Reasons To Vote For Kerry: Things He Will Do To Improve America

[Njorl]

Are you sure you and Russ aren't mixing apples and oranges? I think you're talking about tax RATES. 30% of 150,000 is 45,000. 25% of 40,000 is 10,000. With a 5% difference in income tax rate, the TOTAL tax paid is over 4 times as much.

I'm sure. I am not talking about tax rates.

Add in the other taxes one pays - sales tax for every purchase, inheritance taxes, property taxes, etc., consider which class is most likely to be affected by them, and the wealthy are paying much more than 30% of the total taxes taken in.

No, they are not. Federal income tax is the most progressive tax there is. All other taxes are more regressive, and tend to increase the share of teh tax load paid by the less wealthy. The estate tax was the only tax that was more progressive than the federal income tax.

Not that that is a bad thing. The people gaining the most from the nation's economy should be the ones financing the nation - they have the most to lose if it isn't financed. The ones paying the lowest tax rates (or no taxes at all) are still struggling to for the opportunity to be the people financing the nation. A worthwhile goal everyone's striving for, right?

I know I considered it a pretty significant milestone when I started getting back less in refunds than I'd paid in taxes instead of getting refunds larger than what I'd paid in. I guess still owing yet more taxes come April 15 is an equally significant milestone, but, somehow, it's not quite as fun as the first milestone.

And don't raise the minimum wage. It's fun to pretend raising the minimum wage will increase the number of jobs that are capable of supporting families, but the real effect is to steal those first 'pay your dues' jobs from the young. As John said, increasing minimum wage just lowers the cost of going automated and eliminating the job altogether.

No increase in the minimum wage has ever produced a statistically noticeable impact on minimum wage employment. Of course, no increase in teh minimum wage has ever been by very much either, so it isn't surprising. I think the proper level for a minimum wage, if such a thing exists, is that level at which jobs would start disapearing. I'm sure it is a good deal higher than the present level, but I have no idea where.

Njorl

 

[loseyourname]

No increase in the minimum wage has ever produced a statistically noticeable impact on minimum wage employment. Of course, no increase in teh minimum wage has ever been by very much either, so it isn't surprising. I think the proper level for a minimum wage, if such a thing exists, is that level at which jobs would start disapearing. I'm sure it is a good deal higher than the present level, but I have no idea where.

Njorl

That because increases have always been enacted to offset inflation, which is perfectly fair. That is all an increase should do. There is no mandate to enact a living wage. People who are supporting themselves should not be working minimum wage jobs. Heck, the first job I ever had paid $12/hr. It isn't that difficult to find decent money if you really look. Even when I have taken lower paying jobs, I was always promoted quickly and soon made decent money.

 

[BobG]

That because increases have always been enacted to offset inflation, which is perfectly fair. That is all an increase should do. There is no mandate to enact a living wage. People who are supporting themselves should not be working minimum wage jobs. Heck, the first job I ever had paid $12/hr. It isn't that difficult to find decent money if you really look. Even when I have taken lower paying jobs, I was always promoted quickly and soon made decent money.

$12 an hour?! My first job, I made 20 cents less than minimum wage (he didn't have enough employees to be affected by minimum wage under the laws at the time) In spite of the pay, you almost never had anyone quit. Heck, anyone would be lucky to work in a place like that for free just for the job reference - I know - the owner told us that all the time.

It was a neighborhood ice cream parlor, usually with a college freshman or sophomore as the night manager and high school kids for the other jobs, such as waitress, soda jerk, dishwasher, etc. That was such a big part of our social life we couldn't quit. After work parties, group trips to Geauga Lake, group trips out to Wolf Ledges - just a great time!

And I did get promoted pretty quickly and soon was making 10 cents over minimum wage as the ice cream maker (The local newspaper recognized our store as having the best ice cream in Summit county the year I made it. )

 

[Njorl]

Minimum wage has not kept pace with inflation since 1981. It would be about $7/hr now if it had.

Njorl

 

[Artman]

My wife and I ran a small video store for 14 years. How much would you like to pay a high school or college kid to watch tv, do their homework and occassionally wait on a customer?

Small business owners cannot afford to pay more than the current minimum wage level. Often minimum wage jobs are the first type of job a person will get. This person is not worth even minimum wage to that small business owner until they are trained. They come with such skills as believing that 10% discount is a $10.00 off (it doesn't matter how much the purchase is. Yeah this happened to us, so much for the school system.) We teach them how to count back change, close out the cash drawer, deal with people... We would take a shy, unsure teenager and train them into a person ready for the business world. Then they go off to college, come home and get a real job and realize how much they owe us for the experience.

I think Mr. Kerry ought to try owning a video store for a couple of years instead of Heinz Foods.

 

[Dissident Dan]

My wife and I ran a small video store for 14 years. How much would you like to pay a high school or college kid to watch tv, do their homework and occassionally wait on a customer?

...

I think Mr. Kerry ought to try owning a video store for a couple of years instead of Heinz Foods.

Firstly, Kerry does not and never did own Heinz. Secondly, I worked a minimum wage job at McDonald's when I was 16 and they worked me constantly. Wages only make up a fraction of a business's expenses, and an increase of a $1-2 an hour won't make money-wise (or even not-so-money-wise) entrepreneurs go broke.

 

[BobG]

Firstly, Kerry does not and never did own Heinz. Secondly, I worked a minimum wage job at McDonald's when I was 16 and they worked me constantly. Wages only make up a fraction of a business's expenses, and an increase of a $1-2 an hour won't make money-wise (or even not-so-money-wise) entrepreneurs go broke.

It won't make McDonald's broke, but a lot of your small family owned businesses would be lucky not to go broke even with a lower minimum wage.

 

[Dissident Dan]

I'm not trying to be insulting, if paying employees a little more breaks the bank, it sounds like either you picked the wrong business in the wrong place or are not cut out for entrepreneurship.

Also, please note that minimum wage has not kept up with inflation, so current minimum wage levels are easier on business-owners than they were 5-15 years ago.

 

[loseyourname]

It depends on where you live. Here in California, the minimum wage is $6.75/hr. I believe the highest rate is $6.90/hr in the state of Washington.

 

[Andre]

It seems that the Democrats have also prioritized on environmental issues, which is excellent. However, spearhead of environmental issues at present is "Antropogenic Global Warming" (AGW) which is beyond bad. It's disasterous.

http://democrats.com/preview.cfm?term=global%20warming

Perhaps check the Earth files to find lots of arguments against AGW. Save the whales, the tigers, the oceans, the tropical rainforest, but please please please forget about global warming. It's a non issue, a hype. But it's likely to ruin words economy if Kyoto is really implemented. We cannot save whales, tigers, oceans and rain forests from a prospect of sheer poverty.

When will common sense return?

 

[Prometheus]

When will common sense return?

Please look in the mirror and pose that question again. Let us know what response you get.

By the way, what do you mean by "return"?

 

[Andre]

Yes I know I'm just sticking my neck out to be chopped off. It's only a warning. I won't live anyway to see the disastreous results.

 

[Andre]

How about:

Please look in the mirror and pose that question again.

Although very politely hidden, you are using the standard http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html of the global warmers. Anywone who is "against" global warming is a selfish greedy pig who has no concern for others.

 

[BobG]

I'm not trying to be insulting, if paying employees a little more breaks the bank, it sounds like either you picked the wrong business in the wrong place or are not cut out for entrepreneurship.

Also, please note that minimum wage has not kept up with inflation, so current minimum wage levels are easier on business-owners than they were 5-15 years ago.

The problem is that almost none of your small family owned businesses can compete if the larger chains operate smartly.

It's hard to say consumers are disadvantaged by that. If the local outlet of the chain store can offer cheaper prices, reliable service, and hold on to key employees long enough to provide the same atmosphere your family businesses can, then the consumer's gaining quite a bit. (And that means the store has to pay more than minimum wage to at least the core of their service jobs).

The few family businesses that do succeed make it on customer loyalty built a long time ago. When the owners retire, the store closes and there's no new family businesses to replace them. New family businesses just can't hang in there long enough to build up a customer base, anymore.

It just leaves a little twinge of nostalgic sadness to see all of your cities turning into cookie cutter replicas of each other, each having the exact same stores and restaraunts.

 

[BobG]

That's YOUR experience. If someone has to support themselves and they don't have the skills and/or education to find a $12/hr job, where do you suggest they work? That's why businesses have gotten away with paying minimum wage for so long--because some people have no choice but to take those jobs, and sometimes work two or three of them at a time. Maybe there's lots of $12/hr jobs in California, but try finding those in Mississippi, rural Arizona, North Carolina, etc.

I've done that. In a town enduring a slow death as the rubber companies slowly moved out, everyone gets affected. Laid off from my construction job, a friend of mine hooked me up with a minimum wage security guard job. Later, I caught a lucky break when the night attendant at a gas station out on the interstate got shot in the head - I took his job.

While most of those minimum wage jobs are there for new young employees with no job experience in normal times, those guys get bumped out pretty quick when the real jobs disappear. And then having a few more of those minimum wage jobs at least provide some sort of short term safety net.

In my home town, I think those jobs probably wound up being more than just short term safety nets, though. I wouldn't know. Being young with a new family, it just made sense to move on somewhere where the future looked a little brighter.

 

[loseyourname]

That's YOUR experience. If someone has to support themselves and they don't have the skills and/or education to find a $12/hr job, where do you suggest they work?

Since when is a business owner obligated to pay an employee more than he's worth because he has to support himself without skills or education?

That's why businesses have gotten away with paying minimum wage for so long--because some people have no choice but to take those jobs, and sometimes work two or three of them at a time.

Guess what? Some of these people would have no job if it weren't for minimum wage jobs. The reason businesses have gotten away with paying minimum wage is because that is the market value for the work being performed.

Maybe there's lots of $12/hr jobs in California, but try finding those in Mississippi, rural Arizona, North Carolina, etc.

$12 in California is probably about equal to $6 in Mississippi.

 

[Artman]

If this is all these employees did for you, why did you keep them on? Sounds more like an error in judgment on your part rather than an argument against raising minimum wage.

There wasn't much for them to do, they usually did what was asked. the problem isn't the difficulty of the work, but the time. My wife and I could not work all of the hours ourself, so we hired high school kids to make up some of the hours.

The fact of the matter is that this job and thousands like it don't warrant a higher minimum wage. They don't earn enough for the employer to offset a higher wage. These jobs don't don't require many skills (although some are certainly helpful, such as basic math skills.) If you raise the wages for this type job you will knock thousands of high school kids out of work. Thus placing higher burdens on their parents to support them.

Either that or the higher cost will be passed on to the consumer, then the cost of living goes up.

Fact is, those kids made more money from our business than we did. We made sure they were paid, even if we were not. Business owners don't have a minimum wage to protect them. If there is no profit or a loss it is on them to absorb it.

I've read a list of Mr. Kerry's bills that he has brought to the Senate. Many of them deal with small businesses, I didn't see any in the list that would have benefitted mine. While he might want to help small business, he does not seem to understand it.

Firstly, Kerry does not and never did own Heinz. Secondly, I worked a minimum wage job at McDonald's when I was 16 and they worked me constantly. Wages only make up a fraction of a business's expenses, and an increase of a $1-2 an hour won't make money-wise (or even not-so-money-wise) entrepreneurs go broke.

Firstly, Yeah, his wife does, big difference. Secondly, you worked for a national chain with millions of dollars in advertising, bulk buying power, and many other benefits over a small business.

I agree that McDonalds does get every dime's worth of work out of their employees. For one thing, you are under consant supervision. If a mom and pop store provides constant supervision it means mom or pop is there. If mom or pop is there, there is no need for the employee to be there. We eventually had to put in a video survelliance system to watch that the employees weren't driving away customers by having friends hang around.

It won't make McDonald's broke, but a lot of your small family owned businesses would be lucky not to go broke even with a lower minimum wage.

Thanks BobG. I agree completely.

 

[loseyourname]

What if all they can get is a minimum wage job?

Again, that is not a public problem, and it is not the employer's problem. The employer's problem is staying in business and making a profit. If all they can get is a minimum wage job, then maybe they should go back to school.

Again, you're not following the logic in my post. Your original post had the tone that because you made $12 an hour at your first job, that everybody else should be able to, too. You make it sound like these jobs are abundant "as long as you look hard enough." That's not correct.

The jobs are out there. My girlfriend's brother got a job as a busboy at the local rib joint right after graduating from high school and pulls in at least $300 a week working less than 20 hours. All he does is pull dishes off of tables. He doesn't even have to talk to anyone. I said that if you look hard enough, you can find a better paying job. That is true. Jobs in food-service and commission-based sales, in particular, offer great opportunities for people with no education and little to no experience to make good money. I made $12/hr. moving office furniture around in a warehouse. I made $14/hr. as a Census Enumerator. I made $13/hr. as a performer at Disneyland. The one time I took a minimum wage job (as a stock-person at a retail store), I worked my ass off, got promoted, and within 6 months made $12/hr. as the stock manager. My girlfriend pulls in a couple hundred dollars a day as a server at a mexican restaurant - her first job with no experience.

Even if one had to work a minimum wage job, there are studio apartments available around here for about $500 a month. The minimum wage here is $6.75/hr, which after taxes comes to about $5/hr, most of which you get back at the end of the year. This comes to about $800 a month, leaving $300 for food and utilities and bus fare, which is certainly enough. If you live with roommates, it's even more affordable. I know you can find cheaper rents elsewhere, too. I had a friend in WV that had a one-bedroom place at $200 a month.

I agree--I don't think any employer should pay an employee more than they're worth. Since you made $12 an hour at you first job, I take it you've never had to work at McDonald's or some other crappy fast-food or retail job. I have. I earned $4.25 an hour (minimum wage back then). I know I worked harder there than I ever did at any other job, and I deserved more than $4.25 an hour. I saw the receipts at the end of the day--I knew this business was making plenty of money and could afford to pay me more. It's not about paying people more than what their skill or education level is--it's about ripping people off who work hard, all for the sake of your own profit.

Ripping people off? You don't sound very grateful that McDonald's gave you a job. Where does this attitude of entitlement come from? You people act like it's your birthright as an American to live a middle-class lifestyle. God forbid you actually have to work for something. An employee is not paid based on how hard he works. He is paid based on how much he is worth. Presumably had you quit and not been replaced, McDonald's would not have lost much more than $5 or so an hour. Don't forget that they also pay insurance for you guys, not to mention health benefits for full-time employees. There are also overhead costs such as lease and food-service licensing and franchise fees.

I believe that's the rationale of sweatshop owners in the third world, too. Hey, they're lucky to get 12 cents an hour there, right? Make 'em work 80 hours a week too--since they're not educated or skilled, who cares?

And you know what? Many of those people did not even make 12 cents an hour before the sweatshop moved in. Don't forget these are the same people that provide extremely affordable products to poor customers in the US.

 

[Prometheus]

Anywone who is "against" global warming is a selfish greedy pig who has no concern for others.

Sorry, but I do not understand what you mean by "against" global warming.

Although very politely hidden, you are using the standard ad hominem fallacy of the global warmers.

Wow. You were able to discover the ad hominem fallacy that I have so politely hidden in the text? Sorry to disappoint you, but there is no ad hominem, there is no fallacy, and there is nothing hidden, polite or otherwise.

You merely made a meaningless generalization, and I made the same meaningless generalization, changing the subject to make it about you instead of about your topic.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Uneducated adults working unskilled jobs should question why they have no education or skills. Why blame the employer?

 

[loseyourname]

Try telling that to someone who has to work 80 hours a week to survive.

Are they born having to fend for themselves?

Again, I'm assuming these are all CALIFORNIA wages. Like you said in a previous post "$12 in California equals $6 in Mississippi." Those numbers you throw out don't sound so great when you cut them in half, do they?

Are you having trouble understanding cost of living? A person that makes $6/hr in Mississippi (close to minimum wage) has as much spending power as a person that makes $12/hr in California.

Again, you should read posts more carefully before you respond to them. I never said I worked at McDonanld's.

You said you worked a crappy retail/fast food job and mentioned McDonald's. Excuse me. This makes a huge difference, doesn't it?

Are you saying I don't work? How do you know anything about me? Based on my posts, you're jumping to a big conclusion there, no? FYI, I've worked FULL-TIME since I was 16. I paid my own way through college and graduate school. Nobody ever handed me anything, and I never expected anyone to. And who exactly are you referring to when you say "you people"? I'm just curious to know other group you're lumping me in with, just in case you happen to be wrong again.

Calm down, Elizabeth. I didn't mean you personally. When I say "you people," I mean you and Dan, specifically, and more generally, all supporters of living wage laws and social welfare. By the way, I think it's a little ironic that you managed to pay your way through everything working minimum wage jobs and seem to be doing pretty well while at the same time arguing that minimum wage is not enough to get by on.

Since when did minimum wage jobs start paying for health insurance for their employees? Again, I wouldn't know about McDonalds, but I sure as hell never got any health benefits at the pit I worked at.

At pits like that, the only full-time employees are the management staff. They received health benefits.

So you think sweatshops are a GOOD idea? Well then, I have a GREAT idea--lets make 'em work 100 hours a week, and only pay them 6 cents an hour. That'll make stuff even MORE affordable for all the "poor people" in the United States who buy $100 Nike shoes and $50 T-shirts. Better yet, how about we pay them NOTHING? Brilliant!

Thanks for completely hijacking the thread and then even managing to change the subject of the hijack. By the way, what's a good example of a country with sweatshops? Thailand? If you're curious, 12 US cents is worth about 5 Thailand Bahts (their equivalent of the dollar), so if they really are making 12 cents an hour, that's only 15 cents less than our minimum wage.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Maybe rent in Mississippi costs half as much as it does in California, but does food? How about diapers? Clothes? Electricity? The cost of living is not based on rent alone--that is your error in logic.

Electricity:

Mississippi: 6.48 cents per kilowatt-hour.
California: 10.81 cents per kilowatt-hour.

Source: http://www.nol.org/home/NEO/statshtml/115.htm

Gasoline:

Mississippi: $1.80 per gallon.
California: $2.25 per gallon.

http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/gasprices/

Having lived in the Midwest and California, there is no comparison: California has a much higher cost of living. And while rent is not the only consideration, it is a huge one. A family in Mississippi will have roughly $300 more each month simply due to the lower rent.

 

[Kalimaa23]

Whats the name of that country over in Europe where most of everyones income goes to taxs but the Gov't provides universal healthcare, complete unemployeement insurance, free training to the unemployeed (I think), and a host of other services, is it Sweden or Switzerland ?

Most European countries are like that.
Belgian has always been in the UN top 5 on the list of countries with the highest quality of life, and has the best healthcare system in the world.

The tax rate is usually 40%-60%, depending on how much you make. If you make more money, you pay a higher percentage.
In return, we get unemployement fees when you're out of work, the governement pays pack about 95% of all medical expenses, and education is dirt cheap. It is even included in the constitution that lower and secondary education should be free. It's not, but it's so cheap that nobody complains anyway.
Higher education is heavily state-subsidized as well. On average, you pay about 500 euro's (about the 600 dollars these days) a year to go to university, and then there's an extensive grant system, free housing and such for those who need it.

Thank god that I live in a country with a strong Socialist party

 

[JohnDubYa]

Yeah, and it's just as warm in Mississippi (or the Midwest) as it is in California...

Ever lived in Fresno? Bakersfield? Needles?

There is this myth that California is the land of 70-degree summers. Sure, in some parts of the state. From personal experience, Redding is bloody hot in the summer.

So $1.80 is half of $2.25? that is, afterall, the gist of the post you're defending. I guess I missed that day in math class.

Well, in terms of commuter time, 25 counties in California (nearly half of all state counties) ranked in the Top 250 nationwide, and nearly every one of these counties features very high costs of living. Not a single Mississippi county is listed. So maybe it isn't just about gas prices?

http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Products/Ranking/2002/R04T050.htm

 

[JohnDubYa]

Fair enough. But the cost of gasoline and commute time should factor into the cost of living, should it not?

I thought you went to bed?

 

[BobG]

Most European countries are like that.
Belgian has always been in the UN top 5 on the list of countries with the highest quality of life, and has the best healthcare system in the world.

The tax rate is usually 40%-60%, depending on how much you make. If you make more money, you pay a higher percentage.
In return, we get unemployement fees when you're out of work, the governement pays pack about 95% of all medical expenses, and education is dirt cheap. It is even included in the constitution that lower and secondary education should be free. It's not, but it's so cheap that nobody complains anyway.

I don't want to be lumped in with Hillary's push for universal health care, but I do have to admit opponents managed to pick the very worst health care system in Europe as their example of what happens with socialized medicine. Most European countries do have better health care than the US (at least in terms of access - patient to doctor ratios). And, obviously, they do have much higher taxes.

I'm not sure how big of a tax increase I'd accept for universal health care, but the debate ought to at least focus on realistic costs/benefits vs. trotting out England's health care system as the model example of socialized medicine.

 

[Artman]

Since when did minimum wage jobs start paying for health insurance for their employees? Again, I wouldn't know about McDonalds, but I sure as hell never got any health benefits at the pit I worked at.

It's called worker's compensation. It is a form of mandated insurance that is paid for every employee.

Sorry, I don't understand your logic. Are you saying that it's more important for high school kids to have jobs than it is for self-supporting adults to have jobs?

Not at all. We employed adults occassionally. One of the adults was paid about $3.00 over minimum an hour to do the scheduling and manage the employees. This job was worth more to us, so we paid more for her to do it. Sometimes an adult would ask for a job, we would hire them with the understanding that the job did not pay much but was not terribly demanding. All of our employees had the oppurtunity to increase their earnings by collecting late charges, we paid a commission on these.

So you were paying these kids minimum wage and they had a better income than you did? Did you ever consider maybe getting into a different line of work? If what you say is is true, I don't think your business would have been profitable no matter what.

We owned 7000 video tapes. What line of work would you like us to try? Technology changes were our main problem, not our management style. We were well liked in the community; cable TV was just more convenient. Closing a business is a lot more involved than just closing your doors and walking away. We ran the business at a loss for several years. Some people actually think of the customers and the employees (even though it was just minimum wage, at least it was a job.) and not just the bottom line. Our competition was a big corporate chain that didn't care if your child was sick and you couldn't get your movie back on time, or that you were just five minutes late bringing it back, they didn't care what type of movie you personally would enjoy.

 

[russ_watters]

Thanks for completely hijacking the thread and then even managing to change the subject of the hijack. By the way, what's a good example of a country with sweatshops? Thailand? If you're curious, 12 US cents is worth about 5 Thailand Bahts (their equivalent of the dollar), so if they really are making 12 cents an hour, that's only 15 cents less than our minimum wage.

Whoa now - I was with you until there. That's not how exchange rates work. If it were, you could buy a cheeseburger, fries, and a coke in Japan for 5 yen. Have a look at the current exchange rate...

I spent a weekend in Lithuania a couple of years ago. Their currency is arbitrarily tied to the US dollar - 4 of theirs equals one of ours. Doing the math, a pair of Nike's that cost $125 in the US still costs you $125US there.

Money systems have evolved separately and have separate bases. Even when based on gold, you wouldn't ever have people agreeing that $300, 300 British Pounds, 300 yen and 300 French Franks would buy you an ounce of gold.

If the US government suddenly printed 10x as much money as we have today, you'd see almost instantaneous 1000% inflation as the markets adusted to this new, arbitrary baseline.

 

[Artman]

I am aware of what worker's compensation is.

Worker's compensation is not the same thing as "health insurance." Health insurance implies having coverage when you go to the hospital, go to the doctor or need a prescription filled. You know, where you pay a deductible and the office visit is covered. (And I'm not saying that employers should be mandated to pay for this for minimum-wage employees--that's a whole other subject). In a previous post someone had said that all full-time employees making minimum wage at places like McDonald's have health insurance. I was pointing out to her that that is not true.

Her exact quote was:

...Don't forget that they also pay insurance for you guys, not to mention health benefits for full-time employees.

This statement as listed above could include worker's compensation (catestropic coverage), social security (as a form of life insurance) medicare, liability, theft insurance also benefit the employee. Some minimum wage jobs carry additional coverage for certain tasks such as driving or working in hazardous environments. Additional health benefits, as you pointed out, would not be mandetory for part time workers.

 

[russ_watters]

The middle class, and the poor are getting poorer. When the price of oil rises sharply, the price of shipping food causes a rise in the price of food, and oil for heating, price of goods rise, due to shipping cost. When medical costs triple, and all other costs rise, but wages don't rise, and unemployment rises, and jobs go off shore, then the bottom drops out on people. I haven't even mentioned the fixed income people. They are really hurting.

That's inflation. Historical income numbers are adjusted for inflation. http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/h0101.html

 

[russ_watters]

First off Russ, thank you very much for keeping this pretty civil, mad props to you cuz.

Secondly, I believe that the figure of the top 1% paying 90% of the federal taxes is off base, I've heard people like Sean Hannity saying that the top 10% pay 50% of the federal taxes, and I really doubt Hannity was low-balling it. I'd be more inclined to believe Njorl's stat.

Quite frankly, I haven't researched this like I said I would - busy weekend. I'll just plain concede. Njorl's numbers looked credible. That said, 30% for 1% is still quite a lot.

In response to your "who are you to say..." question: I am an American citizen, and I support the idea of taxing the richest 2% of Americans more than they currently are being taxed. Kerry will do this, so I support him, if enough people support Kerry, he will be elected and instate that policy, which is how democratic republics work.

Yes, that's how the democratic process is supposed to work, but is that specific opinion how the United States is supposed to work? The US is the first country founded on individual rights and the idea that the majority shouldn't have the power to take away the rights of a selected minority. The founding fathers called that a "tyranny of the majority."

All Kerry wants is a multi-billion dollar tax cut...

...a tax cut already implimented. I will continue to object to the framing of it that way. Supporting something that has already done is not the same as doing it yourself.

If you look at that chart, the dirt poor pay 10%, the poor pay 15%, and the lower-middle class pay 25%. It may be almost nothing in terms of the amount of money the federal govt. collects, but if you're only earning $30,000 a year, paying 1/4 of that means a lot to how you're able to live.

That's the marginal rate - the rate you pay on your last dollar of taxes, not the rate you pay on every dollar of taxes. And this has nothing to do with deductions (a single person with a $30,000 income is only taxed on at most $25,000) - even after you take out deductions and consider only the adjusted gross income, that's still not the actual average rate (except if you're in the bottom category).

What that table says is your first $7,000 gets taxed at 10%, your next $21,000 at 15%, and your next $40,000 at 25%. For someone on the low end of the 3rd bracked - say with a $35,000 adjusted gross, that's...

10% of $7,000 or $700
15% of $21,000 or $3,150
25% of $7,000 or $1,750

...for a total of $5,600 or 16%.

First off Russ, thank you very much for keeping this pretty civil, mad props to you cuz.

I have no problem with arguing in a civil manner as long as the respect is mutual: mad props to you too.

 

[loseyourname]

No, I think you are. Maybe rent in Mississippi costs half as much as it does in California, but does food? How about diapers? Clothes? Electricity? The cost of living is not based on rent alone--that is your error in logic. You have a whole paragraph about how you and your suburban friends make $13 and hour (or whatever) for bussing tables. Just because it's been easy for you and your friends to find nice jobs at the mall, doesn't mean it's that easy for everyone.

Elizabeth, where the heck do you live? I've lived in both rural North Carolina and just outside of Los Angeles. I can assure you that $6 in NC goes about as far as $12 here. Obviously the exchange isn't exact - I never said it was. The point is that the cost of living is a lot higher here; and even higher in NYC, where I've also lived. You just seem to be ranting with no real intent. What is the point you're even trying to make?

No it doesn't. I implied that McDonald's qualifies as one of those types of jobs. I never said I worked at McDonald's--you just assumed that.

Elizabeth, does this matter? I'm very sorry that I misinterpreted where you worked. How does this change any of our arguments?

Where did I say that I worked my way through college on minimum wage jobs? Again, you have misquoted me. I said I worked at a one minimum wage job--I didn't work there when I was in college. Again, please read posts more carefully before you quote someone in error.

Fair enough, but this still goes toward proving my point. There is no good reason why someone should be working a minimum wage job for that long. The point is that you were able to work your way through despite not yet having an education. You weren't nefariously stopped in your tracks by evil Republicanly low minimum wage laws.

Just to see if we can this on some semblance of a productive track, what exactly do you think we'd accomplish by raising the minimum wage? What would be the advantage to the country?

 

[loseyourname]

By the way, I don't work right now. I get plenty of money from financial aid. I said my girlfriend and her brother make good money in food service jobs. They also make minimum wage - the money they take in is tip money.

 

[russ_watters]

Right now the minimum wage is $5.15. Kerry wants to raise it incrementally to $7.00 by 2007. I would assume most people with entry level jobs make that much now. Do we have any entry level employees out there that can provide us with numbers?

Problem: what is "entry level?" I was an entry level engineer in my current job - I started at $44k...

By the same token, a buddy of mine worked in a marketing company (he has a degree) and entry level there was $19k.

In any case, $7 by 2007 is reasonable.

See, now how exactly is this gap measured? If the average middle class person makes $30K a year, and the average upper class person makes $100K a year, and their respective salaries increase over 20 years to $60K and $160K, the numerical gap has widened, even though the middle class salary went up 100% and the upper class salary only 60%. It would take a little more detail to make the statement "we have one of (if not the) hugest gap between the wealthy and the poor that this country has ever had" meaningful.

Actually, even percentagewise the rich are getting richer faster and the US does have one of the worst ratios of any country. But by the same token, the US also has among the "richest" poor people. The knife cuts both ways.

Although I cannot believe that someone making only $76,000 per year would be considered upper middle class. I think Russ had some more realistic figures.

Income stats are tough (mine were from the census bureau): I'm both an individual and a household. I would certainly say an individual making $76k is upper-middle class. But not a "household" (by my definition, a faimly of 3 or more).

I'm also not sure about gross vs adjusted gross: http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/h0101.html table doesn't say, but the lower limit for the top 5% in 2002 was $150k.

 

[amp]

Russ:

...But by the same token, the US also has among the "richest" poor people. The knife cuts both ways.

Really, compared to who the rest of the world? There is a shred of truth in what you say but in the cut is the siphoning off of these 'riches' to further line the pockets of those who least need it.