MyDD :: More proof that they're out of touch

More proof that they're out of touch

by thezzyzx, Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 11:29:25 AM EST

Check out this quote from the New York Post that's supposed to scare people from voting for Obama due to tax issues, "Right now [it] is 35 percent, Obama wants to take that to 39 percent . . . We're talking about people who make over $200,000. That's not rich. So it's actually going to impact more people than you may think."

$200k a year isn't rich? Even in New York City itself, that's a pretty impressive salary. Moreover, the bump itself isn't exactly huge. If it were going to 50 or 60 percent, that would be one thing, but going from 35 to 39? Even people who believe in the Laffer Curve [1] would have a hard time arguing that someone would be willing to work for 65% of their gross income but couldn't possibly be motivated for 61%.

Keep it up conservatives. At the beginning of a recession, start arguing that a person making $200,000 a year isn't rich. I'm sure that'll play really well among those working class voters that are supposed to be having such a problem with Obama. Between this argument and McCain's attempt to push the Carter meme - a perfect appeal to those who became Republicans in the late 70s, but worrisome if he's having to work that hard for conservatives in their 50s and 60s - it looks like McCain and his supporters might be falling into the trap of assuming everyone is like them.

"If we appeal to late middle aged people who make $200k a year, there's no way we can lose! That's the vast majority of the US population, right?"

[1] By the way supply siders, note the word "curve." That means that at some point the stimulus effect of tax cuts would stop working. It's not enough to say that tax cuts can actually increase government income in some cases; you have to prove that we're still on that side of the curve. Either remember that or start arguing that setting a tax rate of 0% will bring infinite revenue.

Tags: McCain, conservatives (all tags)

Permalink :: 6 Comments :: Post a Comment

I would not be frightened (none / 0)

Obama is in the tank for the rich:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/06/the-insider.html

What's the big deal about Obama campaign fundraiser/Vice President selection committee member Jim Johnson getting $7 million in loans from Countrywide Financial Corp.? (As the Wall Street Journal reported Saturday and the New York Sun's Josh Gerstein followed up on.).

Mortgages with rates below market averages, including "a $5 million home equity line of credit against a house in Ketchum, Idaho, a 5.25% loan of $1.3 million for a home in Palm Desert, Calif., and a 3.875% loan of $971,650 for a home in Washington, D.C." Mortgages set up through an informal program for friends of the company's CEO, Angelo Mozilo.

The problem is, Obama critics say, perception and hypocrisy. Obama had railed against Countrywide and Mozilo, and his campaign had impugned Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, for taking money from Countrywide lobbyists and for allowing a senior campaign adviser to simultaneously do work for Countrywide.

**

Campaigning in Pennsylvania in March, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, assailed mortgage giant Countrywide Financial Corp., for embodying the economic and political culture dominated by corporate lobbyists and insiders.

"Countrywide Financial," Obama said. "This is a company that is as responsible as any firm in the country for the housing crisis we're facing today. When Countrywide Financial was sold a few months ago, its top two executives got a combined $19 million. These are the folks who are responsible for infecting the economy and helping to create a home foreclosure crisis....They get a $19 million bonus while people are at risk of losing their home. What's wrong with this picture?"

("They" are Mozilo and the president of Countrywide, David Sambol.)

Around that time the Obama campaign also criticized Clinton for affiliations with Countrywide.

Here's what Ben Smith says at Politico:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0 608/Obama_No_vetting_the_vetters.html

At a press conference in St. Louis, Obama defends his choice of Jim Johnson to lead his vetting team, calling reports into Johnson's ties to the mortgage company Countrywide "a game."

"Johnson has a very discrete task," he said, dismissing the notion that he'd "hire vetters to vet the vetters."

The fact that his staff made similar tactical attacks on Clinton, on very similar issues (actually, nobody on in Clinton's orbit was ever accused of getting a special deal from Countrywide) makes it harder for Obama to take cover on the high road here.

Lisa Lerer at Politico drives home the point:

In a presidential campaign where the subprime mortgage crisis and high corporate salaries figure to be staples of debate, Johnson is now at risk of becoming a political liability for Obama, who's trying to sell anxious voters on an economic message that calls for stricter financial industry regulation and ridding Washington of special favors and tax breaks for wealthy CEOs.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/060 8/10971.html

He's a politician from Chicago -- remember that.

by katmandu1 on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 11:38:08 AM EST

Re: I would not be frightened (none / 0)

I see. Now I understand why conservatives are arguing that $200k a year is not rich. Your non sequitur makes it all comprehensible!

If Obama nominates Johnson to be his VP, I'll worry about his positions.

But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.

by thezzyzx on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 11:48:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

$200,000 a year in NYC for a *couple* (none / 0)

is NOT rich.

Its middle class and not even well to do. Many would say its middle class and struggling (I don't agree..)

But nobody would argue that living in NYC can be VERY expensive. Skilled people in NYC in almost any professional field - at least those who don't work in nonprofit sector or for government, almost routinely make six figure salaries.

Thats what it costs to hire good people there.

A basic, even spartan one bedroom apartment in Manhattan can rent for $3000 a month or EASILY cost $600,000 or more to buy as a co-op. That is not a classy pad, its a basic apartment. The boroughs are substantially cheaper, but still can be quite expensive. The whole NYC metro area is increasingly expensive. Over the last three or four years, even as rents elsewhere have fallen, rents have still been going up in NY and some other cities.

Health Care: WHY do we pay MORE and GET LESS?
http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/con tent/full/hlthaff.28.1.w1/DC1

by architek on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 10:24:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

More proof that your out of touch (2.00 / 1)

What a pathetic stretch. This guys sole job is to find skeletons in the closet of potential VP candidates. That's it. He has zero role in running the campaign and has zero impact on policy.

Johnson vetted potential nominees for Sen. John Kerry in 2004. I'm sure Obama never considered hiring a team to vet the vetters. It gets to the point of the absurd.

The only candidate who does not accept lobbyist or PAC money and now has had the DNC adopt the same policy is in the tank for the rich? Maybe in the parallel universe your living in. In the real world fat cats control politicians through K street making sure they are dependent on them for adequate financing so they can keep their jobs. Obama tossed them out on their ear.

by hankg on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 11:53:38 AM EST

Re: More proof that they're out of touch (none / 0)

This guys sole job is to find skeletons in the closet of potential VP candidates. That's it. He has zero role in running the campaign and has zero impact on policy.

Exactly.

What is The October Protocol?

by Koan on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 12:09:53 PM EST

Re: More proof that they're out of touch (none / 0)

Actually in the context of NYC 200k is not very rich. Fortunately, most of the country don't understand that so don't expect the 200k plus crowd to get huge sympathy although their tax adjustment is going to fairly modest. It's the 400k plus crowd who are going to feel it although in reality they won't feel it. If you earn a million it means you're probably paying about 200-250k in taxes which is going to go to 250-300k. So a Jag xke rather than an Aston Martin. Tough duty.

by ottovbvs on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 12:18:41 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.