these people more will solve what exactly? It will not even dent one year’s defecit spending. Maybe it will make you FEEL better…

    And Buffet’s effective rate is approx 40%. Numerous articles have been linked to on this board to show he is misrepresenting his tax burden to the public.

  67. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Muck- you are acting like a four year old today.

    AI summed it pretty well for you. He left off don’t blame others, but take personal responsibility for every action and outcome.

  68. concernedtacoma7 says:

    “By the way, all evidence proves that Trickle Down Economics, doesn’t trickle down.”

    You going to show us that 100% of economists agree? Or just Krugman? 80’s and 90’s were pretty good economic times.

    If you are looking for evidence that govt interference in markets does not work, then you might get 100% approval. Or that Keynesian economics does not work. See how this works

  69. Actually aislander has it dead on for actions. Does anybody think that what he has proposed is that difficult for a person.

    My premise take place before those actions and are ongoing… a decision to no longer be poor.

    Once you make a decision to be more than who or what you are at this point in time, that becomes the first in a long, never ending series of decisions to not being poor. That decision is made every day by millions of people. I personally think that decision is easy – to no longer want to be poor.

    What happens next can be more challenging and is up to each individual. How challenging it becomes is dependent on the resources, desires, support system and many other variables for the individual.

    It is no secret lefties, government can provide some resources but if you become dependent on them then your station in life is dependent on what someone else decides for you.

  70. concerned… My time is too valuable to waste replying to people who devolve to making personal attacks when they lack the intellect to discuss and debate real issues. When you have nothing to offer, then you should offer nothing, rather than filling space with pointless nasty comments. Therefore, I won’t bother myself to read your tripe any longer, so don’t expect any reply or response from me.

    As regards your latest silly comment: “Muck- you are acting like a four year old today.”

    I suppose that would be in comparison to you acting like a three year old – every day?

    concernedtacoma7 = TBI

  71. Muckibr
    R = Republicons
    Pot = Tea Party

    Concerned – you won’t even get 10% on ‘government interference on markets don’t work’.

    After all government contracts and susidies are good for the economy.

  72. 80′s and 90′s were pretty good economic times.

    Trickle down was sold as “all boats rise” but:

    Only the rich got richer in ’80s, Fed concludes During Reagan era, poor lost ground

    Economic Inequality Grew in 90’s Boom, Fed Reports

    And, since the 80s and 90s introduced significant deregulation which allowed the banks to create derivatives and make this mess, even if all boats rose (which they didn’t) it is highly debatable whether, in the long term, it was worth it.

  73. Aislander, if you can demonstrate that there was any time in history where everyone could stay out of poverty by taking any job then your premise might work.

    Argentina doesn’t regulate jobs – about 60% of the population is below the poverty line.

  74. Do you have any idea how small the number of people who fall in this category is?


  75. xring, thanks for the RPot explanation!

    beerBoy, “the number of people who fall in this category” is 1%, right? They are the 1%ers, correct?

    Oh, and thanks for the info and links on the failure of Trickle-down economics. (I think it was George H.W. Bush who originally termed it as Voo-Doo Economics .)

  76. bb – when you have NO job… take a job, any job… use that job to provide resources, manage those resources as best you can… move on to a better job… on and on it goes.

    Is it not what you did to improve your station in life?

  77. Damn! In my heart I just knew qq… was going to let us down and not be able to come up with a way to just Stop Being Poor. What a disappointment qq… is.

    And to just default to that lame garbage posted by aislander was even more of a disappointment.


  78. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Poverty line in US approx $22K. 2x earners making min wage working 40 hours/week [($7.25x40x50)x2] make $29k per year. Not rich by any means (perhaps spiritually) but surviving. In WA it would be $35k.

  79. aislander says:

    The Census Bureau provides figures that show that, while the poverty rate remains rather constant (apparently we have lost the War On Poverty more decisively than the War On Drugs…) over the decades, those who compose that cohort we call “the poor” change, with very few remaining in poverty for an extended period of time…


    I don’t write for you and don’t really care what you think. I thought that obvious by now.

    It is clear to me that you (euphemistic you) want someone to take care of you from the cradle to the grave. You want someone else to be responsible for all your choices, all your decisions.

    This is the second time with this free will, decision to be poor stuff. You need it to be something outside yourself to be at fault for your station in life. If it is someone else, then someone else can come to the rescue to save you from yourself.

    But if I (and others) are correct, then you have to painfully admit that no one will save you except for yourself… and we know what the odds of that is don’t we.

  81. aislander says:

    What is lame is calling something “lame garbage” without proving it wrong…

  82. aislander says:

    Actually, xring, the acronym was WWJMYD and I was bouncing off another post in which the member used WWJD to justify lefty social programs.

    By saying that you didn’t find the former in a web search, am I to understand that you are faulting me for originality?

  83. aislander says:

    Sum-one wrote: “My time is too valuable to waste replying to people who devolve to making personal attacks when they lack the intellect to discuss and debate real issues. When you have nothing to offer, then you should offer nothing, rather than filling space with pointless nasty comments…”

    Ahem: “…lame garbage…”

  84. qq… Today, DEC 14 at 9:54 AM wrote: “The key here is to make some moves to stop being poor. IT really is that simple.”

    But has COMPLETELY FAILED to explain the simple way to stop being poor.


    Guess it’s not that simple after all, is it?

  85. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Get a job, spend within reason. SIMPLE! have children when you are emotionally and fiscally prepared to. SIMPLE! Stay off drugs. SIMPLE!

    Since you need help finding employment, http://seattle.craigslist.org/tac/jjj/

  86. You want to stop poverty then choose to no longer be poor. It all begins inside each and every one of us. It is that simple a concept.

    Once that choice is made then the decision becomes a series of decisions followed by actions. As I said before aislander provided a series of actions and guidelines to use as a guide to behavior that will, at the very least be in alignment to preventing poverty.

    I know the need for an out… but sorry, in the end it is you that controls your life.

    Why would you allow someone else or some other entity to have some unnecessary influence over your life? That would be sad… :(

  87. LarryFine says:

    LMAO !!! muckibr says:
    Dec. 14, 2011 at 2:51 pm concerned… My time is too valuable to waste replying…”

    I’m saving this one.

  88. LarryFine says:

    here’s a peek inside > “so don’t expect any reply or response from me.
    As regards your latest…”
    … too funny.

  89. Aislander, Jesus makes us do nothing. What we do, even in the Name of Jesus, is done by our own free will.

  90. aislander says:

    God, xring, TRY to pay attention. I didn’t say that Jesus forces us to do anything; I said government does…

  91. LarryFine says:

    Is xring “Patty” ?

  92. xring, I know, I can’t believe it either, that

    aislander was so proud of coming up with WWJMYD for What Would Jesus Make You Do,

    and then aislander writes,” I didn’t say that Jesus forces us to do anything; I said government does…”

    You’re not the one who needs to “pay attention” xring.

    aislander is the one here with the Attention Deficit Disorder, and I really hope he has that looked into.

  93. tellnolies says:

    “2)Get a job–any job”

    There are 13 million unemployed as of last month, and 3.4 million unfullfilled job vacancies, according to the government. (http://www.bls.gov)

    So, if everyone just “gets a job”, there will still be about 9.6 million who can’t.

    I won’t assume malice on the part of the poster, ignorance is sufficient to explain the mistake.

  94. aislander says:

    Sum-one wrote “The so-called lefties are more in-tune with the old 90s notion of “WWJD?”

    To which I responded: “Actually lefties are “in tune” with WWJMYD: what would Jesus MAKE you do? The answer to that is nothing–it’s all voluntary. Not with lefties, though. Force is their custom…”

    From sum-one: “I just wanted to tell you that Jesus doesn’t Make Us Do anything. We have free will from God. So we can do what we want to, even if it is the wrong thing. Jesus would just like us to do the right thing instead.”

    From me: “We don’t have free will from lefty taxation and social engineering. I personally try to follow certain precepts but I am not so egotistical as to use the force of government to take the property of others to make EVERYBODY follow those precepts…”

    So…the coercion comes from government and lefties’ using its power to enforce their moral precepts. My comments weren’t about Jesus (I specifically stated that He doesn’t force us to do anything, but lefties do), rather they were about lefties and government.

    Got it?

  95. aislander says:

    No mistake, tell. If no one will give you a job, make your own…

  96. tellnolies says:

    ROFLMAO! That’s even funnier, in the sad sort of way

  97. aislander says:

    You’re right NO ONE has EVER done that…

  98. tellnolies, Good points, and glad you are getting a good laugh out of aislander. He/she is one of the really funny ones on this blog. Reminds me of that English guy Benny Hill!

    WWJMYD = What Would Jesus Make You Do according to aislander is NOT saying that Jesus would MAKE you do anything. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That’s so rich!

  99. aislander says:

    If you can’t deal with independence, then do what I first suggested. If you are willing to take ANY job, you should be able to find something.

    Getting rid of the minimum wage would really help to generate entry-level jobs, giving people a chance to get a foot on the ladder…

  100. tellnolies says:

    Yer a hoot AI! ’tis the season to be jolly! Which reminds me, since this has apparently devolved into comedy…The reason Santa is so jolly? He knows where all the bad girls live! (George Carlin)

  101. tellnolies says:

    I feel like I’m having a conversation with the elder Lebowski! (chortle) Okay, I’ll play along. You can call me dude, or El Duderino if you’re not into the brevity thing

  102. aislander says:

    So…tell…(if your above post was addressed to me) we’re still having a conversation, are we? So far, you have said nothing not intended to marginalize.

    Refute what I’ve said. I’VE made my own jobs when I’ve needed to. I’VE taken any job available. I’VE worked for less than minimum wage. Now, I still work at a job I’ve created, but not at or below minimum wage…

    If you ARE addressing me, I would have to guess that you believe your jobs numbers are dispositive. They’re not. Jobs exist that are not covered by your numbers…

  103. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    On average, a person tells a lie 3 times a day. Thus, every time you use the handle “tellnolies“, you’re lying… and really skewing your average. You’ll need to seriously consider a name change, for the sake of credibility.

    Oh, and snarky remarks are a dime a dozen around here.

  104. X & Muck, you ever able to follow Aislanders paragraph… If you read it slowly and look up the big words you will realize what he said. In little, easily understandable(that means makes sense) words:

    He was saying that liberals would like to change it to WWJMYD(what would Jesus make you do). He was pointing out the same thing you are, that Jesus didn’t make anyone do anything, that it was done with free will. And how this contrasts(is different) from what liberals want as law in this nation. Do the smaller words help you understand a little easier?

  105. SandHills says:

    We aren’t really in a class war….yet. But when the middle class keeps slipping in order to just keep their head above water on the mortgage, rising food, utilities, and higher education costs – and the truly rich keep buying more and more influence in our government – well new Mercedes and gated communities are going to be even larger targets for the dispossessed. I just remember how far above the masses the royalty were in pre-revolution France (as depicted in the “Tale of Two Cities”). You can bet there is someone out there right now knitting some names…..

  106. tellnolies says:

    “So far, you have said nothing not intended to marginalize. ”

    I just thought I’d adopt your style of banter for the evening. I’ve wondered if you (and others, including some lefties) really believe some of the crap you post, or if it’s merely for effect.

    I did refute your assertion, then you said “make your own”, a knee jerk dissmissive comment such as the first. Do the government numbers reflect the entire game? No, but the black market isn’t for everyone either AI. The current reality is there is more labor available in this country than there are jobs to fill. Did you hear about the recession? FYI, I’ve worked at a variety of jobs myself, and worked my way through college with NO financial assistance. But I’m not so arrogant as to assume that my experience is, or even can be, the universal norm.

    “Oh, and snarky remarks are a dime a dozen around here”

    Wow, hadn’t noticed that Voxy. I’ll take the name change under consideration. (not) So, am I Kard now? ROFLMAO, this is kinda fun

  107. Nice posts – aislander and ct7. Always the same nonsense from the lefties. Mostly just insults because they can’t reply with an intelligent comment. If lefties can’t win the war of words, they always tell you you are arrogant or ignorant. Have fun guys.

  108. Circular logic: make an assertion, restate the assertion slightly differently, assert that the original assertion has now been proven by the restatement of the assertion.

    Original assertion: “poverty is a choice”
    Restated assertion: aislander’s prescription for not being poor.

  109. over the decades, those who compose that cohort we call “the poor” change, with very few remaining in poverty for an extended period of time…

    Got a link for that? Not clear how the Census could show that as it isn’t a longitudinal study that follows individuals.

    Cuz, if that is true, then it pretty much blows away the argument that government programs are trapping people in poverty, rather it would make more of a case that socio-economic status in America (at least for the Middle Class) is extremely fragile.

  110. “Original assertion: “poverty is a choice”
    Restated assertion: aislander’s prescription for not being poor.”

    Who made this quoted statement bb? Are you talking to me, the double-q, if so be clear especially if you misquote.

    False original assertion: “poverty is a choice”
    Better premise “remaining in a state of poverty is a choice”

    False interpretation of a restated assertion: “as above”
    Better interpretation of the premise: aislander presented a working list of actions and guidelines that can prevent poverty. These actions were directly correlated to studies related to poverty in America that show for example, if you had a baby early (teens, prior to HS graduation), you were x number of times more likely to be ‘poor’

    Not sure what you are doing bb… again but this is me helping you ;)

  111. beerBoy, I think that argument “that government programs are trapping people in poverty,” has been proven false time and time again. Government programs that help the poor and unemployed have been mostly designed to give folks a hand-up rather than a hand-out. But, they, like the folks who design them, are not perfect and they can be abused.

    Did you read/hear a short while ago about…

    Welfare fraud investigators raid $1.2 million Lake Washington home
    Seattle chiropractor, wife accused of welfare fraud


    There’s a case where the rich figured out a way to get richer by robbing the funds that were meant for the poor. And people wonder why some people have such contempt for the rich. Go figure!

  112. aislander’s prescription for avoiding poverty leaves out many of the reasons people are in poverty. One should add as one of the top prescriptions: “choose your parents well”. People born into poverty have a very difficult time escaping, and people born into the top 10% generally stay in the top 10% throughout their lives.

    The simplistic idea that most people have a choice of whether to live in poverty is naive at best and appallingly cruel at worst.

    One of the largest, if not the largest reason people are in poverty is disability and health-related issues. And, because of our substandard health care system for the working poor, children who are born into poverty are much more likely to be born with a disability or to acquire a disability.

    The idea of taking any job leads to poverty for many people. Fox News recently reported that 7% of full-time wiorkers are living in poverty and 15% of part-time workers are:

    “The numbers show that a job is by no means a guarantee against falling into poverty. Among all American workers, the rate was 7 percent — and 15 percent among those working part-time, a rate little-changed from last year.


  113. Thank you tuddo!!!

    THANK YOU for a most illuminating comment!!! Supported by Fox News no less!


  114. Tuddo – using your scenarios…

    Born ‘rich’ – yep you got a leg up on your poorer neighbor, sure do. Break a few of the guidelines and the buffer between you and poverty will be lessened. This is a small percentage of the whole, is it not?

    Health – If you have a disability or a health related issue your chances of losing any support buffer you currently have will diminish if you do not follow the guidelines. If you are healthy and a disability or other health related issue afflicts you then yes, your chances of moving where you are to a state of poverty do increase. Here is an issue with something that may be outside your general control. What is presented are those items within your control. Don’t control items on the list and you compound your health issues.

    Job – again taking a job provides resources, managing those resources are what will provide the foundation to get to the next rung. We are also talking NO job. If you have no job then yes, any job (do we really need to quantify here) can help.

    “The simplistic idea that most people have a choice of whether to live in poverty is naive at best and appallingly cruel at worst.”

    I said you have a choice to move from poverty. You and you alone need to make that choice. Whether to actually LIVE in poverty is dependent on your initial choice, your decisions, state of mind and body, the resources available to you, your management of those resources, and any help that may be available to you.

    The decision is yours to move from where you are to where you want to go. The variables will determine how fast or far you move… sadly, in some cases, if at all.

  115. Right wing real speak

    Socialism; government money and aid go to poor, working, and middle class.

    Capitalism” government money and aid go to big businesses and the rich.

    Hypocritical ring wing real speak:

    The poor are not truly poor because of all the government programs that support them.

    Government welfare makes people lazy and must be done ended to .

    Census: US poverty rate swells to nearly 1 in 6

    The overall poverty rate climbed to 15.1 percent, or 46.2 million, up from 14.3 percent in 2009. The official poverty level is an annual income of $22,314 for a family of four.


    09-13-11:More Americans were living in poverty in 2010 than at any time since at least the 1950s, with the overall poverty rate climbing to 15.1 — a 6 percent jump in just one year — according to Census figures released Tuesday.


    Tmell – big words or small, AI is wrong more often than he is right?

  116. xring… Amen!

  117. aislander says:

    Nice series of straw men, xring: setting up by stating what the “right wing” says; following that by conjecturing about what it “really means.”

    Well, guess what: Your definitions of socialism AND capitalism are not even close to what I would use.

    You seem shocked–shocked!–that the poverty rate has gone up in a terrible recession (one that left-wing “cures” have only made worse), but neglect to mention that the people in that category are largely not the same people as five years ago. Very few who don’t have profound personal problems stay in poverty for an extended period of time–except for many who are being paid by the government to stay poor…

  118. slugoxyz says:

    Muckibr – alright. I’ll bite. There is a social experiment/exercise dealing with circles, triangles and squares. Towards the end of the exercise, roughly 75% of the group has become circles (the poor), 20% have become triangles (middle class) and roughly 5% have become squares (the rich or entitled). Eventually, (if done correctly), the squares make the rules, look down at the circles, and become more and more exclusive and exclusionary. It’s an interesting little exercise to show roughly how society works. Is that result bad? I never thought it to be so. I just figured it was the way capitalism works. You ask me why I didn’t make my own breaks to become ‘rich” or a circle. I will tell you that I never truly had the desire to be a circle. I am a firmly entrenched triangle. I am lucky because I have a good job somewhat free from recession and I work hard to be good at what I do, one deep in my organization. I am fortunate to have survived the military for more than 20 years and have that retirement, good medical for me and my family and a few other benefits. That on top of my society serving position here and I call myself fortunate. Rich? I have a nice, medium size (small to some) house, I eat a restaurant meal once a week, we have presents under the tree, TVs in every room, nice vehicles (and the car payments to go with them) and we don’t miss meals. What more do I need? I have the love of my family, heat, food and my health. So, Muckibr, I worked very hard for my whole life. I am a North East Coaster with a Puritan work ethic (there is no fun before the work is done). So, I feel I have made my own breaks and made it up as far as I care to.

  119. aislander says:

    slugoxyz: You’ll never be a good class warrior with an attitude such as you just expressed; you lack the requisite envy…

    I actually admire your sentiments and agree with them. Leaving aside the question of whether the “rich” create jobs (they do), what does it matter what someone else has if you are happy with what YOU have?

  120. slugoxyz, That’s cool. I respect your choices. Was just curious. Thanks for the reply.

  121. concernedtacoma7 says:

    More excuses from the left. More passing the buck, ‘its not my fault!’ speak. ‘its my parents fault!’.

    Where does individual responsibility start for the left? Does it only apply to the rich?

    With more and more children (I think it is 40%) being born into single parent households, how do you see poverty ending? Using your excuses, all those kids are justified to be on the teet for life.

  122. My father made a choice to move from poverty, and good for him. Luckily, there was the Civilian Conservation Corps for him to join. Otherwise he would have stayed picking cotten and living without access to a high school diploma.

    Unfortunately, the far right will not tolerate the idea of federal work programs that were so effective during the Depression and they do not even want guaranteed student loans for education.

    Federal social programs in the 30’s through the 60’s allowed a huge number of people to escape poverty and join the middle class. Unfortunately, the more we ramp down assistance, as we have been doing since Reagan, the smaller the percent in the middle class becomes.

  123. yes tuddo, good for your dad.

    I do question the premise that just because a specific program might not be avaialble then he would have stayed in ‘poverty’.

    We are then making the assumption that either your fathr would not have found other means of advancement or another program would not have been available.

    I don’t think either one of us could forsee what would have been if the CCC was not available.

    As far as the rest of your post, I get it, Republicans are not on your christmas card list.

    As far a student loans are concerned that is a program that make no sense. No cost containment – when you have the federal government and their wallet available, their is absolutely no cost control for education. I keep hearing education is expensive…. why?

    Also as a student why would you saddle yourself with the kind of debt fresh from mama’s wing? Especially for a liberal arts degree?

  124. Good for your father tuddo.

    No question that the access to the CCC made the difference in your father’s and ultimately your family’s situation.

    Your dad might have found work with another program, like the WPA for example, but that’s only because the Democratic FDR administration made sure those opportunities where available.

    We could easily speculate what might have happened if the CCC had not been there, and that would likely not have been a good situation.

    As far as the rest of your post, all good points! I remember the Republican Reaganites throwing the mentally challenged out in the streets to fend for themselves, all in the name of budget cutting. Heartless goons!

    As far as student loans go, President Obama’s recent executive order is a good step in the right direction, but more needs to be done to help students and not burden them with huge loans. Tuitions need to be reduced, not increased as they recently have been. That means more revenue to the schools, and taxing the rich could provide that. The rich can afford it. And, the rich (who some call the “job creators”) owe it, as they gain the biggest benefits from a highly educated workforce.

    As regards the student; so many on this blog, from the righty side, have said over and over that to succeed one needs to get a good education. Now, hypocritically, one says “why saddle yourself with the kind of debt” generated by huge student loans. What a hypocrite! What’s wrong with a Liberal Arts degree anyway, especially if one decided to become a teacher?

  125. dude, it depends on what you want to do with your life. In some cases a good education is needed, in other cases good training is needed. It does not have to be expensive to be good.

    Dude, why would you saddle yourself with debt if you dont have too? If other options are available to educate / train yourself in a cost effective manner then go for it, take advantage of it.

    Nothing wrong with a liberal arts degree, just be aware of the salary range for a person entering a particular field with a particular degree. And make appropiate decisions as to you cost to obtain said degree.

  126. tuddo, it occurs to me that someone might offer an argument like, “In some cases a good education is needed, in other cases good training is needed. It does not have to be expensive to be good.”

    But how foolish would such a person be to make those kinds of silly incongruous claims! It makes me laugh to think someone might really think that. That person would really have to be out of touch with the real world.

    If someone did make those kinds of conflicting foolish arguments I would have to challenge that person to prove it with real life examples of such inexpensive training that would lead to a good job and promising career. But, I bet that person would try to duck that challenge with some kind of flippant remark.

    Nope, the hypocrite says out of one side of his face, “You need a good education to succeed.” Then, later in the blog, out of the other side of his face he says, “You don’t need an expensive education to succeed. Just get some cheap training.” And I ask, where at — McDonald’s U?

  127. then it occurs to me mucky that you really don’t have any imagination on how to ‘succeed’ in life.

    If I a person is so ‘foolish’ yet you offer nothing in return to counter such foolishness. Just empty insults.

    Why does training have to be ‘expensive’ to be good? Their are countless stories of person with ‘expensive’ degrees but no job and no promise of any career… and I am not talking just of this recession.

    Who are you having a conversation with, I never said the first part.

    By the way, for a franchiser, McDonald’s does have what is considered one of the best training facilities in the world. It is called ‘Hamburger University’.

  128. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Is there nothing the ‘rich’ is not expected to pay for? How do think that can last forever, or even short term? When you run out of ‘rich’ people, we will all just be poor and in debt.

    You have zero understanding of economics or basic finance. How will more revenue to schools (tuition) make school cheaper? How is the takeover of student loans making schools cheaper? Many schools are private, and now we are going to throw (more) taxpayer money at them?

    It is like obamacare; spreading out the costs does nothing to address the actual problem, the cost.

    No pride, no sense of individual responsibility. You are now off in the deep end of the progressive looney bin. You can ignore me all day, but I bring attention to your madness all day.

  129. AI – lest you forget –

    The recession was caused by Wall Street, Bankers, and the ‘Rich’ being allowed to play by conservative rules – that is by no rules except greed is good.

    And the only thing the right has to offer is more of the same polices that got us here in the first place.

    I am shocked that you don’t recognize a response to one of your own posts, for the second time on this one thread.

    The rich have done such a good job at creating jobs that we are in a major recession and real unemployment of 25% because they only create jobs overseas.

    In today’s parlance:

    Socialists believe in the abolition of private property. Liberals do not.

    Liberals focus on using taxpayer money to help better society.

    Progressives focus on using government power to make large institutions play by a set of rules.

    Tuddo – Say it ain’t so! You farther got ahead by joining a government ran make work program?

    OMG, what’s next! That he got a free college education paid for by the government?

    I’ll bet we even accepted government help in buying a home!

  130. aislander says:

    Sorry xring, the market was not allowed to function freely, otherwise sick banks (and auto companies) would have been allowed to fail. Leaving aside Fannie’s and Freddie’s (and Congress’s) complicity in the housing bubble, there has been a series of bubbles that have inflated due to governmental attempts to defeat the business cycle; the next bubble being more expansive than the one before, making the ultimate reckoning that much worse.

    That “lack of regulation” is a lefty fantasy…

    As for your responding to posts of mine, xring, perhaps you should make reference to the post, as I usually do–or at least address your mordant parries to me…

  131. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Ring, as one who had his college paid for by big govt and one who continues to live off taxpayer dollars, I can say you are way off on you understanding of govt.

    The difference is those who earn the benefits and those who expect it.

    Given my public salary, I am comfortable but not in your definition of 1%. Your values and principles are against what make our country great with your anti-rich rhetoric.

    Because a man has more money than you does not mean he did not earn the difference. Even if he inherited or stole the difference, it was luck or his risk.

    I understand you have issues with your deployment overseas 40 years ago. If you need help, seek it off a public thread. Don’t mask your issues in progressive rhetoric. They are transparent.

    As a veteran, I will help you if you ask. Good luck and Godspeed.

  132. Pacman33 says:

    The rich have done such a good job at creating jobs despite the uncertainty of a radical and unpredictable POTUS and the world’s highest capital gains tax of 35%. Regardless, an infestation of leftists would still double the worlds highest corporate tax and question why they only create jobs overseas.

    Socialists believe in the abolition of private property. Liberals Are the only group of people that don’t consider compensation and earnings for labor and services private property.

    Liberals focus on using conservatives money to help better society then take credit for it despite doing nothing except the theft conservative’s property.

    Progressives focus on using government power to make large institutions, Agencies and Bureaucracies .

  133. aislander – your black and white world view has equated Government intervention on the behalf of failed economic institutions with regulations to prevent those institutions from making reckless speculations on virtual debt “products”.

    Graham-Leach-Bliley repealed part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, removing barriers in the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies that prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company. With the passage of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, commercial banks, investment banks, securities firms, and insurance companies were allowed to consolidate.

    G-L-B was a REDUCTION in regulation. A reduction of regulations that were put in place to prevent the Banks from once again engage in the reckless activities that led to the Great Depression.

    While I agree with you that Iceland’s approach (let the banks fail) was, ultimately, the best long-term approach – providing interest-free loans of TRILLIONS is not regulation.

    Yes, I know, in your fantasy utopian society the US Congress doesn’t do anything to regulate commerce utilizing the powers given them by Article I, Section 8, Clause 3.

  134. Pacman33 says:

    Say it ain’t so tuddo! Your father got ahead by joining a government ran Make work program? ‘Make’ work is right too. LOL.

    These programs were foolish rabbit holes. The workers were so lazy and constantly ridiculed for it. WPA was the worst, they would drag out the length of jobs deliberately. The organization’s acronym was said to stand for “We Piddle Around” or “Working Piss Ants”. It was so bad when they finally pulled the plug on these money pits, workers had to join the war because no one would hire them for their reputation. Safe to say we haven’t attempted ‘relief employment’ since. The only problem is public employees of today have adopted it as their model.

    These programs were a few of many that combined along with ‘The New Deal’ that improved the economy for 2-3 years and puttered out and right back into a recession. luckily WWII began and dictated the market. Many think it may have extended the depression overall. Though maybe not the impact FDR wanted, It had an impact:

    – Distaste in wasteful & ineffective programs and policies and government overreach created what became modern day conservatism

    – Voters liked progressives so much, they elected Conservative Coalition largely controlled Congress from 1938 to 1964

    – Progressive/liberal = Deficit Spending = Big Government = Debt

    – Non-Stimulating Corrupt Stimulus Spending

    – Gallop poll in 1939 reported 40% of Americans think New Deal and FDR prolonged the depression

    – 1st New Deal was so great the 2nd was almost constitutional

    – The Awareness for Americans to keep guard up from a SCOTUS Stuffing, Government Inflating and Capitalism Poisoning Tyrants.

    – Term Limits

  135. beerBoy, the reference to Iceland is interesting. Iceland decided on a populist/socialist approach and guaranteed individual accounts through its nationalized banks but let the private banks fail. They increased their social programs for citizens and insured that all citizens would not lose their primary residence, their basic income. Of course, they already had health care and other social programs that made sure their citizens are not the ones being punished for corporate failures like Republicans demand for the USA.

    The head of the Iceland government recently told Angela Merkel that the austerity programs for the EU (what conservatives want here in the USA) are bound to cause grief and long-term poverty instead of growth. Iceland is betting on its people, not its banks, as opposed to the George Bush school of economics and the mainstream Republican’s approach.

  136. @ Pacman33: Your statement that capital gains rates are 35% and highest in the world is not factual. For 2008-2012, long-term capital gains tax is 0-15% depending on income and short-term is 10%-35%. Furthermore, if you are thinking it deters business opportunities, 100% of the taxes on capital gains for angel and venture capital investors on small business investments are exempt if held for 5 years. Corporatons are allowed to use capital losses to reduce their net gains retroactively for three years, and this reduces their taxes significantly.

    The average paid tax rate is much lower than 35%. Other countries have equal or higher capital gains. Canada taxes capital gains at the same rate as regular income, so if you are at the highest bracket, you are paying 43% capital gains taxes.

    US Corporations had an average book rate of of 27.7% capital gains in 2006 through 2009 based on a PricewaterhouseCoopers LLC study. Japan, Morocco, Indonesia, Germany and Italy all had higher corporate capital gains tax rates than the US.


    Facts are pesky things, and quoting Fox News commenters is not the best way to get your facts.

  137. Pacman33, I am a realist and a practical person. I look for results, not ideology. If 60% of Americans think the New Deal did not prolong the Great Depression, good for them. It is a hypothetical, anyway, because we do not know how long it would have alsted otherwise.

    What I do know is since conservative, trickle down economics have been in place (which I voted for and talked up during Reagan’s years, by the way), we have seen the people suffer, the middle class decimated while corporate profits soar and measures like health care, education and other standards of living decline. The proof is in results, and blowhard conservative commenters cannot hide actual facts.

  138. That’s Game, Set and Match for tuddo!

    No prize for Pacman33, sorry, he lost!

  139. According to your data…

    Canada, for the time period, had an average effective tax rate quoted as 21.6%. Your 45% appears nowhere in the document. Is that the statutory rate?

    The US had an effective tax rate of 27.7%. When compared to 58 countries excluding the US – 19.5%, OECD-28 ex US – 22.6%, Non-OECD countries – 16.5%, EU – 21.9%. this according to page three providing summary results. The US appears to have the highest average book effective tax rate.

    As far as Japan – ” Japan has proposed reforms to reduce its corporate tax rate by five percentage points effective in 2011 (although these may be deferred due to the recent earthquake and tsunami).”

    According to their conclusion:

    ” Among the companies on the Forbes Global 2000 list for 2010, U.S.-headquartered companies faced an average effective tax rate of 27.7 percent compared to a rate of 19.5 percent for their foreign-headquartered counterparts. Only five of the 59 countries in the sample had higher effective tax rates than these U.S.-headquartered companies over the 2006-2009 period: Japan (38.8 percent), Morocco (33.9 percent), Italy (29.1 percent), Indonesia (28.1 percent) and Germany (27.9 percent).”

    Lots to digest here but I wouldn’t be quick to say the US is competitive as far as tax rate, reporting and policy is concerned.

  140. who says I was talking to you, muckibr… ;)

  141. nice pom-poms… muckibr

  142. aislander says:

    Don’t forget, qq, that many of the nations cited as having higher tax rates than the US DON’T have the equivalent of the local and state taxes that we do…

  143. Thank you kardnos-yabetchya for making my point yet again!

  144. SandHills says:

    The differing posts I’ve read here is all the indication I need to see we are headed down a road that offers no positive solutions. Even taking away the buzz words used for and against either the Democratic or Republican candidates or political platforms, those on this forum is a rough sampling of some ingrained major – maybe unreconcilable – differences among everyday Americans about where a future America should strive to be.

    This forum, like countless ones in all the newspapers across the country, bring out some strong opinions – which at best is harmless expressions that might bubble over to ad hominem attacks. But it does give a sense that there are some issues that have created a schism that many don’t want to try and bridge. In 1860 there was only one issue that had a schism so wide it took a war to bridge (with part of Southern culture continues to honor the scars from that war). One has to wonder if the schism between the haves and have nots will have to be resolved in just a radical manner. And I will repeat my “Tale of Two Cities” analogy and add that many of our elected officials in both parties can be paraphrased by using a quote attributed to Marie Antoinette: “Let them eat cake”.

  145. Pacman33 says:

    Japan announced it will be reducing its corporate tax rate, the United States will soon hold the dubious distinction of having the highest corporate tax rate in the world, at 35 percent. To say our tax code puts American job creators at a disadvantage is a serial understatement. With unemployment still at 8.8 percent(20% w/ real figures) and bleak projections ahead, we simply can’t afford to allow our tax code to continue to hinder our competitiveness. It costs too many jobs.

    With a 35 percent tax rate, American companies are continually less competitive compared to their foreign competitors. The 35 percent rate also makes it likely foreign-based employers will invest elsewhere in the world. In fact, the U.S. taking no action — simply maintaining the status quo — will ensure we continue to fall behind.

    In 1990, the U.S. corporate tax rate was below the global average. Twenty years later we are poised to become the highest taxed country in the world. This is a recipe for losing the future.

    What’s more, our backwards system actually traps American money overseas. When global American companies are successful outside the U.S., it means they create jobs back in America to support those foreign operations. Yet when those employers are successful, our current tax code actually discourages them from investing their overseas earnings back in America.

    The U.S. is one of only five industrialized countries to tax the worldwide earnings of companies headquartered in their country.

    Coupled with the world’s highest corporate tax rate, our tax code punishes American companies for success time and again. Rather than enticing our companies to stay, our tax code actually encourages them to head elsewhere for a better environment to create jobs.

  146. qq, since Pacman did not make a distinction between corporate and individual rates, I presented information on both. The article I linked to provided information on corporate taxes.

    Most countries do not provide the exemptions and ability to retroactively apply losses to back tax payments, so that is why studies have to be conducted to see what corporations are actually paying on capital gains. Quoting 35% as the maximum rate does not give a clear picture of what is actually paid.

    A complete overhaul of corporate taxes is needed, because looking at each tax piecemeal gives a very different picture of what really happens. The USA actually has some of the lowest effective taxes for corporations in the world. US corporations’ taxes are equal to 1.3 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Most industrial countries collect more from companies, about 2.5 percent of output.


  147. concernedtacoma7 says:

    ” the middle class decimated ”

    Lets place the drama in check. While times are not great (we are in a prolonged recession, or at least something close to a recession), look at the parking lot at the mall and tell me the middle class is decimated. Look at sales of autos, big screen TVs, and iPhones.

    Our standard of living is still very high compared to the rest of the world.

    Corporations have no obligation to the public other than to follow laws and regulations. Same for the rich. If you do not like the system, you need to change the laws and regulations.

    Our education and healthcare are declining due to progressive principles. Destruction of the family unit, over regulation, freebies, big govt.

  148. Pacman33 says:

    tuddo could only come up with ~
    “Pacman33, I am a realist and a practical person. I look for results, not ideology. If 60% of Americans think the New Deal did not prolong the Great Depression, good for them”

    The Progressive Porkulus Prototype was advertised to avert the depression. 40% said the ‘Deal’ did the exactly the polar opposite….

    If you are a realist and a practical person, how would that be acceptable in any practical or realistic situation?

    What do you think the odds are of the poll having more than two answers to choose from?

  149. Pac33 – Spoken like a true broke-back conservative tool.
    Some WPA projects still in use
    Grand Coulee Dam
    Hoover Dam
    Doubleday Field, Cooperstown N.Y
    Camp David, Maryland
    Dealey Plaza, Dallas Texas
    From information on just how lazy the WPA workers were go to:

    Under Regan National Debt when from $0.97 trillion to $2.60 trillion.
    Under HW Bush, debt went from $2.60 trillion to $4.06 trillion.
    Under Clinton, debt went from $4.06 trillion to $5.67 trillion.
    Under W Bush, debt went from $5.67 trillion to $10.02 trillion (excluding the trillion or so war funding which was on separate budgets)

    In other words since 1980 the US Debt went up about $9.05 trillion with about $7.6 trillion coming under fiscally conservative Republicans.

  150. PAC33,
    Unless one is a somnambulant zombie, there is no excuse for not knowing that so many US companies are reporting record or near record profits because they manufacture goods overseas, pay no duties or taxes to bring the products into the US, and horde the profits in offshore banks so they pay NO US TAXES.

    Concerned, “Corporations have no obligation to the public other than to follow laws and regulations”

    Tell that to the families who lost loved ones at the Upper Big Branch Mine where the owner increased his bottom line by not following health and safety laws and regulations.

    Or to BP who openly and flagrantly ignored safety concerns on the Deepwater Horizon Drill Rig.

    Or to any Wall Street Brokerage Firm that lied about the long term stability and earnings potential of mortgage backed securities.

  151. Pacman, the New Deal could not have been “advertised to avert the depression”, as you put it, since it was a fact during Hoover’s administration, and Hoover did everything in his power to make sure it got worse before Roosevelt even had a shot at reducing its impact through the New Deal.

    The best thing about the New Deal, according to most historians, is that the US industrial machinery was already geared up to high production levels through the big Federal infrastructure programs when WWII commenced. Without it, it would have taken 15 months to 2 years to get where we already were at the outset of the war, and huge numbers of men who went into the war would have had to be employed building the plants and infrastructure that was already there because of the New Deal.

  152. And the team of xring – tuddo has soundly thrashed Pacman33 – concerned…

    Game, set match to xring – tuddo!!!

    Nice job!

  153. aislander says:

    tuddo writes: “…Hoover did everything in his power to make sure it got worse before Roosevelt even had a shot at reducing its impact through the New Deal.”

    tuddo, for once I agree with you! Hoover was a progressive Republican who initiated many of the measures that Roosevelt expanded on. In fact, Roosevelt attacked Hoover for being a big spender!

    And yes: such measures DO make an economy worse…

  154. tuddo, watch out! When aislander starts to agree with you, you need to watch your back.

    Wikipedia says that “President Herbert Hoover started numerous programs, all of which failed to reverse the downturn.” and a lot more.

    The great Depression was a very complex set of problems, and takes a huge amount of analysis to determine who did what to turn things around. Economists from all sides have been arguing about that for years, and probably will never stop arguing about it.

    Add to that World War II, and the huge impact that had on industrial America and the labor force with most of the men in uniform, and you can’t really say for sure what ultimately fixed the economy, can you?

  155. took14theteam says:

    xring, why didn’t you include how much the national debt has gone up under Mr. Hope and Change, BHO?

  156. Hoover was an able and intelligent president who attempted orthodox economic ideas (many of the same ones later used by FDR), but became a victim to the collapse of the banking system.

    Projects Hoover tried include;

    Boulder Dam, which was designed to jump-start the economy and add job;

    Efforts to reform banking to provide mortgage relief, and funnel more federal money into business investment; and

    The Federal Home Loan Bank Act, which lowered mortgage rates for homeowners and allowed farmers to refinace their farm loans and avoid foreclosure.

    Hoover’s most ambitious economic measure was Reconstruction Finance Corporation, authorizing to provde emergency financing to banks, life insurance companies, railroads and other large businesses.

    Just as it seemed that this might work and that recovery was at hand, in the winter of 1932-33 the banking system in America went into a tailspin. On March 4, 1933, the American banking system ground to a complete halt.

    Though Franklin Delano Roosevelt indeed in fact create the New Deal, helping 6 million people find jobs, he did not “fix” the Great Depression. World War 2 was the main reason that the United States got out of the Great Depression


    Took – why don’t you? Also include how much of the debt increase is due to having to continuing Bush Wars, and pay the interest the Bush’s loans

  157. aislander says:

    If I recall correctly (and I do), FDR’s Treasury Secretary said, after a few years of New Deal futility, that what we’re doing isn’t working…

  158. aislander says:

    The wars cost an average of $160 billion per year over their ten-year span, xring–not even CLOSE to the increased size of the deficit. And DON’T blame the tax cuts–revenue was generally higher until the current unpleasantness…

  159. Aislander – class warriors don’t have envy. We have compassion and as sense of justice.

    Tmell – if you can’t follow all the big words above – Blame Yourself.

    Pac33, better a tax and spend liberal than an overspend and borrow fiscal conservative.

    Concerned, the middle class is being decimated because corporations are greedy and very short sighted.

    Healthcare is declining because it is overpriced and stingy with benefits.

    What Morgenthau said (and The Heritage Foundation confirmed) was that because the unemployment rate was higher in 1939 than in 1931, the New Deal had not worked. The reason unemployment was supposedly higher in ’39 was because CCC and WPA personnel WERE COUNTED AS UNEMPLOYED.

    So under Bush2 the Debt went from $5.6 trillion to $11.6 trillion.
    Between 1980 and 2008 the debt rose by $10.7 trillion with $9.2 coming under fiscally conservative Republicans.

  160. aislander says:

    Morgenthau said a lot more than that, xring. He said the New Deal was a failure…

  161. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Once again you look at the Presidents and not congress. You blame Bush for every evil since 1776, yet your saintly dems get a pass.

    Why hide the truth?

  162. Pacman33 says:

    bB – your black and white world view has equated lack of regulations on the behalf of failed economic institutions with outdated, Deppresion era Government intervention to prevent the Banks from once again engaging in reckless activities.

    The idea that the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act has anything to do with our current economic crisis really makes no sense at all. If the Glass Steagal Act was part of the problem, it would be the commercial banks, not the investment banks, that were in trouble and GSA would not have helped the situation. Further, by the time Glass Steagall was finally repealed with GLB it was an obsolete Depression Era relic. Leftists can’t grasp the fact that the 80-year-old legislation was all but gutted when finally repealed. They only sound uninformed mentioning GLB.

    The five large investment banks, B. Stearns, Lehman, Merrill, Morgan and Goldman, could have continued doing all of the things that they actually did during the decade of the 2000s. It looks to me like the Gramm-Leach-Bliley has helped the U.S. manage the crisis by allowing commercial banks to take over troubled investment firms.

    Reimposing Glass Steagall would drastically reduce the stability of banks since it would essentially ban bank diversification. The real solution is an end to fractional reserve banking and government intervention in currency markets.

    In fact, since 1980, Congress has passed four new sets of regulations for every one de-regulatory act, and between 2001 and 2008, there were nine new sets of regulation and not one bit of deregulation. The outcry for more regulation will only bring about more concentration and systemic risk to an industry that is already plagued with perverse incentives and moral hazard.

  163. Pacman….Are you really saying that the Derivatives market has nothing to do with the Crisis? (remember that Derivatives weren’t legal until the ’80s deregulation) Or that the various bank failures (and subsequent buy-ups) weren’t made possible by deregulation?

    What part of “too big to fail” is made better by making firms that required TRILLIONS in interest free loans from the Fed even bigger by buying up failed institutions?

    Your posts have become less and less based in reality….

  164. beerBoy, I was going to ask what 4 deregulations he was talking about since the 80’s, that were followed by re-regulation. (But, I have learned not to ask Pacman33 any questions, as it just gets him agitated and flummoxed.)

    I remember the …

    1. De-reg of the airline industry, and following recession.

    2. De-reg of the S&L industry, and its subsequent downturn. (Remeber the Keating Five? John McCain was a club member, with a jacket, in that one!)

    3. Then there was the de-reg of the Energy industry (Remember Enron everyone! The smartest guys in the room, NOT!) and it’s huge economic downturn.

    4. Then finally the mortgage/banking de-reg and stuff we are dealing with now.

    Four times Congress de-regulated various industries, followed by four recessions in the economy. Followed by the need, four times again, to re-reg to fix what those bozos broke all by themselves. (With a little help from their rich buddies and their paid lobbyists.)

    Geeze Louise! You would have though they’d have learned from the first three de-reg/re-reg fiascos!

  165. Yay Neil Bush! Silverado Savings! Ronald Reagan sure started the ball rolling with bailouts.

  166. And let’s not forget the 1980 Chrysler bailout.

  167. And the Hunt Bros. bailout….

  168. ReadNLearn says:

    Heck, at least bankers work.

    If we had class warfare, make war on the welfare recipients, they’re a drain. Force them to work.

  169. Back to who is waging class warfare against whom: The USA decided to bail out the rich and wage war against the middle class in this crisis. The rich bankers got bail outs, the rich investors got bailouts, Wall Street got bailouts, corporations got bail outs and austerity programs were introduced in social programs, many of them passing. The plan of attack was agreed upon by both Republicans and Democrats in thrall of conservative principles. They were paid handsomely for their support by big corporate donors.

    State and local governments have had to reduce social programs, unemployment insurance is collapsing and state and local infrastructure activities dwindle.

    The brilliant economist Paul Krugman has been correct since 2008 when he urged our nation to take a demand-side approach to resolutions instead of the supply-side, trickle-down nonsense that we are in the midst of.

    Again using bBoy’s example of Iceland, that country did take Krugman’s approach and bailed out their middle class and poor instead of their rich bankers and corporations. They let the private banks fail, and let shareholders take the brunt of the fallout. Gambling on bad investments created a negative outcome instead of the bailouts like the gamblers in the USA got.

    Instead of the 10%-12% unemployment forecast, their high was 7.5%. They are investigating bankers, politicians and CEO’s for fraud and other criminal activities instead of bailing them out. Iceland came out of their recession must swifter than anyone would have thought and home foreclosures never reached a serious problem.

    We must stop the class warfare against the middle class and poor in this country through Voodoo economic systems or we will continue to suffer and decline.

  170. aislander says:

    Here’s what Roosevelt’s Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau, Jr. said seven years and almost four months into FDR’s first term:

    “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot!”

  171. aislander says:

    tuddo: Where does money come from?

  172. aislander, part of it is about the tax code and part of it is the false assertion that the deficit is our main problem right now. The lack of investment and spending is the problem, spending by individuals as well as the wrong kind of spending by the federal government.

    Despite even Republican voters’ majority saying the end of the Iraq war is essential and lowering of Defense spending critical to our economy, Republican presidential candidates are all talking about increased Defense spending and more wasted spending in Iraq.

    We need more investment in infrastructure and economic activities at home. We also need a fair and simple tax code that eliminates the tax loopholes that corporations and the rich get to use that lowers their tax rates to the lowest ever in the last 75 years, a simpler tax code for all, a progresssive income tax with a higher top end and a return to a moderate inheritance tax. Currently the code allows wealth hoarding by the super rich that has created undue influence and wealth amalgamation into a tiny few hands like we did not see while we had a more progressive tax system. Now we have the super rich who hoard in offshore shelters and foreign investments which does nothing for our economy.

    Huge bonuses and stock deferrals that are not based on economic performance of a publicly-held corporation should be taxed at higher rates than regular income.

    We had no problem creating wealthy people in the 50’s and 60’s with a much higher top rate. I don’t propose going back to the highest levels, but all this absolute nonsense that the rich create more jobs when their tax rates are extremely low (effective rates lower than the middle class now) has been proved false over and over.

    In this commentary, Jack rasmus points out, like many others before him that corporations are currently hoarding unprecedented amounts of cash, many of it illegally kept offshore, while Congress refuses to let Treasury do anything about it:


    “Big business in general is sitting on a cash hoard of about $2 trillion and multinationals are hoarding between $1 and $1.4 trillion offshore. The latter even admit to $1 trillion, so its undoubtedly somewhat higher. These are the big multinational corporations who blew right past the recent recession hardly experiencing an impact. The stock value of the S&P 500 companies, of which the big US multinationals are the largest segment, rose from $6 trillion to $12.3 trillion between 2007 and 2011. That’s a lot of capital gains income passing through at a mere 15% tax rate to wealthy investors!”

    How’s that for a start?

  173. LarryFine says:

    Loooong and borish.

  174. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Iceland vs USA? Come on now. Even you can see through the BS and acknowledge the two country;s economies are not the same, or even similiar.

    The bank bailouts cost the taxpayer NOTHING. TARP lead to a profit for the little guy, the taxpayer. Nice try.

    The bigger outrage is the stimulus. Less than 10% went to infrastructure. The rest was the biggest union kickback in history.

    And BB, we have been down your GLB road before. It is a silly argument based on some article you read which you pull out every few weeks to try and sound smart.

    Tuddo- the second you say Krugman you lose all support for an argument except from those on the extreme left. Anybody who reads the NYT can see his extreme partisanship is the foundation for all he does.

  175. The bank bailouts cost the taxpayer NOTHING. TARP lead to a profit for the little guy, the taxpayer. Nice try.

    he Troubled Asset Released Program, better known as TARP, will cost the federal government $34 billion, the CBO reported on its director’s blog.


    Nice try but no cigar….not even close.

    And that’s not even counting the trillion + given by the Fed…..

  176. concerned, if you dismiss Krugman, then you diosmiss almost all of the economics that have actually worked in market economies in the last 100+ years. The problem with the far right is that they are so tied to ideologies that have proved not to work but sound good that they ignore facts and realities while they wait for another bogeyman to attack. As I’ve said before, I don’t attack based on labels. I look at what works and what doesn’t work.

    Every statistic is on Krugman’s side, but you would dismiss that because it is just not part of your belief system. Religious fervor, bhelieving in fanciful stories, proclaiming oneself superior because of supposed higher powers on hyour side is good in many instances, but not in economics.

    The exact same market forces that caused the Icelandic edonomy to collapse were the cause of the US economic collapse. The economies are much more similar than disparate.

    Let’s watch Greece and see if austerity brings them back faster than Iceland’s anti-austerity program has worked.

  177. Larry, sorry I can’t come up with one-liners on how to fix the economy. The far right is best about that. Yelling “Obamacare” and “socialism” taunts haven’t fixed anything yet.

  178. aislander says:

    So…where does money come from, tuddo…

  179. took14theteam says:


  180. aislander, the answer is just like anything else that our great country takes on, we are all in it together.

  181. aislander says:

    Wrong, tuddo! Money is created when someone or something (evil corporations, maybe…) adds value to a product or service. That added value allows the Fed to add to the money supply without inducing inflation. The Big News? Government doesn’t have its own money! It has to take it from somewhere, and, when it does, opportunities are lost.

    You know: basic non-Krugman economics…

  182. aislander says:

    Nobody caught that part about “seven years into FDR’s first term.” I meant “seven year into FDR’s administration…”

  183. tuddo and beerBoy, I see you guys going to great efforts to try to explain the current economic situation in rational and logical detail, with the facts and figures to support your comments. And then you try in vain to show how all that relates and contributes to the class warfare situation that is readily apparent in America today.

    The guys on the other side simply come back with uniformed pithy quips that have no substance whatsoever. They don’t care about the facts! They do not want to know the truth! They prefer to stay ignorant and go along with whatever propaganda is being fed to them.

    Why even bother to try to educate these people, when clearly they are completely close-minded and incapable of thinking for themselves, since they are letting others do their thinking for them?

    These guys are like Rush Limbaugh’s infamous “Dittoheads” (And they may even be Dittoheads.) They just listen to what Limbaugh says, or whatever right-winger they are obeying, and say “Ditto” without even thinking or considering the possibility that Rush or whomever may be wrong about something once in a while.

    In fact, one of Rush Limbaugh’s most frequent and most famous quotes has always been, “You don’t need to think, I’ll do the thinking for you.” And that is exactly what has happened to the likes of these other guys on this blog. Somebody else, maybe even Rush, is doing their thinking for them.

    tuddo, you wrote “Larry, sorry I can’t come up with one-liners on how to fix the economy.”

    But the thing is; Larry CAN’T come up with any one-liners about fixing anything either, and he never has. All that Larry ever comes up with is nonsense comments that add nothing to the discussion. He’s like the court jester or village idiot, there for entertainment only and not much of anything else. The sad thing is, the other guys are getting just like Larry too, but they really aren’t very entertaining either!

    Why bother trying to help these guys understand?

    PLEASE NOTE: The question above is directed specifically to tuddo and beerBoy only. No one else need respond or reply. Thank you.

  184. aislander says:

    muck writes: “PLEASE NOTE: The question above is directed specifically to tuddo and beerBoy only. No one else need respond or reply…”

    And this is why totalitarian regimes are–without exception!–left wing phenomena–the tyrannical urge that is on display right here in muck’s last post. Q.E.D.

  185. aislander….your last post reminds me of a great line from a Joni Mitchell song:

    He said ‘I’m as constant as the Northern Star’
    I said, ‘Constantly in the dark, where’s that at?
    If you want me I’ll be in the bar’

    Your demonstration of circular logic demonstrates nothing.
    Your initial premise is: all totalitarianism is of leftist origin.
    Then you define all totalitarianism as coming from the Left by parsing history and politics.

  186. aislander, I am not being tyrannical in any way with my note. You can comment if you want. No problem! However, the question is for beerBoy and tuddo, and I really don’t care what you or anyone else has to say about it. But, spew on if you feel you must. It’s a FREE COUNTRY!

  187. concernedtacoma7 says:

    First off, there are no easy solutions to our country’s economic or partisan woes. No one liners or silver bullets.

    Spending more govt (i.e. taxpayer/China) money does not work. History shows that to be a fact. Our govt spends an incredible 24% of GDP. Sorry boys, but keynes is alive and well, and not helping us.

    Krugman ignores our huge debt. We are graced right now with a very low interest rate, so the govt can borrow at historically very low cost. But those days are coming to an end. The world financial market knows that the debt is not sustainable. The higher the risk to the investor, the greater the likelihood to default, the higher the rate will go. Then we are up the creek.

    90% of the stimulus did not go to infrastructure. BHO and his admin have shown that they can ‘invest’ wisely. Jobs promised were not created, money was spent foolishly.

    Recent drop of unemployment was a numbers game. Look that one up for yourself, but the method of counting unemployment blows in the political winds. Total scam. The biggest factor in the recent drop is unemployment benefits running out, not new jobs.

    I proved yesterday the income gap OWS and the left is screaming about was not a tragedy and the selective talking points mean nothing. Fell on deaf ears. Sorry you do not like facts not presented by Krugman.

    On the really hard to fix front, the destruction of the family is a huge problem for our future. How we got here will be debated forever, as will trying to fix it.


    And muck, nice to see you cheerleading and belittling those that do not agree with you. Very adult.

  188. “And muck, nice to see you cheerleading and belittling those that do not agree with you. Very adult.”

    Well, somebody has to!

  189. LarryFine says:

    It’s so cool to have so many examples of the local lefties not answering a simple question and the ensuing d.o.c.’s they come back with.

    Thanks ai…

  190. Larry.. continues true to form.

  191. Concerned – Bush and his 3 rubberstamp congresses get the blame for 2000 to 2008.

    Funny how you defend Bush by blaming Congress, but blame Obama as is there were not Congress.

    R-N-L given the harm banks did to our economy one might wish bankers worked a less.

    ‘make welfare recipients work’ Now about make US Corporations bring jobs back to this country,

    End corporate welfare by closing tax loopholes and ending all government subsidies and support to supposedly profitable corporations and businesses.

    Aislander – that is WHAT Morgenthau said, and I gave you the WHY he said it.

    Reality Check – our Constitution gives Government the right to collect taxes and other duties and to use the money for the common good.

    Where would the corporations be if the government had not created transportation and communication infrastructures?

    Most dictatorships are RIGHT wing. Even the ‘communist dictatorship’ such as the USSR and Cuba.

    Tuddo – one-liners are to long and boring Larry – he needs three word slogans like GOD, GAYS, GUNS.

  192. Oh my God, did you say Larry is Gay and has a Gun?

    What CLASS does that put him in?

    Who is at War with that Class?

  193. LarryFine says:

    Larry P. Hill ? How the heck would we know ?

  194. Asking where the money would come from would have been a good question, too about the Iraq war.

    The cost of the war is staggering. The Congressional Research Service puts the US dollar cost of the direct military actions in Operation Iraqi Freedom at $806 billion. The estimate of the projected total cost of veterans’ health care and disability payments is between $422 billion and $717 billion.

    US funds paid to private contractors for construction projects in Iraq:(2003-2011): $61.83 billion. As a basis for comparison, the US after World War II spent $34.3 billion in Germany and $17.6 billion in Japan on post-war reconstruction. (All figures in 2011 dollars.)

    Where does this money come from – (not from trees as someone so tritely put it). Same place as anything else America feels like it can and should do. We are all in it together.

  195. took14theteam says:


  196. took.. you say you have Been There and Done That? When did you come out of your closet? I must have missed it.

    Now, rather than just dropping a typical LarryFine nonsense no-value clone comment, would you care to expound on anything in the balance of my statement above? Perhaps you disagree that Adolf Hitler was greedy, initiated and conducted a CLASS WAR against all Non-Arians.

  197. Where does money come from?

    The overspending fiscal-conservative Republicans prefer to borrow money from China.

    Tax and spend liberals prefer to tax-revenues from American Citizens and Companies.

    You all can decide which is better for Our Country.

    Tuddo, main three real reasons for the Iraq war.

    Transfer control of Iraq oil over to the Big Western Oil Companies.

    Transfer billions of taxpayer dollars to private hands via sweetheart, old boy, and no bid contracts.

    Let Bush and his Gang seize power under the guise of being a War Time President.

    Took14 – more like BTDTLN.

  198. aislander says:

    Wow–the libs are scattershotting this thread! So much dissimulation; so little time.

    So…muck…weren’t Aryans considered a “race?” Doesn’t that (by your “logic”) make WWII a race war? What a ridiculous point you tried to make…Your reductio ad absurdum (actually reductio ad hitlerum) makes only YOU look absurd.

    The Republicans lost control of Congress in 2006, which makes EVERYTHING from 2007 to 2009 the fault of the Democrat Congress and EVERYTHING from 2008 to 2011 the fault of Democrats, period. During the eight years of the Bush admin, he had a Republican Congress for only three and a half…

    As I’ve already pointed out, the two wars cost an average of $160 billion per year, a fraction of the huge deficits (which actually got down to under $200 billion). And then came…Obama…

  199. aislander says:

    So…xring…where does the money that tax-and-spend liberals tax and spend come from–originally? How is money created? Your explanation simply begs the question…

  200. aislander, you asked tuddo where does the money come from, and he answered you.

    Then you ask xring where does the money come from, and he answered you.

    Do you have some kind of cognitive disability that prevents you from reading and understanding the answers that have been given, so that you must ask the same question over and over again? Or, are you simply out of rational arguments and have to default to LarryFine-like nonsense quips? Talk about someone who makes himself look absurd. Look in the mirror dude!

  201. aislander says:

    The cognitive disability lies in asserting that tuddo actually answered the question, muck…

  202. aislander says:

    Correction: Bush had a fully Republican Congress for four and a half years…

  203. Muck – AI just thanks by asking the same question he will eventually get the answer he wishes to.

    So here goes round 3;

    Money comes from the Government Printing Office.

    My money comes from my paycheck.

  204. aislander says:

    So…xring…is the economic ignorance of liberals actually this profound, or have you decided to be completely non-responsive? Are you suggesting that the government can just print money and that money will retain any value?

    “Money” is actually created by the Federal Reserve, which lately has been buying T-bills, which is the government’s way of borrowing money. The Fed is nominally not a government entity, but everyone knows that’s a charade of the same sort as Fannie Mae and Freddi Mac. So, government IS “printing” money wholesale and then borrowing that fiat money. It is a circle-jerk of the worst kind, and it is taking real money out of the bank accounts of every American. Our government is now the biggest counterfeiter of US dollars in the world…

    The idea of the Federal Reserve’s creation of dollars has to do with keeping up with the expansion of the US economy, so that there will be enough dollars circulating to conduct business. That was the deal when the gold standard was abandoned. That is, increasing the amount of dollars should reflect the amount of wealth the economy is creating. Now, however, dollars are being issued far in excess of the amount of wealth the economy makes. This means each dollar is worth less and less.

    As for that government check you receive, xring, I’m sure it doesn’t reflect any wealth creation on your part…

  205. aislander says:

    I should make clear that the dollars created by the Federal Reserve are supposed to reflect the NEW wealth created by the economy.

    I have described on previous occasions how wealth is created, but if any of you lefties have any questions about that, I will be very happy to answer them…

  206. LarryFine says:

    Based on muck’s very passionate 8:56 am post, I’d have to say someone really struck a nerve. Couldn’t get much more of an off topic personal attack than that one.

    I always get a kick out of the folks who claim to be the tolerant ones when they loose it and try to belittle someone by throwing out the gay accusation. Especially considering how they hold homosexuality in such high esteem and then use it as a negative (hatespeech if you will). Kooky
    Muck has been using the “teabagger” label for a few days now in his regiment of namecalling posts. I’m thinking there’s some projection going on there muck_nos.

    btw, if orientation is determined at birth, how do you explain people that switch back and forth ?
    Dec. 14, 2011 at 1:43 pm
    I’d really ask you all to read the post by Pacman33 and then you decide who is using hate speech to trigger divisions.

    muckibr says:
    Dec. 14, 2011 at 8:10 am Every time you guys can’t fight an argument with a logical honest alternative, you bring out HITLER!


    muckibr says:
    Dec. 14, 2011 at 2:51 pm concerned… My time is too valuable to waste replying to people who devolve to making personal attacks when they lack the intellect to discuss and debate real issues. When you have nothing to offer, then you should offer nothing, rather than filling space with pointless nasty comments.

  207. LarryFine says:

    Hmmmm… this is kooky considering the 8:56 tirade …

    RW98512 says:
    Dec. 18, 2011 at 12:09 pm Voicing verbal support for a civil rights issue is spending money? You speak as if there are no Teamsters that are gay.

  208. LarryFine says:

    muckibr says:
    Dec. 17, 2011 at 9:11 pm took… When your comment(s) looks like Larry’s I ignore it(them), like I ignore his

    … LMAO!!! Yea… you showed me.

  209. Aislander,
    Money is created by the Federal Reserve;
    The Federal Reserve is owned by the Federal Government;
    Therefore the Federal Government creates our money.

    Thank you for the simplified lesson in the economics of money.

    BTW I never said that the government could just print money and that the money would retain any value.

    The government pays me for my services and I spend my money on goods and services, therefore I contribute to the economy. I also pay taxes both on my income and on my purchases.

    The problem with creating wealth, which you on the right are typically blind to, is that wealth created by using foreign labor harms the US, and hording wealth in of shore accounts harms the US even more.

    Larry, IMO sexual preference is determined by many things including biological and cultural factors and is just one of the many things humand will probably never understand. Sort of like why some men like redheads and some like blondes.

    No one can answer for you, but before you decide consider that one side thinks in ok for the top 10% to take home almost half of the total income US, the other side does not…

  210. time for bed.
    Larry humand = humams with a typo.

  211. aislander says:

    The Federal Reserve is a private entity with a quasi-governmental function, and very marginal governmental oversight. We are just now debating whether it should be audited…

    Normally, I would favor private versus public entities, but the Constitution names Congress as being responsible for the issuance of currency, and, with the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, Congress abdicated that responsibility, which, truth to tell, it never really embraced even before 1913…

  212. aislander says:

    I knew you were a government employee!

  213. aislander says:

    xring: You are at best a cypher with respect to economic activity. Nothing personal, but every penny you are paid comes out of the economy before it can be distributed to you. It’s my old metaphor of taking water out of one part of the ocean and running down the beach to pour it back in: zero effect (although an argument could be made that the whole process actually makes the economic “ocean” shallower…).

  214. LarryFine says:

    Kooky, RW and Muck are no where to be found…

  215. aislander says:

    I posted this in another thread, but it seem to pertain more to this one.

    “It isn’t just the moral and religious realms that have been attacked by the left, it is also the things we have in common that have united us culturally. I think THAT’S what multiculturalism is really about.

    Those little commonalities that identify us as members of the same club are being stripped away from us in various ways. Granted, we all belong to other clubs, based on background, occupation, ideology, wealth, and class (historically, wealth and class have not been synonymous in America), and so on, but we have all been members of the American club.

    The left has been trying to “raise” (or at least alter) consciousness so that we become more aware of the things that separate us than those that unite us. The left’s addiction to the promotion of crises is the tool of choice for this purpose.

    The current economic crisis, which really should cause a reaction against collectivism, is being used by the left to agitate for MORE government action: the very thing that has bankrupted Europe and is bankrupting us.

    We on the right MUST win the war of ideas on this front to garner some good from all this and restore the essence of America: freedom and opportunity.”

  216. aislander, your statement about belonging gto the same “club” is proof positive that the arguments of the racist South still reverberate in the halls of far-right conservatives. Read your post again and tell me that it wasn’t written in the 1950’s by segregationists bemoaning the left’s support of integration.

    Acceptance of diversity and changes to culture that actually provide more freedom and opportunity are very difficult for iconoclastic conservatives.

    It is only the right that keeps wanting to maintain and exacerbate the things that divide us. Just look, for example, on the thread about Muslims in America and how the right presents fear and laothing and reasons to make people of Islamic faith seem unAmerican, or atheists to seem unAmerican, or want gays to not enjoyu the freedoms and opportunities of America, while the progressives say, we are all in it together; we are all equal under the law.

  217. LarryFine says:

    No doubt aislander is fully capable of addressing the flaws and strawmen in your last post tuddo, so I’ll keep this short.

    It’s the left that “maintain and exacerbate the things that divide us” as evidenced by the race baiters like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton (just to name two). In a large part, the left depends on maintaining a certain amount of victims to ensure their electability.

    Tuddo, you might want to check your sources that have misled you into believing segragation was a product of the right… Woodrow wilson comes to mind

    Thomas Woodrow Wilson (December 28, 1856 – February 3, 1924) was the 28th President of the United States, from 1913 to 1921. A leader of the Progressive Movement. In 1913, President Woodrow Wilson ordered the segregation of the federal Civil Service. kooky (just the tip of the iceburg)

    Have you forgotten which party championed the civil rights act of 1964 (which ended all state and local laws requiring segregation.) ? You guys are just as entitled to your opinions as any one else, but not your own facts.

  218. aislander says:

    You have extracted exactly the opposite meaning from my post, oh stolidly earnest one. It is intended to say that we are all Americans together, regardless of our differences, but that some commonalities we DID have are under fire.

    That was not intended to further separate, say, blacks from whites, but to narrow our differences. How you derive a return to segregation from that is between you and the shrink you so desperately need…

  219. aislander says:

    I suspect, tuddo, that you are an internationalist who finds the idea of ALL Americans sharing in a common culture threatening.

    A common culture doesn’t mean that diversity–true diversity–cannot exist, but the overall culture and subcultures are like the intersecting circles found in logic problems. You know: some A’s are B and all B’s are C, but not all A’s are C, and so on. A common culture doesn’t mean we all must be the same, but we must have that intersection where we can understand and relate to each other as Americans.

    I don’t think that suits your agenda though, tuddo…

  220. aislander, the far right has no idea of what the real America is all about. Equality under the law and a belief that all people have the same rights under the Constitution is our culture. Our culture is not Christianity. Our culture is not seeing who can make the most money and die the richest. Our culture is that all of us can come together and make a society that allows every single person to reach their highest potentional and try to make a more perfect union through the efforts of every citizen.

    Justice and equality is what brings freedom and liberty, not the reverse.

  221. aislander says:

    You mean “fairness and equality,” don’t you tuddo? And what of the rest of the world’s people? Don’t they deserve fairness, too?

  222. aislander, I have no idea what agenda you are promoting by your refusal to treat people who are different from you as part of America and equal inheritors of our Constitution’s guarantees of justice and equality.

    But, like I said, it certainly reminds me of the agenda of the whites-only crowd and the Protestant-only crowd of the South where anti-Catholicism ran rampant and Catholics were considered as foreign usurpers and not entitled to be part ofr mainstream culture and where blacks where treated as less than human. Yes, this was all within my lifetime, not the far distant past.

    In parts of the South, anything that had a “taint” of Hispanic heritage was also considered as not part of American “culture” and denounced as the dreaded multiculturalism that the far right wants us to fear. In South Texas, however, the hispanic heritage was just part of the fabric of our nation, like Oktoberfest or Saint Lucia and smorgasbord with lutefisk at Christmas.

    If you look at the contrast between the far-right ruling class in Arizona, which paints anything hispanic as evil, and that of New Mexico, you can see the difference in attitude between the far right fear mongers in Arizona and the practical, “hispanics have always been part of American culture” attitude in New Mexico.

    The circle where we all intersect (using your diagram), is our Constitutional values of justice and equality which lead to freedom and liberty for all.

  223. LarryFine says:

    tuddo says:
    Dec. 20, 2011 at 8:18 am aislander, I have no idea what agenda you are promoting…
    That’s certainly not the impression you’ve left from your posts up thread…

  224. aislander says:

    THAT’S what you believe is culture tuddo? Wow! I guess you see what you want to see–you must, if you believe that having a common culture results in all the horribles you list…

    No wonder WE can’t communicate…

  225. tuddo, your comparison to the differences in Arizona versus New Mexico attitudes and dealings towards persons of Hispanic Heritage is spot on! It is an apt corollary to the rich/poor Class Warfare going on in the rest of America. Too bad aislander lacks the courage to debate that, and instead sidesteps and runs away.

    We can communicate, if we choose to.

    If YOU, aislander, don’t want to address the issue, then just run away. Buh,bye!

  226. LarryFine says:

    YOU ran away my homophobic friend…

  227. LarryFine says:

    YOU, Muckibr, ran away after your homophobic personal attack on me.

  228. I didn’t attack you Larry. I simply wished to give you the opportunity to come out!

    No attack. Never. Some of the very best friends I have are Gay or Lesbian. I would never ever attack anyone for their sexual preference. It’s not an issue. Just, if you want to, come out here for yourself among people who will accept you for who you are.

    Just stop with the stupid little quips will you? If you are going to post a comment here, at least try to make it worth reading for a change. Okay?


  229. aislander, I think that deTocqueville had much of it correct when he said that the Jeffersonian Democracy in America allowed for voluntary associations of all kinds, with the Federal government the largest of such. Voluntary associations were about the only American culture that he could find. Other things he called “customs” or other descriptors. He was amazed that people with such different languages, interests, heritages, backgrounds and beliefs could form a country.

    When he toured, people spoke German more often than English, and much of where he traveled spoke French. Yet we were still one country. Catholicism was not seen as Christianity by large parts of America, but was still considered the only true religion in other areas. So none of those things could be classified as American “culture”, but all of them could exist because of American culture.

    We are united by our beliefs as stated in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and not by religion or race or ancestors’ land holdings or parent’s status as are many other countries. That is our strength.

    When our voluntary associations go against those values in the Constitution, as I pointed out that they had in the South with blacks or hispanics in Arizona, then you do get horrible consequences. It is not the “result” of our common culture of equality and justice as you are claiming I said. Voluntary associations can be evil and fight against Constitutional guarantees, as in the KKK, or they can fight for those principles, as in the ACLU. When we follow the Constitutional path of justice and equality, then we grow closer to our ideal of a “more perfect union.”

  230. aislander says:


  231. Sorry aislander, you failed the “test”

    Please study harder and try again.

  232. Aislander,
    Without government employees we would have anarchy and you would last about 0.3 seconds.

    What the current economic crisis is causing is a backlash against the collectivism being practiced by the 1% and robber baron ran multi-national corporations.

    If the right wing wins the Country and the American People lose and the only ‘freedom and opportunity’ will belong to the rich elites.

    Larry –
    ‘Stawmen” no one can refute that which does not exist.

    The only people I hear Al Sharpton baiting these days are Republicans and 1%ers.

    Woodrow Wilson invented segregation? Racial Segregation has existed in the Country since before the Mayflower.

    Party that supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964 – party wise it was bipartisan; regionally it was Civil War All Over.

    Hard to communicate when you do not share a common language.

    IMO what Tuddo was describing was cultural warfare with the members of one culture attempting to declare their culture as the superior one and to exclude all who don’t meet the proper standards.

    Muck and Tuddo,
    As my Professor at Western New Mexico University told us, his wife was Spanish because she married a college professor. Her sister was Mexican because she married an auto mechanic.

  233. PS: Same Source

    Spanish implies White

    Mexican impies a racial mix of Spanish, Indian, and Black.
    (AKA La Raza)

  234. LarryFine says:

    Loud and clear aislander…

    Gosh Muck… I’m getting weepy eyed with your concern… I really thought you were attempting denigrate me by making the gay accusation…

  235. LarryFine says:

    Not to pile on to your hypocrisy… but… you DID say you were ignoring me… several times.

    I’m living rent free in your mind… and judging by your projections … well, everyone else gets the picture.

  236. I’m just having a little fun with you LarryWhine. Like poking a stick at a rat in a cage. You know. (BTW, you are the rat.)

    Also, LarryWhine, are you EVER going to post anything on these blogs that is relevant to the topic? Everything you seem to post is just stupid off topic nonsense.

  237. aislander says:

    I haven’t run anywhere, muck: just having difficulty getting my comments posted. I suspect that sum-one has been flagging promiscuously…

    And the Federal government is our common culture? C’mon…

  238. aislander says:

    Here’s a De Tocqueville quote for you, tuddo:

    “Americans are so enamored of equality, they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.”

  239. Alexis de Tocqueville was writing about Americans in the mid 1800’s. (19th Century) Surely we have changed a bit since then. How about more current references? (21st Century)

  240. “What is the most important for democracy is not that great fortunes should not exist, but that great fortunes should not remain in the same hands. In that way there are rich men, but they do not form a class.”

    -de Tocqueville

  241. aislander says:

    Your De Tocqueville quote is an opinion, and everyone who has an opinion has an…well, you know; my De Tocqueville quote is an observation. You know which one carries more weight, don’t you?

    Er…muck…tuddo brought up De Tocqueville. I was merely replying in kind…

  242. aislander, I did not accuse YOU of bringing up the quote did I? No. I sure didn’t. Why so defensive?

    It doesn’t matter who brought it up, if it was an opinion or observation. It only matters that its 19th century and we are living now in the 21st century.

    We’re not discussing class warfare in days of old, but the actual class warfare that is being carried out today. Right?

  243. aislander says:

    There is no such thing as a New Man, muck. Human nature is immutable…

  244. Are you saying that in the long history of mankind, that todays man is no better, no more evolved than the Cro-Magnon or Neanderthal man?

    Are you saying that the shift from hunter-gatherer, to agrarian, to industrial, to informationalist is not a change of any kind in the nature of man, or man’s human nature?

    Are you saying that the evolution from subjects of The King to Free Men under a Democratic Republic is not a change in the nature of man?

    Is that what you are saying?

  245. aislander says:

    Neanderthal, yes; Cro Magnon, no.

    Raise a modern baby in a Cro Magnon setting, and you would have another Cro Magnon. Raise a Cro Magnon baby in Bellevue, and you would have another guilt-ridden liberal…

    (Cro Magnons are considered to be the first modern humans…)

  246. aislander says:

    But, raise that baby in Texas (outside of Austin) and he would have a chance at being a freedom-loving, independent, self-sufficient, contributor to society…

  247. aislander, why, thank you. I was raised in Alpine, Texas, and I feel your description of me is very apt. I also feel that there are many who were raised in Austin, Texas, or Austin, Minnesota, and places all over the USA who meet that description as well. Some admit to being conservatives and some admit to being liberals or progressives and some are independent of any label.

    It is interesting that you place such value on social dynamics like place of residence being a primary force in the lives of humans. That is usually a more liberal theory.

    And, btw, Dallas ranks much higher in percent voting for liberal candidates than Austin. In fact, many cities in Texas are much more liberal that Bellevue or Tacoma. This is according to the study: “The Most Conservative and Liberal
    Cities in the United States”


  248. aislander says:

    Don’t read too much into it, tuddo. I’m surprised, though that the bash-Texas contingent of forum members didn’t take some shots at your home state.

    I don’t understand, though, how someone who proudly accepts the description of freedom-loving, self-sufficient, and independent would subscribe to a political philosophy that is antagonistic and inimical to all those qualities…

  249. Well, no offense fellas, but I for one am very glad that Crawford Texas got their village idiot back. Now if the other one, Perry, would just go back to his village then that’d be good too.

    You only answered one of the three questions from my 5:43 comment aislander. Sidestepping the other two?

  250. P.S. New evidence suggests that Cro-Magno may have interbred with Neanderthal. And that might have created what? A new man! Maybe.

  251. Tuddo – shame on you. Don’t you know their De Tocqueville quotes are better than our De Tocqueville quotes?

    Of course AI doesn’t know the difference between a quote and an opinion.

    Human nature may change but the standards of what makes a man do change.

    ‘Raise that baby in Texas. . ’ Sounds like your ideal male is John Wayne – a draft dodging, alcoholic, drug addict, raciest, wife beater.

    ‘freedom-loving, self-sufficient, and independent’ a fair discription of Casanova, Don Juan, and dead-beat dads in general.

  252. aislander says:

    You thought those were three different questions, did you muck? I took them as the same question posed in a tautological way. I believe in economy of words, so my answer covers all “three…” But, yes, a modern human is a modern human. There have been no genetic changes that would make him more…er…”caring” or likely to want to have his life energy stolen to be used as other people wish to…

    xring, xring, xring: there you go again. The dichotomy was between opinion and observation, NOT opinion and a quote.

    Again with the straw men, huh? How do YOU know what I had in mind?

    And you join RW in putting the worst possible spin on what most people would view as exemplary qualities. But then, as a lefty, I guess you should be antagonistic toward those qualities…

    It’s all a little…sad…

  253. aislander, I am tooting my own horn, here to make a point, so gag if you must: When I turned 75 last July, a group of my former employees in Texas staged a surprise party for me. While I cherished the affection they showed me, it was their invited guests who delighted and humbled me.

    Each of the attendees, some 30-35, brought a person with a disability with whom I had personally worked under the Vocational Rehabilitation program in that state and who had remembered me, even after 20 or 30 years for some of them. Because of that government program, each of them had moved from dependence, most of them from isolation and all of them from a state of freedom-yearning, idependence-and-self-sufficiency-seeking” to become contributors to society. All of them had paid back the costs of their rehabilitation hundreds of times over, and all of them said it would not have been possible without such a program.

    The difference between you and me is that I am optimistic about the human condition and think that the vast majority of people aspire to the attributes you cite. I think the vast majority of people desire a hand up and not a hand out. I also believe that united together, we the people of the United States can join together to give such a hand up.

    There is too much evidence on my side to even try to refute my assertions with facts, so the far right uses fear mongering, isolated instances of abuse and out-and-out lies to spread their message of how evil the poor are, sucking on the hind teat of the glorious and virtuous rich.

  254. aislander says:

    The poor aren’t necessarily evil, tuddo, but it HAS been miraculous how, historically, most unemployed find work just as their benefits are about to expire…

  255. Well aislander, I think you are wrong and I believe tuddo’s surprise party story proves it.

    In past history those who were aged and in-firmed were cut out from the tribe and left to die. Man has evolved to be more compassionate, and caring.

    Human nature has changed from strict survival of the fittest to concern and caring for others rather than just satisfying one’s own on selfish desires.

    Over the centuries human species have developed a more altruistic nature than our species originally started out with. That is change in Human Nature.

    Human Nature is NOT immutable, it is constantly changing. The proof is all around us. Read tuddo’s story again!

  256. aislander, you made my point, exactly, about the use of misinformation by the right to place a cloud of suspicion and negative outlooks on the nature of people with your statement about unemployment benefits.

    In 1999, when the maximum was 39 weeks, the average length of stay on unemployment was 14.5 weeks, less than half of the time eligible. That is hardly “most unemployed” and not at all “just about to expire”.


    In 1990, when the maximum was 26 weeks, the average length of stay on unemployment was 13.6 weeks.

    In 2005, half of all spells on unemployment insurance lasted 7.0 weeks or less.

    When you make a condescending remark about your fellow workers and humans, at least look up the facts before posting. There are enough bad actors and people gaming the system out there to at least make the conservative point of view look plausible.

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0