1

We face an odd situation of a president who might wind up being a lame duck for a full three years of his term.

I really hate looking forward to the next three years. Pass the KY Ultimate, please.

2  This is who Obama is. This is what he believes. Like the scorpion in the fable, this is his nature.

We face an odd situation of a president who might wind up being a lame duck for a full three years of his term.

True.  And what is continually amazing is that Obama openly professed his radical positions thoughout the campaign but people incredibly chose to take the position of, "Yeah right!  Like he would ever do that!"  And they elected him anyway.  Sheesh.

Or more appropriately perhaps - sheep.

3 Non-pole-based.  That's hard for some of us.

4 Barone mentions the possibility that Obama might triangulate and seek a more centrist course as Clinton did, much to his benefit, in 1995.

Obama will try this, especially after the Rs take the House.
His problem is he's no Bubba. Clinton could sell that. Hell Clinton could sell anything. Obama is a consummate actor, but he's stereotyped now as Liberal Savior and he can't deliver. It's hard to buck a stereotype, ask any actor.

5 I hope Barone is right - he usually is.

Any additional taxation doesn't really sting too badly, because above that level, you're pretty set.

Not sure I agree, unless you're talking about a liberal democrat.  The government takes so much as it is, "any additional amount" more than stings.  It is absolutely amazing to me that one's cumulative tax burden can approach and even exceed 50% of income.

6

Slick Willie is a liberal but he was also a politician who was interested in saving his own neck when the political winds changed directions. Barry's arrogance won't allow him to accept that or I hope that he refuses to accept that and stays down the 2009 path that makes him a one termer.

7 "We face an odd situation of a president who might wind up being a lame duck for a full three years of his term." Is there enough popcorn in North America to sustain such a development?

8 Iceberg ahead! Full reverse! Full reverse.

9 True.  And what is continually amazing is that Obama openly professed his radical positions thoughout the campaign but people incredibly chose to take the position of, "Yeah right!  Like he would ever do that!"  And they elected him anyway.  Sheesh.

Don't forget the he has just as much experience as Lincoln crap. Can we stop that comparison yet?

10 damn sockpuppet

11 and lets take down the Paultard while we are at it, TIM GRANEY for TX-14!!!!!!!  DONATE

12 (Inefficient transfer, too, of course -- of every dollar stolen from taxpayers, only seventy cents, tops, winds up in the hands of the poorer beneficiary; the rest goes to the government.)

The government doesn't accumulate that cash like cat hairs on a lint brush. The money that doesn't go out to the "deserving" end up in the pockets of what you've referred to as the "Educated Class". Which is why the "Educated Class" doesn't care if taxes go up, or the economy slumps, or people are thrown out of work.

13 Bridge troll union leader Robert Reich blames 1994 conservative surge on then non-existent Fox News!

http://tinyurl.com/y9j4wbl

14

Way back when, Algore said a income of $250000/yr made you a millionaire. That's because in 4 years you took in a million bucks (even if you didn't). Therefor you needed taxed more.

Beavis and Butthead government.

15 This is who Obama is. This is what he believes. Like the scorpion in the fable, this is his nature.

That reminds me of something Krauthammer said during the primaries.  He was musing whether the country would be better off with Hillary.  His thought was, in effect, that even though Hillary mouths leftist cant, she is so shamelessly out for her own political survival that she could be counted on to occasionally do the right thing, only because that's what the political winds dictated; whereas Obama would steer his political career, and the country, into the ditch because of his ideological blinders.

16 8 Iceberg ahead! Full reverse! Full reverse.

No dude, it's more like, "Iceberg ahead! Let's go even faster and try to ram through it!"
or

 "Once the iceberg sees ME, I'm sure I can get it to move out of the way because of how fuckin'-A-awesome I am!"

17

This is not exactly cowbell worthy - need some sort of iconic marker for this kind of news though.

Maybe the pudding?

18 We, as the middle class, are the forgotten man. We are the engine that drives the economy and power in politics. And we are being robbed blind. This cannot last.

19 I'm not sure 250K a year gets it done anymore Ace. I'm out 3K a month on a mortgage for a small house (sub 2000 sq ft), 3K a month for nursery school tuition, and about 2K a month in primary school tuition. Neither the nursery or elementary school are anything exotic or special. Add in 500 a month to feed the little locusts and thats 100K right there; maybe at 250K my minivans would have less then 150K miles on them -- but I doubt I would go all dapper and carefree.

20

Another amazing thing, imo, is from where the mashuga, I mean messiah derives his arrogance - the teleprompter!  His greatness, in his and his acolytes minds, is directly attributable to how good of a speech maker he his.  Hell he can't string a cohesive sentence together without it - unless, of course, 'ah' has a deeper meaning than I have been led to believe.

Maybe someone should give him a hint that the teleprompter has lost its marbles.

21 After his presidency is over, he's going to blame the country for not being evolved enough to follow his brilliant plan.

And we will laugh.

22 Don't discount the ability of the GOP to fuck this up royally.

23 Considering that he's not achieved anything at all since signing the Spendulus, I think we're looking at a president who will be a lame duck for 1436 days of his 1462 days in office. 

24

1974 was the first election that I really participated in, as a college freshman. Now THAT was a serious bloodbath.  In my state of Kentucky, a great Senator named Marlow Cook lost his reelection, pretty much solely because he had the bad luck to have been the chairman of Nixon's second Inaugural in 1973.  Kentucky went another 10 years before electing a Republican Senator.   That is how badly Watergate damaged the GOP.

If this is going to be that bad a year for Democrats, we will win the Senate as well as the House.  We will see some spectacular defeats of people like Barbara Boxer that were unthinkable a year ago.  We will probably win even in New York.  We will pick up 8 House seats just in Pennsylvania.

25 The rich do pretty well in the aggregate as well. I don' have stats on their total wealth, but according to Rush Limbaugh's website, and oft-cited stats on his show, the richest 50% pay 97% of all taxes. The richest 25% pay 86% of all taxes. And the richest 1% pay 33% of all taxes.

The fact that the richest 1% pay roughly ten times the taxes that the poorest 50% pay speaks volumes about how progressive our tax code is.

26 "$250,000 per year -- at that level of income, all of your needs, and most reasonable wants (great private school for kids, big damn house, etc.) are taken care of. Any additional taxation doesn't really sting too badly, because above that level, you're pretty set."

At that level of income in NY you are paying well over $100k in taxes, and the rent on your 2 bedroom apartment is $3,600 a month.

Not poor, but nothing more than an urban middle class lifestyle.

In the suburbs of Houston, with no state or city income tax, you get a hacienda.

27

#13 I went to UC Berkeley to email fucking Bob that fact about Fox news and the pussy has his email address hidden.

If you say it that makes it true in libtardland.

28

OT: SEIU President Andy Stern calls Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson "terrorists."

http://tinyurl.com/yhxrj4t

 

29

"We face an odd situation of a president who might wind up being a lame duck for a full three years of his term."

Well, if it quacks like a duck it's gonna get the treatment it deserves... for as long as we're stuck with the duck.

30 Bad economic policy/wealth redistribution is bad enough. But Obama has combined that with hideous apology tours and demonstrations disdain for America and her people. Sgt Crowley is just one example.  While that may not be on people's minds like the economy, it's there in the background and amplifies misgivings and distrust of him.  The voters who were willing to give him  benefit of the doubt gave him the margin of victory.  I don't think he can win them back very easily.

31 Don't discount the ability of the GOP to fuck this up royally. Absolutely. Nevertheless, if Barone thinks the Demotards have hosed themselves, there's a good chance that they are indeed dripping wet.

32 I'm buying stock in Jello pudding.  And popcorn. 

And in three years or so, maybe we'll get a capital gains tax cut and I can sell it all for a nice fat profit.

33 15,

he will drive this country into a ditch because he is so inexperienced which leads him to following the advice of his sycophantic czars.

"People are out of work, focus on health care President."

These people only have lofty govt positions because they know him and will do anything to please him. Because they will not get another job that pays like that on their own. So they agree with every brainfart he comes up with, Just like a clueless network Tv exec. Who ultimately drives the network into the ground.

This type of relationship reminds me of another person called Michael Jackson.

"Dating a chimp, great idea Michael"

"Black and White is going to end with you smashing a car and grabbing your crotch, awesome!"

"Sharing you bet with 8-12 year old boys, nothing wrong with that."

"Need more pills sure thing, Michael"

"want more plastic surgery, I'll call the doctor now"

"cant sleep you want to IV Diprivan, so ahead"

What President Obama needs is an advisor who is is Czar of brutal truth who will shoot down all of his idiotic ideas and programs.

34 Looks like Obomba's budget has cut out all funds for the Shuttle replacement.  That ought to generate some jobs!

35 "We face an odd situation of a president who might wind up being a lame duck for a full three years of his term." Well, if it quacks like a duck it's gonna get the treatment it deserves... for as long as we're stuck with the duck. Just so long as it's the duck that gets poled this time. I'm worn out.

36 For those wondering how Narcissimus Maximus would handle the augering in of his presidency and wholesale rejection by the country, the answer is in his stated preference to be a stellar one termer.  He has already made the mental calculation that he is a one termer.  He explains this to himself by assuming that the American people simply couldn't (but will eventually) recognize the awesomeness of what he has wrought.  He did the right things but it will take the rest of us lesser beings a while to see it.  If he had done the easy things, he would be a two-termer, but that wouldn't make him awesome.

At a superficial level, you simply can't dent his self-regard.  However, deep down in his reptile brain he knows he is a fraud and has no business in the Presidency. 

37 What President Obama needs is an advisor who is is Czar of brutal truth who will shoot down all of his idiotic ideas and programs.

Messianic egomaniacs do not surround themselves with such men.

38 "so let's call it $250,000 per year -- at that level of income, all of your needs, and most reasonable wants (great private school for kids, big damn house, etc.) are taken care of. Any additional taxation doesn't really sting too badly, because above that level, you're pretty set."

Not really Ace.  If you live in a big city and have more than two children you are not "pretty set".  The tax hikes sting and sting badly.  You have to remember that most people spend everything they make.  They can barely save.  Remember how low our national savings rate was.  They depend on their jobs and, even if you are making that kind of money, you are still worrying that you will be laid off (remember partners in law firms have been shown the door this year).  So these people are upper middle class not lower upper class.  The ceiling should really be 500 grand a year.   those are the people who are "pretty set".   Think about places like NYC.  Those people pay federal tax, state tax, city tax and in some instances town and school taxes.  Heard some guy on the radio figuring he was giving 70% of his income in taxes.  Not to mention all the hidden little taxes when you buy things.   Nope people in big cities making $250,000 a year with a mortgage and a couple of kids are not "pretty set" rather they are "scared to death".

39 For those wondering how Narcissimus Maximus would handle the augering in of his presidency and wholesale rejection by the country, the answer is in his stated preference to be a stellar one termer.

Exactly.  If he is not re-elected, he is therefore completely vindicated.

40

#13 I went to UC Berkeley to email fucking Bob that fact about Fox news and the pussy has his email address hidden.

Berkeley - where the "Free Speech" movement was popularized by the same exact folk who, only weeks before, were cutting the power cords with a hatchet when Bob Dylan was attempting to go electric at Newport RI music festival.

Life is So Grand.

Go Bears!!©

41

#33 A Czar of Brutal Truth would be brutally run over by a bus.

42 > We face an odd situation of a president who might wind up being a lame duck for a full three years of his term. And that's the optimistic case!

43 Obama in his first year adopted the priorities of what pundit Joel Kotkin, a Democrat himself, calls the "gentry liberals." I suspect Kotkin finds nothing wrong with fancying oneself a gentry liberal. Sort of like a benevolent dictator.

44 Nope people in big cities making $250,000 a year with a mortgage and a couple of kids are not "pretty set" rather they are "scared to death".

Which is why cities have gone from the engines of industry and finance to money sinks of welfare. Simply put, cities slit their own throats.

45 angler, very good point; I overstated. See my correction/softening explanation at post's end. I sort of lost a lot of *nuance* in a rush to make a point.

46 At that level of income in NY you are paying well over $100k in taxes, and the rent on your 2 bedroom apartment is $3,600 a month.

Not poor, but nothing more than an urban middle class lifestyle.

In the suburbs of Houston, with no state or city income tax, you get a hacienda.

Posted by: Holdfast at January 27, 2010 12:02 PM (Gzb30)

I agree.  250K living in NE is nothing compared to 250K living in the midwest or south.

47 I don't know what the number is, so let's call it $250,000 per year

So few people make 250k+, there's no voting bloc there. They are Obama's people, but there's almost none of them. The real economic "gentry" is wealthy, not well-paid. They're also Obama's, but there aren't very many of them either.

The social gentry works for the government, or the so-called "deep state": lawyers, professors, media, NGOs, finance, unelected politicos, corporate management, etc. They're a mega-bloc—the biggest single one in the country—and they're almost all Democrats.

It is an economic bloc, of a sort, but it's not defined by income. It's defined by who pays. The rest of us do. It, not the "underclass," is the parasitic class. Poor people are mostly self-financing. They're just shitty at it.

48 If you are a cop and a nurse in NYC you are making $250 grand together and if you have kids you are living in a modest house and your expenses are through the roof.   Same with two teachers or any people in those service type professions.  They are, even with all their perks from their unions, having trouble making things work.  So you can imagine how difficult it is for the legal secretary married to the accountant without the union perks to make things work.

49 The Chicken: You know that old joke about visiting the barrel around the back of the barracks when you get... lonely? Lame Duck: Yeah, so? The Chicken: It's your turn in the barrel.

50 Ace, I agree with your update.

That same attitude pervades other wealthy liberals.  Warren Buffet comes to mind.  He is in favor of a huge estate tax.  Easy for him to say because he has so much of an estate.

51
What the Duck?

52

He has already made the mental calculation that he is a one termer. 

I think this is a very interesting point, but I think it has more to do with the fact that he's utterly lazy and knows he can't handle this job for more than one term, even if things were going very well for him.  He can't possibly think he's going to be anything better than a mediocre one term president.  Presidenting is HARD!

He's telegraphing that he's going to quit, and go on the Retired Messiah Lecture Tour and make millions trying to rewrite the history of his presidency with words, words, and more words, which is all he's ever had. 

Remember the ration of shit Sarah Palin got for quitting her governorship?  Somehow I think Barry quitting the presidency is going to be perceived a bit differently from his lunatic followers.

53 8 Iceberg ahead! Full reverse! Full reverse No Full Ahead!! No Full Reverse!! No! Full Ahead No!11!! Hard to starboard!! No! hard to port! Which one is left??? Hard left!!! Turn Left!! Rahm?? Ax??? How do you get this MF to turn hard left??

54 You really think he thinks he is a one termer?  No way.  Although i would like to have him stick to one personality.  when he said that he was reverting to the understanding grandfatherly persona who listens and learns, he used that one in the campaign on and off.   If he honestly believed that his campaign would not be in full campaign mode, david plouffe would be out looking for a job and the money wouldn't be pouring in.

55 This is prolly the finest article you've ever written.

56 Rush just played the clip of Barry's, rather be a good one termer than mediocre two termer, not here just to be popular and get re-elected. That was a shot at Slick Willie. After the 1994 election Slick wouldn't take a piss without figuring out the approval numbers for it. Barry is saying he won't go Willie's route of just doing what it takes to be popular and win re-election.

57 I hope everyone reads my update; I really did overstate. And yes, I failed to take into account the furiously high cost of city-living. I shouldn't have specified an income level -- that varies. My point-- call it $x. at some value of x, depending on where you live and how many kids you have, you will have most of your wants met, and so additional dollars -- while having utility -- do not have AS MUCH utility to you in the here and now as the same dollars (or even fractions of dollars) would to someone having less than $x.

58 I agree with your update, too.  It reminds me of the smart growth signs that showed up in my small college town a few years ago, protesting a new mall or somesuch.  Those signs might as well have said "I've got mine."

59 Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 27, 2010 12:19 PM (1Jaio)

to those who believe this one term stuff and not slick willish stuff....may I interest you in this magnificent bridge which has only recently come under my many holdings and give you an opportunity of a life time....

60 Czars Obama unlikely to appoint in addition to the "Brutal-truth"czar:

"You have food in your teeth"-czar.

"Your fly is open"-czar.

"You can't be serious"-czar.

"Can't you fucking do math?"-czar.

61 Buffett is just a prick. He loved higher taxes and said he pays very little. So how is it he can have his private jets and cheeseburgers and cherry Coke at 30000 feet so easily? He pays himself a small taxable salary and accrues his wealth instead through less taxable means like cap gains. If he were sincere he would agitate for a wealth tax, a tax on one's entire net worth for the year. Notice he has never supported such an idea. These pricks in high finance with access to gubmint contracts and alternative compensation schemes, who say we aren't taxed enough, ought to take a long walk off a tall cliff. The rest of us who get paid on salary cannot get the low tax rates available to people like King Creep Buffett. And T. Boone Pickens can go blow himself. Yet another billionaire sniffing for a gubmint teat.

62 oblig. I think your wrong. The people who get 250K from salary maybe the gentry, educated bloc -- but the people who have 250K in income are small businessmen and women. They operate a restaurant employing eight people, a general contractor who builds few houses a year employing fifteen guys, a plumber with three trucks and four employees, etc.

63 Preach it!  Although I'm so far away from $200K that I'd sure like to know how that particular sting feels...I'd like to know what the sting feels like at 100K.

64 As I am a filthy Scandi reindeer shagger, can someone tell me if this pro-0bama argument has merit? http://tinyurl.com/y85r8qj And if it doesn't, can you debunk it for me? I haven't got any american pay stubs, so I really can't tell one way or the other.

65 Actually, there is another aspect to this upper class liberal love of taxes. It is a great way to stop people from moving up social classes.

The last thing the average leftist elitist wants is an SUV driving, gun owning, Republican voting small business man and his family moving into their ritzy neighborhood...

66

Like others on this thread, my wife and I are in the 250K/year zone. Living in the Seattle area, it's not "all that", but it's pretty good. However, I don't agree that more taxes don't sting that badly.

The reason I make what I do is because I run a small business and work 75-80 hours/week. When I take my family on vacation, I take my computer and work 6 hours/day.

We do this because we have goals for our children's education, our retirement and a vacation home. I know, cry me a river. But I can assure you, if adjudge my taxes as confiscatory, I will trade my productivity for free time. And the government makes nothing off of my free time.

67 To further illustrate ace's point, an extra $500 a month in a middle class family's pocket can be the difference between being able to afford living in a home in a great school system and being stuck in a shitty, violent underachieving system. That's a pretty big fucking deal to your life if you're a parent. If you're already wealthy, that $500 a month means very little to you. And that's why all these rich, climate change scaremongers who want to enact policies that could double your energy costs should be punched in the nuts.

68 Dip...Dip...Dip!

69 The last thing the average leftist elitist wants is an SUV driving, gun owning, Republican voting small business man and his family moving into their ritzy neighborhood... Don't get me started on their habits, with their wrinkled pants.

70 If he honestly believed that his campaign would not be in full campaign mode

He is reverting to campaign mode because that is all he knows.  He is the original one-trick pony.  I do believe he wants to complete one term with a shred of dignity, and this is his answer.  I didn't say it was a good one.

It might seem hard to reconcile his concern with looking like a failure with his bulletproof self-regard, but that is just our old friend cognitive dissonance rearing its head. 

71 Somehow I think Barry quitting the presidency is going to be perceived a bit differently from his lunatic followers.

Yeah, like he's going to give up the private plane and the wagyu parties and forcing the networks to pre-empt stuff people actually want to watch. 

He'll stop trying to do all the shit he promised (which is fine by me!) and outsource most of the daily work to unelected partisan hacks (seems he has already...), but he's not going to resign and let someone who wants to do the work take the job.

72 how many people posting here have incomes over 250K ? I don't I drive a truck

73 I get what Ace is saying about relative impacts in a tax increase based on total income.  While he's certainly right in kind, I would niggle about degree.  When screws are tightened on folks with means, a common result is that they figure a way to keep their money, either through offshore accounts, modifying their economic activity to take advantage of loopholes, etc.  I don't begrudge them that, because I believe people should be able to keep what they earn, particularly if the government is going to piss it all down a rathole anyway.  My point is that while it's true rich folk are less prone to notice an extra 1k here or there, they nevertheless tend have accountants that are dedicated towards the idea of keeping as much of their money as possible by modifying their economic activity based on changes in the tax code. 

74 19 I'm not sure 250K a year gets it done anymore Ace. I'm out 3K a month on a mortgage for a small house (sub 2000 sq ft), 3K a month for nursery school tuition, and about 2K a month in primary school tuition. Neither the nursery or elementary school are anything exotic or special. Add in 500 a month to feed the little locusts and thats 100K right there; maybe at 250K my minivans would have less then 150K miles on them -- but I doubt I would go all dapper and carefree.

Posted by: Jean at January 27, 2010 11:57 AM (pIKTP)

Your problem is that you're paying for private school tuition. If you shipped the "Little locusts" off to public schools and Head Start, you'd have an extra 5K per month. Not only would you have no trouble paying your taxes, you could even afford to pay MORE. People like you are why we have starvation and oppression! You need to step up and pay back to the society you were lucky enough to be born into! Class enemy! Parasite!

(This is my first attempt at trolling. How'm I doing?)

75 As Warden says, I am talking about the difference between "hard" issues -- money -- and "soft" issues -- social type stuff, like Climate Change. If you make ENOUGH money, the difference between them becomes mostly semantic, which is why the very wealthy, for example, will cast a vote seemingly aganst their economic interests in order to get a pro-choicer into office. They can put aside "hard" concerns and vote just on "soft" ones. This isn't to denigrate those who elevate social issues above money, generally. It's just to say that if you are rich enough, there is no distinction between such hard and soft concerns; to such a person, they're ALL soft, which is why Leonardo DiCaprio can happily agitate for global warming legislation that wipes out 15% of the world's wealth in a stroke; it just won't affect him at all.

76 Actually, there is another aspect to this upper class liberal love of taxes. It is a great way to stop people from moving up social classes.

Yeah, how dare that Limbaugh guy be successful enough to take a private jet to a football game?  He didn't even finish college.  He should be forced to fly coach.

/

77 He has already made the mental calculation that he is a one termer. He explains this to himself by assuming that the American people simply couldn't (but will eventually) recognize the awesomeness of what he has wrought. See "Narcissistic Personality Disorder," and related entries under "Psychosis."

78
Lame duck?
 Dumb duck.
  As dumb as a box of barocks.

79 Not really Ace.  If you live in a big city and have more than two children you are not "pretty set".  The tax hikes sting and sting badly.

Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 12:08 PM (p302b)

Certainly, but more and more liberals don't have children. In fact, I've started to say such leftists laugh in their chats about how expense it is to raise children followed by comments to the effect of, "maybe you should have so many crotchfruit". 

Who they expect to pay for their retirements is not entirely clear...

80 An under-appreciated facet of Obama's failure is his lack of intelligence. Despite all the teen-crush blather from the media about his towering intellect, it just isn't there. He got through college as an affirmative-action "clean, well-spoken black guy" and has almost certainly never read anything but Lefty screeds of the Howard Zinn/Noam Chomsky variety.  Unlike former President Bush, he doesn't seem to be a reader -- recall the photos during the campaign of Mr. Smartypants carrying the same book in staged photo-ops three months apart?  Bush went through a new book every week.

He literally does not know anything.

That's why his Presidency is such a disaster.  He is a profoundly ignorant man of only average intelligence who has been told -- and believes -- that he is a super-genius.  Hence his constant blaming of others: he knows he's super-smart, so failure must be the result of other people.

81 Been reading lately what college professors make and those under them.  These people are not doing so badly and they usually live in college towns and have nice homes and don't work nearly the hours that I and my friends work.  And, and I just recently learned that their children either go to the college they teach at for free or their college has arrangements for other colleges to take their kids, for free.  Or they get a vastly reduced cost.  These are the real libs and they are the ones who are having things pretty sweet.  But they are so quiet about it, people don't realize how big a business education really is and how when everyone was being fired, they were hiring like crazy.  

82 Obama abandoned the blue-collar/middle-class Democratic voter in favor of two groups, the lower class, and the, ahem, "Educated Class" about whom David Brooks waxes so poetically.

You are from the Boston area right Ace? If so, study the Brown/Coakley election result map town by town and you'll see she won the rich and the poor. Scott won the middle. However, a disconcerting realization is, he needed to win the middle big - like 60/40 - to overcome the rich & poor voting block. So, dispite winning the State significantly geographically, winning the cities and the wealthy western suburds was enough to put her within 5%.

Now, here's something else you won't read anywhere. Matthews was complaining that Mayor Menino did not "produce" the votes for Coakley. Turns out Scott and Menino have a friendly relationship. I think that means the 116,000 dead people Menino had in his hop pocket stayed there during the election. What would have happened if they hadn't? Well 116K is right around Scott's margin of victory.

In short, at least in MassachusettEs, the middle are not the undisputed King makers. It's the Rich and Poor + the dead,

83 Not really Ace.  If you live in a big city and have more than two children you are not "pretty set".  The tax hikes sting and sting badly.

Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 12:08 PM (p302b) 

Wow, my spelling is terrible today...let me try that again...

Certainly, but more and more liberals don't have children. In fact, I've started to see such leftists laugh in their chats about how expensive it is to raise children followed by comments to the effect of, "maybe you shouldn't have so many crotchfruit". 

Who they expect to pay for their retirements is not entirely clear...

84 BTW, I should have said: Part of this is influence by my own transition from liberal to conservative. When I was a kid, I wasn't making money, and wasn't really being taxed very much on what little I made. It was all spending money to me. I was a dependent. I lived with my parents. They bought me food. Etc. Folding money. When I was a kid (in high school, first couple of years of college), tax questions frankly bored me, and I did consider anyone who brought them up to be "selfish." Again -- because there was NO IMPACT on me whatsoever. I could focus, cost-free, on "soft" issues (which I was also liberal on). And I am trying to say that if you are wealthy enough, you find yourself in sort of the same position I was as a teenager/college student, where issues of taxation are a My Eyes Glaze Over affair compared to the Big Important Social Issues. Wealthy liberals talk about the latter almost exclusively

85 but, the poor hard working middle class is where the rich and the poor expect all the money to come from to pay for things.  The rich cause they have ways to avoid taxes and the poor cause they have been trained to rely on the government for the things they need.

86 (This is my first attempt at trolling. How'm I doing?)

Not so good, unless you're being sarcastic.

The couple who sends its kids to private school, arguably, contributes more to the public coffer than those who don't.  While they pay the same taxes that fund public schools, they do not receive the benefit of those services.  In fact, they don't use those services at all, thereby helping to correct the problem we hear oft-repeated - overcrowding and a bad teacher-student ratio. 

In addition, the private school tuition goes to fund a private business, which employs more taxpayers, resulting in a net increase in tax revenue.

87 I want to add, I do enjoy paying taxes for wacky public schools, while sending my kids to private ones.

88

I can't help but wonder why "rich" parents support the death tax. Is their social altruism greater than their parental instincts?  Not even most of the "rich" can hide their incomes adequately from the government. I am seriously at a loss on this.

89 Despite all the teen-crush blather from the media about his towering intellect, it just isn't there. He got through college as an affirmative-action "clean, well-spoken black guy" and has almost certainly never read anything but Lefty screeds of the Howard Zinn/Noam Chomsky variety. Trimegistus at January 27, 2010 12:32 PM (Z+rhq) +1000 It's easy to look like a brilliant, elegant man when 19 out of 20 media outlets are determined to convince the world of that, no matter the facts. He must be one of the least educated men ever to sit in the WH. Lots of time in expensive universities, not much learned. In his own leftard bubble. Even I had to read Marx at Berkeley, and I read Hayek and Smith and von Mises on my own. I'm more well-rounded in political thinking and I'm just a moron on a blog. Barry is literally empty. He is nothing but a voice, like Colonel Kurtz in "Heart of Darkness." Tris, you have put your finger precisely on who he is.

90 "And I am just trying to figure out why, and cast it as an assertion (I suppose I really should cast it as a theory or as questions, but it's punchier to say I just know it's like this, even though I don't quite know it)."

I think it is guilt, plane old fashioned guilt.

91

CrotchFruit?......

92 Don't forget another reason that the super rich like liberal policies...

They have the resources to influence government policy.  More government interference in the private sector, means an increase in their sphere of influence. 

Why shell out money to support candidates to keep the government out of your way, when you can buy candidates who will crush your competitors with regulations, push "green jobs" initiatives that will subsidize your business, or even bail you out when your investments don't turn out how you want them to?

93 I want to add, I do enjoy paying taxes for wacky public schools, while sending my kids to private ones.

I hear you.  Where I live, it would be tantamount to parental malpractice to send your kids to public school if you could possibly afford not to.

94

Yeah, like he's going to give up the private plane and the wagyu parties and forcing the networks to pre-empt stuff people actually want to watch.

Sure he will.  To make $10 million a year speaking once a week, and still be in the limelight as much as he wants to be (because the press will let him be), and without actually having to work all that hard?

For the first time in his life, the guy actually has to pay attention for more than a couple of hours a day, and it's killing him.  Even if he hangs on for another term, that's still another four years of having to pay attention and (marginally) use his brain for at least 10 hours a day, 6 days a week.  He knows that'll kill him.  Just delegating to a bunch of scum who think like him doesn't mean he'll get to stop being awake.

The dude is profoundly lazy and he's never worked an honest day in his life, until now.  He's probably close to insane at the thought of having to do this for another 7 years. 

Say what you want about the intoxicating effects of power, there have been no successful lazy presidents, or would-be dictators. 

95 Ace, this was an outstanding column.  A great explanation as to the effects of taxation on the middle class vs. the truly wealthy in this country.  Bravo.

96

I can't help but wonder why "rich" parents support the death tax. Is their social altruism greater than their parental instincts?  Not even most of the "rich" can hide their incomes adequately from the government. I am seriously at a loss on this.

It's simple...They haven't really thought it thru...even though they think they are the smartest people on the planet.

Liberals are far superior...just ask them!

97 "95

CrotchFruit?......

Posted by: Jimi at January 27, 2010 12:39 PM (fqxV7)"

I laughed out loud on that one.  Funny I have a friend who has a lot of kids.  Recently at a school meeting some lib actually called her "a rich republican who shows her wealth by having children".   She was a little stunned and the proudly exclaimed her democratic status.  But she was wondering where that idea came from that you have children to show how wealthy you are, but only if you are a republican?

98 The hyper-rich liberal considers a vampire victim to be a mere "blood donor."

99 Tax the grocer/grocery his customers can afford it ; Taxing the rich hurts the middle class just as much as if they were taxed directly.Not to mention,yachtmakers,million dollar housemakers,and exotic car manufacturers need customers with large disposable incomes.

100
We need more spammmmmm....

101 Posted by: angler at January 27, 2010 12:37 PM (SwjAj)

Yes, I was being sarcastic. If I was a real troll I wouldn't have spelled every word correctly.

Also, I'm certainly not anti-capitalistic, or anti-free enterprise. As unknown jane said upthread, I'd love to find out for myself what the sting of earning 250K - or even 100K - feels like. Especially as I'm currently funemployed.

102 The dude is profoundly lazy and he's never worked an honest day in his life, until now. This cannot be emphasized enough. Look at his history. The only time he lights up is when he is on stage, bloviating and basking in adulation. It's telling that one of the first images of Barry that emerged from the WH after January was the one of him with his feet up on his desk, gabbing on the phone. Not exactly the image of a diligent worker, and that was an official WH photo, I think.

103 And I am trying to say that if you are wealthy enough, you find yourself in sort of the same position I was as a teenager/college student, where issues of taxation are a My Eyes Glaze Over affair compared to the Big Important Social Issues.

I'm thinking NFL players.  Someone gives you $20M; $11M vs $10M after taxes doesn't seem important.  You're really fucking rich either way.  Especially if you came from a single-mother welfare-collecting background.

104 Damn it.  I was loaded for bear with a rebuttal on the $250k and then Ace updated/walked it back.  My anecdote: I am fortunate to be in the bucket above Ace's initial threshold.  I also work in NYC, and live in NJ.  My take home from my 2009 year-end bonus was 47.2% of the gross.  The various gubmints got the rest, and obv. more than me.  My house was built in 1929 and is 2000 sq feet.  The property taxes are $18,000 per year, and the public schools in our town after 6th grade suck bad.  Private school is $24K per year, per kid, should I decide to go that route.  10 years ago, I left a $100k per year job to pursue a masters degree with the express intent to get a job in the field I am currently.  I took on debt of $80k to do so, and have paid it all back.  Now, I have no debt other than my modest mortgage, but by NO means does our family consider ourselves rich, nor are we worry free.  I remain scared to death of Bambi and his crew of incompetents, and have held off on nearly all discretionary spending for the last 2 years to brace myself for more.  Working to have half for me and half for Bambi keeps me up at night.  Often.  It is a dangerous and slippery slope when someone like Ace even entertains the idea that at some level(x), incremental taxes don't or shouldn't worry you, much. 

105 really was just trying to explain why it is the very-wealth tend to be much more liberal than the middle class.

Three additional motivations

1) It's worth it to "payoff" the lower classes to leave you alone in the burbs - don't underestimate that motivation. Remember the story from this summer about the wealthy swim club when the inner city kids showed up? It's not so different from all the companies that showed up at the white house willing to "do a deal" rather than fight. Protection money is some times money well spent when money isn't a big problem for you.

2) A lot of these people make money off the Democrats in one way or another especially lawyers, contractors, etc.

3) They want to be left alone to do their drugs and have sex with their mistresses without being judged.

106 It is a great column today ace and somehow it seems appropriate for right now, for how people are feeling and what is going on.  would be so funny if the little speech writers are imploding now cause you somehow read their little minds and hit on something they might have decided to tackle in the SOTU speech  and now a blogger, a blogger beat them to the punch today.

107 3 years Lame Duck!! hooray! I'll take it! Our dear leader will self destruct... I just hope we have a way to dig out of the financial hole the dems are digging for us ( and RINOS). In ten years, this will all be funny, right?

108 The other thing that people also do not mention when talking about higher taxes for the "rich" is that the "rich" usually do not end up bearing the full brunt the higher taxes that are aimed at them.

Part of the reason for this is because the "rich" are able to pay for financial advisers/accountants, lawyers, who can exploit every tax loophole that would lower the taxes they owe - whether it's deferring income, increasing their philanthropic giving, etc.

Middle-class taxpayers can't afford this and usually are the ones who bear the full brunt of any tax increases which is why the expiration of the current child tax credit (not the bogus childcare tax credit increase Obama is proposing) and the marriage penalty fix would be major tax increases for middle class taxpayers.

109

Ace, I think you hit it pretty good.  I think the reason why so many ultra-wealthy people are liberals is because at that level of income and amassed wealth, a few $100k here and there is inconsequential to their lifestyle if they were brought up liberal to begin with.  Take a look at someone like Sam Walton, who grew up dirt poor to found the most sucessful company in America, and then compare to someone like a Kennedy.  What's the magic difference? 

A few more percentage points of tax hikes has absolutely no impact on a super wealthy individual because they have so much money they can insulate themselves from any political change.  The question then becomes how they can affect the political change they would really like to see foisted on the rest of us, safely behind their offshore accounts.

110 Looky heah, got this from Big Government. It figures BTW.

111 Progressive taxation is at the root of this nonsense. I guarantee you that if everyone, no matter how much or how little they made, paid exactly the same percentage of their income to the government in the form of income taxes, you'd see rates drop immediately and permanently to levels that would send the Barack Obama's of the country into shrieking spasms.

112 To make $10 million a year speaking once a week, and still be in the limelight as much as he wants to be (because the press will let him be), and without actually having to work all that hard?

I still think he likes the power.  Or at least likes not letting Joe Biden have it.

113

83 -- Curious, as I used to be a unit B college instructor, I can say yes, and no.  The tenured faculty and department heads have it really sweet (and some college towns are not at all expensive to live in, thus these folks are some of the town elite, and they love it...which kinda ties into the notion of them not wanting domestic beer guzzling peasants anywhere near them and theirs but they love to tell the working class how to live their lives).

The unit B (or part time, non-tenured PhDs and master's degree folks) are another story alltogether (usually).  They don't make jack.  I was lucky to pull in $40,000 a year in a good year, when they decided to throw me extra classes, along with grading tenured faculty's papers for them plus work in committee, plus substitute teaching on my non-class days.  My actual work hours went well beyond what was in the classroom proper, and there was no health insurance or any other benefits besides my reduced fee parking sticker (which I still didn't get because it was still expensive as hell) and my teacher's retirement (which wasn't bad, but during bad years, when I didn't get extra work, I'd have to take it out to help make ends meet; during those years I cleared more like $25,000).  Since the unit B folks are given contracts on a semester basis, they can often find themselves without jobs at a moment's notice, and they do not qualify for unemployment due to the contractual nature of their employment.  These folks are most definitley not the elite nor are they sitting pretty (although if you have a working spouse with decent health insurance and a decent income, depending on where you are at, you'll do ok -- my family's life was comfortable although more taxes are a big, big issue), and believe me, the tenured faculty love to keep it that way.

114 $250,000 doesn't go far and is not hard to reach in a two income home.

Remember in most states, except the mid west where they're very few "democrats," you have to send your kids to private school, if you want them to learn English or go to college.  That's 10-15K a kid in AFTER tax dollars.  Three kids $45 K after tax, bam there goes your first $100K in income.  On $250K you net after taxes , $100-125K, so send you kids to private school, and pay the mortgage and fed them on "fun money".

Trust me, the guy making only $250K with a family is sucking wind unless he is living in a trailer and sending his kids to public school. 

You know, "The One" went to private school, but his white granny, remember the racist one, paid for that.

115
Again -- because there was NO IMPACT on me whatsoever. I could focus, cost-free, on "soft" issues (which I was also liberal on).

Posted by: ace at January 27, 2010 12:36 PM (jlvw3)

Actually, this is why we should not allow a situation where half the population pays no taxes. If we had a fair tax system - where we took the national budget and simply divided it by the number of taxpayers and sent them a bill, we'd see the federal budget brought under control immediately.

But as things are now, a virtual majority are allowed to just keep voting themselves more goodies.

116 An under-appreciated facet of Obama's failure is his lack of intelligence. Despite all the teen-crush blather from the media about his towering intellect, it just isn't there.

Virtually every goddamn day Michael Medved says "He's a very intelligent man; there's no questioning that" as I'm screaming at my fucking radio "Based on what?"

117

because at their level of income it is almost cost-free to do so

BINGO!

The bell never tolls for liberals. Everyone else is supposed to bear the pain of their imbecillic ideas.

 

118 josef K, your too smart for a troll. The savings aren't really there -- 1) no public options for nursery school, and 2) after-school care at the public school (since the teachers get off at 3pm, thank you NEA) would be $600 per month -- so I net $1500/month during the school year (again, thank you NEA) and have to re-educate them at home.

119

CrotchFruit?......

Posted by: Jimi at January 27, 2010 12:39 PM (fqxV7)

I guess you aren't hip to the latest in leftist jargon:

Crotchfruit = children

Breeder = Parent

They really are all about the tolerance of others my friends...

120 In addition, the private school tuition goes to fund a private business, which employs more taxpayers, resulting in a net increase in tax revenue.

All good points, angler. Also, remember that the kid who graduates from private school can actually read, knows something about history and economics, and is far likelier to go on to start a successful business and contribute to society, than the public-school kid. Harsh truth, maybe, but truth all the same.

121 I guarantee you that if everyone, no matter how much or how little they made, paid exactly the same percentage of their income to the government in the form of income taxes, you'd see rates drop immediately and permanently to levels that would send the Barack Obama's of the country into shrieking spasms.

Are you running for office?  Please?

122 But she was wondering where that idea came from that you have children to show how wealthy you are, but only if you are a republican?

Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 12:43 PM (p302b)

Having children violates leftist religious beliefs - it is bad for GAIA and it is hard work, both of which are sins.

123 Crotchfruit = children

That's when they're being polite.  I usually hear "crotch droppings."  Or "fuck trophies."

124 Guys, don't worry, this year is gonna be nothing like 1994. You've got me, remember? You guys....where you going?

125 122 josef K, your too smart for a troll.

Posted by: Jean at January 27, 2010 12:50 PM (tJF9l)

Damn! I was hoping to work from home, too. Maybe if I drink heavily before posting?

126 I have a tern for Leftards: ass fruit.

127 Posted by: unknown jane at January 27, 2010 12:48 PM (5/yRG)

thank you for explaining that to me.  You aren't the only one.  Today have been talking to my friends in that position.  They are going for their master's or phd's and teaching and they are saying everything you are saying and adding...Professors don't have to retire.  One of my friends likened it to all the basoon players waiting in the wings at the philharmonic for the bassoon player to essentially move on if you know what I mean, so they can compete for his one seat.  My friends are hoping to have the spots of the professors some day but they are thinking they won't get them until they are like 50 years old.  They are saying it is better to go the administrative route and hope you can make it to president of a school within the university or president of the university itself where you will really be sitting pretty.

128

I have found the most fascinating thing when getting to the heart of the way Liberals think.

In most cases I have found that Liberals would rather that everybody suffers, the standard of living decreases for everybody, instead of having to dig deep within themselves and drag their status upward and maybe bring a few along with them.

I also discovered, that they are impossible to please. I think it is part of their DNA to have to complain about something. 

129 130 I have a tern for Leftards: ass fruit.

Posted by: maddogg at January 27, 2010 12:54 PM (OlN4e)

And I'll add one more: ass drippings.

130

@123

No not really, but how about these?

FeedBags = Breasts

HangDown = Male Member

 

 

131 Virtually every goddamn day Michael Medved says "(Barry's) a very intelligent man; Meh. Medved is odd. He can say something incisive one minute and the next, something incredibly naive. Plus, he believes in Sasquatch. And I don't mean the one sleeping with Barry.

132 FeedBags = Breasts I like "dirty pillows."

133

In most cases I have found that Liberals would rather that everybody suffers, the standard of living decreases for everybody, instead of having to dig deep within themselves and drag their status upward and maybe bring a few along with them.

Posted by: Jimi at January 27, 2010 12:54 PM (fqxV7)

Close, but not quite. When their is a strong economy and people succeed based on a mix of planning and hardwork, it is very hard to stay on top unless you are willing to do the same.

Now when the government starts to clamp down on the economy, they first hit those hardworking people who would otherwise climb up the economic ladder. Instead, the people who get to climb up the ladder are determined by the people setting the government's rules.

And who are those people? Liberal government bureaucrats.

134

That article appeared in U.S. News & World Report in July 1994. -

Uh oh.  Ya slipped there ace ol' buddy.  Now those of us who aren't "in the know" might be able to find out who you really are. 

135 Posted by: George Orwell at January 27, 2010 12:56 PM (AZGON)

I think it is a function of fear.  People are afraid to say anything bad or the world will come down on them like a ton of bricks.  Notice in the fashion blogs they say "MO is truly a beautiful woman, but that dress just didn't do her justice, what was she thinking?".  Translation, nothing can help even an expensive designer dress.

136

Certainly, but more and more liberals don't have children. In fact, I've started to say such leftists laugh in their chats about how expense it is to raise children followed by comments to the effect of, "maybe you should have so many crotchfruit". 

One hopes that this leads to the demographic end of the Commiecrats. Then again, this is why they are so hell bent on importing an underclass and indoctrinating them in America-hating "multiculturalism".

137 #139 Yes, of course! After all, think about the flapdoodle over Sasquatch's arms. Arms? A woman's arms? Well, that's because no one could say she has a beautiful face without being laughed out of the room.

138 Rush just said he is going to talk about what Obama needs to do in the "state of obama speech tonight".   wonder if he meant to say that?

139 One hopes that this leads to the demographic end of the Commiecrats. Then again, this is why they are so hell bent on importing an underclass and indoctrinating them in America-hating "multiculturalism". Exactly. They have a plan to perpetuate libtard thinking. It's called public education.

140 Re: rich liberals loving higher taxes, people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett don't make their money via "income," so it's no skin off their noses. Higher income taxes means less need for higher taxes on non-wage earnings. They also don't mind the death tax, since they are able to set up bogus foundations to pass their enormous boatloads of cash to their children without it being called "inheritance." They have the means to play the system, and they don't care about the little guy getting squeezed out of his hard-earned property. It's how they buy their own salvation, saving the "poor" with somebody else's money. But the real cost is the expense of our liberty, since taxation without representation is tyranny, and with the current Administration, there ain't nobody representing you, bub.

141

Virtually every goddamn day Michael Medved says "He's a very intelligent man; there's no questioning that" as I'm screaming at my fucking radio "Based on what?"

I have the same reaction everytime I hear - everywhere - that Obama is eloquent and that his rheroric soars. I swear on my favorite easy chair that I can't hear those things. He's no more than a B+ in my ears, even putting aside my bias. A Shakespeare he is not. Not even more than a romance-novel writer. Honest to Zeus on high, I think Ace has him beat by a mile.

142

I still think he likes the power.

Hell, yeah, he does.  But my point is that he doesn't really have any power now, and never will again.  The last time he had the power to do anything was when he signed the Spendulus.  Since then, nothing but sound and fury signifying (and accomplishing) nothing.

Obama is similar to Hitler (yes, yes, Godwin, etc.) in one respect:  Once he finally realizes that his messianic plans will not bear [crotch]fruit, because the people have failed him, there will no longer be a point to him remaining president.  Hitler only realized this at the very end, but once he did he capped himself immediately (it helped that the Rooskies were only a week or so away from capturing his bunker, but still).  Obama's not going to do that, obviously, since he has options of a lucrative financial variety and no threat to his life. 

I think he'll hold on to the end of this term, give a speech where he extols his virtues and says something like "The American people were just not ready for the profoundly successful change that I proposed" and decline to run again.

And everyone in the country will exhale, say "what a fucking douchbag" and count their lucky stars that we're still alive.  If we still are.

 

143

131 -- Also realize that most of the unti Bs are non-unionized, and the colleges love to keep them that way (because the colleges break a lot of rules in regards to legal number of class hours worked without paying overtime -- I was legally only allowed to teach the equivalent of 20 hours a week as a unit B.  Anymore than that and they're supposed to consider you full time, in the teacher's union, and given full time pay plus benefits.  My peers and I were habitually pulling up to 60 hrs. equivalent a week, and still on the part time roster.  The union was the only way to get our complaints addressed (which means joining that damn teacher's union, but it's a catch 22 -- at some point you have to forget ideals and do for you and yours).  Any breathe of "union" and that unit B was not given a contract next semester, and the tenured faculty -- in all their liberal, solidarity goodness -- were the worst ones when it came to working the unit Bs like mules and narcing on them to admin if the word "union" came up.

Academia is a really good place to study the rot of liberalism -- and I'm not even getting into the ideological stuff, or the lack of business sense, or the private lives of a lot of tenured faculty.

144 They have the means to play the system, If people would only understand that one thing, they could comprehend why much of Big Business just loooooves Big Government.

145

Posted by: George Orwell at January 27, 2010 12:56 PM (AZGON)

Take it from me, when a Jew repeatedly says that a black person is "intelligent", that indicates that he believes no such thing.

How many times do you hear people say that brilliant Asians are "intelligent"?

The reason is, you don't need to.

Substitute "idotic slobbering fucking dumbass" for the "intelligent" and you're closer to the mark.

146 The simple and easy rule to follow that has a 98% chance of being correct?

Obama lies, he lies every time.

Use that rule and you will be the most prescient fortune teller in the world.

147 Great post Ace. Right (correct) on all accounts.

148 But I can assure you, if I judge my taxes as confiscatory, I will trade my productivity for free time. And the government makes nothing off of my free time.

^^^^^This^^^^.

It is the only way short of not paying the IRS to screw the "man".

149

Lots of folks I know are just this kind of rich lefty. And it's true that while they will bitch about their taxes as much as any corn-cob-smokin', sister-fuckin' moron, they do it as conversation. They wouldn't dream of actually voting their wallets--that's tacky.

But they also aren't very politically savvy and contrary to assertions above, don't have much to gain from socialistic policies. So they can be turned to the Dark Side. I usually feel them out in political discussions by asking them when we can expect liberal policies to start working.

I mean, we have a history of experimenting with feel-good tax-and-spend programs and what do we have to show for it? Why would you want to piss money down a hole? What if your money is actually making things worse?

150 140 -- And that points to their inherent foolishness and lack of ability to think ahead; if the liberal gentry think those unwashed masses, yearning to breathe free will look up to them in awe and wonder they are dead wrong.  Once the middle/working class money runs out, they will either have to fork over their own stash or risk the mob.  Dumbasses.

151 #149 Say Texas, do you think he's really trying to mock him by lending him undue praise? Perhaps he is, but I don't pick it up in his tone of voice. At any rate, remember Medved was gaga over Huckabee. Strange man, he is.

152 Part of boobs like Chris Matthew's disdain for the money they 'earn' is the ease with which it rolls in the door; show up and spout off, get paid big bux.

My favorite example is that leprechaun mummy Larry King talking about 'not being greedy, pay more taxes'-whenever that clod needs some more dollas, he can make another commercial for liver pills or boner medication; show up, read a script, pocket $250k. Is that opportunity open to me or you? Not so much.

153 Is the Fevah spreading to Venezuela? Something has Venezuelan students all abuzz: #FreeVenezuela is trending in the US on Twitter. Live English Google translations here: http://is.gd/7af9T Refresh to see updates.

154 Apple event live blogging

155 Here's the deal.  Liberals think of taxes as if this is their charity giving.  Just look at the surveys on who gives.  So since they think that govt social spending is the best charity, they think we are evil if we want lower taxes, because we aren't helping the less fortunate in their eyes.

156 #158 Oh fuck. It's real, the Apple tablet. Glad I own some Apple.

157 Ace, you hit the nail on the head.  I have been laughing for years at the democrats' charge that the GOP is the party of the rich.  The rich are almost all democrats, because: 1. they either inherited wealth, and don't know how they got that way, or earned it acting, singing, or playing sports, or 2. they can afford to be liberal, since it does not affect their standard of living.  The poor are democrats, because they think they can't afford not to be.  This leaves the middle class as the bastion of the GOP.

158

@153

I have found that you cannot reveal to a Liberal your political likeness. If you reveal that you are a conservative or libertarian you'll get nothing but hate, and they will NOT reveal where they stand on any issue,

If you pretend to be a Liberal, you can calculate their positions, figure out how they really feel, and also get a good estimate on either how bad they have been brainwashed, or how intelligent they are.

In doing so...getting to heart of the way some of these people think is not only amazing, but absolutely Frightening.

159 #56

That promise is probably about as good as every other pre-election promise Obama has made so far.

Does anyone REALLY think that Obama won't do what he things it will take to get re-elected?

The only question is whether or not what team Obama *thinks* will get him re-elected actually will, or whether or not it will be "too little too late".

160 That's when they're being polite.  I usually hear "crotch droppings."  Or "fuck trophies."

Posted by: HeatherRadish at January 27, 2010 12:52 PM (mR7mk)

Disgusting. This actually made me think of a related point.

I remember a lefty pissing and moaning to me about what a bunch of uptight scolds we have in America after the outrage following the Janet Jackson exposed boob Superbowl incident.

"Big deal," he said. "It's just a boob."

"You don't have kids," I said.

"So don't watch."

"Given that parents have a reasonable expectation that the Superbowl is a family oriented event and that they had no warning of what was about to happen, they didn't really have that opportunity, did they?" I responded.

"So what, it's just a boob," he sneered. "Use it as an educational opportunity or something."

"Part of the anger had to do with the violent act of Timberlake ripping off her shirt," I explained. "Kids model behavior that they see. I don't want to have to explain that kind of stuff to my kids before they're ready."

"Well, I just think it's overblown. People just want to be outraged about something instead of paying attention to the issues that matter," he said.

Translation: I don't care. It doesn't affect ME. So fuck you. I don't want to hear your complaints.

It's the same impulse ace discusses in his post. It's easy to shrug off anything that doesn't impact you.

BTW, all the lefties squealing about the pro choice add slated to run during the Superbowl are the same ones who sneered at people's anger at Janet Jackson flashing her titty to viewers. Just thought I'd point that out.

161 Chris Matthews and all these limousine liberals would feel that money, if you took it from them. The wealthy are greedy, in the sense that they prefer having money to spending it frivolously. It takes many different forms, but you and I (and many, for that matter) prefer spending our money vs. saving it. Money is everything to the wealthy, and they miss it when it's gone. Just a hint of that is enough to trigger a nervous breakdown.

No, when they get taxed, they call their accountant and their attorneys. They move their money, set up a trust fund, open an offshore account. That's why they vote for liberals. It's good PR, and they know trash like the Obamas and the Clintons are just dying to rub elbows with them. It's just a party, anyway.

162 This Ace fellow makes some good points. Who is he? A guest blogger?

163 "160 #158
Oh fuck. It's real, the Apple tablet. Glad I own some Apple.

Posted by: George Orwell at January 27, 2010 01:14 PM (AZGON)"

Right now I am so pissed that I didn't buy it at $99...but they told me I had too much of it and I should just stop....ugh so pissed

164 145

Virtually every goddamn day Michael Medved says "He's a very intelligent man; there's no questioning that" as I'm screaming at my fucking radio "Based on what?"

I have the same reaction everytime I hear - everywhere - that Obama is eloquent and that his rheroric soars. I swear on my favorite easy chair that I can't hear those things. He's no more than a B+ in my ears, even putting aside my bias. A Shakespeare he is not. Not even more than a romance-novel writer. Honest to Zeus on high, I think Ace has him beat by a mile.

Posted by: Agnostica at January 27, 2010 01:04 PM (gbCNS)

Every time this topic comes up I say the same thing. Obama is a fucking idiot. He was too stupid to see that he could not possibly win a fair election, and if he had the slightest bit of sense, he should have known better than to try.

To which people often state the obvious "But  he won." To which I always respond, a feat which would have been completely impossible if the Media wasn't controlling the narrative that the American people are permitted to hear. If the Media had treated him the way they did John McCain, he would have been a GREASY spot before the first primary.

No Reasonable, intelligent person would have believed that the Media would have been SO biased as to cover up so many campaign killers, or so ruthlessly unfair to McCain and Palin. Hell, "Family Guy" Did a special in which they illustrated NAZI soldiers supporting McCain/Palin!

The fact that nobody can see any of his grades is because the man truly is stupid, and his grades are so bad that they would embarrass anyone. The only reason he even went to and got through college is because of affirmative action.  Obama has only one talent. Chutzpah.

165 I think you may have hit on it, Ace. I can tell you as a small business owner, it feels like the govn't is hell-bent on putting me out of business and making me dependent on the govn't. I think the Cloward-Piven plan is to shrink the middle class, not by creating opportunities that increase wealth but by shrinking opportunities with taxation that forces small businesses to close.Thus, those on the lower margins of the middle class drop into the lower class. Of course these formerly middle class people should not let their pride get in the way of taking govn't handouts because that's what they were paying taxes for anyway all these years. Now a cascade has been set in motion in which people slip lower and lower in the middle class until they are priced out of it.

And, just as your explanation points out, you that those who have made their nut (the rich) who can withstand, to a degree, confiscatory taxation and the poor who are dependent on the govn't. Also there is a small but educated middle class who are aparatchiks (sp?)to run the govn't bureaucracies.

The beauty of the American Experiment was that as a classless society anyone could move from poor to rich and vice versa simply by the choices they freely made. Sadly, the govn't, since at least the start of the 20th century, has worked to limit those choices we used to freely make.

However, based on recent events, it seems that the principle of equality of opportunity is stronger than equality of outcome.

166 Holy crap... Evan Thomas clip on Rush... the guy who said Barry was like a god is now bagging on Barry, calling him fundamentally dishonest. What an ultramaroon. If you've lost Evan Thomas, it's time to hit the heroin, Barry.

167 Diogenes at January 27, 2010 01:18 PM (ou+hP) Can you imagine how the lamestream media will behave starting January 2012? It's gonna be Nuremberg rallies every day.

168 Even if you aren't an apple fanboy/fangirl...it is so worth taking a look at the pictures at the liveblog link that I posted.   it's beautiful and people are already posting that they have to have one.  It will change everything.

169 #119

If we had a fair tax system - where we took the national budget and simply divided it by the number of taxpayers and sent them a bill, we'd see the federal budget brought under control immediately.

Whether or not a system like that would truly be "fair" is debatable (I'd say "definitely not"), but one thing is for sure. . .if you did that most people wouldn't actually be able to pay their tax bills.

I've got no problem at all with a Federal VAT-type/ consumption-based "fair" tax so long as it REPLACES the current Federal income tax, and doesn't just act as another way to siphon money out of the private sector for politicians to waste.

170 sorry OT - ha ha ha I bought apple stock at $12!!!!! when they were going bankrupt supposedly! loyalty pays

171 Well, I'm a little late to the game (miss an hour, drop 100 comments down in the list), but I'd frame Ace's point like this:

Those who agitate most for change tend to be those most insulated from the pain of change.

Slap a fancy label on that ("Dynamo's First Law of Political Turmoil" or something), and you've got Obama's election. But that's why it's easy to campaign on change but hard to govern on it. Obama doesn't know how to govern, only campaign, which is why Ace's observation about a Watergate-type reaction is spot-on. The economic results and political blunders over the past year have shrunk that insulated pool, and Obama doesn't seem to recognize what's happened yet.

172 #174 well done, sir!

173 Even Rush is talking the iPad! It will get more page views than SOTU, guaranteed.

174 "174 sorry OT -

ha ha ha I bought apple stock at $12!!!!! when they were going bankrupt supposedly!

loyalty pays

Posted by: BlackOrchid at January 27, 2010 01:23 PM (SB0V2)"

I've paid all different prices and then I figure my average purchase price and thank God I'm doing ok....lol

but not like you, you are a genius

175 Thank you George, I'm a girl tho! btw anyone see the PA polls today? The Spectre is on the wane . . .

176 Curious, I am really not into the lastest gadgets, but what is it?  A laptop size cell phone that has internet?

177 curious, I'm not so much a genius as I am OLD. that was a long time ago when I was a DINK and had money to invest.

178

164 -- You know, "crotchfruit" doesn't bother me.  I think I'm going to take that term over (hey, the left does it all the time, so why not right back at them?).

Crotchfruit is a reference back to "fruit of my loins" -- so they screwed up and went for something that's rather Biblical/Christianist, oh-oh lefties!

Well, it's your crotch area that's involved, and no shame in that -- I thought lefties were supposed to be all about the crotch area?  A bit Puritanical of them to disdain it, no?  Oh-oh lefties.

Fruit is supposed to be healthful, life sustaining, and oh so good for you right?  Don't the lefties believe in things like fruit over, say, meat?  Aren't they some of the biggest sqwaukers when it comes to having more fruit in your life and less...meat?  So the lefties are really fruit haters here and prefer the desiccated and sterile, overly processed "meat" of crotches ground and ground, overprocessed if you will, but still barren and producing no fruit?  Oh-oh lefties.

 

Yeah, I think I'm going to take over "crotchfruit" and have some fun with it.

179 Guy, go to curious's link upthread or go to engadget live blog!

180 Posted by: Guy Fawkes at January 27, 2010 01:25 PM (DIYmd)

essentially if is the iphone plus on steriods.

He is sort of negating a reason to have a computer at home on your desk or even a laptop for most people.

181 Well, I flipped over just to see what it looked like, kinda like a laptop, but what new does it do?  Why are people saying this is a big leap ahead?

182 If I could put Photoshop on the iPad and use a stylus, I would be fully golden.

183 Can you imagine how the lamestream media will behave starting January 2012? It's gonna be Nuremberg rallies every day.

Posted by: George Orwell at January 27, 2010 01:21 PM (AZGON)

I am hoping that their influence will have waned greatly by then. I am also thinking that Obama will be such a fiasco that they will be UNABLE to put lipstick on that pig.

184 #156

Indeed.

With Hollywood actors (as one example of perpetual lefties), the amount of money they earn is largely disconnected from the amount of actual work they do.   EG:  Does Tom Cruise have to work twice as hard to earn $10 million from a movie compared to $5 million?

The comparable young rich whose earnings are actually directly tied to measurable performance. . .professional athletes. . .tend to vote Republican.

185 ""It's powered by our own silicon. The 1GHz Apple A4 chip. It screams."

186 well Mr Orwell, you can do that of course with that highly expensive Wacom thing

187 Sorry to be so OT, but Jobs just said "It's powered by our own silicon. The 1GHz Apple A4 chip. It screams." Well well.

188 I use a Wacom all the time, I would love to be able to use a light tablet with a stylus as responsive as Wacom's.

189 192 - you have a Cintiq? doesn't work that well? I have been quite desirous of one. anyway I agree - this thing looks rockin

190 "184 Posted by: Guy Fawkes at January 27, 2010 01:25 PM (DIYmd)

essentially if is the iphone plus on steriods.

He is sort of negating a reason to have a computer at home on your desk or even a laptop for most people.

Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 01:28 PM (p302b)"

Once I go play with it I can tell you what I really think.

But, now I know why you could not get this at Christmas, it would sell out in under fifteen minutes. 

191 Obama/liberal Democratic agenda is not only not designed to help them

As opposed to Republicans who have presided over thirty years of declining real wages, increasing household debt, higher medical costs, escalating education costs, NAFTA (Clinton, the cocksucker, faux repub), vast deindustrialization, and always, always, the fawning obeissance at the erect cock of finance capital.

You're a stupid asshole, ace.

Speaking of assholes, mine is currently crammed with Stove Top stuffing. It's the only thing that I could think of to make me feel better after my Messiah was exposed as a bumbling buffoon.

And do you know what goes great with stuffing? Gravy! BRB. Gonna go to the bathroom and make some.

192 "191 Sorry to be so OT, but Jobs just said

"It's powered by our own silicon. The 1GHz Apple A4 chip. It screams."

Well well.

Posted by: George Orwell at January 27, 2010 01:30 PM (AZGON)"

Remember when he bought the chip maker and they had all those government contracts and the government got uber nervous about that part.  Well, they are some chip maker it seems....God knows what is in the government stuff if this is in the little apple ipad

193 No cintiq, I have learned to use a small ordinary tablet, and I fine with it. The cintiq bugs me because of all the cabling and need for a host computer. If I could have it all in one that would be fantastic. The 3rd party converted macbook is too expensive for my taste.

194 Well, they are some chip maker it seems....God knows what is in the government stuff if this is in the little apple ipad That's why someone will be jailbreaking the iPad, I promise.

195 I am fast falling behind the tech curve, but it sounds like the geeks are geeked up about it, so viva la free market competition and innovation.

I do notice these type of things usually drop about 50% in price a year later.

196

You're an idiot, TR. Republicans haven't presided over their own homes for 30 years, let alone Congress. What planet are you thinking of?

Most of your litany of whinges consists of government missteps, BTW.

197 It will change everything.

Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 01:21 PM

Sure.

198 "199 I am fast falling behind the tech curve, but it sounds like the geeks are geeked up about it, so viva la free market competition and innovation.

I do notice these type of things usually drop about 50% in price a year later.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at January 27, 2010 01:41 PM (DIYmd)"

to me it is something I can stick in my purse and it won't weigh me down.  And it has a lot of power in that small footprint.   Usually apple products don't drop in price but I have noticed that he has been pricing things more consumer friendly lately.

199 hey erg , what up dood ?
Now fuck off and die .

200 To me I am hoping I can get comic books electronically on it. like the old ones I have in boxes all zipped up that I'm not allowed to read or touch or even breathe on. yes I am that geeky. plus I like Mr. Orwell's idea and hope it happens in a gen or two - drawing on that thing will be a lot better than on my iPhone

201

Big Daddy - you hit the nail on the head.  This gang is all about killing small business and the entrepreneurial middle class.  The other reason leftists want to run small business out of business is that small businesses can't be unionized and it is much more difficult to order them around.  Big business will always play along with government.  I am just waiting for the inevitable move to unionize the remaining 5 banks, along with Walmart and the other 5 remaining retailers, and Microsoft and Apple.  We're all going to be herded into one of these huge mega-corporations that will become essentially part of a corporatist state apparatus.  Anyone who dares to leave the collective and start a business will be hit with punitive taxes and regulations, no health insurance, etc. 

They also hate entrepreneurs who are willing to work 70-80 hour weeks because the unions fight so hard for 40 hours and that's it.  They don't like people who work "too much." 

202 This whole thing reminds me of the scene in "The Aviator" when Howard Hughes (Leo DiCaprio) is having dinner with the Hepburns.  The Matriarch states that they don't care about money and Hughes responds with, "That's 'cause you have it!"  It is a great scene and when Hughes says that "Some of us choose to work for a living", gets up and says he has to return to more of that "aiplane guff", I almost believe that DiCaprio believes what he is saying.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Z1pPyarKhA (FFWD to 4:00)

203

Obama may promise a pivot in the SOTU address tonight but anyone who listens to his promises any more is delusional.

If Obama says he has heard the people and will focus more on jobs, don't believe it.  Additionally if he does focus more on jobs, it means Stimulus II and it will just be a rehash of Stimulus I.

No matter what his focus, more radical socialism will be the answer to the problem he focuses on.  Count on it.

204 Tumescent Republican at January 27, 2010 01:34 PM (Z/lpU)

Back to work, erg. That inventory code for 'Fisting for Families' isn't going to write itself!

205 Polls? How about 38% approval for Dear Reader in Pennsylvania.  ~snicker~

206

Another huge issue is if they tax the wealthy then you are taking the discretionary money away from the best investors, like Warren Buffet, and giving it to the worst investors, like Nancy Pelosi. Even Ben Affleck might come up with a movie that made money and gave people good jobs with his extra money. Also, I thought the figure for government charity was more like 40% that actually made it to the recipients (from Parliament of Whores).

207 "Actually, there is another aspect to this upper class liberal love of taxes. It is a great way to stop people from moving up social classes." Bingo. This is the only point the movie Titanic got right other than the ship sank. The rich hate new money and people moving into their social class. Can you imagine the horror of someone being at the same event as David Brooks and ordering a beer, talking about actually doing an honest days work and the new truck that was just bought that gets under 50 mpg? We really do have to tax people to avoid stuff like this.

208 "Liberals and Democrats don't give to charity unless there is something in it for them" - just read that on another blog.   do you think that is true?

209 unknown jane, how'd you manage $40 K?  I was an adjunct, and then a lecturer, and even with teaching more classes at more colleges than I was "allowed," I still managed to pull in only about $26K a year, and of course pay taxes.  The adjunct/lecturer is the wage slave, if you will, of the higher education system.  The tenured faculty wouldn't give up a single parking permit between them to let an adjunct make a proper living wage teaching only the maximum number of classes "allowed," and the adjunct sooner or later realizes that none of them will ever retire, so...

210 204 To me I am hoping I can get comic books electronically on it.

like the old ones I have in boxes all zipped up that I'm not allowed to read or touch or even breathe on.

Hey, I have tons of comic books from my collector husband. I stupidly de-zipped them for reasons I forget, but I understand there are some real collector's items. I'm looking to unload them for space reasons, and I have my own separate collector's items anyway. I don't have a clue how to do this without getting screwed other than going through an auction process.

211 "201 It will change everything.

Posted by: curious at January 27, 2010 01:21 PM

Sure.

Posted by: The Segway at January 27, 2010 01:44 PM (XSikc)"

hahhahahahha

It will.  Look at the price.  Look at the keyboard dock.  Look at all the salivating female professionals.  He hasn't had the women.  He's always had me but women are fickle and with this, he is reeling them in.   Plus, look at the price....look at the price.

212 Maybe its expensive in NYC and private schools are "must haves" there, but its not the end of the world to go to public schools (especially charters.) 250k is a lot of income. Not saying you deserved to be taxed until you bleed, but its not as if you're struggling.

213

Doctor Zero posted quite an enlightening essay on this exact topic two or three posts back at his website (http://www.doczero.org). Everyone should go and read his take on this as well.

As for Hollywood Dicks like Affleck, they just hire a battery of attorneys and accountants who play hide and seek with all their income to protect it from the taxman, so who's to say whether any tax increase would even touch their ilk.

214

216 Maybe its expensive in NYC and private schools are "must haves" there, but its not the end of the world to go to public schools (especially charters.)

250k is a lot of income. Not saying you deserved to be taxed until you bleed, but its not as if you're struggling.

Odumbass would concur.

215 217 Unless you are Wesley Snipes

216

213 -- I worked outside the college and I worked on committees (believe it or not, according to my bosses I was one hell of a good interdepartmental liason and research/grant person -- I tend not to write "professionally" on blogs, because I'm lazy and don't have to).  Plus, I had a talent for teaching ESL and working well with internationals -- it pays to know how to do those things...and be willing to stay up until 1 -2 a.m. every damn day of your life doing work (the one time my insomnia actually paid off).

But those were "good" years -- most of the time I was in the same bracket as you (and sometimes in worse shape -- when you start pissing off the big kids by bucking the ideology, worse, challenging it, you're in trouble).

217 "Actually, there is another aspect to this upper class liberal love of taxes. It is a great way to stop people from moving up social classes."

Bingo. This is the only point the movie Titanic got right other than the ship sank. The rich hate new money and people moving into their social class.

The liberal upper class are like a HS clique that do not want the new kid to enter into their territory. They are just as petty and superficial as Blair Waldorf in Gossip Girl. Because they see new blood as a threat to their position. Someone who will usurp of as king of the world.

218 Judging from U2's move to Switzerland to avoid taxes, I'd say that even compassionate multimillionaires keep an eye on their tax takes.

John Lennon fought deportation in the 70s not because he thought Americans were such swell people, but because in the 70s his home country took up to 90 percent of his wealth.

Then you have notorious cheapskates like the Kennedys who won't even leave a 5 dollar tip for a struggling waitress or bartender

219 The libs work under the "chump change" theory of taxes.  It is best illustratated by this movie scene where the rich guy is going thru his wallet looking for a tip.  He searches thru a giant wad of cash, finds a $50, says "how'd that get in there?" He balls it up, throws it on the ground, and walks away from it.  How does this work with libs?  If you're rich / super rich, then all taxes ARE chump change.  That's why the super rich libs are always talking about how they should be taxed more i.e. Gates, Buffet, et al.   Then, you get bragging rights as to how much of your "income" you're willing to walk away from (like the guy who thru the $50 on the ground).  

That's the underlying conceit of their claims that "I should be taxed more" BS.  It's the tax version of name that tune i.e. "I'm so rich that I can pay another $50k in taxes" until you get up into the Buffet-sphere and can say "I'm so rich I can pay another billion in taxes" and win the game.  The celebutards and wannabes jump on the band wagon and argue for tax increases because "look at how much money I have, I can afford to be taxed more."  Funny, how they could voluntarily give more money to the goverment but NEVER do so.   Clooney, DiCaprio and the other useful idiots have incorporated themselves so that the $25 million they get for a picture doesn't count as income and is not taxed at the rates that the suckers who make $250,000 pays?  Amazing how they intentionally structure their personal finances to pay the minimal amount of taxes but advocate tax increases on the middle class struggling to provide for their families. 

220 curious at 101-- I have 4 kids, and haven't considered myself Republican since it became fashionable to describe yourself as a compassionate conservative. Wealthy Progs play the tax game with our income, not total worth. The Prog worldview is fixed pie. Wealth preservation. They have no idea how to make a buck, thus the panic. Any asshole can be generous with someone else's dough.

221 when you start pissing off the big kids by bucking the ideology, worse, challenging it, you're in trouble).

Posted by: unknown jane at January 27, 2010 02:41 PM (5/yRG)

The same goes for college kids, like my own, who are brave enough not to join the brainless lib masses. Just shut up in class to make the grade.

222 It isn't that the value of money changes for the rich, it is the ability manage their income and expenses in a tax efficient manner. They can move their primary residence, use trusts and shell corporations, and have professionals to manage their funds. When your worried about the paycheck after next you cannot do this.

223 The larger incremental losses from wealthy people are still losses to the economy whether or not, from the perspective of the viewer, their wants are "reasonable" or not.  An extra $12,500 in taxes per year for a family with an income of over $250,000 may mean that a car gets replaced every four years instead of every three -- and the number of cars purchased decreases by a commensurate amount.

There is also some degree of creep in the term "reasonable".  Above a certain income level, for instance, it's more reasonable to fly for vacations than drive.  If people above $250K start taking more driving vacations, then AA and the rest suffer the consequences...$2000 in plane tickets vs. $200 in gasoline means $1800 not in the private sector.  And in a country where 70% of the economy comes from consumer spending, increasing the tax burden on people with high incomes (and remember -- wealth is not income and there is no real year-to-year tax on wealth) can only reduce the overall level of consumer spending, with a trickle-down negative effect on everyone.

If you believe that people make decisions on the margin, then lowering the margin more for people with more discretionary income will only lower the consumer-supported portion of the economy that much more.  This is assuming that people with incomes above $250,000 spend whatever excess they have, and does not even address the downstream potential of bank deposits, CDs and other investments that sucking money into the hole that is the federal government will preclude. 

Truth be told, on a moderate income you can have qualitatively the life of a wealthy person.  You may drive a Kia instead of a BMW, but you have a car.  You may have a Best Buy store-brand Blu-Ray player and TV, rather than a custom-installed home theater, but you can see hi-def movies in your own home.  You may have a 1.5Mb DSL rather than FIOS, but you have the internet.  Your home may have been born with wheels, but it keeps the elements out as well as the mansions of East Hampton.  Most of the rest is features and sense of security. 

The threat of increased taxes reduces the sense of security for everyone, and the idea that diverting the discretionary income of wealthy people to the government occurs without any ill effects is pretty naive.  Most people in the targeted 1.5% or so of taxpayers were not born there, fine to make a punching bag of Matt Damon, etc., but they are by far the exception rather than the rule.  The self-employed are already getting double-taxed on FICA, and if you believe they will work for diminished reward above what's necessary to maintain their lifestyle, you're badly mistaken.

224 man that's a long post

225 Obama dedicated his life to taking from white people and distributing it to black people.  Look at his career.  From community organizing to civil rights lawyer to how he voted in IL senate.  This is what he didicated his life to.  His devotion to power was his means to take and distribute the most.

226

Confirming what others have said, I once had the chance to ask a financial advisor of a Forbes 400 person what the guy thought of a planned tax increase.

I was surprised at the time when the advisor said that although they obviously weren't ecstatic, it really was not that big a deal to them. Why? (1) As Ace said, at that level they are so well insulated that the change will not impact their lifestyle in any manner whatsoever, nor that of their heirs. (2) They hire the best tax lawyers, etc. who will make sure that they are impacted as little as possible by whatever changes are made. Even if the financial road takes a bit of a bad turn for a while, they are sure to maintain their "edge" relative to most others.

 

227

225 -- Heh, heh, I used to teach the students in my classes "how to read your professor in  order to get good grades" (I thought it only fair that the myth of the compassionate teacher be debunked for those young, impressionable minds)...in all fairness, not every prof is like this; there are still some that subscribe to the honor of their profession and actually teach.  Their ranks have thinned to the point of extinction however.  Quite a few of them are ideological hacks at best and sexual predators at worst.

As for my kids -- well, I have so many and am not a wealthy person so it was off to the military for them.  Rich kids go to school; poor kids go to basic training (that was another area where my husband and I just didn't fit into the academic mold -- it is one thing to be former military and squawk about how eeevilll it is, or be former military and be a "stupid redneck grunt", but if you're former military, at the top of your graduate class, and proud of your service, plus see it as a fantastic way for those without to get ahead in life?  oh, oh my, lol).  In some regards, my kids are quite a few steps ahead of their peers in the actual wisdom department -- and thanks to their military training will likely land better jobs than their peers as well.

228 The reason wealthy progressives don't mind income taxes is that they can arrange their assets so income taxes affect them less than the average person.  Does anyone remember Teresa Heinz Kerry's tax documents from 2003?  She paid an effective tax rate of 12%, much less than the nouveau riche Bushes, because a chunk of her income was municipal bond income not subject to taxation.  You can do that when you have $10 million sitting around with which to buy 4% bonds for the sewer system in Indianapolis or whatever.

Wealth versus income, people.  Income taxes hit the "little people", income taxes don't effectively hit the truly wealthy.

229 229 -- Tell that to the people in the communities he "organized"; I fail to see where he gave any of them "the white people's money stash".  That is a myth, and sadly, one that is believed by many.

230

231  in all fairness, not every prof is like this; there are still some that subscribe to the honor of their profession and actually teach. 

Unknown Jane, my own husband was a college professor like that, so I hate to have all professors painted with an ideological brush. But stereotypes are sadly based on reality. I swear, my kid's profs seem to be as stupid as the kids, not having learned from life in the real world.

231

Wow, Ace, you really hit a nerve!  Over 200 comments in just over 3 hours!  I too questioned the $250K figure.  Did you mean per person or per family?  My wife and I make exactly that much for a family of four and in the SF Bay area it does not go very far, even without private schools.  But we are comfortable, pay extra principal on our mortgage, and save a lot for retirement and college.  You are absolutely right about the larger point, though.  Liberals like to claim that they are generous and conservative selfish, but it's very easy to be generous with other people's money.  Did anybody of modest means vote for Obama because they wanted to give more of their money to the poor?  Of course not!  They are already free to do so if they want anyway.  They voted for Obama because they thought they would be getting more money and services from "the rich".  And yet conservatives are supposed to be the selfish ones for wanting to keep our own money and do with it as we please (including donating it to the poor, which we do at much higher rates than liberals).  The only people with money who vote for Democrats are as you say those with so much it doesn't matter to them. 

#206: You beat me to it with The Aviator.  Remember in that scence Hepburn also told him "we're all socialists, of course".  Of course.

232 My husband and I have a small business. and let me say we are under attack.  By some people standards we would seem well off. But we work 70-80 hours a week. Never take time off. We have 10 employees and we take good care of them. Our business is hurting due to the economy. But we haven't let anyone go or reduced salaries. We haven't taken a paycheck since early December because we meet our payroll and obligations before paying ourselves. I pray to God that the idiot in the White House is a lame duck and the idiots in congress don't switch to "fixing" jobs. I know there are many small businesses worse off that we are. At least we can still meet our obligations.

233 And I am just trying to figure out why, and cast it as an assertion

The 'why' is very simple.  If Mr. X makes $300k or more a year, he is seen as the best of the best.  Mr. X, however, realizes he's not a super genius, just well above average.  So Mr. X then figures that if he's not a super genius, somebody making under 100k must be fucking retarded.  In fact, Mr. X realizes that 99% of society are probably drooling idiots.  Reality TV proves it.  How can we expected the mouth breathers to take care of themselves? Mr. X concludes that the only sensible and fair solution is to have the government, controlled by Mr. X's peers (or betters, which means any school fancier than Mr. X's), run the lives of the 'folk'.  After all, you can't trust children to take care of themselves, can you?

For example, can you imagine mouth breathing rednecks running around with guns? They'll either shoot themselves or get drunk and shoot their kids... since they're so fucking retarded.  Thus Mr. X believes guns should be banned, except for special people like himself, who can get permission through their political connections.

So that's it.  Wealth breeds a sense of superiority, which leads to disdain and distrust of those beneath you.  The options are then (a) exploit the masses (aka be Republican), or (b) have the gov't run the lives of the masses, for their own good.

234

Ace, what you're trying to do with your analysis of over $250K income people is what we crack economists call "interpersonal utility comparison," and it just can't be done.

As my Econ 101 perfesser explained memorably, "The rich man who can't afford new tires for his Cadillac cries tears just as salty as those of the poor man who can't afford new shoes for his children."

235 Then you have notorious cheapskates like the Kennedys who won't even leave a 5 dollar tip for a struggling waitress or bartender

Posted by: kbdabear at January 27, 2010 02:52 PM (sYxEE)

And that's after they've raped them. Talk about adding insult to injury.

236 ...cries tears just as salty...

Delicious, delicious tears.

237 220, challenging the ideology...yup.  I am way more soc liberal than most of the posters here, but I was told by my advisor and some other tenured profs that I was too conservative to ever get a job except, maybe, in the Deep South, teaching...I think I must have laughed at the wrong Marxist.

238 So we should get rid of withholding, the Dept of Education, then Tenure or Withholding, Tenure, then the Dept of Education.

239

241 -- That's why you lie your ass off and play the good little apparatchik in all those meetings.

Jean, how about get rid of witholding and then storm the Bastile that is the Dept. of Education, thus perhaps removing some of the pukes out of tenure positions?  Seriously, if the American public knew what education from pre-school to graduate is really like, they would be at the front doors of every university with torches and pitchforks demanding their money back,

240

"Altruism is when you give up something of value for someone else. At their levels of income, $100,000 is... well, you can never say it's without value, of course, but in practical terms of day-to-day living, it's just money they'd have to work hard at actually spending anyway"

 

Extremely perceptive Ace....this answers a few questions I'd had re; Limo Liberals. 

241 eat the rich. and crap out their remains on top of mbt on sale.