Support NeoGAF

[LProtag]

Isn't the general idea behind why people from the middle and lower classes support the whole no-taxes for the rich Republican doctrine because of perceived wealth in the future? As in, they think that one day they can enter into that bracket that's going to be taxed higher and they feel that they will have worked their way up into it and shouldn't have their hard earned money taken away while others who 'didn't work as hard' aren't paying as much in taxes.

At least, this was how it was explained to me once. Though the sad truth is barely anyone will make it there from the lower and middle classes. They just assume they can because of capitalism and want to protect their future, albeit impossible future, earnings.

 

[Oblivion]

I keep hearing that the Dems haven't passed a budget in 3 years. There HAS to be something wrong with that. Can someone explain it to me?

Anyone.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Anyone.

I was under the impression that Obama passed a 10-year budget a while ago.

 

[Cygnus X-1]

Well...................




UNBELIEVABLE: S&P Favors Reid Plan, Boehner Plan May Result In Losing AAA Status
Joe Weisenthal | Jul. 25, 2011, 8:45 PM

Gamechanger?
According to CNN's Erin Burnett, sources familiar with S&P's thinking indicate that the Boehner plan -- which attempts to raise the debt ceiling and make cuts in two separate steps -- probably wouldn't be enough to avert a downgrade from AAA.
On the other hand, the Reid plan, which does it all once, would be looked on more favorably by the ratings agency.

Two quick thoughts on this development:
This makes the ratings agency look especially political, as it previously demanded $4 trillion in spending cuts -- exactly what Obama wanted -- as a precondition to preserving the AAA rating.

The AAA rating might be overrated, but up until now it's been respected by politicians on both sides of the aisle being something worth preserving. That a two-step process wouldn't preserve the rating is a huge strike against it.
All this being said, neither Reid nor Boehner is likely to pass in its current form (as Obama will say tonight) something that can pass both houses will need the all-at-onceness of Reid, with cuts that favor Boehner.
​

#############


So yeah about that credit rating stuff GOP. At this point should we even wonder if they even care about all this stuff?

Wow. The rating agencies are the wild card of Obama. The pressure on GOP now increased.

 

[Diablos]

Reid's plan still sucks ass. Man, what a clusterfuck.

The GOP doesn't give a shit about what S&P has to say. Well, the teatards won't. There will be a lot of back and forth and I don't think we will know what's going to happen until the last second.

The GOP is so radical these days nothing would surprise me; they will have no problem whatsoever allowing the country to default if it means it makes the President look bad.

240 Republicans are holding the world's economy hostage. Unreal.

 

[shadowsdarknes]

Isn't the general idea behind why people from the middle and lower classes support the whole no-taxes for the rich Republican doctrine because of perceived wealth in the future? As in, they think that one day they can enter into that bracket that's going to be taxed higher and they feel that they will have worked their way up into it and shouldn't have their hard earned money taken away while others who 'didn't work as hard' aren't paying as much in taxes.

At least, this was how it was explained to me once. Though the sad truth is barely anyone will make it there from the lower and middle classes. They just assume they can because of capitalism and want to protect their future, albeit impossible future, earnings.

That might apply to some people. But others just hold the viewpoint out of ideological fairness. If they worked hard and earned their money, they shouldn't necessarily be "penalized" for it. Some view it as a means to be deceptive of their income so they won't enter the higher brackets, too.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Reid's plan still sucks ass. Man, what a clusterfuck.

The GOP doesn't give a shit about what S&P has to say. Well, the teatards won't. There will be a lot of back and forth and I don't think we will know what's going to happen until the last second.

The GOP is so radical these days nothing would surprise me; they will have no problem whatsoever allowing the country to default if it means it makes the President look bad.

240 Republicans are holding the world's economy hostage. Unreal.

It's sad that the actions of >300 people can affect the lives of over 3 billion people.

 

[A Human Becoming]

Can you reword that a little bit better? From your post, I got that both parties are equally to blame for not reaching an agreement.

Boehner blamed Obama and Obama blamed a faction of Republicans (Tea Party) for the debt ceiling still not being raised.

 

[empty vessel]

Boehner blamed Obama and Obama blamed a faction of Republicans (Tea Party) for the debt ceiling still not being raised.

Only one of those is accurate. It isn't the former. Boehner would be lying through his teeth if he said Obama were responsible for the debt limit not being raised. All, or effectively all, Democrats would vote 'yes' on a bill to raise the debt limit, and Obama would sign it. The problem is that Republicans will vote no. Since Republicans control the House, the effect of this is that the debt limit is not raised.

 

[eznark]

Gold is useless. Its not backed by anything.

Try and build a house out of gold. Try and feed your kids gold.

I can unequivocally say that building a shelter out of gold will be infinitely easier than building shelter out of stock certificates.

 

[gcubed]

I can unequivocally say that building a shelter out of gold will be infinitely easier than building shelter out of stock certificates.

Depends if you trust the builder. The gold shelter collapsing would kill you. The stock certificate building collapsing would turn itself into a blanket and smother you in warmth and good feelings

 

[eznark]

Future are up on strong Ford earnings, so I guess my pessimistic read on the confrontational speeches was an over reaction.

I'm back on the "some deal will get made" side of the pool.

 

[Plinko]

Isn't the general idea behind why people from the middle and lower classes support the whole no-taxes for the rich Republican doctrine because of perceived wealth in the future? As in, they think that one day they can enter into that bracket that's going to be taxed higher and they feel that they will have worked their way up into it and shouldn't have their hard earned money taken away while others who 'didn't work as hard' aren't paying as much in taxes.

At least, this was how it was explained to me once. Though the sad truth is barely anyone will make it there from the lower and middle classes. They just assume they can because of capitalism and want to protect their future, albeit impossible future, earnings.

But the majority does NOT support the whole "no taxes for the rich" doctrine. Recent polls show that--I believe even the majority of Republicans were in favor of raising taxes on those who make over $250,000.

 

[eznark]

So disgusting that a politician can't govern without the fear of getting primaried.

Oh wait, that was last week.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/07/obama-poll-jobs-democratic-base-crumbling.html

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Primarying the President would basically be admitting defeat and handing the GOP the presidency.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Primarying the President would basically be admitting defeat and handing the GOP the presidency.

Just thinking about that scares the shit out of me. They shouldn't be allowed anywhere NEAR the WH for about 12-16 years or so.

 

[Mercury Fred]

Just thinking about that scares the shit out of me. They shouldn't be allowed anywhere NEAR the WH ever again for any reason.

fixed

 

[Cyan]

Wow. The rating agencies are the wild card of Obama. The pressure on GOP now increased.

Really not keen on S&P trying to dictate policy, no matter which side they come in on.

 

[Byakuya769]

Really not keen on S&P trying to dictate policy, no matter which side they come in on.

Same here. Focus on not giving "AAA"s to toxic assets and stay the fuck out of policy discussion.

 

[eznark]

Really not keen on S&P trying to dictate policy, no matter which side they come in on.

I don't think it's fair to claim that they are. The story doesn't even cite an anonymous source at S&P, just a source that knows stuff about how S&P does business.

 

[Krowley]

Isn't the general idea behind why people from the middle and lower classes support the whole no-taxes for the rich Republican doctrine because of perceived wealth in the future? As in, they think that one day they can enter into that bracket that's going to be taxed higher and they feel that they will have worked their way up into it and shouldn't have their hard earned money taken away while others who 'didn't work as hard' aren't paying as much in taxes.

At least, this was how it was explained to me once. Though the sad truth is barely anyone will make it there from the lower and middle classes. They just assume they can because of capitalism and want to protect their future, albeit impossible future, earnings.

This is one of the great misconceptions among liberals.

The truth is, a lot of the working poor in America are actually very proud and they bristle at the idea that they would have to ask rich people for handouts. They have a principled opposition to the idea of being dependent.

Dems woud do much better if they tried to win these people over with fire and brimstone combative populism rather than softball rhetoric about giving people a helping hand.

 

[Byakuya769]

This is one of the great misconceptions among liberals.

The truth is, a lot of the working poor in America are actually very proud and they bristle at the idea that they would have to ask rich people for handouts. They have a principled opposition to the idea of being dependent.

Dems woud do much better if they tried to win these people over with fire and brimstone combative populism rather than softball rhetoric about giving people a helping hand.

I've never met any of those people. I meet a lot who take principled positions against certain programs, but clamor to use 90% of all the other safety net benefits and tax code spending available to them.

 

[Krowley]

I've never met any of those people. I meet a lot who take principled positions against certain programs, but clamor to use 90% of all the other safety net benefits and tax code spending available to them.

I've met plenty.

 

[radioheadrule83]

Same here. Focus on not giving "AAA"s to toxic assets and stay the fuck out of policy discussion.

Policy very much affects their outlook on those assets though. Boehner's plan is a temporary solution, the very idea of this political game being renewed again in 6 months adds an element of uncertainty, and uncertainty is not compatible with lending and associated ratings. I can totally understand their position. From that article posted earlier it simply sounds as though S&P want to the USG committ to a decisive longterm strategy, they're not getting down into the weeds and telling the government how it should do things, they're saying one plan is preferable to the other because it represents a commital to a longer term solution.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

This is one of the great misconceptions among liberals.

The truth is, a lot of the working poor in America are actually very proud and they bristle at the idea that they would have to ask rich people for handouts. They have a principled opposition to the idea of being dependent.

Dems woud do much better if they tried to win these people over with fire and brimstone combative populism rather than softball rhetoric about giving people a helping hand.

It has little to do with pride.

The big man on the TV tells the poor that if the rich get tax cuts, they'll get a job because the rich will make them a job using the extra money.

And because the poor are not usually educated, they are swayed more easily by arguments that sound flashy and convincing, but are really full of holes and are flat out lies.

 

[Byakuya769]

I've met plenty.

That don't use any tax deductions?

 

[PhoenixDark]

The GOP would probably love for S&P to downgrade the US during Obama's term.

 

[eznark]

It has little to do with pride.

The big man on the TV tells the poor that if the rich get tax cuts, they'll get a job because the rich will make them a job using the extra money.

And because the poor are not usually educated, they are swayed more easily by arguments that sound flashy and convincing, but are really full of holes and are flat out lies.

I don't think this is condescending or patronizing enough. Could you tilt your head back and look down your nose at the moronic poor a bit more?

 

[War Peaceman]

This is one of the great misconceptions among liberals.

The truth is, a lot of the working poor in America are actually very proud and they bristle at the idea that they would have to ask rich people for handouts. They have a principled opposition to the idea of being dependent.

Dems woud do much better if they tried to win these people over with fire and brimstone combative populism rather than softball rhetoric about giving people a helping hand.

The mistake here is in thinking that these sorts of things amount to a 'handout'.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

I don't think this is condescending or patronizing enough. Could you tilt your head back and look down your nose at the moronic poor a bit more?

Could you twist my words some more, I don't think they're stretched enough

 

[Krowley]

That don't use any tax deductions?

You are misunderstanding what i'm saying.


They feel entitled to benefits they get because they pay their taxes and work their asses off. When they hear liberals talking about giving them a little help by taking money from the rich, they bristle because it has a condescending connotation. Republican rhetoric about living within your means and economic freedom is much more appealing to them. '

From the liberal perspective, they respond much better to combative rhetoric about going after the rich. It's not a difference in substance as much as a difference in perception and delivery. They feel [and rightly so) that the rich have been screwing them over forever, but they don't see themselves as "needing a little help"

 

[Dude Abides]

I've met plenty.

Well, that settles that then!

 

[eznark]

Well, that settles that then!

He doesn't want to bore you with the details.

 

[mckmas8808]

J.P. Morgan on labor:

http://www.investorvillage.com/uploads/44821/files/07-11-11_-_EOTM_-_Twilight_of_the_Gods__PWM_.pdf

Corporations are now toying with us at this point. But hey the GOP says that corporations need even lower taxes to spur more job growth.

This shit is pathetic.

 

[ChoklitReign]

Depends if you trust the builder. The gold shelter collapsing would kill you. The stock certificate building collapsing would turn itself into a blanket and smother you in warmth and good feelings

Tell that to these guys.

 

[Deku]

The GOP would probably love for S&P to downgrade the US during Obama's term.

Even if polls show they are getting the disproportionate amount of the blame?

 

[Clevinger]

Even if polls show they are getting the disproportionate amount of the blame?

Those polls change with the framing of the questions. I wouldn't put much stock in them.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Even if polls show they are getting the disproportionate amount of the blame?

Right now, they are. But I fully expect it to come right back on the Dems and Obama.

 

[Dude Abides]

He doesn't want to bore you with the details.

And here I was with an anecdote about a conversation I had with a cab driver all ready to go.

 

[timetokill]

Even if polls show they are getting the disproportionate amount of the blame?

If there's ever a safe bet, put it on the short-mindedness of the voting public.

If that were to happen, by this time next year you would hear nothing but how this is "the 2nd Great Depression" and how "it all happened on Obama's watch."

Ahem. For example.

The question I have to ask is: "Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?"
Unless you're asking that to the ric -... er, job creators, then the answer is almost assuredly no.

Obama was brought into office on a message of hope and change. The only thing that has changed is that we no longer have any hope. What a long way we've come from "Morning in America." Right now we are looking at the twilight of America, but my friends -- this does not need to be the end. We need to get America back on track. Yes these times are looking dark indeed, but the night is always darkest before the dawn: the dawn of a new day, a new morning in America.

Vote for [GOP Name Here] in 2012 and let's get America back to work!

 

[GhaleonEB]

Even if polls show they are getting the disproportionate amount of the blame?

They. Don't. Care.

Polls show the public would hold the GOP liable for default. Polls also show they have a wildly unpopular position by insisting the wealthy pay no new taxes in a deficit reduction bill. No fucks have yet been given.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Vote for [GOP Name Here] in 2012 and let's get America back to work!

And then in a speech later in the day, that GOP candidate will say the Government doesn't create jobs

I hate my country sometimes

 

[Krowley]

And here I was with an anecdote about a conversation I had with a cab driver all ready to go.

I posted my clarification above and I'll post it again in case you missed it

You are misunderstanding what i'm saying.


They feel entitled to benefits they get because they pay their taxes and work their asses off. When they hear liberals talking about giving them a little help by taking money from the rich, they bristle because it has a condescending connotation. Republican rhetoric about living within your means and economic freedom is much more appealing to them. '

From the liberal perspective, they respond much better to combative rhetoric about going after the rich. It's not a difference in substance as much as a difference in perception and delivery. They feel [and rightly so) that the rich have been screwing them over forever, but they don't see themselves as "needing a little help"

I'm surprised this is getting so much disagreement.

 

[timetokill]

And then in a speech later in the day, that GOP candidate will say the Government doesn't create jobs

I hate my country sometimes

you're right, I should've phrased it, "Let's let America get back to work."

 

[mckmas8808]

The GOP would probably love for S&P to downgrade the US during Obama's term.

BAM! I'd put money on the fact that you are 100% right about this. I think the US has had a AAA rating for like 90 years or something.

If we get downgraded during Obama's Presidency, the GOP and tea party heads would strictly blame Obama.

 

[SomeDude]

I seriously predict secession.

 

[Deku]

BAM! I'd put money on the fact that you are 100% right about this. I think the US has had a AAA rating for like 90 years or something.

If we get downgraded during Obama's Presidency, the GOP and tea party heads would strictly blame Obama.

The red neck tea partiers might. But the establishment is probably banking the dems cave completely at the last minute or Obama raises the limit himself and then they could bog him down with impeachment hearings.

The Republican strategy isn't that sophisticated. I really wish the democrats would be smarter about it and call their bluff.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

So guess who's city had the highest job growth in America?

Mine

 

[Clevinger]

I'm surprised this is getting so much disagreement.

Probably has to do with you saying it's The Truth when it's just anecdotal. I'm sure there are plenty of people who are as you described, just as there are many who aren't.

 

[Chichikov]

This is one of the great misconceptions among liberals.

The truth is, a lot of the working poor in America are actually very proud and they bristle at the idea that they would have to ask rich people for handouts. They have a principled opposition to the idea of being dependent.

Dems woud do much better if they tried to win these people over with fire and brimstone combative populism rather than softball rhetoric about giving people a helping hand.

You're conflating two different things here.
Hardly anyone want to be on welfare, in no small part because life on welfare fucking blows, but that does not mean that they oppose our tax code becoming more progressive.

In fact, every poll I saw show support for tax burden on the rich.