The New Resentment of the Poor

[groovedaddy]

In a decade of frenzied tax-cutting for the rich, the Republican Party just happened to lower tax rates for the poor, as well. Now several of the party’s most prominent presidential candidates and lawmakers want to correct that oversight and raise taxes on the poor and the working class, while protecting the rich, of course.

These Republican leaders, who think nothing of widening tax loopholes for corporations and multimillion-dollar estates, are offended by the idea that people making less than $40,000 might benefit from the progressive tax code. They are infuriated by the earned income tax credit (the pride of Ronald Reagan), which has become the biggest and most effective antipoverty program by giving working families thousands of dollars a year in tax refunds. They scoff at continuing President Obama’s payroll tax cut, which is tilted toward low- and middle-income workers and expires in December.

Until fairly recently, Republicans, at least, have been fairly consistent in their position that tax cuts should benefit everyone. Though the Bush tax cuts were primarily for the rich, they did lower rates for almost all taxpayers, providing a veneer of egalitarianism. Then the recession pushed down incomes severely, many below the minimum income tax level, and the stimulus act lowered that level further with new tax cuts. The number of families not paying income tax has risen from about 30 percent before the recession to about half, and, suddenly, Republicans have a new tool to stoke class resentment.

Representative Michele Bachmann noted recently that 47 percent of Americans do not pay federal income tax; all of them, she said, should pay something because they benefit from parks, roads and national security. (Interesting that she acknowledged government has a purpose.) Gov. Rick Perry, in the announcement of his candidacy, said he was dismayed at the “injustice” that nearly half of Americans do not pay income tax. Jon Huntsman Jr., up to now the most reasonable in the Republican presidential field, said not enough Americans pay tax.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/31/opinion/the-new-resentment-of-the-poor.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha211

[TwilightGardener]

1. They're not even hiding their contempt anymore for the non-wealthy.

Edit to add: they must not have to worry about re-election, for some reason.

[HockeyMom]

2. Add in the Old and the Sick too

We are heading swifting back in the 1940's to you know where.

[RaleighNCDUer]

3. It never occurs to them what what they SHOULD be arguing for is

a living wage so that nobody would earn to little to pay taxes.

47% not paying income taxes says a lot more about the state of poverty in America than it does about the tax system.

[w0nderer]

14. very true

want me to pay more taxes, raise my pay

want me to pay no taxes as all
either lower my pay or, make me a company with a great year

your call

usually that results in a RW talking point repeater going into infinite loop :-)

[DJ13]

4. K&R

[n2doc]

5. And yet they wouldn't have a job if a lot of those poor didn't vote for them

Tells you alot about the power of prejudice and brainwashing in this country.

[patrice]

6. Why? Aren't we becoming a commodity upon which "faith"-based "initiatives" will feed?

Guaranteed jobs for the "right" people & Replicating overhead over and over and over with each new initiative & justifying union-busting, because, after-all, it's only for the poor, so "we" really can't afford REAL professional services.

[nashville_brook]

7. must read article of the day

[booley]

8. It's not resentment.

Fact is even the most die hard republicans, when pressed (really hard) will admit that he kind of likes some government and to have that government, somebody has to pay.

Oil companies and Walmart may hate regulations and the EPA but they sure like the subsidies.

Banks aren't' so adverse to FDIC insurance.

Lots of tea baggers are on MEdicare (even as they claim they have never used a government program. But I chalk this up to the fact to tea baggers being morons). Even the ones that are still young enough to not be on Medicare seem less then .. aware. Remember when they complained about how the public transportation in DC wasn't living up to their needs?

And I sure don't see the scores of elected Republicans who told us government run health care is evil and bad giving up their government health care.

However while these people often will come up with lots of rationalizations on how this doesn't violate their principles (some some more comical then others) the bottom line is... there' s a bottom line.

SOMEBODY has to ultimately pay for this.

Everybody like a free lunch and the rich are no different. In fact they seem to have perfected free lunches. Except that there are no free lunches and again, to get their goodies, somebody has to pay for them. The rich (generally) just think it shouldn't be them. The obvious problem of course is that they are the only ones left who have enough money to pay for these things without loads of personal hard ship. Take half of a billionaire's wealth and he's light years ahead financially then the bottom 90% of the country. But obviously the rich dont' want to lose any of their of their money. And certainly not if it means helping someone who isn't them.

What to do? Well the key here is phrase "personal hard ship". The poor can pay. It' s just the cost comes out as more then money. It's in staying poor and in debt and insecure. It's in not going to college and small business that were never started and poor schools and even poor credit ratings and crime and depleted food banks.

The poor do have money. And there are so many of us that it's a lot of money. It's just as I said, the cost of taking it is more then financial. But if one is a callous a*hole, that's not really a concern. That's a misperception I think many liberals have about the cons who propose these things. They think these guys have some sense of shame at causing harm to their fellow human beings. But these guys really don't.

So this isn't really resentment. That's just orwellian for "I want my goodies but I also care more about not spending a dime to get them then I do about you getting basic necessities". And so they use the idea of fairness to promote an idea that is inherently unfair. And this si supposed to shut up Liberals since by pointing out that this is unfair, we are being "against fairness"

In short, this is just an attempt at creating a meme where something is used to promote it's opposite. Like hate the sin/ love the sinner, or compassionate conservatism or liberating a country by killings lots of people in said country.

Resentment implies that one wants the object of their dislike gone. Bu the right most certainly do not want the poor gone. They want the poor to stay poor and powerless. they need to the poor to exploit and scapegoat and demonize and distract.

For people like Bachmann and the Koch's and the rest, it's All of Me and None for Thee. The "resentment" at how lucky the poor are is just the way they plan on covering up what horrible greedy people they are.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

9. In the case of the truly rich, it's often ignorance

I did my graduate work at two Ivy League schools (on fellowship--I never could have afforded it). While this was a wonderful and enriching experience in many ways, the cluelessness and callousness of some of the undergraduates was just nauseating.

The clincher was when a group of undergraduates simply could not believe that neither I nor my parents could afford to fund a year of research in Japan on our own.

And even Kingman Lyman Brewster, president of Yale in the 1970s, made this comment when the clerical workers went on strike because those on the bottom rungs of the salary scale were eligible for food stamps: "If they want more money, they should get other jobs." (Spoken like a true upper crust guy with three last names. Never mind that Yale's low clerical salaries depressed all clerical salaries in the region.)

[groovedaddy]

16. They do, in deed, live in a bubble! n.t

[COLGATE4]

10. They're just not bothering to hide their belief in the 'Protestant

Ethic', a neo-Calvinist doctrine of faith which divides humans into winners and losers. Winners (i.e. the wealthy) achieve success because God blesses them, i.e. wants them to. Losers (i.e. everyone else) is predestined by God to not achieve much of anything, due to some unknown failing on their part. So, if the rich are becoming richer and everyone else is becoming poorer, don't blame the Rethuglicans - blame God.

[Cool Logic]

11. "...giving working families thousands of dollars a year in tax refunds."

How is it possible to give a tax refund to someone that doesn't pay taxes?

[bhikkhu]

15. Child Care Credit, for instance

...and, yes, if you have children and dependents and low income, you can pay no income taxes and still get a credit back every year.

That's not the real problem, though - one study the other day indicated that about everyone making less than $500k a year pays a net of about 40% of their income in all the various taxes (state and federal, property, sales taxes, etc), while those making over $500k pay about 17% average net taxes.

So even if you don't really make enough to live on and people depend on you, you still pay about 40% of your income as taxes. If the federal government gives a little of that back, no problem by me - its the guys making $500+ a year and not paying a fair share that are the real problem.

[katty]

12. criminalizing the poor - these arrogant assholes

[bvar22]

13. Jon Stewart summed it up prefectly a few weeks ago.

Watch these two clips.
These may be the BEST work Jon has done.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-18-2011/world-of-class-warfare---warren-buffett-vs--wealthy-conservatives

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-18-2011/world-of-class-warfare---the-poor-s-free-ride-is-over

In these two clips, Jon shows us what we are up against,
and its NOT pretty.
It IS a WAR,
and I know on which side I will be fighting.
"Compromise" and "Bi-Partisanship" with these people is NOT possible.


"They were arrogant and spoiled; they had everything they needed and still refused to help the poor and needy." Ezekiel 16:49




Cherish your memories, SUCKERS!
because we're TAKING everything else!
Hahahahahahaha!




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.

Solidarity!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Lydia Leftcoast]

17. Those sociopaths braying about class warfare...

:grr:

And I do not use the term "sociopath" lightly.

[Overseas]

18. Wow. Big News is actually acknowledging the successful right wing PR of the post-Reagan era?

I guess the results of that continuous campaign to demonize compassion have finally gotten so extreme that Big News and Old Fashioned Republicans feel that they have to take official notice.