For America's Middle Class, the Hits Just Keep on Coming

[steveox]

A lot of ink and pixels have been spilled this week over the ICI's report that equity mutual funds suffered net withdrawals totaling over $33 billion in the first seven months of 2010. Myriad reasons were cited for the trend, including a mistrust of stocks, the flash crash and an aging population. (See: The Next Bubble? Investors Flee Stocks in Droves In Favor of Bonds.)

Perhaps the biggest reason of all hasn't gotten enough attention: Americans are making due with less and don't have the money to put into stock funds, and many are taking money out of their investments to pay for basic necessities like food, clothing and shelter.

With wages stagnant for those who still have a job "a lot of people are having to tap into their nest egg to keep their living standards going," says Damien Hoffman, co-founder of WallStCheatSheet. "A lot of people are living out of principal. There's no other way to get around that."

Fidelity's recent report of a sharp increase in the number of 401(k) participants seeking loans or hardship withdrawals in the second quarter is further evidence of the disappearing middle class. "These are basically emergency ways to fund yourself. We think it's a scary statistic," Hoffman says. "Where is the middle class going to be if they draw down their 401(k)s drastically over course of next few years?"

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/for-america%27s-middle-class-the-hits-just-keep-on-coming-535363.html?tickers=^GPSC,^DJI,TBT,TLT,CMG,FMAGX,PTTAX

Thats why we want BUSHS TAX CUTS EXPIRE! Cause it only benifits the wealthy. And Obama supposed to keep hkis promises.

 

[GenSeneca]

Thats why we want BUSHS TAX CUTS EXPIRE! Cause it only benifits the wealthy.

Put the pipe down for a moment and try to focus...

Lets say the taxes on "rich" people doubled tomorrow, exactly how would that lessen the financial burdens faced by the middle class?

 

[steveox]

Well at least people like Warren Buffett pays his own fair share.

 

[GenSeneca]

Well at least people like Warren Buffett pays his own fair share.

I'll take that reply as your way of admitting that raising taxes on the rich will in no way benefit the middle class or reduce their suffering during down economic times.

Since raising their taxes will not help the middle class, calls for raising their taxes can only be done out of malice.

This would be a good place for that quote about how Socialism is the equal sharing of misery.

Steve, out of morbid curiosity, what percentage of ones income would you consider a "fair share"?

 

[steveox]

I'll take that reply as your way of admitting that raising taxes on the rich will in no way benefit the middle class or reduce their suffering during down economic times.

Since raising their taxes will not help the middle class, calls for raising their taxes can only be done out of malice.

This would be a good place for that quote about how Socialism is the equal sharing of misery.

Steve, out of morbid curiosity, what percentage of ones income would you consider a "fair share"?

People who make between $250,000 and $750,000 a year or more should pay at least 40% People who make over $750,000 a year and more should pay 60% Just like the wealthy brits do over in england.

 

[OldTrapper]

I'll take that reply as your way of admitting that raising taxes on the rich will in no way benefit the middle class or reduce their suffering during down economic times.

Since raising their taxes will not help the middle class, calls for raising their taxes can only be done out of malice.

This would be a good place for that quote about how Socialism is the equal sharing of misery.

Steve, out of morbid curiosity, what percentage of ones income would you consider a "fair share"?

Ahhh, the old "socialism" tactic again.

Tell me, do you think the growing gap in wealth between the "rich", and the poor, is a myth as some do?

Do you think the "rich" are losing their homes in the same percentage as the working class is?

Do you see the "rich" losing their jobs?

Who was bailed out with the taxpayers money, and why should those who benefitted the most from that bailout not be required to pay for it?

What do YOU think a fair tax would be on those who most benefit from the economic circumstances we find ourselves in be?

 

[steveox]

The Rich are not hurting you dont see performers ,movie stars or singers begging for a job do you?

Im against the Fair Tax. Cause people who make under $20,000 should not pay anyhing to the IRS. Why you think that old man flew his plane into the IRS Building . Hes right about one thing. IRS has two septerate Tax Laws,, One for the Rich and one for ordinary people.

 

[OldTrapper]

The Rich are not hurting you dont see performers ,movie stars or singers begging for a job do you?

Im against the Fair Tax. Cause people who make under $20,000 should not pay anyhing to the IRS. Why you think that old man flew his plane into the IRS Building . Hes right about one thing. IRS has two septerate Tax Laws,, One for the Rich and one for ordinary people.

Well, there is a flaw in your argument. Even if the ones earning under 20,000 were to pay a tax under the "fair tax" system they would still get it all back in the end. Not to mention, with that income they qualify for energy assistance, food stamps, housing asistance, EITC, medicaid, etc.

Having them pay a tax would just be an emotional incentive to them to do better.

 

[BigRob]

Ahhh, the old "socialism" tactic again.

Tell me, do you think the growing gap in wealth between the "rich", and the poor, is a myth as some do?

Who cares if there is a growing gap? The solution to that is to eliminate the "rich"?

Do you think the "rich" are losing their homes in the same percentage as the working class is?

Does it matter? Did "rich" people somehow not pay for their house with money they earned?

Do you see the "rich" losing their jobs?

Yes, all the time.

Who was bailed out with the taxpayers money, and why should those who benefitted the most from that bailout not be required to pay for it?

Well, the argument can just as easily be made that everyone with money in a bank benefited greatly from the bailout (if you buy into that kind of thing), so therefore everyone should pay for it right?

 

[OldTrapper]

Who cares if there is a growing gap? The solution to that is to eliminate the "rich"?

Never even insinuated that. Why did you?

Does it matter? Did "rich" people somehow not pay for their house with money they earned?

And how did they "earn it"? With government subsidies, and incentives; hiring cheap labor from overseas, or using illegal immigrants; through fraud in the H1B, L1, etc. visa programs; cutting the wages of American workers, or firing them; cutting benefits to American workers; etc.

Question still remains, are they losing their homes?

Yes, all the time.

Only to go to another job. However, in the meantime they have put away enough to last them the rest of their lives. They surely are not in the unemployment line.

Well, the argument can just as easily be made that everyone with money in a bank benefited greatly from the bailout (if you buy into that kind of thing), so therefore everyone should pay for it right?

Savings in banks for the poor, and the working poor, have been at their lowest point in any time in history. Most people have a debit card which lasts about 1 month. They did not gain near as much as the wealthy, if any.

However, if you want to think they benefitted from the bailout, then so be it.

 

[GenSeneca]

People who make between $250,000 and $750,000 a year or more should pay at least 40% People who make over $750,000 a year and more should pay 60%

Since you know that higher taxes on the wealthy will not increase tax revenues and it will not improve the conditions for the other classes, will you admit your interest in jacking up their taxes is out of malice?

 

[GenSeneca]

Ahhh, the old "socialism" tactic again.

Tell me, do you think the growing gap in wealth between the "rich", and the poor, is a myth as some do?

Do you think the "rich" are losing their homes in the same percentage as the working class is?

Do you see the "rich" losing their jobs?

Who was bailed out with the taxpayers money, and why should those who benefitted the most from that bailout not be required to pay for it?

You cannot argue that raising their taxes increases federal revenue and you cannot argue that raising their taxes will do anything to soften the pain felt by the other classes... Will you then admit you interest in jacking up taxes on the rich is out of malice?

Really, I understand, you want to "get even" with those evil rich people who aren't suffering the way the other classes are suffering and you don't think that's "fair".

What do YOU think a fair tax would be on those who most benefit from the economic circumstances we find ourselves in be?

All citizens should have equal treatment under the law, so I would support a flat tax which everyone has to pay and nobody is exempt.

 

[Gipper]

Really, I understand, you want to "get even" with those evil rich people who aren't suffering the way the other classes are suffering and you don't think that's "fair".

FAIR you say????

My parents, while being somewhat disinterested in their children and certainly not the best parents in the world...(though I love them dearly) advised me early on about FAIRNESS and they deserve commendation for this.

They said, "Life is not FAIR. Get over it and quit complaining." I tell my beautiful children the same thing.

I would hazard a guess liberal parents never say these words to their offspring. And, the consequences are so dastardly.

Life as a liberal must be so unsatisfying. They always want to F things up and they are so envious of others.

 

[orogenicman]

Are you saying that poor people must remain poor because your parents were selfish? Because that appears to be what you are saying.

 

[Gipper]

Are you saying that poor people must remain poor because your parents were selfish? Because that appears to be what you are saying.

You and I could look at the Statue of Liberty and likely view it completely opposite of each other.

You see, I live in reality and you in a dark dank unreal nasty place. So, our communicating with each other could be difficult.

Did your Mommy and Daddy baby you or did they treat badly? In my many years of experience, I have found that liberals generally feel unappreciated, disconnected from society, overly sensitive, and usually harbor tremendous resentments. Not to stereotype or anything...

One theory as to why Liberals want government to take care of them, is Mommy and Daddy did not. Boo Hoo....aww poor baby....

or is this what happened???