the face of REAL class warfare(link)

catamount man · Post by **catamount man** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 4:50 am

http://www.alternet.org/news/152470/rea ... own?page=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **kalm** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 5:07 am

It's an undeniably true statement: in 1979, those in the top 10th of 1 percent of the American economic ladder took in 1.11 percent of the nation's income, but by 2008, they were grabbing 5 percent. Those extremely wealthy few didn't become five times smarter and aren't working five times harder than they were in the late '70s, and the seismic shift in our economic structures wasn't an accident: the upward redistribution of wealth in this country has been a direct result of policies for which those at the top have lobbied hard – labor policies, trade deals, cuts to the social services that lifted some of those at the bottom out of poverty and a tax structure that shifted a big chunk of the burden from corporations and the wealthiest to ordinary working families.

The other big myth is that the bottom 50% who don't pay taxes are simply lazy. Yet it's amazing how US productivity has continued to rise through that same time frame.

Terrific article and tons of good information for some of you economic royalists.

Post by **Cap'n Cat** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 7:56 am

Again, where are the tax cut, trickle-down jobs, Conks??? Ten years > Bush tax cuts - where are they?

hank scorpio · Post by **hank scorpio** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 8:07 am

Cap'n Cat wrote:Again, where are the tax cut, trickle-down jobs, Conks??? Ten years > Bush tax cuts - where are they?

HAZELWOOD, MO—Twenty-six years after Ronald Reagan first set his controversial fiscal policies into motion, the deceased president's massive tax cuts for the ultrarich at last trickled all the way down to deliver their bounty, in the form of a $10 bonus, to Hazelwood, MO car-wash attendant Frank Kellener.

"Back when Reagan was in charge, I didn't think much of him," Kellener, 57, said, holding up two five-dollar bills nearly three decades in the making. "But who would have thought that in 2007 I'd have this extra $10 in my pocket? He may not have lived to see it, but I'm sure President Reagan is up in heaven smiling down on me right now."

Leading economists say Kellener's unexpected windfall provides the first irrefutable proof of the effectiveness of Reagan's so-called supply-side economics, and shows that the former president had "incredible, far-reaching foresight."

"When the tax burden on the upper income brackets is lifted, the rich and not-rich alike all benefit," said Arthur Laffer, who was a former member of Reagan's Economic Policy Advisory Board. "Eventually."

The $10 began its long journey into Kellener's wallet in 1983, when a beefed-up national defense budget of $210 billion enabled the military to purchase advanced warhead-delivery systems from aerospace manufacturer Lockheed. Buoyed by a multimillion-dollar bonus, then-CEO Martin Lawler bought a house on a 5,000-acre plot in Montana. When a forest fire destroyed his home in 1986, Lawler took the federal relief check and invested it in a savings and loan run by a Virginia man named Michael Webber. After Webber's firm collapsed in 1989, and he was indicted on fraud and conspiracy charges, he retained the services of high- powered law firm Rabin & Levy for his defense. After six years and $7 million in legal fees, Webber received only a $250,000 fine, and the defense team went out to celebrate at a Washington, D.C.-area restaurant called Di Forenza. During dinner, lawyer Peter Smith overheard several investment bankers at an adjoining table discussing a hot Internet start-up that was about to go public. Smith took a portion of his earnings from the Webber case and bought several hundred shares in Gadgets.com, quadrupling his investment before selling them four months later. Gadgets.com's two founders used the sudden influx of investment capital to outfit their office with modern Danish furniture, in a sale brokered by the New York gallery Modern Now! in 1998. After the ensuing dot-com bust, Modern Now! was forced out of business, and Sotheby's auction house was put in charge of liquidating its inventory. The commission from that auction enabled auctioneer Mary Schafer to retire to the Ozark region of Missouri in 2006. Last month, while passing through Hazelwood, she took her Audi to Marlin Car Wash, where Kellener was one of the employees who tended to her car. She was so satisfied with the job that she left a $50 tip, which the manager divided among the people working that day.

"This money didn't just affect one life," Laffer said. "It affected five."

Prior to joining Marlin Car Wash in 2005, Kellener worked for nearly two decades at a local Ford assembly plant that is now defunct. Before that, he was employed by the FAA as an air traffic controller until his union went on strike and Reagan fired him, along with nearly 13,000 others. This is the largest tip he has received in his professional life.

"I thought Reaganomics was nothing more than a mirage that allowed President Reagan to reward his wealthy support base," Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) said. "But two generations later I am seeing Reaganomics in action, and I like what I see. It just took a little longer than I thought it was supposed to."

The tip has not gone unnoticed by the economic team in the current administration.

"Had Mr. Kellener received that money in 1981, like the Democrats wanted, it would only be worth $4.24 today because of inflation," Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr. said during an official announcement of the economic policy's success at a press conference Monday. "Instead, Kellener has a solid $10 to spend right here and now. The system works, and our current president intends to keep making it work."

Kellener, who has cared for his schizophrenic sister ever since her federally funded mental institution was closed in 1984, said that he plans to donate the full $10 to the Republican presidential candidate who best embodies Reagan's legacy

http://www.theonion.com/articles/reagan ... -man,2302/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **Appaholic** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 8:33 am

kalm wrote:
It's an undeniably true statement: in 1979, those in the top 10th of 1 percent of the American economic ladder took in 1.11 percent of the nation's income, but by 2008, they were grabbing 5 percent. Those extremely wealthy few didn't become five times smarter and aren't working five times harder than they were in the late '70s, and the seismic shift in our economic structures wasn't an accident: the upward redistribution of wealth in this country has been a direct result of policies for which those at the top have lobbied hard – labor policies, trade deals, cuts to the social services that lifted some of those at the bottom out of poverty and a tax structure that shifted a big chunk of the burden from corporations and the wealthiest to ordinary working families.
The other big myth is that the bottom 50% who don't pay taxes are simply lazy. Yet it's amazing how US productivity has continued to rise through that same time frame.

Terrific article and tons of good information for some of you economic royalists.

I don't think they are lazy at all. But they are hypocrites & just as selfish as the ultra-rich. They scream for the ultra-rich to pay a higher percentage of income tax while at the same time bemoan their ability to pay ANY income tax at all.

Post by **TwinTownBisonFan** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 9:10 am

Appaholic wrote:
kalm wrote:
The other big myth is that the bottom 50% who don't pay taxes are simply lazy. Yet it's amazing how US productivity has continued to rise through that same time frame.

Terrific article and tons of good information for some of you economic royalists.
I don't think they are lazy at all. But they are hypocrites & just as selfish as the ultra-rich. They scream for the ultra-rich to pay a higher percentage of income tax while at the same time bemoan their ability to pay ANY income tax at all.

bear in mind that this bottom 50% pays a much higher percentage of their income in sales taxes and use fees. they also feel the bite of property taxes more acutely as well. (while the wealthy have more, and more expensive property, usually a much lower percentage of their personal wealth is tied up in it)

it's a rather large red herring to suggest that the bottom 50% of income earners in this country skate by paying no taxes. they are the butt end of at least half a dozen regressive tax schemes.

Post by **Ivytalk** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 9:18 am

Lessee, now, just who or what is AlterNet?

"AlterNet's aim is to inspire action and advocacy on the environment, human rights and civil liberties, social justice, media, health care issues, and more." -- Left-wing hot buttons, each one.

"AlterNet has developed a unique model of journalism [sic] to confront the failures of corporate media, as well as the vitriol and disinformation of right-wing media, especially 'hate talk' media." -- check. I get it: another southpaw website. Nothing to see or learn here. No wonder kalm loves it. Move on[.org].

OL FU · Post by **OL FU** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 9:21 am

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
Appaholic wrote:
I don't think they are lazy at all. But they are hypocrites & just as selfish as the ultra-rich. They scream for the ultra-rich to pay a higher percentage of income tax while at the same time bemoan their ability to pay ANY income tax at all.
bear in mind that this bottom 50% pays a much higher percentage of their income in sales taxes and use fees. they also feel the bite of property taxes more acutely as well. (while the wealthy have more, and more expensive property, usually a much lower percentage of their personal wealth is tied up in it)

it's a rather large red herring to suggest that the bottom 50% of income earners in this country skate by paying no taxes. they are the butt end of at least half a dozen regressive tax schemes.

I certainly don't blame the bottom 50% for not paying taxes. I do however think more than 50% of the people need to have some skin in the game when it comes to paying federal taxes.

What percent of the bottom 50% actually gets more back in taxes than they pay in. I guess that number is probably in the 20 to 25% range and that is a huge problem. Once again not blaming the people that get it, they are doing what is legal. But the issue is we don't need to hide a welfare payment (yes for corporations too) in the tax system which is not set up to verify the need.

On the issue of the top earners taking down a bigger share, that probably has less to do with some of the policies that we discuss here and more to do with globalization, increase in deals and financing activities and ridiculous incentives to meet short term goals in public companies.

native · Post by **native** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 9:25 am

Ivytalk wrote:Lessee, now, just who or what is AlterNet?

"AlterNet's aim is to inspire action and advocacy on the environment, human rights and civil liberties, social justice, media, health care issues, and more." -- Left-wing hot buttons, each one.

"AlterNet has developed a unique model of journalism [sic] to confront the failures of corporate media, as well as the vitriol and disinformation of right-wing media, especially 'hate talk' media." -- check. I get it: another southpaw website. Nothing to see or learn here. No wonder kalm loves it. Move on[.org].

Same old, same old, k.

Post by **kalm** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:27 pm

native wrote:
Ivytalk wrote:Lessee, now, just who or what is AlterNet?

"AlterNet's aim is to inspire action and advocacy on the environment, human rights and civil liberties, social justice, media, health care issues, and more." -- Left-wing hot buttons, each one.

"AlterNet has developed a unique model of journalism [sic] to confront the failures of corporate media, as well as the vitriol and disinformation of right-wing media, especially 'hate talk' media." -- check. I get it: another southpaw website. Nothing to see or learn here. No wonder kalm loves it. Move on[.org].
Same old, same old, k.

Right on que.

Whatever you two do, make sure you don't challenge yourselves intellectually. Alternative points of view can be sccccaaaarrry.

Oh, and quadruple

Post by **Grizalltheway** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:42 pm

kalm wrote:
native wrote:
Same old, same old, k.

Right on que.

Whatever you two do, make sure you don't challenge yourselves intellectually. Alternative points of view can be sccccaaaarrry.

Oh, and quadruple

Yeah, wouldn't want them to strain themselves refuting the points in the article.

Post by **Ivytalk** » Fri Sep 23, 2011 6:47 am

kalm wrote:
native wrote:
Same old, same old, k.

Right on que.

Whatever you two do, make sure you don't challenge yourselves intellectually. Alternative points of view can be sccccaaaarrry.

Oh, and quadruple

Equally predictable retort!

kalm or an ideological ally posts a complete portside thread from a favored blog, without any analysis whatsoever, and says "discuss." When called on it, they have the unmitigated gall to say that they win because we didn't rebut every factoid in the blog.

I'll be frank, kalm: the reason why I don't take the billable time to do that is that it's a Sisyphean task. You remember that myth from your school days, right, kalm? The guy who kept rolling the boulder up the hill, only to see it roll all the way back down? Face it: You'll never agree with the substance or details of any response that I might post from a conservative scholarly source, which I have by the way if you want the link, and I'll never agree with yours. So let's just leave it at that.

YoUDeeMan · Post by **YoUDeeMan** » Fri Sep 23, 2011 7:22 am

I thought Sisyphus was an STD.

Post by **kalm** » Fri Sep 23, 2011 10:28 am

Ivytalk wrote:
kalm wrote:

Right on que.

Whatever you two do, make sure you don't challenge yourselves intellectually. Alternative points of view can be sccccaaaarrry.

Oh, and quadruple

Equally predictable retort! kalm or an ideological ally posts a complete portside thread from a favored blog, without any analysis whatsoever, and says "discuss." When called on it, they have the unmitigated gall to say that they win because we didn't rebut every factoid in the blog.

I'll be frank, kalm: the reason why I don't take the billable time to do that is that it's a Sisyphean task. You remember that myth from your school days, right, kalm? The guy who kept rolling the boulder up the hill, only to see it roll all the way back down? Face it: You'll never agree with the substance or details of any response that I might post from a conservative scholarly source, which I have by the way if you want the link, and I'll never agree with yours. So let's just leave it at that.

Bullshit. Some of my best friends are conks.

Post by **Ivytalk** » Sat Sep 24, 2011 8:25 am

kalm wrote:
Ivytalk wrote:
Equally predictable retort! kalm or an ideological ally posts a complete portside thread from a favored blog, without any analysis whatsoever, and says "discuss." When called on it, they have the unmitigated gall to say that they win because we didn't rebut every factoid in the blog. :roll

I'll be frank, kalm: the reason why I don't take the billable time to do that is that it's a Sisyphean task. You remember that myth from your school days, right, kalm? The guy who kept rolling the boulder up the hill, only to see it roll all the way back down? Face it: You'll never agree with the substance or details of any response that I might post from a conservative scholarly source, which I have by the way if you want the link, and I'll never agree with yours. So let's just leave it at that.
Bullshit. Some of my best friends are conks.

And I make sure to invite at least one libtard to all of my cocktail parties!

Post by **kalm** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 4:48 am

Ivytalk wrote:
kalm wrote:
Bullshit. Some of my best friends are conks.

And I make sure to invite at least one libtard to all of my cocktail parties!

...so there's at least one smart guy in the room.

catamount man · Post by **catamount man** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:17 pm

kalm wrote:
Ivytalk wrote:

And I make sure to invite at least one libtard to all of my cocktail parties!
...so there's at least one smart guy in the room.

REP POINTS!

JohnStOnge · Post by **JohnStOnge** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:37 pm

Sigh. What a bunch of crap. We've been through this before and I actually posted some stuff on this earlier. Won't do it again right now because I'm getting up at 4:30 am. But support for the basic premise of this author's argument would require that the inflation adjusted income of the "middle class" in 1979 was lower in 1979 than it was in 2008. And it wasn't.

The fact that the "rich" controlled a greater percentage of total income in 2008 than they did in 1979 does not mean that the "middle class" was worse off in 2008 than it was in 1979. Nor does the fact that the "rich" controlled a greater percentage of income in 2008 than they did in 1979 mean there was a "redistribution" of wealth towards the "rich."

This is such crap. When is it going to stop?

D1B · Post by **D1B** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 7:39 pm

Ivytalk wrote:
kalm wrote:
Bullshit. Some of my best friends are conks.

And I make sure to invite at least one libtard to all of my cocktail parties!

Ivytwat's cocktail party

Post by **Ivytalk** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:17 am

catamount man wrote:
kalm wrote:
...so there's at least one smart guy in the room.
REP POINTS!

Wrong Board, Slappy.

Post by **Ivytalk** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:26 am

kalm wrote:
Ivytalk wrote:

And I make sure to invite at least one libtard to all of my cocktail parties!
...so there's at least one smart guy in the room.

Er, two!

Post by **Ivytalk** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:27 am

D1B wrote:
Ivytalk wrote:

And I make sure to invite at least one libtard to all of my cocktail parties!

Ivytwat's cocktail party

Looks more like a UNI grad contemplating suicide after his team's latest playoff flop, Douches1Bagg!

D1B · Post by **D1B** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 8:05 am

Ivytalk wrote:
D1B wrote:

Ivytwat's cocktail party
Looks more like a UNI grad contemplating suicide after his team's latest playoff flop, Douches1Bagg!

Yawn,

Post by **Cap'n Cat** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 8:06 am

D1B wrote:
Ivytalk wrote:

And I make sure to invite at least one libtard to all of my cocktail parties!

Ivytwat's cocktail party

D1B · Post by **D1B** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 8:07 am

Ivytwit's annual Christmas Soiree

Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

the face of REAL class warfare(link)

the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)

Re: the face of REAL class warfare(link)