Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nothing in the article refutes the fact that average quarterly GDP was higher under Clinton than it was under either Reagan or Bush 43 and the numbers of Americans below the poverty level decreased.
Dot.com bubble. Artificially inflated and not sustainable. We all know how that turned out... crashed HARD.
Quote:
That article however was an excellent rant against the FED.
Thanks for sharing.
Yes, the Fed is a HUGE problem, but why in the world would you just gloss over all of Clinton's missteps?
Emmerich analyzes disposable income and economic benefits among several key income classes and comes to the stunning (and verifiable) conclusion that "a one-parent family of three making $14,500 a year (minimum wage) has more disposable income than a family making $60,000 a year."[[/b]/INDENT]
Your secondary premise:
The GROSSLY abused 'entitlement' system has to end... NOW
[A] rip off the middle class each and every day, courtesy of the world's most generous entitlement system.
Yet not in a single instance do you quantify the amount of that this hypothetical middle class family is being "ripped off"! Why, because the sum total of their ripped offness is 15% of their total tax liability based upon the exaggerated subsidy levels, more on that later, (as you've erroneously laid it out to be as pointed out by Factsplease).[/quote]
Something has struck me about all of this rage against entitlements. There is no mention made of ending federal farm subsidies or any of the other subsidies, tax exemptions or tax credits that corporations in this country receive.
Also the guy or gal with $60,000 paycheck is more likely than not working for a company or corporation where executive pay and corporate profits has soared over the past 20 to 30 years while pay for non-executive salaried employees has lagged significantly but where is the anger and outrage against corporate executives that give themselves lavish pay and perks while middle class salaried employees are just expected to suck it up and continued to work.
These days corporations are basically f**king over non-executive wage earners by demanding that they work harder for smaller wage increases.
Also the guy or gal with $60,000 paycheck is more likely than not working for a company or corporation where executive pay and corporate profits has soared over the past 20 to 30 years while pay for non-executive salaried employees has lagged significantly but where is the anger and outrage against corporate executives that give themselves lavish pay and perks while middle class salaried employees are just expected to suck it up and continued to work.
These days corporations are basically f**king over non-executive wage earners by demanding that they work harder for smaller wage increases.
WHERE IS YOUR OUTRAGE?
You brought up a couple of interesting things to consider, such as non-salary benefits. Very few wage earners making $60,000 are not eligible for company contributions to 401ks, health and dental benefits and other differed income, not to mention significant severance allowances. But hey, the working poor are easy targets.
Thanks for posting this chart. I saw it the other day on zero hedge, I consider it the most important article I read all year. This is very upsetting, it shouldn't be this way.
This is why I am attracted to TEA party type candidates. I feel they are the only ones who have the guts to cut gov handouts and reverse this trend.
There is not much incentive to make more money when what you make is less than what they have cut off.
I use to play that game with the IRS and their idea of tax brackets, when work was booming.
Can't remember what it actually was, but there was a income amount where it really jumped once you made more than that. When I got close to that number, I quit working, for the rest of the year and went hunting for a month or 2.
Income tax is a way to regulate your wealth, at the same time your life.
Progressive tax rates are a forced way to redistribute wealth, nothing else.
Last edited by BentBow; 11-24-2010 at 05:48 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
