Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, September 13, 2021

Senior House Democrats on Monday unveiled legislation that would represent the most significant tax increases on the rich and certain corporations in decades, reflecting President Biden's pledge to confront a dramatic surge in U.S. inequality.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

But the trickle down. The devoted fans. The violent insurrections. Warm days sunbathing in Zuccotti Park, listening to the distant roar of the 20's.

#1 | Posted by LesWit at 2021-09-14 12:01 AM | Reply

Getting rid of the Trump tax breaks for the wealthy corps and individuals would be a great start....

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2021-09-14 01:04 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The Democratic Party is still the party of the people and this is why I still identify, proudly so, as a Democrat. We arent' perfect, sometimes, but we are still Democrats just as ll thosFDR envisioned our party to be. Historically, we know that it certainly wasn't the Republicans that helped us recover from the Great Republican Depression of 1929. We have had some variations to our economic polices over all those decades but there have been constants such as the belief in minimum wages, the 40 hour work week, child labor laws, etc. Today, we have companies trying to destroy those basic principles by making employees be "contractors" instead of employees but I am fairly confident that the Democratic Party will soon address theske attempts to undo a century of labor reforms and make it perfectly clear that the employees of Uber and Lyft are, in fact, employees who deserve all the benefits associated with being an employee not a contractor.
As Leswit mentions, yes Democrats are will to literally fight for the rights we have gained and we make no apologies for that. And Les, don't mentions violent insurrections to me when we haven't even finished trying the Jan. 6 insurrectionists yet and they sure as hell weren't Democrats. In our history of the 20th Century amd now the 21st Century, Democrats have stood strongly for Civil Rights, against unnecessary wars, fairness in the work place but we have never attacked the capital with the intention to murder the Speaker of the House nor the Vice President. Democrats are patriotic Americans not coup attempters. Call us whatever you want, disorganized? yes. Not always on the same page? yes. Many other things? yes. But, we have been for almost a century now, the voice of the working man in America. Who was the greatest President of the 20th Century? Is there any argument at all that it wasn't FDR?

#3 | Posted by danni at 2021-09-14 03:28 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"but we are still Democrats just as ll thosFDR envisioned our party to be."

Wrong. FDR would cringe if he saw how intolerant the Democratic party has become. He would excoriate people like you, Danni, who wish others dead and even rejoice at deaths. He would cringe at the whining and name calling of people like you.

You know nothing of FDR if you think he would approve of today's Democratic party and people like you who make it up.

#4 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 04:23 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Historically, we know that it certainly wasn't the Republicans that helped us recover from the Great Republican Depression of 1929."

You are right, Danni. But only partially. It wasn't the Democrats, either. It was World War 2.

www.forbes.com

#5 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 04:29 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"FDR would cringe if he saw how intolerant the Democratic party has become."

Sorry but you are completely full of crap.

"{Those who used to have pass-keys are not happy. Some of them are desperate. Only desperate men with their backs to the wall would descend so far below the level of decent citizenship as to foster the current pay-envelope campaign against America's working people. Only reckless men, heedless of consequences, would risk the disruption of the hope for a new peace between worker and employer by returning to the tactics of the labor spy."

docs.fdrlibrary.marist.edu

Read the entire speech, link above, and then try to tell me how Roosevelt would have cringed. You simply don't know what you are talking about, you certainly know little about Roosevelt of 20th century American history. Might take a break from your right wing news sources because they absolutely do make you look dumber every single day.

But let's be honest here, you won't even read his actual speech because it would destroy your right wing talking points so completely that you would be speechless.

Like it or not, FDR was the greatest President of the 20th Century but he didn't carry your political beliefs because....your political beliefs are wrong while he was right. And it was FDR that rescued American Capitalism, realize that, at that time other philosophies were being presented as alternatives to our capitalistic economic system even more strongly than they are today.

#6 | Posted by danni at 2021-09-14 04:49 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

"Sorry but you are completely full of crap."

Sorry, but I'm not. In fact, you just reinforced my point. FDR wasn't an immature child who would stoop to that rhetoric just because someone disagreed with him. Nor would he wish death on people as you do, Danni. Pretend otherwise (something else FDR wouldn't do) if you want. You are constantly lying and have to always be corrected.

Speaking of that, I'm still waiting for your apology for calling me a liar on another post when I clearly did not. FDR would apologize.

#7 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 04:56 AM | Reply

"Like it or not, FDR was the greatest President of the 20th Century"

Finally you get something correct.

" but he didn't carry your political beliefs because....your political beliefs are wrong while he was right."

Actually, he would have a bigger problem with you than me. I never wish death on people as you do almost daily, Danni. He would not approve. He wouldn't keep puking out words like Nazi as you do, unless they applied. He wouldn't unabashedly lie as you do.

Nope, Danni -- FDR would cringe if he heard someone like you call themself a Democrat.

#8 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 04:58 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

"You are right, Danni. But only partially. It wasn't the Democrats, either. It was World War 2."

Sorry Jakester, even on that you are wrong, in 1939 our GDP began growing again without the WWII expenses, then after WWII we paid down our war debt in just a few years because of, not inspite of, FDR's 90% tax rates on incomes in the millions. So, basically he taxes those who made fortunes during the war at a heavy enough weight to actually pay off the costs of the war in under 10 years.
And be assured of one true fact. It was the Democrats, the Republicans hated everything Roosevelt did and still do. G.W. Bush's reason to invade Iraq was, partially, to privatize Social Security. The Republicans hate the fact that SS has accumulated such a huge amount of money that they can't get their greedy hands on.
BTW, GWB went on a nationwide tour trying to sell his ideas about privatizing SS but, fortunately, Americans weren't buying his lies.

You should probably go into your den with your tail between your legs because you will never win an argument about these matter ever because I have history and the truth on my side. You have nothing but right wing, disprove talking points, which are pretty easily refuted.

#9 | Posted by danni at 2021-09-14 05:05 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Sorry Jakester, even on that you are wrong,"

Nope. I'm right. I even provided a link from a well respected financial institution to corroborate.

You? Just your lies again. It gets tiresome, Danni.

#10 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 05:08 AM | Reply

What do Bush and Iraq have to do with my assertion that WW2 ended the depression. Jesus Christ, Danni. You can't even stay on topic when you make your wild claims.

#11 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 05:10 AM | Reply

"Nope, Danni -- FDR would cringe if he heard someone like you call themself a Democrat."

As usual Jakester, you don't know what you are talking about.

"Perhaps the most memorable line of the speech came when Roosevelt described forces which he labeled "the old enemies of peace: business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering." He went on to claim that these forces were united against his candidacy; that "They are unanimous in their hate for me " and I welcome their hatred."

en.wikipedia.org

Clue: actually read some of his speeches and realize Roosevelt was an actual advocate for the working class whether you are honest enough to accept it or not, it's still true. He would have laughed at your pretentious beliefs about who he was because he didn't conform to the wishes of the rich elite even though he had come from that world. Try, as you will, but you can't actually rewrite history.
'

#12 | Posted by danni at 2021-09-14 05:15 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Mobilizing the economy for world war finally cured the depression."

www.loc.gov

" The Depression was actually ended, and prosperity restored, by the sharp reductions in spending, taxes and regulation at the end of World War II "

www.forbes.com

" The Great Depression indisputably ended during World War II, which is when the output gap closed"

www.theatlantic.com

For ----- sake, Danni -- stop with the revisionist history just to glorify the Democrats.

#13 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 05:16 AM | Reply

"As usual Jakester, you don't know what you are talking about."

If you have to resort to condescension or name calling, you've lost all credibility, Danni.

Learn this and better luck next time.

#14 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 05:18 AM | Reply

"Roosevelt was an actual advocate for the working class"

Did I say otherwise?

Again, Danni, you're all over the place, except on topic. You once called me a drug addict because you disagreed with me. Did you know drug addicts can't stay on topic, just as you have been doing?

"Try, as you will, but you can't actually rewrite history."

Make sure you let Forbes and The Atlantic, two well respected publications, know they are rewriting history, too, Danni. I'm sure they'll be as amused as I am.

#15 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 05:22 AM | Reply

"You? Just your lies again. It gets tiresome, Danni."

I'd be embarrassed to present that as an argument. You don't know history Jake but I do. Give up, you can never win because I actually know the truth and will present it in the face of your pathetic nonsense. I am not brilliant on personal finance and many other things but on the history of American in the 20th Century, I have a pretty good understanding and you will never be able to overwhelm me with lies on that though you will, I am quite sure, try to. Lies are your weapons, truth is mine. We'll see which one prevails both here in an obscure web site but also in reality and the Right is definitely trying to sell their lies but fortunately, we also have truth tellers out there refuting you.
There are two kinds of liars today, those who cognizantly know they are lying and also those who are just repeating the lies they have been conditioned to repeat. I suspect you are one of the latter.

#16 | Posted by danni at 2021-09-14 05:23 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I'd be embarrassed to present that as an argument."

Yet you aren't embarrassed with your lies and condescension.

BTW, it's true. You are lying.

Prove me wrong.

"Lies are your weapons, truth is mine. "

Yet I provide links for what I claim. You don't. That's because yours are unsubstantiated lies.

Dishonesty such as yours really sucks. But the worst kind of dishonesty is those who can't be honest with themselves, even when proven wrong.

You're a lost cause, Danni. I've proven my point beyond the shadow of a doubt with well respected publications. You have only your lies.

Continue to wallow in them. I'm through with this conversation. So sorry you lost your point.

#17 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 05:28 AM | Reply

"You once called me a drug addict because you disagreed with me. Did you know drug addicts can't stay on topic, just as you have been doing?"

You'll have to fill me in on that because I don't ordinarily call anyone a drug addict but I have been known to go over the top in arguments but calling someone a "drug addict" is pretty unlikely to have ever been said by me. I might call you a liar, or many other things but a "drug addict" is very unlikely though I won't say it was impossible. Your denial of history sort of speaks for itself.
You don't like it that I can refute virtually every comment you make with historical facts. I get that. But that doesn't give you license to claim I said things I didn't say.
You want to make that claim then let's see your link to it.

#18 | Posted by danni at 2021-09-14 05:29 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The end to the Great Depression came about in 1941 with America's entry into World War II."

www.americaslibrary.gov

"World War II pulled the nation out of the Great Depression."

www.iowapbs.org

#19 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 05:34 AM | Reply

Your denial of history sort of speaks for itself.

#20 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 05:35 AM | Reply

"You're a lost cause, Danni. I've proven my point beyond the shadow of a doubt with well respected publications. You have only your lies."

You always forget one basic thing, history. I did and I can prove everything I say. I can link to it, as I have done throughout this argument. It is easy for me because it is history that is the basis of my contentions while yours are based on attempts to refute history. It is probably not fair because my parents did become adults during the depression and they also endured WWII and they did inform me and my siblings of the facts, especially about FDR. My Mother told us many times of her moment when she learned of his death and how the entire nation felt in that moment. It was a very significant moment. As she described it, "it was as if their father had died." They had witnessed what he did since 1932. He resurrected our economy, restored jobs, brought security to the elderly, instituted minimum wages, overtime wages......the list goes on. And then he had to win WWII. The most important figure of the 20th Century including Hitler and Stalin because the world followed his vision not theirs.

#21 | Posted by danni at 2021-09-14 05:39 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

""The end to the Great Depression came about in 1941 with America's entry into World War II.""It was the largest debt

Unless you look at GDP figures, in 1939 we were back to the normal levels that we had before the depression but, even if you want to look at WWII as our great salvation....what was WWII economically? It was the largest debt crisis even entered into by the United States in history but, because of FDR and the Democrats, we had very high tax rates on the idle rich and paid it off in under 10 years.
I laugh at the argument you just made because it is so common from righties, they aren't able to recognize the flaw in it.....that high taxes still financed the war and paid off the debt. You can never erase that fact. Like I said before, it's history, you can try to rewrite it but there will always be stubborn folks like me who will correct you and prove you wrong.
Your problem is your political philosophy which is based on lies, always has been, always will be. Hey, if you try hard enough maybe you can make Hoover over into a great president instead of a total failure.

#22 | Posted by danni at 2021-09-14 05:46 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It is now 5:49 a.m. and I am going back to sleep.

We can continue our discussion later if you want to but I will still continue to kick your ass. You know, history and all that nonsense.

#23 | Posted by danni at 2021-09-14 05:51 AM | Reply

"I laugh at the argument you just made "

Good for you. I cite well respected sources. Laugh at them, not me.

Your dishonestly is absolutely mind-boggling.

#24 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 05:52 AM | Reply

"You know, history and all that nonsense. I will still continue to kick your ass. "

You mean your revisionist history which you fail to cite vs actual history which I substantiated with several links from well respected sources?

Yeah, keep kicking my ass, Danni. LOL

#25 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 05:55 AM | Reply

Some of the takeaways from the Democrats plan...

The top corporate rate is 26.5%. 18% on the first $00K, then 21% rate for corporate income up to $5MM.
For individuals with taxable income over $400,000 the top rate is 39.6% and the capital gains tax rate is 25% and will not be retroactive.
There is also a 3% surcharge for individuals with income over $5MM.
Nonpassive income will be subject to net investment income tax if income is over $400k single/$500k MFJ.
Qualified business income deduction will be capped at $400k single/$500k MFJ.
"Back door" Roth IRA conversions will be eliminated for taxpayers with income over $400k single / $450K MFJ.
S corporations (with an S election effective on or prior to 5/13/1996) can reorganize as a partnership tax-free.

I'm sure the GQP will try to paint this as a tax increase for the middle class.

#26 | Posted by Nixon at 2021-09-14 08:05 AM | Reply

"Mobilizing the economy for world war finally cured the depression."

^
Not the war: Mobilizing the economy for world war.

Government spending ended the Great Depression.
Just like it took the edge off the Great Recession.
And just like it took the edge of the Global Pandemic.

Republicans don't think government should pay to "cure" the economy when it gets sick; Democrats do.

#27 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-14 08:36 AM | Reply

#27 Also don't forget that most of Europe, Russian and Japan's manufacturing base was bombed into oblivion during the war. The US manufacturing base was untouched. The end of the war finally allowed the pent up demand for consumer goods that for six years were not being made to be filled.

#28 | Posted by Nixon at 2021-09-14 08:40 AM | Reply

No matter your opinion of him I think we're all pretty sure who FDR would support today if he were alive.
It sure ain't the party of Trump.

#29 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2021-09-14 08:42 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#29
You can make a good argument supporting the view that FDR may well have saved capitalism in the US. Maybe it's time for some reparations.

#30 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2021-09-14 08:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I see goatman was signed into the jokester account last night.

#31 | Posted by jpw at 2021-09-14 08:54 AM | Reply

"The end of the war finally allowed the pent up demand for consumer goods that for six years were not being made to be filled."

It might have been better if we just focused on the domestic market, though, because ultimately a lot of those jobs we grew, we waited two or three generations and then started shipping them overseas for two or three generations. Basically been slowly pulling the rug out from under the middle class for 50 years now. That could have largely been avoided if Capitalism didn't reward exploitation of the working class so handsomely.

#32 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-14 08:59 AM | Reply

#26 | POSTED BY NIXON

I think $400k single/$500k MFJ generously encompasses the middle class. And the top rates are still too low. As DANFORTH pointed out in the last tax discussion we had, this is only addressing rates, not the myriad tax strategies the uber-wealthy exploit. But it's a good start.

#33 | Posted by El_Buscador at 2021-09-14 09:55 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It might have been better if we just focused on the domestic market, though, because ultimately a lot of those jobs we grew, we waited two or three generations and then started shipping them overseas for two or three generations. Basically been slowly pulling the rug out from under the middle class for 50 years now. That could have largely been avoided if Capitalism didn't reward exploitation of the working class so handsomely.

#32 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

I would certainly agree we waited far too long to protect our manufacturing. That being said, a lot of the reason we had that global advantage was because of the devastation in Europe and Asia following WWII, and our largely untouched landscape. It took about two of those generations for the rest of the world to get back to where they were pre-WWII.

#34 | Posted by El_Buscador at 2021-09-14 10:17 AM | Reply

"It took about two of those generations for the rest of the world to get back to where they were pre-WWII."

Okay, but we didn't move our jobs to those places. We moved them to places that were nothing pre-WWII, and have been built up since: China and the rest of what we used to call the "Third World" like Mexico.

#35 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-14 10:25 AM | Reply

#35 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

That's certainly accurate. And we spent at least a couple generations moving from manufacturing to service before we realized how relocating our manufacturing was removing our economic foundation and creating trade imbalances.

#36 | Posted by El_Buscador at 2021-09-14 11:00 AM | Reply

You are right, Danni. But only partially. It wasn't the Democrats, either. It was World War 2.
www.forbes.com

#5 | POSTED BY JAKESTER

This idiot...

Your article actually says World War II DIDN'T end the Great Depression...and the Great Depression couldn't end until after World War II when defense spending and rationing stopped.

BTW, FDR was so tolerant of opposing views that he threatened to stack the Supreme Court when they got in his way.

Try again.

#37 | Posted by Sycophant at 2021-09-14 05:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"And we spent at least a couple generations moving from manufacturing to service before we realized"

I strongly disagree with that synopsis.
That's like saying it took a century of CO2 emissions to realize we were warming the globe, when Arrhenius essentially proved it back in 1896.

The experts knew all along.
The experts being the CEOs who chose to outsource these jobs, and the politicians who assisted them.

Same CEOs and politicians who, on a lesser but equally obvious scale, lobbied for Right-To-Work laws and moved jobs to Right-To-Work states.
All you need to do to "realize" that is going to weaken workers is to stop drinking the Free Market Kool-Aid.

#38 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-14 05:14 PM | Reply

"This idiot...

Tru again"

Actually, you're the one who needs to try again. The logical fallacy of ad hominem negates whatever your argument was.

I'll wait.

#39 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-14 05:47 PM | Reply

#26 | POSTED BY NIXON AT 2021-09-14 08:05 AM | FLAG: BtW, corporate taxation is just a 'pass-thru' as the price of their goods and services are raised for the consumers adding to inflation.

Also, foreign companies providing similar products/services are then cheaper as they are taxed less so more of our monies flow out of the country as consumers want the most 'bang for their buck'.

Ireland corporate taxes are cheaper so watch for more companies consider the move: Almost 1,000 multinational companies have chosen Ireland as their strategic European base due to our pro-business environment and attractive taxation rates. Ireland has one of the lowest corporation tax rates in Europe at 12.5%. Companies can avail of a 25% tax credit against research and development costs.

Why companies will choose to invest in Irelandhttps://connectireland.com reasons

700 US companies
The ACCI's latest report into foreign direct investment shows that 700 US companies based in Ireland now employ 130,000 people. Among them: Google, Apple, Facebook, PayPal, Microsoft, Yahoo, eBay, AOL, Twitter and Intel. Pfizer, Boston Scientific and Johnson & Johnson also have a major presence there.

#40 | Posted by MSgt at 2021-09-14 09:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Just a little FYI: 'The latest government data show that in 2018, the top 1% of income earners"those who earned more than $540,000"earned 21% of all U.S. income while paying 40% of all federal income taxes. The top 10% earned 48% of the income and paid 71% of federal income taxes.Mar 3, 2021'

In 1 Chart, How Much the Rich Pay in Taxes - The Heritage ...

So some say they do not pay their fair share? Seems that they pay plenty as all the rests of us [the remaining 99%] are only paying 60% which IMO is UNFAIR'. joke is, there are many who are actually ignorant enough that they think they will be taxes less if the Top pays more - LOL

#41 | Posted by MSgt at 2021-09-14 09:18 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

^
Isn't the heritages foundation run by the same dork that crashed the Kansas economy?

#42 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2021-09-14 09:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Just a little FYI: 'The latest government data show that in 2018, the top 1% of income earners"those who earned more than $540,000"earned 21% of all U.S. income while paying 40% of all federal income taxes. The top 10% earned 48% of the income and paid 71% of federal income taxes.Mar 3, 2021'
In 1 Chart, How Much the Rich Pay in Taxes - The Heritage ...
So some say they do not pay their fair share? Seems that they pay plenty as all the rests of us [the remaining 99%] are only paying 60% which IMO is UNFAIR'. joke is, there are many who are actually ignorant enough that they think they will be taxes less if the Top pays more - LOL

#41 | POSTED BY MSGT

FYI, Income Tax is one of a whole SLEW of taxes that are paid. So to argue anything on taxes when only considering income taxes makes you a disingenuous lying piece of ----.

Are you a disingenuous lying piece of ---- MSGT?

#43 | Posted by truthhurts at 2021-09-14 10:23 PM | Reply

Let's punish people for being successful.

Let's reward people for not.

#44 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-09-15 05:59 AM | Reply

"I'd be embarrassed to present that as an argument."

Please.

Even you had the ability to be embarrassed, you'd have stopped posting here long ago.

The problem is you lack the education to understand when you're wrong. Which, when it comes to economics, is always.

#45 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-09-15 06:02 AM | Reply

"FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate"

"President Roosevelt believed that excessive competition was responsible for the Depression by reducing prices and wages, and by extension reducing employment and demand for goods and services," said Cole, also a UCLA professor of economics. "So he came up with a recovery package that would be unimaginable today, allowing businesses in every industry to collude without the threat of antitrust prosecution and workers to demand salaries about 25 percent above where they ought to have been, given market forces. The economy was poised for a beautiful recovery, but that recovery was stalled by these misguided policies."

www.ff.org

#46 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-09-15 06:05 AM | Reply

#26 | POSTED BY NIXON AT 2021-09-14 08:05 AM | FLAG: BtW, corporate taxation is just a 'pass-thru' as the price of their goods and services are raised for the consumers adding to inflation.

Well der...gee....why not put corporate taxes at zero then?

I mean, the US cut corporate taxes by 40% in 2017, why didn't prices go down 40%?

Why MSGT?

Please enlighten us why corporate America didn't cut prices because corporate taxes were cut 40%?

#47 | Posted by Nixon at 2021-09-15 08:01 AM | Reply

I think $400k single/$500k MFJ generously encompasses the middle class.

As a reminder, each quintile has a full 20% of all US households in it. Here is how the income quintiles broke down for 2019:

1st Quintile ("Lower Class"): $0 - $28,083

2nd Quintile ("Lower Middle Class"): $28,084 - $53,502
3rd Quintile ("Middle Class"): $53,503 - $86,487
4th Quintile ("Upper Middle Class"): $86,488 - $142,500
5th Quintile ("Upper Class"): $142,501 or more in household income
The lower limit of top 5% of all households was $270,002.

www.donebyforty.com

Calling $500,000 middle class is just plain wrong. The beginning income for the top 5% of all families in the US is $270,000. Saying they are middle class is just supply side lies designed to distort the true reality income distribution in the US.

#48 | Posted by Nixon at 2021-09-15 08:12 AM | Reply

The feels like a lost in translation.

San Fran median home price: $1,504,311 for middle class homes.

Median income: $112,449

$400k is what you need to be middle class in San Fran.
Unless you bought a home there 40 years ago, you are probably lower class income whether you like it or not.
Relocate to.. anywhere else almost, and you can comfortably live in a 2000-2500sq ft home on that income unless you decide to be kid poor.

#49 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-09-15 11:17 AM | Reply

It's a great example of Snoofy pointing out gains going to the top. San Fran homes appreciated 6% last year. If you're not the landed gentry you do not benefit from real estate expenses massively inflating beyond wage growth.

#50 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-09-15 11:21 AM | Reply

"$400k is what you need to be middle class in San Fran."

Yep, that's why $400K is a fair cut point.
$400K is obviously too high in a lot of places.
But not in the places that are really driving the high-tech economy.

#51 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-15 11:25 AM | Reply

People are using their equity created by the California housing shortage to buy up Austin homes and turn them into rental properties. It's a pretty good business strategy given the prevailing winds.

#52 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-09-15 11:30 AM | Reply

Let's punish people for being successful.

#44 | Posted by madbomber

You think money means you're successful?

Usually it means you were lucky. Often it means you're corrupt. Or that your lazy ass never worked a day because your daddy was rich.

Trump has money (not a billionaire) but he has been a failure at everything he ever touched. Inheritance, corruption, and crime are the reason he has money.

#53 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-09-15 12:08 PM | Reply

"You think money means you're successful?"

If people give you lots money in return for you providing them with some form of good or service, then yes, your successful.

"Usually it means you were lucky."

Very occasionally. Like if you have a really strong streak at a high-stakes table, or win the lottery. But most of those people wind up even poorer than they were before they won.

"Or that your lazy ass never worked a day because your daddy was rich."

It happens, but it's rare. In the book "The Millionaire Next Door," the authors determined that 80%-90% of millionaires were first-generation wealthy. And in fact you were more likely to find millionaires in middle class and blue-collar neighborhoods, because wealth accumulation wasn't so much a function of how much you earned as it was how much you saved.

"Trump has money (not a billionaire) but he has been a failure at everything he ever touched."

Absolutely not.

Trump is a socialite first and foremost. He has been since at least the 1980s. I went back and re-watched the TV show "Just Shoot Me." One of the main characters (Jack Gallo) has an ongoing feud with DJT in the series. This was before The Apprentice, and certainly before the presidency.

As for his inheritance, had he simply hired a good financial advisor and spent his days playing golf, he'd probably be far richer today. But for rich people money is not nearly the social feedback that power is. You can't buy yourself an Air Force One or White House. You have to convince the voters to give it to you.

#54 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-09-15 03:16 PM | Reply

If I were a Republican strategist, I would recommend that the Repubs support the bill-on the condition that it was funded by a value added tax as opposed to an income tax, thus bringing the US more in line with our western contemporaries.

I don't think the left would go for it at all, and it would reveal that they don't really want any of this stuff unless they don't have to pay for it.

#55 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-09-15 03:20 PM | Reply

"But for rich people money is not nearly the social feedback that power is. You can't buy yourself an Air Force One or White House. You have to convince the voters to give it to you."

That's right.
And unlike Trump Airlines, Air Force One is not going out of business anytime soon.

#56 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-15 03:21 PM | Reply

"If I were a Republican strategist, I would recommend that the Repubs support the bill-on the condition that it was funded by a value added tax"

You'd get RINO's for suggesting a tax hike, and for reneging on Grover Norquist's Tax Pledge.

#57 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-09-15 03:22 PM | Reply

This thread starts off real nice with Danni kicking Jake'sass all over the place.

One thing is for sure. Jake is a fkkking moron.

#58 | Posted by ClownShack at 2021-09-15 03:24 PM | Reply

You can't be a pro-Tax Republican, you won't survive your own primary even if you campaigned literally with both of Trump's --------- in your mouth.

You can barely be a pro-Tax Democrat. When it came to asking about letting Trump tax cuts expire being a tax increase, all of a sudden Harris & Biden go deaf & dumb.

#59 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-09-15 03:42 PM | Reply

1st Quintile ("Lower Class"): $0 - $28,083

2nd Quintile ("Lower Middle Class"): $28,084 - $53,502
3rd Quintile ("Middle Class"): $53,503 - $86,487
4th Quintile ("Upper Middle Class"): $86,488 - $142,500
5th Quintile ("Upper Class"): $142,501 or more in household income
The lower limit of top 5% of all households was $270,002.

I have a problem with these categories because they do not take into account where somebody lives. I live in the PNW, where houses are expensive, not as expensive as San Francisco, but expensive enough. My house has more than doubled in value since I bought it in 2009, and every month Redfin tells me it's gone up another $5 or 10k in value. My wife and I make a decent living, if the above numbers were gross income, we'd fall just inside the 5th Quintile, if it's net income, we'd fall in the middle of the 4th. I'm sorry, but we don't live like we're either upper or upper-middle class. We own a small one-story house, I drive a 12-year-old car, hers is a year old, but it's a Mitsubishi. If we lived in Alabama or Kentucky then yes our income would put us in the upper-class, but in my neighborhood, we're happily middle-class.

#60 | Posted by _Gunslinger_ at 2021-09-15 04:58 PM | Reply

Well, Danni, have you come up with any links to counter mine? Or are you going to stick with your historically inaccurate and unprovable meme? So far you haven't posted one to back up your premise. I've posted 5.

#61 | Posted by jakester at 2021-09-15 05:47 PM | Reply

As for his inheritance, had he simply hired a good financial advisor and spent his days playing golf, he'd probably be far richer today. But for rich people money is not nearly the social feedback that power is. You can't buy yourself an Air Force One or White House. You have to convince the voters to give it to you.

#54 | Posted by madbomber

Interesting that you've pledged your fealty to a man you admit sucks at business and is simply thirsty for power because money isn't enough for him.

#62 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-09-15 05:57 PM | Reply

"Usually it means you were lucky."

Very occasionally.

YEAH AS IF BEING BORN INTO A FAMILY THAT TEACHES RESPONSIBLE FINANCES WAS A CHOICE.

"Trump has money (not a billionaire) but he has been a failure at everything he ever touched."

Absolutely not.

Trump is a socialite first and foremost. He has been since at least the 1980s. I went back and re-watched the TV show "Just Shoot Me." One of the main characters (Jack Gallo) has an ongoing feud with DJT in the series. This was before The Apprentice, and certainly before the presidency.

WHAT'S YOUR POINT? THAT BEING MENTIONED ON A SITCOM PROVES HE WASN'T A FRAUD WHO STIFFED CREDITORS AND HAD TO HAVE HIS DADDY BAIL OUT ALL HIS FAILING BUSINESSES?

#63 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-09-15 06:00 PM | Reply

Eat the rich!

#64 | Posted by a_monson at 2021-09-15 11:32 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable

Drudge Retort