New Pew research about rising tensions (rich vs. Poor) and Buffet's challenge.

[blankslate]

There is a new Pew Research Poll that indicates that the conflict (mildest version of the definition I am guessing) between the Rich vs Poor is more evident than the others fairly common ones except native born vs. immigrants.

Additionally, the perception of a rich vs poor tensions has risen the most. While the percentage of those who perceive a black vs. white tension has slightly decreased. As shown below

Another interesting thing is that the divide between people who think that the rich got that way from ability and hard work, and the ones who think it was because of knowing the right people or being born with the silver spoon is fairly even.

This might be because of who was on the mind of the person surveyed when they answered because no one would say that Steve Jobs, Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg didn't work hard.
There are others who we could name who are just rich because of an inheritance or who they know as well.


The interesting this is the demographics of those who answered. Pretty much across the board there the people who see a strong or very strong conflict between the rich and the poor are in the majority and that the number percentage of those who hold this view has increased.

If you read through the study you can see that it this increase of people who notice rich/poor conflict is common across just about every demographic.
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012...flict-between-rich-and-poor/?src=prc-headline


On another topic that is fairly related to this Warren Buffet has decided to answer the people who ask why doesn't he just make a voluntary donation of his money if he thinks he pays too little in taxes.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_...ffett-throws-down-financial-challenge-to-gop/



As for the Pew study. I am not surprised at all about the responses to the Pew study. As the gap between the super rich and the middle class has increased by a wide margin.

I think that Buffet's challenge is more of a way to keep his initial ideas about his tax rate compared with his secretary in the public's awareness. Because of course Mitch McConnell isn't going to accept Buffet's challenge with any serious amount of money.

what do you guys think?

 

[PeshakJang]

Exactly what one would expect when you've had a president telling the nation for the last 3 years that the rich are to blame for all their problems.

 

[blankslate]

Please, we've reduced taxes for the wealthiest from about 39.6% to 35% on top incomes and still the "job-creators" are uncertain after 10 years or more.

Where are the jobs? not going to happen until there is demand for products that encourages the businesses to hire people.

 

[Rainsford]

I think the whole premise of the question is silly. It's not just "rich" and "poor", and asking it that way makes it likely that people will misidentify the group the belong to. The point shouldn't be that there is a conflict between rich people and poor people, because that's too easy to spin as the poor just being lazy...and it's not the real problem in any case.

The issue is between rich and middle-class, who largely work hard for a living and have seen an increasingly smaller percentage of the economy come there way. If anything, I think these numbers undersell people's feelings about the issue, since they see themselves as middle class but probably not as poor.

 

[Rainsford]

Exactly what one would expect when you've had a president telling the nation for the last 3 years that the rich are to blame for all their problems.

Citation needed, to borrow the Wikipedia phrase. Like "traveling around the world, apologizing for America", it's a great conservative line, but not exactly fact-based.

 

[PeshakJang]

Citation needed, to borrow the Wikipedia phrase. Like "traveling around the world, apologizing for America", it's a great conservative line, but not exactly fact-based.

Citation- any speech from the last two years. You have to be pretty obtuse to even think to deny it.

 

[theeedude]

Citation- any speech from the last two years. You have to be pretty obtuse to even think to deny it.

Any speech? Then why are you having trouble finding an actual citation?

 

[Cerb]

The 40-year-olds numbers make sense. IME, many middle-aged, especially men, have this idea that they have a fair chance to become, "rich," if they work harder, despite what is going on the in the world around them. It makes sense they would be lower than others, based on that.

The 65+ numbers, OTOH, surprise me. I would not have expected 50+%.

 

[PeshakJang]

Any speech? Then why are you having trouble finding an actual citation?

Sorry, I guess I made the assumption that you pay attention to what's going on around you. Since you obviously don't even listen to anything coming out of your president's mouth, I'll keep that in mind from now on when destroying your arguments.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/11/30/remarks-president-american-jobs-act

It’s paid for by asking our wealthiest citizens to pay their fair share. (Applause.)
...
So what I’ve said is, to pay for this tax cut, we need to ask wealthy Americans to pay their fair share. (Applause.) We’re asking -- what we’ve said is let’s ask the folks who’ve seen their incomes rise fastest, who’ve gotten bigger tax breaks under Bush, let’s ask them to help out a little bit, because they made it better through the recession than most of us. Let’s ask them to contribute a little bit more to get the economy going again.
...
And by the way, let me say this: When you talk to most folks who are making a million dollars a year, they are willing to do more if they’re asked. Warren Buffett is a good example. They’re willing to do more if they’re asked.
...
Are you going to ask a few hundred thousand people who have done very, very well to do their fair share?

...

Are you willing to fight as hard for middle-class families as you do for those who are most fortunate? What’s it going to be?
...
What does it say about our priorities when we’d rather protect a few really well-to-do people than fight for the jobs of teachers and firefighters?
...
we expect everybody to work hard, but we don’t believe in every person for themselves
...

I could link any other speech, but the vast majority sound exactly the same. Rich people aren't doing enough, so it's their fault when we raise taxes on you!


But yeah... you really should start paying attention kiddo.

 

[Rainsford]

Sorry, I guess I made the assumption that you pay attention to what's going on around you. Since you obviously don't even listen to anything coming out of your president's mouth, I'll keep that in mind from now on when destroying your arguments.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/11/30/remarks-president-american-jobs-act




I could link any other speech, but the vast majority sound exactly the same. Rich people aren't doing enough, so it's their fault when we raise taxes on you!


But yeah... you really should start paying attention kiddo.

That's a pretty big stretch to call that "blaming the rich for all our problems". I never liked the phrase "fair share", but all I see there is a President who's approach to tax policy is to ask for a little more from very well off Americans. I guess you have to really want it to read any of that as Obama blaming or otherwise attacking rich people.

Whether you agree with it or not "Let’s ask them to contribute a little bit more to get the economy going again." is hardly inflammatory rhetoric.

 

[theeedude]

Sorry, I guess I made the assumption that you pay attention to what's going on around you. Since you obviously don't even listen to anything coming out of your president's mouth, I'll keep that in mind from now on when destroying your arguments.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/11/30/remarks-president-american-jobs-act




I could link any other speech, but the vast majority sound exactly the same. Rich people aren't doing enough, so it's their fault when we raise taxes on you!


But yeah... you really should start paying attention kiddo.

Where does he blame the rich for all the problems, which is what you claimed, in that citation?

 

[blackangst1]

Translation: I'd love to pay more. But only if you do it first. Im not passionate enough to lead by example.

I love this:

In a New York Times op-ed last August, Buffett lamented that in 2010, he paid only 17.4 percent of his taxable income to the government -- even though middle class earners in his office paid between 33 percent and 41 percent. Buffett paid a lower rate in part because a significant part of his income came from investments, which are taxed at a lower rate than wages.

Lamented? He obviously wasnt upset enough to send in an extra check (at least that we know of). Lamented? lol

41%? Who the hell paid 41% in federal? In 2010 the highest tax rate was 35%, and that was for income earners over $373k. Hardly middle class.

Nothing against Buffett. But the hypocrisy is strong in this.

 

[Brainonska511]

Translation: I'd love to pay more. But only if you do it first. Im not passionate enough to lead by example.

Collective action problem

 

[Rainsford]

Translation: I'd love to pay more. But only if you do it first. Im not passionate enough to lead by example.

I love this:


Lamented? He obviously wasnt upset enough to send in an extra check (at least that we know of). Lamented? lol

41%? Who the hell paid 41% in federal? In 2010 the highest tax rate was 35%, and that was for income earners over $373k. Hardly middle class.

The article doesn't just say "federal tax". I can see maybe 41% once you add up ALL the taxes you pay to the fed, state and local governments.

Nothing against Buffett. But the hypocrisy is strong in this.

Don't be silly. He's not saying problems would be fixed by him personally forking over more money in taxes, he's using himself as an illustrative example for why taxes on the rich should be higher. The fact that he thinks so despite the fact that he'll be taxed more too is the opposite of hypocrisy.

Or do you honestly believe that the only way ANYONE can argue for higher taxes is by first voluntarily sending more money to the government? Because that sounds kind of goofy to me.

 

[blackangst1]

The article doesn't just say "federal tax". I can see maybe 41% once you add up ALL the taxes you pay to the fed, state and local governments.

Could be, of course.

Don't be silly. He's not saying problems would be fixed by him personally forking over more money in taxes, he's using himself as an illustrative example for why taxes on the rich should be higher. The fact that he thinks so despite the fact that he'll be taxed more too is the opposite of hypocrisy.

Or do you honestly believe that the only way ANYONE can argue for higher taxes is by first voluntarily sending more money to the government? Because that sounds kind of goofy to me.

I didnt say that. I was commenting specifically on his....challenge. It's hypocritical. If he's using himself as an example, AND if he truly believes what he says (that taxes should be higher, he wants to to pay more in taxes, etc) he should lead by example. Perhaps start a movement. Supposedly theres alot of rich (alot is vague, I know) who feel the same way. If they feel higher taxes are an answer, then by all means pay them. No one is stopping them. And then perhaps it would inspire those in WADC to actually raise them.

 

[shira]

Sorry, I guess I made the assumption that you pay attention to what's going on around you. Since you obviously don't even listen to anything coming out of your president's mouth, I'll keep that in mind from now on when destroying your arguments.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/11/30/remarks-president-american-jobs-act

I could link any other speech, but the vast majority sound exactly the same. Rich people aren't doing enough, so it's their fault when we raise taxes on you!

But yeah... you really should start paying attention kiddo.

No, no, sorry, YOUR statement was the following:

Exactly what one would expect when you've had a president telling the nation for the last 3 years that the rich are to blame for all their problems.

All is see from your link is the President saying he wants the richest Americans to "pay their fair share." Are you claiming that that's the same as "blaming all of America's problems" on the wealthy?

 

[Jaskalas]

Exactly what one would expect when you've had a president telling the nation for the last 3 years that the rich are to blame for all their problems.

Really... Just one man? The President did it!!! Replace him with a Bush and everything will be a-okay!

You gotta be smarter than this. All of Obama's voters are telling the nation that. Not for the last 3 years either, but for so long as they've been taught to recite their dogma.

It's the socialist half of our nation and they're continuing to successfully indoctrinate others.

 

[Rainsford]

...
I didnt say that. I was commenting specifically on his....challenge. It's hypocritical. If he's using himself as an example, AND if he truly believes what he says (that taxes should be higher, he wants to to pay more in taxes, etc) he should lead by example. Perhaps start a movement. Supposedly theres alot of rich (alot is vague, I know) who feel the same way. If they feel higher taxes are an answer, then by all means pay them. No one is stopping them. And then perhaps it would inspire those in WADC to actually raise them.

I'm still not getting your argument here. Buffet isn't saying rich people should VOLUNTARILY give more money to the government out of a sense of duty, in which case you'd be absolutely right that he would by hypocritical by not leading the charge. But that's not what he's saying...he's arguing that the government should raise taxes on rich people. How could he possibly "lead by example" there? He doesn't have any direct control over tax law, and obeying non-existent laws (which seems to be what you're suggesting) is silly when his point is that the system should change for everyone.

 

[Rainsford]

Really... Just one man? The President did it!!! Replace him with a Bush and everything will be a-okay!

You gotta be smarter than this. All of Obama's voters are telling the nation that. Not for the last 3 years either, but for so long as they've been taught to recite their dogma.

It's the socialist half of our nation and they're continuing to successfully indoctrinate others.

No offense, but that sounds even sillier. You think half of the entire country (well, over half since Obama won in 2008 😉) thinks rich people are evil and responsible for all our problems? And I hate to point out the obvious, but there is a serious amount of political real estate to fit into between "conservative" and "socialist". Especially since "socialist" means specific things and isn't the ridiculously vague general purpose insult you seem to think it is.

 

[dmcowen674]

New Pew research about rising tensions (rich vs. Poor) and Buffet's challenge.

There is a new Pew Research Poll that indicates that the conflict (mildest version of the definition I am guessing) between the Rich vs Poor is more evident than the others fairly common ones except native born vs. immigrants.

Additionally, the perception of a rich vs poor tensions has risen the most. While the percentage of those who perceive a black vs. white tension has slightly decreased. As shown below


Another interesting thing is that the divide between people who think that the rich got that way from ability and hard work, and the ones who think it was because of knowing the right people or being born with the silver spoon is fairly even.



This might be because of who was on the mind of the person surveyed when they answered because no one would say that Steve Jobs, Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg didn't work hard.
There are others who we could name who are just rich because of an inheritance or who they know as well.


The interesting this is the demographics of those who answered. Pretty much across the board there the people who see a strong or very strong conflict between the rich and the poor are in the majority and that the number percentage of those who hold this view has increased.



If you read through the study you can see that it this increase of people who notice rich/poor conflict is common across just about every demographic.
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012...flict-between-rich-and-poor/?src=prc-headline


On another topic that is fairly related to this Warren Buffet has decided to answer the people who ask why doesn't he just make a voluntary donation of his money if he thinks he pays too little in taxes.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_...ffett-throws-down-financial-challenge-to-gop/



As for the Pew study. I am not surprised at all about the responses to the Pew study. As the gap between the super rich and the middle class has increased by a wide margin.

I think that Buffet's challenge is more of a way to keep his initial ideas about his tax rate compared with his secretary in the public's awareness. Because of course Mitch McConnell isn't going to accept Buffet's challenge with any serious amount of money.

what do you guys think?

Nothing new here. I've been posting about this since at least 2000.

Each and everyday we are rapidly approaching full out Revolution in the U.S. thanks to the rich.

 

[Doppel]

It's good to see more aware of it and that there's little they can do to ever get into this group.

 

[Rainsford]

Nothing new here. I've been posting about this since at least 2000.

Each and everyday we are rapidly approaching full out Revolution in the U.S. thanks to the rich.

We're not going to have a revolution, this isn't a war and there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the rich.

Rich people make a lot of money. In the past several decades, a smaller and smaller percentage of the population has been getting more and more of the income and wealth in this country. THAT is bad, since it means a lot of the people who grow our economy aren't getting to benefit from that growth. Which in addition to being unfair, is also fundamentally bad for the economy, since it means the middle class engine for growth isn't as strong as it used to be.

But it's not the "fault" of rich people. Were I in a position to make millions of dollars, I'd take it...and so would you. The problem is that our system seems to substantially reward top tier work almost exclusively, to the detriment of average people and lower class folks. I don't see how you can reasonably hold that against those who have benefited though...

 

[blackangst1]

I'm still not getting your argument here. Buffet isn't saying rich people should VOLUNTARILY give more money to the government out of a sense of duty, in which case you'd be absolutely right that he would by hypocritical by not leading the charge. But that's not what he's saying...he's arguing that the government should raise taxes on rich people. How could he possibly "lead by example" there? He doesn't have any direct control over tax law, and obeying non-existent laws (which seems to be what you're suggesting) is silly when his point is that the system should change for everyone.

Fair enough. Cant argue with that.

 

[First]

Sorry, I guess I made the assumption that you pay attention to what's going on around you. Since you obviously don't even listen to anything coming out of your president's mouth, I'll keep that in mind from now on when destroying your arguments.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/11/30/remarks-president-american-jobs-act




I could link any other speech, but the vast majority sound exactly the same. Rich people aren't doing enough, so it's their fault when we raise taxes on you!


But yeah... you really should start paying attention kiddo.

It's like every thread I visit you're constantly self- owning yourself. Impressive if it weren't so sad.

 

[cybrsage]

Every time Buffet made a challenge, his bluff has been called. Is there anyone left who takes any of his "challenges" seriously?