Why are Dems so mad at rich people?

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-27-2001
Why are Dems so mad at rich people?
19
Mon, 10-25-2004 - 11:47pm
Kerry continues to talk about this evil, tyrannical top 2%. He will bring them down. He will tax the cr@p out of 'em. He will get them for you, the good middle-class people that he relates with so well. Those greedy, Cheshire-cat-grinning, cheats...they are so, very, very bad.

It is my belief that we need social classes; it just doesn't make sense to try and "equalize" society. Some people have more money than others. So what! Most people who make over $200,000 had to sacrifice and work hard to achieve it. It is just plain unfair to tax them at such a high rate. Period. I don't care how they obtained their money. It is not fair and it surprises me that, say, a Democrat who thinks of her(him)self as a fair person...who wants equality for all, would have that kind of mindset against the "wealthiest 2%."

I am middle-class, but why should I think I'll never one day be making over $200,000? I'm sure the vast majority of those "evil" rich people have made sacrifices you could only imagine and that you'd never want to make.



Morrow1.png Sig picture by beansand

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-19-2003
Tue, 10-26-2004 - 7:58am
I am hardly a Kerry fan but I have to say that is not what I got out of what he says.




Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-14-2003
Tue, 10-26-2004 - 8:15am
You have to wonder about this, considering that Kerry and Edwards are far richer than the rest of us. . .monetarily that is. So are most of the Hollywood stars that embrace them. "Limosine Liberals"--they want to "redistribute" wealth---as long as their own is safely obscured. (see lmlmb's post on Kerry and taxes).

That $200K a year? That's peanuts in some parts of the country. I mean--I'd like to make it, and hopefully will some day. But it's not a lot of take home if you live on the eastern seaboard, and have a modest home that costs $400K. Or if you're a small business owner.

Frankly, I think that his plans, using the money that most of the so-called rich are working long hours for, to pay for the poor rest of us are bunk. Taxes are supposed to pay for "necessary" programs. Not to redistribute the wealth. Why should ANYONE pay more than 35% of their income to the government? People can "share" their good fortunes through charitable giving.

It's all part of the liberal plan to have more government control over the population as a whole. . national health care plans, etc. . it's socialism at it's best. And in the end, the middle class that Kerry/Edwards so long to "help" will be a distant memory. We'll have two classes---the very rich and the working poor.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 10-26-2004 - 9:24am

Exactly!

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Tue, 10-26-2004 - 9:26am

He isn't actually for taxing the "crap" out of them.

Avatar for mom2noodles
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Tue, 10-26-2004 - 9:51am
Hmmm, you are the one calling them evil, not him.

Carrie, Mom of Alex & Anna

 <

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 10-26-2004 - 9:52am
Sandy, while we are on opposite sides of this election, and many issues, it is refreshing to see someone approaching the dissension rationally. In all honesty, there are many things I don't post to because they are little more than partisan rants.

Wanted to let you know that I appreciate your maturity.

KJ

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 10-26-2004 - 10:18am

Of course it would be me!
This in another pet peeve of mine because it's so widely misunderstood.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 10-26-2004 - 10:25am

There is such a thing as exempt and non-exempt employees.

Avatar for mom2noodles
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Tue, 10-26-2004 - 10:26am

Carrie, Mom of Alex & Anna

 <

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 10-26-2004 - 10:40am
This is a lot of speculative and misunderstood hype. Here is a more honest view:

Overdue on Overtime

February 16, 2004 | |

Virtually everything about the American workplace has changed since the 1930s. We use computers instead of typewriters, send e-mail rather than use the post office, and rely on just-in-time delivery instead of stacking tons of extra parts in warehouses.

One important thing still dates back to the Depression, though: Our overtime laws. Now, however, the Department of Labor is poised to finally update those laws, so they will reflect the realities of today's workplace and simultaneously return to the intent of the nation's labor laws.

The Fair Labor Standards Act, originally passed in 1938, established 40 hours as the standard workweek and provided employees with "time-and-a-half" pay for hours worked over that. The idea was to encourage employers to hire more workers and improve conditions for those already on the job by limiting work hours.

But a significant problem remains. The law makes executive, administrative and professional employees, along with outside salesmen and saleswomen, exempt from the overtime rules. Needless to say, just who qualifies as a "white-collar" exempt employee is a critical question for both employers and workers. Millions of dollars in overtime pay are at stake. That's why the law desperately needs updating.

For starters, salary levels that employees must receive in order to be considered executives, administrators or professionals haven't been changed since 1975. Depending on his or her job duties, an employee may be considered exempt while earning as little as $250 per week.

At the same time, the regulations are needlessly complicated. Employers use different tests at different income levels, and many of the existing rules prove difficult to apply. The Labor Department's own investigators admit their determination of whether a job is exempt often hinges on the employee's own attitude towards his or her job. These arbitrary decisions are a gold mine for trial lawyers, who have won judgments as high as $90 million against employers who were found to have misinterpreted the incomprehensible rules.

Finally, the rules don't account for the rise of highly skilled production workers. These well-compensated employees receive as much as $70,000 annually and have job duties and training similar to that of engineers. But because they lack formal college degrees, they're not considered "professionals" and frequently must be given overtime pay.

The Labor Department's new rules, however, will go a long way toward fixing these problems. They'll boost – to $425, from $250, a week – the minimum salary an employer would need to pay before a worker could be considered "exempt." At the same time, the rules would be streamlined, making it easier for workers, employers and investigators to determine whether an employee is eligible for overtime.

By raising the minimum salary level needed for "white collar" status, the Labor Department is returning to the original intent of the Fair Labor Standards Act – to protect unskilled manual laborers from the dangers of overwork. By limiting work hours, Congress meant to reduce the dangers of fatigue and workplace accidents and allow workers more time for recreation, family and education.

Executives, administrators and professionals were excluded because they were seen as having both higher compensation and greater job security, giving them better control over their own work hours.

The drafters of the original Fair Labor Standards Act probably would be shocked to learn that, under today's rules, a cook earning $13,000 a year can be considered an executive because he supervises two kitchen workers, while a technician with a $70,000 salary can receive mandatory overtime pay.

More straightforward regulations will make enforcement of the wage-and-hour laws easier. Thus unskilled workers, the employees who have the least control over their working hours and conditions, will receive the maximum level of protection. Under the new rule, any worker receiving a salary of less than $20,000 will be eligible for overtime, regardless of his or her job duties.

Employers will also benefit, because it will be easier to determine who is eligible for overtime. And the Labor Department also will remove well intentioned but unworkable provisions that have complicated the lives of both employers and DOL investigators.

American workers are the most efficient and valuable in the world, and deserve fair compensation for their extraordinary efforts. With new overtime rules in place, our labor laws can finally join our labor force in the 21st century.

Pages