View Story | 411 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
by xysea on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:21:22 AM PDT
would help people in your situation. Your previous diary was correct. An 800 dollar payment to the upper middle class won't help much.
Revenue is revenue. The Republicans have played a shell game with our Social Security taxes so the working person pays less in taxes percentage wise than Warren Buffet and Bill Gates.
"It's the planet, stupid."
by FishOutofWater on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:43:49 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
But the working class is fucked. The labor movement peaked in the mid Seventies and things have been generally downhill for us ever since.
A few "bubbles" in the economy proved that a rising tide lifts all boats, at least as far as apparent prosperity. But now the economy is headed for the crapper, and you can bet that the working class will be left to struggle with the disproportionately small portion of resources allocated to us.
This is CLASS WAR, and the other side is winning.
by Mr X on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:59:51 AM PDT
Quite honestly, much of the working class is used to being "fucked," as that's not a new situation. It's the mid-middle and even upper-middle class are feeling the screwing now.
I am an Edwards Democrat.
by ThirstyGator on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:26:16 AM PDT
In fact, most of the "working class" used to be middle class when I was a kid. Bring back the income tax rates and union participation we had under Kennedy.
by Ready2fight on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:37:05 PM PDT
upwardly mobile. People gripe about baby boomers, none of my parents 5 children is better off than they were. The folks here griping about how lucky the baby boomers were don't seem to understand that it all ended in 1973 with double digit inflation and the energy crisis under Nixon. I'm OK with my life and I'm happy but right now I'm facing having no income in about 3 months if I can't find a job. I just keep on trusting that it will work out somehow, but I'm always living on the edge.
Yes, by all means bring back the tax structure we had under Kennedy. That was when corporations had to pay some taxes. In those days Americans believed we were all in this together. No more. Not since Reagan. The "party of ideas" didn't do much for us regular folks who work for a living. All the money, all the tax breaks go to the "investor class."
There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious...that you've got to put your bodies on the gears...and make it stop. -- Mario Savio
by Boston Boomer on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:03:43 PM PDT
My husband a depression baby and second generation American, first born on the soil, and highly educated by the GI Bill had three children. All received 8 years of college from him and by their own admission all the lessons ever wanted on anything.
They grew up in an exclusive LA neighborhood with a full time housekeeper, gardner, etc. Their mother stayed home and pursued art history.
They all graduated college with professional degrees. They did enjoy their college careers, none worked, and all traveled extensively. None graduated before thirty.
All waited until almost forty to have children. All had dual income families. None could afford long term household help. All struggled for private school for their kids.
None of the grandkids are highly functional in their 20s.
None of the kids had what their parents had.
None of the grandkids look capable of producing what their parents did. All the grandkids are in their late twenties and all remain at home.
by yoduuuh do or do not on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:57:11 PM PDT
You are working class.
Distinctions such as mid-middle and upper-middle class serve only to divide us.
by Mr X on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:45:10 PM PDT
A lot of us are in the same boat-too poor to receive assistance. We're a family of seven living on my husband's salary as a machine operator in a factory. $800 would help us buy six cords of firewood or a tank of heating oil, but we're too poor to qualify. So we sit here in our cold house with just a woodstove to keep the pipes from freezing. It's the same for a lot of people we know around here. What we need are either better paying jobs, or less expensive food and energy.
The weak in courage is strong in cunning-William Blake
by beltane on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 12:08:11 PM PDT
what is needed is an expansion of the Earned Income Credit, and I mean significantly expand it, double it, triple it. That way it is targetted to lower income workers in need of help and more likely to spend it. Also, provide a boost to Social Security payments as well.
And to pay for it, since we should be under paygo, make all income taxed at the same rate (no more special treatment for capital gains/dividends), subject all income to FICA/Medicare and lift the caps (and remove the trust funds from the budget and put it in a freakin' lock box), and eliminate those tax cuts for those in the top 2%.
Both of these ideas target the less fortunate and vulnerable, those that aren't necessarily living above their means, but living itself is above their means.
"There is no barrier of people's acceptance. The only barrier is the media. Remember what people cannot see or hear, they cannot think about."
by dugjxn on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 04:03:43 PM PDT
But, unfortunately, I'm strapped myself right now, with no way out.
I was born a millworker's daughter.....
by cackyp on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:45:16 AM PDT
Responsible people all over this country are getting screwed.
On Tucker last night, I learned Britney Spears spends about 110 million a year.
I'm going to go off for a full day yet I barely meet the bills. No heating, no cell phone, no credit. No car. And I already know I have a health condition, maybe even diabetes. I go to sleep feeling that throbbing in my toes. And I haven't seen a doctor in I.don't.know.how.long.
Plus, he knows what crapped out means, which will help him explain his condition on the morning of November 5 - PBCliberal
by Nulwee on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:52:14 AM PDT
I know it's wrong to say this, but people like her are why the French Revolution had to happen.
And yet every time we ask for the middle and lower class to get some relief, we're accused of "class warfare"!
Class warfare? Excuse me, but nobody's put Paris Hilton under a guillotine. When that happens, you'll have class warfare.
The worst thing about it all is that I'm good with money. We know how to save and how to make sacrifices. And we still can't get back in the black.
Live every week like it's Shark Week.
by droogie6655321 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:13:39 AM PDT
just reduced her inheritance a whole bunch.
I don't remember (or care about) the exact numbers, but Paris Hilton's riches just got mostly given away to charity in a massive trust that he set up, taking the money from his presumed heirs, including Paris and her whole family.
Now, I still don't feel one bit sorry for her. But maybe her granddaddy got tired of hearing all the negative press about the "Paris Hilton tax," and voluntarily reduced how much she will actually inherit.
Hooray for noblesse oblige. Or something.
by Brooke In Seattle on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:01:23 AM PDT
is that she's earned quite a bit herself. Al that self marketing isn't just empty vanity - it's clever product marketing. She might well end up as the richest of her siblings
And FWIW, old Mr Hilton is an asshole in his own right. Old family tyrants who try to impose their own choices onto their offspring are a disgrace. What he does would even be plainly illegal in many jurisdictions (though probably not where he lives).
by cris0000 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 12:53:47 PM PDT
She definitely earned her money. I think getting mad at these messed up celebrities is just distracting. They are not the cause of the economic problems in this country.
by jjellin on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:53:21 PM PDT
if you consider working an activity like driving around in a bus with another rich slut, trying your best to keep your pants on around the common folk little people who's lives you invade while acting like a spoiled rotten five year old, then I suppose you could say she "earned it".
The trick is in what one emphasizes. We either make ourselves miserable, or we make ourselves happy. The amount of work is the same." Carlos Castaneda
by FireCrow on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:30:44 PM PDT
salaries in equally bizarro ways, I just meant we can't blame her (or Britney) for the economic problems we are having. They are just symptoms, not the cause of the disease.
by jjellin on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:48:30 PM PDT
no human being is worth multiple million dollar salaries. Nobody! No actor, no athlete, no CEO, nobody! Where do people think all this money comes from, the money fairy? It comes from us, the people at the bottom of the pile. Don't forget it.
by jimreyn on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 04:41:41 PM PDT
if Paris, or the athlete or the news anchor wasn't making the money, the owner would be. I don't have a problem with the talent taking some of the money away from the 'owner' (yes I use the word talent loosely). But I agree some salaries are obscene. Still, that is not the cause of our economic problems.
by jjellin on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:04:47 PM PDT
...if you're responsible with your money or not, the walls just keep closing in. I could write a whole diary on the small financial "disasters" that have hit my family, just since the first of the year, mostly medical.
Just one "minor" example: My employer changed dental plans this year. Went to the dentist yesterday for my annual checkup (to hell with every 6 months because no plan seems to cover it), the old plan left me with about $4 to pay out of pocket for the visit. The new plan allows me to pay $30 out of pocket a visit. For preventativ care. Pfft. This means that I went from paying around 16 bucks for the family to get checkups and cleanings to $120 annually. Unbelievable.
It's depressing and altogether unconsionable what's happening in this country. I've never seriously considered leaving my homeland before, but it's starting to look more neccesary every day.
I feel your pain xysea. The bleeding just never seems to stop.
Politics, n. Strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. - Ambrose Bierce
by MalachiConstant on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:24:48 AM PDT
She's got a lot of problems, but what has she done to cause the recession. Have a little perspective. She earned her money no less fairly than most. Yes, she's "rich" and messed up, but you can't say she's to blame for the economic problems, or the coming recession/depression in this country.
by jjellin on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:51:51 PM PDT
been making money since she was in The New Mickey Mouse Club. I blame Disney. Lindsey Lohan starred in Disney movies too. Too much pressure, too young and no guidance. Corporations treat all actors as expendable resources and child actors have all of the normal crap to deal with and the problems of money and lax supervision.
Think about how many actors, musicians and sports stars who make ridiculous amounts of money. Yet there are still plenty in those same fields who make as much as the average person. A fair tax system would strip the excess from the system and elevate everybody else. A Pop star could sell more CDs if the price was lowered and those fans had more disposable income. This country has been built up on spending not producing and there is no short term fix for this. We need a new New Deal. That is why I support Edwards, but no matter who the next president is, we need to force them to make big changes to the system.
by pgm 01 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 03:17:27 PM PDT
I like it. Hadn't thought of that before.
by jjellin on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 04:58:53 PM PDT
aimed at the middle and working classes and the poor. The ruling classes see us as nothing but potential soliders or cheap labor.
by Boston Boomer on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:06:14 PM PDT
What they're actually terrified of is a government run by the people for the people. Just like always.
Prosperity ripened the principle of decay; the causes of destruction multiplied with the extent of conquest... Gibbon
by Dinclusin on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:53:34 PM PDT
and have had to reduce my meds because my employer shifted to a cheaper prescription plan that classes my meds as "tier 3" which translates to paying twice what I used to pay.
Full-time work with excellent benefits doesn't mean you're making it anymore.
by Tracker on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:16:19 AM PDT
but it isn't just you having this problem.
I make under the median salary but my wife makes a decent wage. We got a decent deal on a house recently with 20% down and a fixed rate on a mortgage payment that was about the same as the rent we had been paying previously.
Every week as soon as I get my paycheck I put aside money for bills plus a little extra to cover the higher bills during the winter months(heat is expensive here in the Northeast). We had been doing OK with a few hundred dollar cusion in the account. Then the weather got cold and heating bills started to come in. We got the latest monthly bill for about $400 and now our account has 37 cents and there are still a couple bills left to pay. This is to heat a 1300 sq foot house with new replacement windows at 65 degrees. Plus our property taxes just went up.
We aren't about to default or anything, but somehow I'm going to have to figure out how to squeeze some more bill money out of the hundred bucks or so a week I have to pay for everything else. I realize that we are probably better off than a lot of people still, but rather than making me feel good about my own situation, it makes me wonder why people who are barely scraping by are among the better off in this country.
Needless to say, Mrs. Cometman and I spend a lot more time at home these days.
Part of this is just the extra money it costs to own a home. That I expected. But a lot of it is due to the fact that everything costs more, gasoline, heating oil, groceries, you name it. And wages aren't keeping up with the rising costs of necessary goods and services.
But instead of helping people out, the insiders in DC just drop items for the consumer price index so things seem a lot rosier than they actually are.
We need someone to take on the corporate greed in DC that is rapidly destroying the middle class.
"The meek shall inherit nothing" - F. Zappa
by cometman on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:09:24 AM PDT
same situation as you are. Without my husband's overtime (there is talk of cutting it back at his job), we could not pay some of our bills. And we are solidly middle class, according to the government's income numbers!!!
Our neighbors are in the same boat....to a person! The talk at the PTO meetings is of the cost of groceries, more than anything. EVERYONE is feeling the pinch there.
I would love to meet one person who thinks what is happening is good. Just one.
by PsychoSavannah on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:39:17 AM PDT
Writing and Poetry at My Left One.
by socialist butterfly on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:50:21 AM PDT
brags about making a company profitable by laying off the workers.
I meant one person who works for a living, has children in school, perhaps a modest investment portfolio....y'know a "regular" American.
by PsychoSavannah on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:59:25 AM PDT
My family has some people who are juggling between Romney or Guiliani, and these are people with $12/hr jobs who have no reason at all to vote repug.
I also have friends/acquaintances/co-workers who make more, have children & homes & 401ks, but not true wealth, and still think the repug is working in their interests.
I don't get it. I never do.
by socialist butterfly on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:18:15 AM PDT
I said that I can bring in X product (which is for a higher price point) if Democrats get into office.
"Which one?" she asked derisively.
"I don't care which one. Any of them will be better for working people than any of the Republicans," said I.
"But Democrats want us all to live in a socialized country," said she.
Me: "You don't mind socialized services like, oh, the military or the highways, do you?"
Her: "That's not socialism, that's American"
Me: "Well, I don't care what it's called. When Arthur Anderson laid off 50,000 Chicagoans with nice high paying jobs, it sure dragged down wages for the rest of us. And now, none of us are buying (high price-point item over there). Look. If you're selling to the top of the scale or the bottom of the scale, you're doing all right. If you're Tiffany or WalMart, you're making your rent just fine. But my nice little store that sells to the middle class needs the middle class to be there, to be robust, and to have disposable income. And Republicans don't like the middle class, let alone wanting it to be robust and having disposable income."
She tsk'd at me and let me know with a roll of her eyes that she thought I was stoopid and delooded.
Republicans. Feh.
Help a Blue Store!
by ultrageek on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:33:55 AM PDT
All those aspirational folks who think they absolutely must have the same things that "really" rich people do suddenly didn't do so much shopping in high-end places like Tiffany's, Coach, and similar upscale retailers.
I never had that much, so I don't have that much to lose. Life is going to be very interesting to some of these people who have never had a day of want in their entire lives.
by Brooke In Seattle on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:07:11 AM PDT
no?
Bill had Bimbo eruptions ... Crazy John has Rambo eruptions
by kbman on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:09:41 AM PDT
The military isn't socialized... it's American!
Heh.
I suppose Blackwell isn't socialized... but, that's an argument for someone better informed. :)
by ultrageek on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:26:19 AM PDT
Commercial mercenaries. New Orleans is only the first place they will be deployed in the US.
"In the end we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends." MLK, changed to this during the 2008 FISA fight
by bewert on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 03:50:48 PM PDT
Oh, so I guess that means that Western Europe went socialist after all. And THAT means that the Soviet Union actually did win the battle of ideas in the Cold War. And this, in turn, means that Reagan didn't win the Cold War as y'all like to claim. It also means he was chummy with leaders of socialist countries - like Maggie Thatcher.
(I know its a bs argument, but fight fire with fire.)
by kbman on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:34:03 AM PDT
They think they've won the argument. Those Frenchies are the spawn of Satan, doncha know?
That's why I bring in The Military. They looooove the Military... especially if they don't know anyone serving... and, if the Military isn't socialist, both inside and out, I want to know what is. It's supported from each member of society -- serving and not -- according to his abilities; it lives and dies by the weakest link; a four star general with 35+ years of experience makes only 11x what a private who just got out of boot camp; food, clothing, housing and medical is provided equally, regardless of rank (yeah, I know, not really, but theoretically); and on and on and on.
Military = Socialist. Health Care = Capitalistic.
There's your winning argument.
by ultrageek on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:42:15 AM PDT
Unfortunately, I don't want to be a private in boot camp america. Sure, the healthcare that's theoretically provided equally regardless of rank but not really sounds ok, but I don't want the federal government managing my weight for me or fining me $10,000 because I wanted to sell bananas by the pound instead of by the kilo.
Find me some happy middle where we can take care of those who need it most, without it becoming the socialist workers' paradise, and I'm sold.
by NoMoreNicksLeft on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:58:49 AM PDT
We Democrats know that society helping the weakest and most needy among us isn't a bad thing. Many Republicans of my acquaintance equate that with helping Negroes have more children.
Once you bring in the military with its flags and its bands and dripping in medals and heroism and... patriotism... and you call that socialist, you hope that it breaks through their inherent, yet hidden, racist mindset just for a minute... and then, like water dripping on stone, you can wear away at their nasty Republicanism.
by ultrageek on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:14:13 AM PDT
Beyond a skeleton force and a few people with fingers on the nuker triggers just in case some other nation were to get invasion-happy.
But that's probably not realistic.
I do worry, that your nice little republican-busting example of the military is actually, to an extent, indicative of what it would take to implement this "socialism".
by NoMoreNicksLeft on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:20:24 AM PDT
What I think we should do is make sure that our military spending never exceeds the sum of the next three highest spenders combined. The billions of dollars it frees up should go to rebuilding our infrastructure, educating our people, fixing our healthcare system, and whatever else is needful.
Of course, that means that we don't go picking fights all over the world, and live humbly and at peace with our neighbors. And that, my friend, is anathema to my Republican friends who have the audacity to call themselves Christians.
by ultrageek on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:30:43 AM PDT
I don't want to start a fight, but in case you are curious how I think, here it goes. You say this:
What I think we should do is make sure that our military spending never exceeds the sum of the next three highest spenders combined.
And ok, I'm not sure about that ratio (hell, maybe even a little less than that wouldn't be out of the question), but then:
The billions of dollars it frees up should go to rebuilding our infrastructure, educating our people, fixing our healthcare system, and whatever else is needful.
We have debt to pay down. You know what they say about people who just make the minimum payments on their credit cards each month? That's us, as a country.
And besides, I'm not real big on the education or healthcare thing. If we can still pay down the debt a bit after doing all this and still have money left over, let's do two things with it. One, we don't tax it away from the people whom it belonged to in the first place, but more importantly (and technically before that) we just help subsidize things for the people who need it.
If you fall below the poverty line (a real one, not the artificially low crap we have now), welfare is not out of the question for me. If structued in such a way that people aren't discouraged from trying to climb out of it, it could actually work. If a single mother finds part time work... don't take that amount out of how much assistance she was receiving, especially not immediately. If people really need help paying for healthcare, help them too.
Yuppies that bought too much house or that don't want to give up cable tv though, I just can't feel much sympathy for them.
And that, my friend, is anathema to my Republican friends who have the audacity to call themselves Christians.
Not a republican. Sort of libertarianish. Defintely not a christian.
by NoMoreNicksLeft on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 12:34:54 PM PDT
apart, and a tremendous amount of poor people all thanks to Republican rule of America.
by jimreyn on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 04:49:56 PM PDT
Deserve alot of blame. And there's plenty of it to go around. But most of the democrats whose names I know, they're every bit as deserving. For that matter, their ideologies are completely out of whack. Helping poor people is cool, I have no problem with that. Healthcare? Something's definitely wrong there, too. But I just can't choke down the entire democrati... er, "progressive" philosophy.
by NoMoreNicksLeft on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:33:28 PM PDT
We pay more if we smoke or if we are overweight.
by relentless on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:26:28 PM PDT
The diarist's story is the story of an increasing number of people in this country. They should have known that this is what a Bush vote in 2000 and 2004 was going to bring them. So many of us tried to tell them, but they willfully ignored us. They have brought their own pain upon themselves. If they didn't want this, they shouldn't have voted for the GOP. It is that simple.
"News is what someone, somewhere, doesn't want you to know. Everything else is just advertising."
by trueblue illinois on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:32:36 AM PDT
I can tell you I never voted for George W. Bush. I cried the night he was elected.
I knew this would happen to people like me.
I am being forced to pay for the sins of others, well in advance of their own bill coming due.
by xysea on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:42:03 AM PDT
Of course you didn't vote for Bush. You were smart enough to see the writing on the wall.
But you and the rest of us are being forced to pay for the willful ignorance of the people who voted for the GOP. They were warned this would happen, but they chose to ignore it. It was obvious Bush planned to gut the middle and working classes. Yet all those Bush voters voted against their own economic interest. Now they are suffering. But I have no pity for them. They brought this upon themselves. They should have known better than to stick their heads in the sand and assume that banning gay marriage was more important than making sure our country stayed on a sound financial footing.
All of us are suffering because the Bush voters chose to ignore evidence that was patently obvious to me, you and to everyone else on this site. They got the government they deserve. The rest of us now have to suffer.
(Sorry, I know I'm ranting. I'm just way pissed and bitter. Bitter toward the GOP, but also toward those who should have known better when they went into the voting booth in 2000 and 2004. Pissed that we all have to live with the consequences of their willful ignorance.)
by trueblue illinois on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:54:16 AM PDT
my original comment sounded like I was blaming you. Of course I am not. My heart breaks for you and for the rest of us who have to suffer the consequences of others' stupidity.
by trueblue illinois on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 12:19:29 PM PDT
by xysea on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 12:21:38 PM PDT
by jjellin on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:57:17 PM PDT
When are people going to see that Edwards can do this because nobody owns him!
by bunny99 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:44:49 AM PDT
Citi Goldman Deutsche Bank
but so have all the other candidates(Link).
Fear and Loathing in America
by Guy Incognito on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:28:20 PM PDT
don't like so that it won't be as obvious who they give a lot more to.
by relentless on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:31:34 PM PDT
If I were her, I'd demand to be called Ms. Cometwoman . . . .
by Roadbed Guy on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:08:09 AM PDT
by cometman on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:14:56 AM PDT
literally . . .
'cuz, if so, I'm having the same problem - yesterday I lost the ability to give out recommendations (not for diaries, just for comments).
Is there a set number that eventually gets used up?
Guess that gives a whole new meaning to "keeping your powder dry" . . . . a skill that those who frequent a Democratic Party-leaning website really should have down cold (so yeah, guess I don't deserve any sympathy)
by Roadbed Guy on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:45:33 AM PDT
[
