Posts tagged Politics
Posts tagged Politics
Wait, wait, wait…you mean massive union busting tactics led by billionaires is bad for job growth? I mean, c’mon, who could have predicted that?
When you can buy a politician, there’s no guarantee that the American people will be the highest bidder. #politics
I could fix unemployment in one move. Just move wages of employees who make under $100k a year to a credit, instead of a deduction, and adjust the corporate tax rate up to make up the difference.
It would work too - because suddenly instead of corporations pocketing the cash they save from outsourcing, they’d have to pay the government. With no financial incentive to reduce the size of their workforce, employment would skyrocket, and the mode (average) of wages/salaries would race toward (in this example) $100k pretty quick as well.
No way Republicans would go for it. I’m not saying the left is perfect, but when it comes to economics the right-wing is screwing the working and middle classes.
Casual sexism is when my male friends say they wish politicians would stop talking about abortion and birth control and “focus on the real issues.”
or “let’s just focus on the economy” as if birth control and abortion don’t affect my budget
Your ability to gain employment at all has a greater, and more immediate impact. I’m not suggesting these issues should never be talked about, but our political system is broken, in part, because of our inability to prioritize long enough to solve one problem before getting bogged down in a lengthy debate about other issues, such as abortion and birth control. ”The economy” isn’t a group of sexy issues easy to get impassioned about. It IS the issue most likely to impact EVERY SINGLE AREA OF EVERY PERSON’S LIFE.
So especially in times such as these when profiteers are seeking to strip all the wealth, and even the ability to generate wealth from our country, every issue that can be used as a political smoke screen to delay reforms WILL BE USED IN EXACTLY THAT WAY. Even your vagina, sad and wrong though that may be.
This gif kind of symbolizes how he would run the country. He takes from the middle and adds to the top but when the top gets too heavy and there isn’t enough of the middle left to support the top, the entire thing collapses.
^ this fucking comment.
Excellent analogy is excellent.
Pundits and political scientists like to come up with novel ways to categorize the electorate and predict elections. But Philadelphia Daily News columnist and beer writer Joe Sixpack (that is his real byline, although I suspect it’s not the name on his long-form birth certificate) has bested them all. Sixpack put together a chart of density of breweries in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, color-coding them by whether they voted for Obama (blue) or McCain (red) in 2008.
Read more. [Image: Philadelphia Daily News]
…while playing Skyrim (because I’m a loser), and the soundtrack makes every word EPIC.
I have, for various reasons, stayed out of most online political discussions in the last several months. In spite of the fact that our country is in the midst of the most politically tumultuous time my life has yet seen, I have refrained from commenting on a number of misinformed comments on both Tumblr and Facebook. With all that said, there are a number of facts I feel the strong need to point out. I want to preface those facts by saying that I am not, for the intents and purposes of this post, trying to push any specific political agenda, or persuasion, but want to clarify a couple important points that many people are neglecting to keep in mind as they make their political decisions/ build political convictions.
1.) The President of the United States does not, according to the Constitution, have the power to tax the people. This power is given to Congress (see Constitution Article I sections 7-8). With that said, while I’m absolutely sure Obama has specific opinions about taxation (who should be taxed, how they should be taxed, etc) he is without the ability to implement said taxation. The implications of these articles are most important when speaking to the many people I’ve seen become upset at the lack of taxes specific groups of people (namely, most often, the extremely wealthy) or corporations pay in our country. Therefore, it would be wrong of any individual to fault President Obama (or any President, for that matter) exclusively for the way the population of this country is currently taxed. More accurately that fault should be laid on the shoulders of Congress.
2.) The President of the United States is not the only person governing in the US. There are, by way of reminder, three branches in our government: The Executive Branch: consisting of the President, the Vice President, and the Cabinet, the Judicial Branch: Consisting of the Supreme and Federal Courts, and the Legislative Branch: consisting of the bodies of Congress- the House of Representatives and the Senate (See the first three articles of the Constitution). What does this mean for our current political situation? Regardless of your thoughts on Obama, or your thoughts on our current Congress, no one person can be held responsible for the problems our country is currently facing. More specifically, it would be wrong to say that Obama is the cause of all of our grievances (especially since, considering the historical context, most of our greatest problems began well before Obama took office). So, even if you disagree with our President, he cannot be held solely responsible, by any means, for the great issues we are facing right now. These issues are the collective fault of many individuals who have failed to look out for the needs of the people they represent.
I have so much more I can say about the distribution of wealth in this country, the way we treat and handle the marginalized, (often while attempting to defend some of the other people we considermarginalized), the ways our government is not representing the opinions and interests of it’s constituents, etc, but- if you know me- we can dialogue about those things in person. However, in concluding this article, I’d simply like to encourage you to think through these things considering all the facts. I’m becoming (probably obviously) frustrated with the way so many people I know are blaming Obama exclusively for all the problems we are facing right now, and that’s simply not accurate. The only way any real change can happen is if both political parties, in all branches of our government, strive to work together to accomplish a common good- the good of the people they were elected to be governing. Thanks for reading, folks
This is Catlin. You should all follow him.
~ Nicole Nichols
Stupid crap like this is the reason “Conservative Christians” get support from church goers all over the place, despite having some of the most un-biblical policies imaginable. In our two party system where every ebate is “Us vs. Them” idiots who say things like this push real Christians into conservative politics.
Conservative economic policies are wholly without compassion, or even common sense. Jesus would never support legislation that favored only the rich, yet believers regularly get duped into voting for leaders who support such policies. Why? Because liberals have pushed economic policies to the back of the bus, loudly favoring policies that only concern homosexuality and abortion (policies that only impact a tiny minority of people, compared with economic policies which impact everybody).
The very idea that Social Security might be on the chopping block in order to pay the ransom Republicans are demanding reveals both the cravenness of their demands and the callowness of the opposition to those demands.
In a former life I was a trustee of the Social Security trust fund. So let me set the record straight.
Social Security isn’t responsible for the federal deficit. Just the opposite. Until last year Social Security took in more payroll taxes than it paid out in benefits. It lent the surpluses to the rest of the government.
Now that Social Security has started to pay out more than it takes in, Social Security can simply collect what the rest of the government owes it. This will keep it fully solvent for the next 26 years.
But why should there even be a problem 26 years from now? Back in 1983, Alan Greenspan’s Social Security commission was supposed to have fixed the system for good – by gradually increasing payroll taxes and raising the retirement age. (Early boomers like me can start collecting full benefits at age 66; late boomers born after 1960 will have to wait until they’re 67.)
Greenspan’s commission must have failed to predict something. What?
Remember, the Social Security payroll tax applies only to earnings up to a certain ceiling. (That ceiling is now $106,800.) The ceiling rises every year according to a formula roughly matching inflation.
Back in 1983, the ceiling was set so the Social Security payroll tax would hit 90 percent of all wages covered by Social Security. That 90 percent figure was built into the Greenspan Commission’s fixes. The Commission assumed that, as the ceiling rose with inflation, the Social Security payroll tax would continue to hit 90 percent of total income.
Today, though, the Social Security payroll tax hits only about 84 percent of total income.
It went from 90 percent to 84 percent because a larger and larger portion of total income has gone to the top. In 1983, the richest 1 percent of Americans got 11.6 percent of total income. Today the top 1 percent takes in more than 20 percent.
If we want to go back to 90 percent, the ceiling on income subject to the Social Security tax would need to be raised to $180,000.
Presto. Social Security’s long-term (beyond 26 years from now) problem would be solved.
So there’s no reason even to consider reducing Social Security benefits or raising the age of eligibility. The logical response to the increasing concentration of income at the top is simply to raise the ceiling.
[This post is drawn from one I posted in February — before Social Security was as on the chopping block]