Poor Whites Vote Republican? » Forum Post by Island Dog

Last year, Warren Buffett said (you know him, the world’s second richest), he was taxed at 17.7 percent on his taxable income of more than $46 million. His receptionist was taxed at about 30 percent.

Congratulations to Warren Buffett! You still did not answer the question. Do you have an opinion? CAN YOU answer the question? it is a simple question. If you like, I can make the words single syllable for you.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yes

OK! Thank you!

So now, I get a BIG raise. I paid $800k in taxes and you paid $8k in taxes (on incomes of $4m and $80k respectively). After the tax cut, I paid $40k less, and you paid $800 less. I still paid a lot more in taxes on a much higher income, I just paid less than before, as did you. But because the taxes I pay is higher, the amount I get to keep after the tax cut is now more than you.

Is that fair?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Thank you!So now, I get a BIG raise. I paid $800k in taxes and you paid $8k in taxes (on incomes of $4m and $80k respectively). After the tax cut, I paid $40k less, and you paid $800 less. I still paid a lot more in taxes on a much higher income, I just paid less than before, as did you. But because the taxes I pay is higher, the amount I get to keep after the tax cut is now more than you.Is that fair?

No

Successfully updated karma reason!

Oh wait, no need. You've already proven yourself a moron.

I apologize if I offended you. Believe me, it wasn’t my intention.

Proverbs 12:1
Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but he who hates correction is stupid.

Successfully updated karma reason!

That's nice, but as I am not a Christian, quoting scripture to me is like quoting fairy tales to an adult.Don't venture into the forest alone or the big bad wolf might gobble you up!

Now that you have got this off your chest, can we please get back to the subject of concern--why poor whites vote republican.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Just my two cents, as a conservative-leaning person who happens to fall very close to the governmental poverty line. Poor white people tend to vote republican because of a very strong self-reliant ethic that dates back to the original "poor" people, the Scotts-Irish of Appalachia, now known as hillbillies.

The reason why poor white people haven't died out in the harsh US is because of their independent work ethic, and a strong belief that the world owes them nothing. Republicans, at least recently, have cultivated that belief. Democrats are busy bending over backwards to give us "lower-income" people everyone else's money.

Frankly, I don't trust the government to give a shit about me, as long as I keep paying taxes, and the Republicans are honest about that. So for now, McCain gets my vote. Keep your hands off our guns, our religion, our smokes, our food, and, most importantly, our money!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Draginol

Join Date 03/2001

+137

Last year, Warren Buffett said (you know him, the world’s second richest), he was taxed at 17.7 percent on his taxable income of more than $46 million. His receptionist was taxed at about 30 percent.

That's becuase Warren Buffet mostly makes income through capital gains (15%). If his receptionist is taxed at 30% she must be very well paid given that the typical salary of a receptionist would put her at maybe 25%.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Thank you!So now, I get a BIG raise. I paid $800k in taxes and you paid $8k in taxes (on incomes of $4m and $80k respectively). After the tax cut, I paid $40k less, and you paid $800 less. I still paid a lot more in taxes on a much higher income, I just paid less than before, as did you. But because the taxes I pay is higher, the amount I get to keep after the tax cut is now more than you.Is that fair?No

WHy?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Thank you!So now, I get a BIG raise. I paid $800k in taxes and you paid $8k in taxes (on incomes of $4m and $80k respectively). After the tax cut, I paid $40k less, and you paid $800 less. I still paid a lot more in taxes on a much higher income, I just paid less than before, as did you. But because the taxes I pay is higher, the amount I get to keep after the tax cut is now more than you.Is that fair? NO WHy?

Although both of us would receive a 1 percent tax cut, you would still be taxed at 19 percent and I would be taxed at 9 percent.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Oh, and it was the Southern Democrats that opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and opposed it vehemently, often encouraging violent protest and rioting.

You think that fact has any influence whatsoever on his opinion?

Who cares that Republicans are the party of civil rights while Democrats were the party of opposition to civil rights. (Today Democrats only oppose civil rights for Iraqis.)

I'll explain it to you:

Republicans (Lincoln, Nixon, Rice): Racists, warmongers, misogynists

Democrats (Davis, Johnson, Obama): Abolitionists, peace activists, colour-blind

It's easy!

Successfully updated karma reason!

you are satisfied with an unequal tax cut and I am in favor of an equal tax cut for the rich and the middle class.

I guess it all depends on your definition of "equal".

For me "equal" would be if everybody paid the same. But that is not practical.

So "unequal" it is. Now the question is who should pay more.

Think of two people sharing a flat.

One works 40 hours (or more) a week in a difficult job and has hardly any time left for anything.

The other worse 20 hours a week in an easy job.

The first makes, let's say 100,000 nuggets per year. The second makes, since his job pays only half as much per hour, 25,000 nuggets per year.

Accepting an "unequal" tax system, how many hours should each work for society rather than himself? Or should the richer guy have to work fewer hours for society since his hours are worth more (to whomever he works for)?

I covered such a scenario in a blog post:

http://citizenleauki.joeuser.com/article/301955/The_right_the_left_and_the_middle_on_taxation

Successfully updated karma reason!

Although both of us would receive a 1 percent tax cut, you would still be taxed at 19 percent and I would be taxed at 9 percent.

So You are saying I should only be taxed at 9% as well?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Democrats (Davis, Johnson, Obama): Abolitionists, peace activists, colour-blind

Jefferson Davis?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Jefferson Davis?

Jefferson Davis.

Successfully updated karma reason!

.So You are saying I should only be taxed at 9% as well?

Yes!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Thank you for posting a political article that makes Americans THINK !

Successfully updated karma reason!

.So You are saying I should only be taxed at 9% as well?Yes!

What about Deductions? can I deduct for my 4 children? My mortgage? State taxes?

Successfully updated karma reason!

What about Deductions? can I deduct for my 4 children? My mortgage? State taxes?

If these deductions are available for you, certainly you have a right to take advantage of them.

Successfully updated karma reason!

What about Deductions? can I deduct for my 4 children? My mortgage? State taxes?If these deductions are available for you, certainly you have a right to take advantage of them.

But is it fair? I get to deduct my 4 children, you dont as you only have one child.

Successfully updated karma reason!

But is it fair? I get to deduct my 4 children, you dont as you only have one child.

yes

Successfully updated karma reason!

But is it fair? I get to deduct my 4 children, you dont as you only have one child.yes

So how is the tax cut unfair? How is it "favoring" anyone? It merely takes less than was taken before. It "gave" nothing to anyone. YOu have admitted that since I pay more in taxes, then if I still pay more, the unfairness is that I pay so much more. It seems taht the tax cut did not favor the rich, only favored those who paid taxes. And by definition, a tax cut is only going to favor those who pay taxes. Not all people (those who do not pay taxes cannot get a tax cut).

Successfully updated karma reason!

Also, I was just re-reading this original post, and have a simple response to point #1, what have the Democrats done for poor people? Historically, quite a bit.

First and foremost, until recently Democrats have been very pro-Union. While in my humble opinion they are now bloated with too much power, Unions historically have been the front-line activists making sure their blue-collar workers don't starve.

Second, for many senior-citizen voters, the Democrats are the ones who "solved" the Depression with the New Deal. While anyone with an economics background can tell you the New Deal didn't actually stop the great Depression, but rather WWII did, such poorer people didn't have the background to grasp the complex national economy, and so they associated the end of the depression with the Democrats. Many of those poorer Democratic senior citizens to this day vote Democrat, and have no real perception of the current Democratic Party.

So yes, the Democrats have historically championed the "little guy," if not for charity then definately for political power, though class warefare. With their selection of Obama as a candidate, however, it seems the Dems have closed the door on their union roots.

Successfully updated karma reason!

First and foremost

Second,

Excellent points. I really appreciate how you stated the perceptiona and reality in both. And I agree with you on both the perception and reality. But as is all too often the case, perception to many is reality.

So yes, the Democrats have historically championed the "little guy," if

But I disagree here. Unless history is only 70 years old. As a result of the new deal (which when boiled down was just a bribe), that became the perception, the reality is that prior to the new deal, the democrats were no more "Mr. Poor" than the republicans. There were niches of support in both parties. FDR created the coalition that became the "champion" of the poor. His legacy is not only the new deal, but the dupes that followed him and think they are carrying on his legacy.

Successfully updated karma reason!

But I disagree here. Unless history is only 70 years old. As a result of the new deal (which when boiled down was just a bribe), that became the perception, the reality is that prior to the new deal, the democrats were no more "Mr. Poor" than the republicans. There were niches of support in both parties. FDR created the coalition that became the "champion" of the poor. His legacy is not only the new deal, but the dupes that followed him and think they are carrying on his legacy.

For all of our intents and purposes, history IS only 70 years old, because the majority of the electorate are less than 80 years old. I believe you would be hard pressed to find anyone who votes based upon pre-WWI history:)

Successfully updated karma reason!

Life aint fair, all men are NOT created equal (although they can and should be treated equally in the eyes of the law) and no federal judge can make it so.

I don’t think you understood the question. Please, look at it again and give me a better answer.

Successfully updated karma reason!