Why I can't call myself a Republican anymore

[houndawg]

Here's what the top 1% pay for:

Security from the masses.

That's it, really.

If the masses are denied everything, they will eventually storm the castle. That, given the numbers, would mean death to the rich. So, the smart move was to set up a middle class as a buffer. Give some of those damned townsfolk a glimpse beyond the walls into how well the rich live and...surprise...and let them have a small piece of it. Homes, cars, dishwashers, air conditioning, big TVs, clothes, education, leisure time, and money to play with (versus living paycheck to paycheck). Place them between the rich and the poor so that the poor interact with or rob the middle class...after all, the poor are too lazy to make it all the way out to the rich country estates (notice there are no "Occupy Rancho Santa Fe, CA" movements).

Unfortunately, with TV and internet, almost everyone....even the poorest, now want comfort and more things than what a job at McDonalds can afford. The problem is that every job isn't paying a good wage (and won't, unless we are at zero % unemployment...and that would cause its own problems), so you are just expecting that a lot of people will lay down and accept that they won't live a better life while some other folks get to be born into the fast lane (tough to get one of the top jobs without having connections...and even tougher to get a job or create a business plan where the government allows you to practically steal other people's money).

So, what we are seeing is another renegotiation of the cost of not storming the castle. The interesting part is to see whether the middle class will accept the megarich getting richer while the middle class turns on itself (creating more poor) or whether they will demand that the megarich give up more of its share to the middle class and poor in order to maintain their own little fiefdoms.

Fun times.

And that is where the OWS message will sink or swim - it seems that at long last the ever-shrinking middle class is starting to catch on to the reality that they are part of the 99% and all that jive about hard work and free enterprise is happy talk, and our so-called free market system would be next to Soviet collectivism on the rubbish heap of history right now if the taxpayers hadn't been forced to save the scum sucking filth on Wall St. from themselves.

I hope they pass a law that Wall St. bonuses must be paid in cash at place of business on Friday afternoon.

[BlueHen86]

I'm not so sure about that. True, they may carry more than their share of the tax burden, but they also have more access to lawmakers and government than the 99%. That access should come with a price. I don't shed a tear for the 1%, I think they get what they pay for, and they can afford it.

Ummmm

Ummmm yeah. They pay more in, they get more out. Like I said, they get what they pay for.

[ODUsmitty]

While both ends of the wealth spectrum have their very negative stereotypes, I would much rather identify (as an upper-middle class person) with those industrious enough to adapt to an ever-changing economic reality vice colluding with the chronically-unemployed and government-dependent.

If that makes a sap, then so be it. However, I have no sympathy nor respect for those that cannot find a way to support their own existence in this world.

[BlueHen86]

So, what we are seeing is another renegotiation of the cost of not storming the castle. The interesting part is to see whether the middle class will accept the megarich getting richer while the middle class turns on itself (creating more poor) or whether they will demand that the megarich give up more of its share to the middle class and poor in order to maintain their own little fiefdoms.

The "Middle Class" of today is better off than the "Middle Classes" of the 50s, 60s or 70s were. One of the biggest myths of popular culture is that the "middle class" has generally gotten worse off over time. It hasn't.

Middle class families were more likely to get by on a single income back in the 50's. Now both parents often work. The middle class may be better off now, in part because mom joined the work force. If the trend continues for another 60 years we'll have to legalize poligamy so the third parent can get a job.

[Grizalltheway]

The "Middle Class" of today is better off than the "Middle Classes" of the 50s, 60s or 70s were. One of the biggest myths of popular culture is that the "middle class" has generally gotten worse off over time. It hasn't.

Middle class families were more likely to get by on a single income back in the 50's. Now both parents often work. The middle class may be better off now, in part because mom joined the work force. If the trend continues for another 60 years we'll have to legalize poligamy so the third parent can get a job.

It is truly astounding just how out of touch with reality JSO is.

[AZGrizFan]

Middle class families were more likely to get by on a single income back in the 50's. Now both parents often work. The middle class may be better off now, in part because mom joined the work force. If the trend continues for another 60 years we'll have to legalize poligamy so the third parent can get a job.

It is truly astounding just how out of touch with reality JSO is.

It is truly astounding how out of touch with reality you are.

If they're BETTER off because both parents work, how would they be if only the father worked? Houses are bigger, amenities are more common, they (as a group) are higher up on Maslov's heirarchy of needs, getting "wants" rather than 'needs", and yet we are supposed to continually feel sorry for the "middle class"? Hell, I AM the middle class and I don't feel sorry for anyone without the back bone or worth ethic to make something of themselves.

[YoUDeeMan]

Well, "wants" are an interesting thing...they often involve ego, a sense of fairness (and what is fair is rarely agreed upon) and some semblance of respect. If the rich are seen as a group of generous, hard working folks who respect people, and the lower class is allowed to believe they are making progress, then the lower classes generally will keep to themselves and muddle out their days focusing on their own issues (eating, drinking, screwing, spending time with family or keeping entertained). Believe me, the rich love having the masses continually satisfied or quietly struggling with their daily activities...it's a formula that has worked for thousands of years and it is what has especially kept our society humming along without a revolution for quite some time.

However, if the rich are viewed as cutthroats who laugh while dancing on the backs of the poor, and those poor see themselves as having no opportunities, then some folks will get a little pissed and "want" some justice. And if the village really, truly wants what someone has, the village will take what someone has. Given the numbers, there's very little the 1% can do about it other than to fight and die for their beliefs...except they don't usually like to do the fighting, so they hire some other folks to run interference.

AZ, you and I were raised to earn what we have...but make no mistake, there are people that don't think that way. Or at least their version of "earning something" is a bit different than ours because they don’t think everything has been “earned” on a fair playing field.

The fact is that people who are born into money have FAR more opportunities than your average Joe born into poverty...so there really isn't a fair playing field from the start. I'm not saying any one person can't make it…you have…but there is a huge difference between Junior coasting into college through a private school and stepping into a +$250,000 job from his country club connections, as opposed to the person born in the hood or the back woods of Appalachia having to work his azz off every step of the way, some while getting in debt just to earn a modest $40-60,000.

Right now, there are some high profile, arrogant rich folks who seem to have taken the “let them eat cake…on second thought, screw it, do they really need cake?” attitude. Seriously, I’m all for rewarding people for their efforts, but when you have some fund manager clowns manipulating stocks (and CEOs who are slashing jobs just to raise their stock price to exercise their options) so that they can pull in several hundred million per year, it is little wonder they are being vilified. And when you have politicians ignoring regular folks and pandering to the 1%, then there is going to be a backlash…especially in a world where the villagers can simply turn on their computers and see clearly just how the inner circle is laughing all the way to the bank.

Somebody in this system has to put the focus back on the average Joe. That means some rich folks are going to have to give up their 7th home and third yacht, and some poor folks are going to have to accept that they don’t need 3 smart phones and 4 large flat screen TVs but they will have their opportunities if they actually work for them.

Of course, getting to that point will take strong leadership from a person or people with solid morals and a willingness to take a lot of public crap from all sides while standing his/her ground in order to make the tough decisions.

We’ll probably have to struggle along while things get a lot worse before we get to that point.

[kalm]

Well, "wants" are an interesting thing...they often involve ego, a sense of fairness (and what is fair is rarely agreed upon) and some semblance of respect. If the rich are seen as a group of generous, hard working folks who respect people, and the lower class is allowed to believe they are making progress, then the lower classes generally will keep to themselves and muddle out their days focusing on their own issues (eating, drinking, screwing, spending time with family or keeping entertained). Believe me, the rich love having the masses continually satisfied or quietly struggling with their daily activities...it's a formula that has worked for thousands of years and it is what has especially kept our society humming along without a revolution for quite some time.

However, if the rich are viewed as cutthroats who laugh while dancing on the backs of the poor, and those poor see themselves as having no opportunities, then some folks will get a little pissed and "want" some justice. And if the village really, truly wants what someone has, the village will take what someone has. Given the numbers, there's very little the 1% can do about it other than to fight and die for their beliefs...except they don't usually like to do the fighting, so they hire some other folks to run interference.

AZ, you and I were raised to earn what we have...but make no mistake, there are people that don't think that way. Or at least their version of "earning something" is a bit different than ours because they don’t think everything has been “earned” on a fair playing field.

The fact is that people who are born into money have FAR more opportunities than your average Joe born into poverty...so there really isn't a fair playing field from the start. I'm not saying any one person can't make it…you have…but there is a huge difference between Junior coasting into college through a private school and stepping into a +$250,000 job from his country club connections, as opposed to the person born in the hood or the back woods of Appalachia having to work his azz off every step of the way, some while getting in debt just to earn a modest $40-60,000.

Right now, there are some high profile, arrogant rich folks who seem to have taken the “let them eat cake…on second thought, screw it, do they really need cake?” attitude. Seriously, I’m all for rewarding people for their efforts, but when you have some fund manager clowns manipulating stocks (and CEOs who are slashing jobs just to raise their stock price to exercise their options) so that they can pull in several hundred million per year, it is little wonder they are being vilified. And when you have politicians ignoring regular folks and pandering to the 1%, then there is going to be a backlash…especially in a world where the villagers can simply turn on their computers and see clearly just how the inner circle is laughing all the way to the bank.

Somebody in this system has to put the focus back on the average Joe. That means some rich folks are going to have to give up their 7th home and third yacht, and some poor folks are going to have to accept that they don’t need 3 smart phones and 4 large flat screen TVs but they will have their opportunities if they actually work for them.

Of course, getting to that point will take strong leadership from a person or people with solid morals and a willingness to take a lot of public crap from all sides while standing his/her ground in order to make the tough decisions.

We’ll probably have to struggle along while things get a lot worse before we get to that point.

Thats two in a row from you. Damn strong work.

[89Hen]

Somebody in this system has to put the focus back on the average Joe. That means some rich folks are going to have to give up their 7th home and third yacht, and some poor folks are going to have to accept that they don’t need 3 smart phones and 4 large flat screen TVs but they will have their opportunities if they actually work for them.

Thats two in a row from you. Damn strong work.

Except for the above passage. I haven't heard a SINGLE person from the OWS crew come even close to agreeing the second part.

[kalm]

Thats two in a row from you. Damn strong work.

Except for the above passage. I haven't heard a SINGLE person from the OWS crew come even close to agreeing the second part.

Perhaps. But I also never heard anyone from Goldman Sachs tell the nation of Greece 'you really shouldn't be taking these loans from us' or tell pension funds 'these MBS's are mostly pure crap and you shouldn't be buying them from us'.

[BlueHen86]

It is truly astounding just how out of touch with reality JSO is.

It is truly astounding how out of touch with reality you are.

If they're BETTER off because both parents work, how would they be if only the father worked? Houses are bigger, amenities are more common, they (as a group) are higher up on Maslov's heirarchy of needs, getting "wants" rather than 'needs", and yet we are supposed to continually feel sorry for the "middle class"? Hell, I AM the middle class and I don't feel sorry for anyone without the back bone or worth ethic to make something of themselves.

I too am middle class and I don't feel sorry for myself. The reason the middle class enters the discussion is that it doesn't seem anyone in DC is looking out for them. There are people looking out for the poor by trying to make sure their programs aren't cut. There are people looking out for the rich by trying to change the tax code in order to ease their tax "burden".

I've always identified myself as a republican although I side with the dems on some issues, but sometimes it's hard to tell which of the two major parties represents me. I think many in the middle class feel that way too.

[89Hen]

Except for the above passage. I haven't heard a SINGLE person from the OWS crew come even close to agreeing the second part.

Perhaps. But I also never heard anyone from Goldman Sachs tell the nation of Greece 'you really shouldn't be taking these loans from us' or tell pension funds 'these MBS's are mostly pure crap and you shouldn't be buying them from us'.

99% > 1% until it's convenient.

[kalm]

Perhaps. But I also never heard anyone from Goldman Sachs tell the nation of Greece 'you really shouldn't be taking these loans from us' or tell pension funds 'these MBS's are mostly pure crap and you shouldn't be buying them from us'.

99% > 1% until it's convenient.

The derivatives market is greater than the entire GDP of the planet let alone a few ill gotten iPhone 4's and flat screens. You tell me what's worse.

[eagleskins]

Don't forget how many broke racists are republicans.

[YoUDeeMan]

Don't forget how many broke racists are republicans.

Don't forget how many lazy, uneducated, broke, racist thugs are Obama, Rangel, and Barry supporters first...and then Democrats.