When Whites Just Don’t Get It, Part 6

Parent Cafe
41

It depends upon how much you raise the minimum wage. Raise it too much, and it certainly does effect employment, how could it not? If you have a company that’s barely getting by, as many small businesses do, with many minimum wage workers, they can’t survive. But there is a conservative argument for raising the minimum wage. You have businesses and consumers pay for the workforce, as opposed to taxpayers subsidizing businesses by providing government benefits. But people don’t want to lose their benefits.

Removing the FICA cap would just raise more taxes for any purpose, not social security. I don’t think privatization is really going to go anywhere, it’s a moot point, in my opinion. It’s not like the money is really in the “lockbox” and only goes towards social security, they use all the excess for whatever they choose. There is no cap on Medicare taxes.

Now this is a massive generalization: “The best question to ask always is “Who benefits, and who gets hurt?” For 35 years, on almost every policy change, the wealthy have benefited almost exclusively, and everyone else has gotten hurt. People are finally waking up to that and they’re ticked.”

42

The top 10-20% excluding the top 1% or so* seem to have increased income over the last few decades (unlike the stagnation in the bottom 80-90% income range), but nowhere near as much as the top 1% – and, within the top 1%, the top 0.1% have been by far the biggest gainers.

*The top 10-20% excluding the top 1% or so are probably well represented among forum posters here.

However, in Kristof’s opinion, some are picking the wrong scapegoats (people of other race/ethnicity and immigrants, even though most are in a similar economic situation, but may also be facing racial/ethnic discrimination or similar, and do not have significant personal power over macroeconomic or business trends that are causing the income stagnation in the non-high income range) for their discontent about their declining fortunes.

43

It is a generalization, but I think an accurate one, about the direction we’ve been moving in for 35 years. And I don’t see how that can be disputed, given the facts about the chasm that is opening up between the wealthy and everyone else.

Curious-- what do you think can be done to help the shrinking middle class?

44

“Curious-- what do you think can be done to help the shrinking middle class?”

I have a few poorly thought out ideas, if anybody actually listened to me. Simplify taxes–lower rates, take away all deductions, all income taxed the same as earned income. No loopholes, no tax subsidies unless they are for things deemed essential to the country. Lower taxes for small business–many large companies pay almost nothing in taxes, but small businesses can pay a ton. Make it attractive for people to relocate here and start a business, even in manufacturing, where someone doesn’t have to be highly skilled to work in that industry. Encourage the comeback of private unions (don’t know how you do that). Ditch Obamacare, but Medicare available for anyone who wants it (cost based on income). Increase social security payouts, means test social security—very unfair, but if it’s welfare, then call it that.

Lower out of wedlock birthrates, particularly by young women–significantly. Do what it takes, door to door free birth control, free long term birth control, pay women to get Norplant, if necessary. Get them out of the #1 way into poverty.

Find a way to ensure that people can’t abuse their employees and raid the companies bankroll to pad their pockets (I have no idea how you do that). If the company isn’t doing well, the CEO and management can’t do well, either. People can’t sit on each others boards of directors and give each other raises, if they are public companies. Find a way to change people’s hearts and make business not just about making a profit, but doing well by their employees (I’d have to be God to do that one). Perhaps required profit sharing for all employees by public companies. Find a way to get good jobs available to as many people as possible, as opposed to paying people not to work.

45

Ucb, re your last comment – exactly. People know theyrr getting screwed, but many of them have been persuaded to misidentify who’s screwing them.

46

“Ucb, re your last comment – exactly. People know they’re getting screwed, but many of them have been persuaded to misidentify who’s screwing them.”

Great. And it’s up to whomever is vying for power to convince their voters who is screwing them. It’s the rich, it’s the poor. It’s the Mexicans and the Chinese, it’s Wall Street greed.

And we are just foolish pawns, being told whom to blame, and no one person is going to solve it. Fighting and blaming each other, when we should be working together to solve our problems.

47

I completely agree, busdriver. We have been intentionally divided against each other by those invested in keeping us divided.

However, we don’t have to guess at what’s causing the problems for the middle class and our proverbial downscale white guy. (And it’s definitely not the poor or other disadvantaged groups.) Follow the money. Who has benefited – hugely – from dividing us?

48

More poor people = more people dependant on government = more power for those in government to dole out the money = more power for a few.

49

Tatin, how do massive tax cuts for the wealthiest fit into that scheme?

50

busdriver, there’s a lot to unpack in this article, but I thought you might be interested. Some of the most alarming points, backed up by hard data:

So, literally, only the top 1% is doing well compared to 35 years ago, and the top .01% is doing really really well. Everyone else is falling behind. This kind of imbalance makes for an unstable economy which sooner or later is going to come tumbling down for all of us, just as the massive buildup of wealth in the hands of a few led to the crash and depression 80 years ago. But unfortunately, Americans seem uniquely unable to learn from history.

Tatin, this growing imbalance isn’t because of all those greedy poor people and their advocates:

http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21631129-it-001-who-are-really-getting-ahead-america-forget-1

51

You asked who benefits? The 1% may benefit but they are only !% of the vote. Money does buy power and influence power and voting but ultimately to keep power, the political elite must capture votes.

52

Yes, they do have to capture votes, and they well understand that the campaign slogan, “I’m filthy rich, but I need to be richer” isn’t a winner. This is where Citizens United was a huge boon to them. They can spend unlimited amounts of money convincing us that making them richer helps us too. It demonstrably does not, but that’s just one benefit of being really rich. Your voice gets amplified.

ETA – This is an old cartoon that was done during the Gilded Age. The rich are best served by keeping the rest of us fighting among ourselves while they pile up almost all the cookies for themseves, and they’re very good at it:

http://mollycrabapple.■■■■■■■■■■/post/12071060462

53

“So, literally, only the top 1% is doing well compared to 35 years ago, and the top .01% is doing really really well. Everyone else is falling behind. This kind of imbalance makes for an unstable economy which sooner or later is going to come tumbling down for all of us, just as the massive buildup of wealth in the hands of a few led to the crash and depression 80 years ago. But unfortunately, Americans seem uniquely unable to learn from history.”

I fail to understand how the success of a small number of people, the “imbalance” as you call it, is the problem. If someone else has become enormously wealthy, I don’t think it has depressed my income or net worth. The problem that I see, is the huge number of people falling behind. An imbalance is irrelevant. The same for education. They keep talking about an imbalance (if that’s the right buzzword), because some kids are doing extremely well and many others are failing. I don’t think the goal should be to pull down those at the top, but raise the people from the bottom and the middle further up. I believe that pulling people down doesn’t have anything to do with solving the problem, but is merely a desire for what people consider to be fairness.

One tax policy that would be easy to change, and would be extremely fair, is if all income is taxed as ordinary income, no exceptions. That would certainly impact the very high income households, who often are not getting their income via working and raise more money. They should have done this by now.

I don’t believe that all policies in the last 35 years have only benefitted the wealthy. Taxes were cut for everyone, many people now pay no federal taxes-particularly after adding in the earned income credit. Far more money is being spent on entitlements, Medicaid, reduced cost Obamacare (if you qualify for it), food stamps. Of course people aren’t getting rich on this, but the point is that when we spend billions of dollars (or would that be trillions) that we don’t have, we go further into debt. A large number of people getting small numbers of benefits adds up. And I’m not complaining about this, just disputing that only a small number of people have been getting a benefit from tax and policy changes.

Anyways, enough arguing for me, I’m off to bike across the Golden Gate Bridge to Tiburon, with all those wealthy San Francisco one percenters. Move outta my way, because I’m an unstable biker, they clear out when they see me coming! :smiley:

54

“Yes, they do have to capture votes, and they well understand that the campaign slogan, “I’m filthy rich, but I need to be richer” isn’t a winner. This is where Citizens United was a huge boon to them. They can spend unlimited amounts of money convincing us that making them richer helps us too. It demonstrably does not, but that’s just one benefit of being really rich. Your voice gets amplified.”

One last word. There’s a big difference between someone in the 1% group, and someone in the 0.1% group. Most people in the 1% are not filthy rich at all, merely tax donkeys (pull all of the weight but have none of the power). There are a very small number of people who are filthy rich, who can spend unlimited amounts of money buying politicians. They should not be confused with the rest of the group.

55

100% agree, and it’ll never happen because the rich oppose it. Good example of how the desires of the rich are driving policy, regardless of the good of the country.

Have fun on your bike trip, and I’ll give you a wide berth! :slight_smile:

56

Amen. The 1%ers not in the 0.1% still have to go to work every day. They’re often the dual income professional couples who certainly are doing fine, but aren’t anywhere near filthy rich. They’re the ones employing people.

57

You think that a person of color feels, all the time, that it is pointless to pursue a job?>>>>>

No, just how they feel in general. Disregarded automatically.

58

You probably believe that is compassionate thinking, but I can tell you, as someone in a job where I an extreme minority… that sort of thinking is not kind. It is insulting. >>>>>>>>>

I am sorry you take it that way. It was simply an illustration of a feeling, nothing else. That at that moment I knew how it felt to know I didn’t stand a chance simply because of my color! Well, at least that is what we white Americans are being told constantly, that this is how black people feel.
I worked in a virtual United Nations hospital pharmacy in an extremely diverse area. My bosses always tried to hire the best person for the job. Period.

59

51 - Spending on campaigns does not equal votes. If that were true, Jeb Bush would have already been nominated.

The powerful are best served by keeping themselves in power. To do that one needs votes. To get votes, candidates offer bread and circuses, just like in Roman days. (Some things never change). The fewer people who need ‘bread’ from the government, the less power one has. So there is an incentive for keeping people down and out or at least making them think they are down and out.

60

The biggest spending on transfer payments to individuals by the US government is on Social Security and Medicare, which one does not have to be “down and out” to receive.

Of course there are also subsidies to businesses, as well as subsidies to both individuals and business that are frame as tax credits or deductions to make them much harder to repeal (harder politically to “raise taxes” than to “cut wasteful spending”).