So the Third Way Democrats don't want to talk about income inequality

[malaise]

Fuck them!!!

[Zorra]

1. Honestly, if you don't have something nice to say

it is totally appropriate to say it about Third Way Democrats.

[malaise]

2. Nice post

[Zalatix]

52. Hahahaha lol you had me for a second there.

[Dragonfli]

3. That's because Third Way Democrats agree with the economic views held by the Chamber of Commerce

http://www.friendsoftheuschamber.com/images/110905_jobs_letter.pdf

An economic world view that both expects and encourages income inequality.
Just spend a day reading the third way site and her sister think tank the PPI, you will see more that agrees with the US Chamber of Commerce than they would like to admit.

[msongs]

4. they are republicans. nt

[woo me with science]

5. Wars, economic policy, and the police state.

The Third Way and Republicans. Simpatico.

[Dragonfli]

6. +1

[unionworks]

7. Sunshine...

...Lollipops!

[Sarah Ibarruri]

8. Okay, who might be Third Way Democrats? nt

[sabrina 1]

9. Anyone claiming to be a Democrat who argues that

SS had something to do with the Deficit and that that it needs to be 'tweaked' in order to curb all the spending those old people have been doing.


That's one clue to a Third Wayer.

Another, they absolutely hate, with as much passion as the far Right, the 'left' of the Dem Party. They have the same visceral reaction to people like Michael Moore eg, Venezuela choosing its own leaders and anything that is slightly to the left of Bill Clinton, as any rightwinger.

There are lots of other ways to identify the Third Way. But most of those ways are how we recognize the far right also.

[Tabasco_Dave]

12. They don't like New Deal Democrats ether

They use the term "Old Fashioned Populist" to describe us but younger democrats want more populism so they're the old farts now.

[sabrina 1]

23. Yes, young people are much more informed due to not relying on the corporate

media for their 'news'.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

15. Question. Are they REALLY Democrats, or are they right wingnuts posing as Democrats? nt

[sabrina 1]

21. That's a good question. I think the Dem Party has definitely been

'infiltrated' by people with a 'D' after their names who clearly do not represent the Dem Party platform. Maybe we should infiltrate the Republican Party and drag it back to at least some level of sanity. Clearly the far right has been working for decades to incorporate the agenda of Corporate America. And it seems they have been pretty successful up to now. It would take a very good investigative journalist, or a team of journalists to determine of some of those claiming to be Democrats, actually are.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

29. Hey, that's a great idea! There's only one problem. Republicans nauseate me

I don't think I could stomach more than 1 hour with them. Ew.

[sabrina 1]

31. Lol, I know, I feel the same way. But it's interesting that only the Dem Party

has been subjected to this hi-jacking of their ideals. Probably because Liberals ARE too honest to do something like that. But it really is almost necessary at this point, for the sake of the country. People have done a lot more when the country was in need. I'm sure there must be people who are capable of it though. The country needs real Patriots right now.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

36. I remember reading how enthralled everyone was by Reagan - why?

I don't get it. I honestly don't. And yet that's when the full brainwashing of our country took place, and, of course, the beginning of our decay and downfall.

Reagan was an asshole, a none-too-bright bad actor who ridiculed the needy and helpless, was not funny, was a psychic-lover, brown-nosed every rich person he could, and if he could've lived back in the Third Reich, he'd have been s*ng the Fuhrer's sausage.

[Ship of Fools]

41. Living through those days, my theory:

He was handsome. And he was Hollywood.

I honestly believe this was all it took for some people. To me, those days definitely
started the decline. I remember the knot I got in my stomach when I first
heard him utter something about "God" this or "God" that. It literally made me
feel slightly ill and gave me a real sense of foreboding.

He also created the cute sound-bite. May he rot in hell for that.

Just one woman's opinion.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

44. Wow, that's one thing I thought was wrong, his look - to me, he looked like a chimp

Here he is in 1964:

http://boatagainstthecurrent.blogspot.com/2011/02/this-day-in-presidential-history-ronald.html

But aside from that, the man was not intelligent, was not funny (I've seen on programs - his jokes were cruel and vicious, not funny), and he never seemed to have his brain in gear, so he deflected from having to discuss responses to issues he was asked about, by making stupid-ass jokes, a clear indication his brain was just never really all there.

I don't get it. I don't know what it is about Americans that renders them so unbelievably gullible and shallow, so as to throw their country to hell by voting for an idiot like that one.

Maybe the culture of Hollywood sucked Americans' brains out of their skull.

In any case, American stupidity brought us 8 years of that shithead, Reagan.

[Occulus]

57. I have to correct your last statememt.

We've had more than thirty years of that shitstain.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

59. Yes, and his revolting name is on everything. Like having every street named after Hitler nt

[tledford]

49. It's not true that everyone was "enthralled" by Reagan.

About 55% of people were, and that was enough.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

50. And that's about 55% too many. The man was an ugly doofus who couldn't discuss policy,

was a cruel shithead, and laughed while ridiculing the helpless.

[CrispyQ]

55. My theory:

Too many Americans did not want to hear Carter's message of conservation. We're America, after all. We don't wear sweaters in the house & we don't drive 55.

It was the start of greed is good & fuck anyone who gets in the way of you getting what you want.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

56. Amazing. And what a horrible human being Reagan was. He made the term, "welfare queen" popular

Look at this:

A welfare queen is a pejorative phrase used in the United States to describe people who are accused of collecting excessive welfare payments through fraud or manipulation. Reporting on welfare fraud began during the early 1960s, appearing in general interest magazines such as Readers Digest. The term entered the American lexicon during Ronald Reagan's 1976 presidential campaign when he described a "welfare queen" from Chicago's South Side.[1]

Since then, it has become a stigmatizing label placed on recidivist poor mothers, with studies showing that it often carries gendered and racial connotations.[2][3] Although American women can no longer stay on welfare indefinitely due to the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, the term continues to shape American dialogue on poverty.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_queen

And people must've loved this crap, because they voted the a-hole into office, not once, but twice.

[Scuba]

42. +1,000

[Mimosa]

27. They are secular fiscally conservative Reagan Republicans

The faux evangelicals drove the Reagan secular type Republicans out of the GOP in the mid to late 1990s. They found a tenuous 'home' in the Democratic Party and established themselves as our base. They have been actively pushing our party rightwards in their effort to promote 'free trade' and to destroy unions.

Remember Democrats who supported Reagan? They almost own the party now.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

30. That's downright scary. They joined us but didn't really. nt

[hifiguy]

51. Well said. And all too true. nt

[AlbertCat]

33. Are they REALLY Democrats,

Democrats.... before the 1950's maybe...

[unionworks]

10. DINO's.

Democrats in name only. We aren't allowed to mention names I don't think. Ole!

[Sarah Ibarruri]

16. You know how Libertarians HATE being called Republican even tho

they ARE Republican?

Maybe Third Way Democrats are actually Republicans who HATE to be called Republican, and they also don't want to be called Libertarian, Independent, or Joe Lieberman.

[unionworks]

24. Sounds Perfectly

Viable to me! I am a big fan of your OP's from way back, Sarah!

[Sarah Ibarruri]

26. Thanks so much! nt

[GeorgeGist]

40. Those who think busting MMJ dispensaries ...

is more important than busting war criminals.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

45. ? You think that's a gigantic left-right issue? nt

[Comrade Grumpy]

58. It's an issue that transcends left-right.

That's why both the Greens and the Libertarians agree on it. Along with a majority of Americans, but not the Republicans or the Democrats.

[pampango]

11. Any Democrat - period - who doesn't want to talk about income inequality

needs to ask themselves why they are a Democrat in the first place.

[daleanime]

19. Hell yes!

nt

[MisterP]

32. they're Dems because the people who ask about inequality are themselves currently Dems,

and thus unwilling to go on the offensive against someone "on their side"

you don't remove MRSA with another round of amoxicillin...

[xchrom]

13. Du rec. Nt

[Populist_Prole]

14. K & R

[sendero]

17. "third way" Democrats is an oxymoron..

.... they are not Democrats at all.

[Telly Savalas]

18. It's a shame there's not a place on the internet for people to promote liberal Democrats

In the absence of a focused effort to advance a constructive alternative, we're stuck with Third Way Democrats and far right Republicans.

[socialist_n_TN]

20. Well sure they don't. As others have said..........

they don't want to acknowledge that it exists, at least as a policy, BECAUSE MOST OF THEM BENEFIT FROM IT!

ANYBODY ought to know that if the capitalists wanted to close the inequality gap it could be closed tomorrow. The solutions are easy, but it will take income redistribution and that's an anathma to the "Reagan Democrats". Or as they're called now, "Third Way Democrats".

What's really sad to me is that a lot of people who think of themselves as "liberal" would have a problem with it too. When it comes down to it even "liberals" would support the facists over an overthrow of the system. That's why they're "liberal" and NOT "communist".

[TBF]

22. They could hike the capital gains tax back up to normal levels

(ie you pay the same on investments as you do on earned income) and we'd see a lot of $$$ right there. That would be the first step I'd take.

[socialist_n_TN]

25. Yep that would be a good first step...........

I'm still not sure of the reasoning as to why "no sweat labor" (pushing computer bytes to make money) is TAXED at half the rate of REAL labor. It just don't make sense. Unless you're a capitalist of course.

[AlbertCat]

34. That would be the first step I'd take.

How about starting with making corporations pay a mandatory minimum tax.... even though that's a Clinton idea.

Then make churches pay taxes.... at least on their businesses.

Then go for individuals.

[TBF]

46. I don't understand your "even though that's a Clinton idea" comment -

what's that all about?

Mandatory taxes for corporations and churches are great too - I didn't speak about that because I haven't done as much reading on it. I have no problem at all with those suggestions and there are probably many more we should put on the table.

[Selatius]

35. As far as I know, Capital gains taxes never equaled earned income taxes, even under FDR.

To be sure, the arguments split along the lines of those who thought we shouldn't kill the goose that lays the golden eggs vs. those that saw income redistribution through capital gains taxation as a necessary measure to guard against the insecurity of income inequality. That was back then.

Today, the argument splits along the lines of lowering the rates in a "pro-growth" maneuver vs. leaving them as they are. Such is the power of corporate cash on the policy positions of politicians in the House and Senate coupled with right-wing propaganda on the electorate that puts the politicians into power.

Personally, I am firmly encamped on what most Americans consider "far left." I think capital gains should be taxed as heavily as earned income, with a strengthening of Social Security to ensure security in old age.

[The Green Manalishi]

37. If Capital Gains were subject to progressive taxation

we might make more headway.
A lot of retirees do indeed count on income from investments to just get by; the mantra I was taught was that the company I worked for would provide some retirement, SS would provide some and I should invest in things that would provide me some income in retirement, a 'stool with 3 legs'/ And, fortunately, I pretty much have, having a bit of investments and some pension due me.

There are a lot of people with modest investments in things that will pay capital gains. Obviously seeing things from my own vantage point here, but I do feel it would be best to keep, or even lower the rate on the first few thousands a year of capital gains and then ratchet it up as one gets more income in capital gains. Progressive, just like income. I mean there is no good point in sticking it to someone who has a few thousand a year coming in to augment SS just because they have been both lucky and diligent enough to buy some stock over the decades, but it's stupid to let millionaires get away with hundreds of thousands a year taxed at the low rate.

[Selatius]

39. I actually did kick around the idea of tweaking what I said with an exemption for the poor.

Say, the first 20,000 or perhaps 30,000 is tax exempt as far as capital gains. The notion of raising capital gains is to hit out at people who make multiples of that in just a year and in some cases several thousand times that amount.

If a hedge fund manager earns a percentage off the investments he makes for his clients and banks over 50,000,000 in a year in capital gains, which is not actually a big chunk of cash when compared to the top hedge fund managers, his effective rate should at least be close or higher than it would if an individual made 50,000,000 through earned income. As it stands, a person who derived all that cash through earned income would pay more taxes than if he had earned the same cash through capital gains. He would pay an effective rate on that cash that is roughly 15%.

As it stands, capital gains tax structure functions much like a flat tax, and as anybody who has studied economics would know, flat taxes tend to hit harder on lower income earners than it does on the wealthy.

[TBF]

47. Agreee with you 100%. nt

[malaise]

43. Excellent post

[sadfwesdfwe]

28. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[Iliyah]

38. Like it not

the Democratic Party, unlike the GOP party, pretty much do not march to the same tune. I know, and although I get so angry with the Dems, at least they sorta represent the way America is, diversed.

The other day a Dem Rep. spouted it was not a "war on women". I cringed, but I guess thats the way he felt, and I guess thats ok, because majority of the Dems feel that there is a "war on women" by the GOP.

[badtoworse]

48. What an erudite post.

[bvar22]

53. DURec!

We DEMAND that the following be acknowledged as Basic Human Rights, and protected by our Government of The People!!!

"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens. ---FDR, Economic Bill of Rights

At one time, not so long ago,
the above RIGHTS were Democratic Party Policy,
and voting FOR The Democrats
was voting FOR the above values.

Sadly, that is no longer true,
and the people who believe in these traditional Democratic Party Values
no longer have a voice or a choice in our government.
I miss THAT Democratic Party.



[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22 at the Labor Day Picnic in St Paul
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]


[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. Shocked I tell you, SHOCKED!!!!