[Vision2020] The 1% in Congress
Paul Rumelhart
godshatter at yahoo.com
Sun Nov 13 19:31:30 PST 2011
I haven't seen a lot of well-reasoned commentary by protesters in
general. I've seen a few eloquent individuals on Youtube that had
obviously thought this through, but the majority of what I've seen has
been an unfocused angst from people who are having a bad time
financially and are lashing out at those who aren't.
Everyone seems to take my commentary as unblinking opposition when it
isn't. I could say the sky is blue and people on here would go out of
their way to show me how wrong I am by showing me pictures of the sky on
a cloudy day or at night. There are, however, two main reasons I'm
speaking up here about this:
One: This is a prime opportunity for change to be made. The climate is
right for it. The power of the people could really do some good here.
Instead, we get articles like the one Jay posted about a bunch of
miscreants and their sense of entitlement. Just camping out is not
enough. Organize! I may even join you! (You being the OWS movement, I
don't know if you're a member or not).
Two: This focus on class can have some real downsides. A generic rant
against the wealthy isn't helpful. It's no different on it's face than
a generic rant about a particular religion or culture that has some bad
members. There is a lot of potential here for ugliness on that scale.
How long until someone who looks well off gets their ass handed to them
by a crowd of protesters? There is real danger here. It would go a
long way for the movement to acknowledge that and to focus on rational
arguments and plans to fix them rather than a simple venting of frustration.
All of this is just my opinion, of course. It's based on what I've
happened to come across in the media. I don't get TV, nor do I listen
to much radio (except for NPR when I drive to work). Most of what I've
seen comes from online media, usually referenced by people already
involved in an argument on a forum somewhere. Your mileage may vary.
Paul
On 11/13/2011 06:04 PM, Reggie Holmquist wrote:
> I don't think anyone hates anyone, except maybe for the greedy bankers
> who ruined our economy by spreading around toxic CDOs. But that
> doesn't mean that we shouldn't aim for a higher effective tax rate for
> individuals making millions and millions of dollars. The rich can
> handle it better, it's more fair, and right now America needs the
> public revenues, if for no other reason than to pay down the debt.
> Under FDR the highest tax bracket was 90%. Even under Nixon it was
> 70%, and for much of Reagan's term it was 50%. Right now it is 35%,
> and so many Occupiers think it would be good to push that top marginal
> tax rate back to Reagan levels. There is also a strong argument for
> raising the capital gains tax, which is where most of the 1%'s income
> comes from, anyway. It's more fair, the rich can handle it better,
> and right now America needs the public revenues. There is no reason
> that Warren Buffet should be paying a lower effective tax rate than
> his secretary.
>
> Aside from that, Occupy has been making many of the arguments you seem
> to be asking them to make. They are against corporate tax loopholes,
> they are against corporate personhood, they are against a system which
> allows the financial industry to leverage our own economy against us
> (i.e. reinstate Glass-Steagall). A lot of them also support Campaign
> Finance Reform (because a system that allows the 1% an exponentially
> larger amount of influence in the elections is unjust, un-Democratic,
> and unAmerican), and I have heard quite a few call out for Electoral
> Reform (move from plurality voting to preferential, thereby allowing
> for 3rd parties).
>
> To me, Paul, your amorphous argument against Occupy does not seem
> significant or relevant. Maybe I just don't understand your position?
>
> -Reggie
>
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com
> <mailto:godshatter at yahoo.com>> wrote:
>
>
> It's indiscriminate class warfare. Targeting people based solely
> on how much money they have is not any different than targeting
> someone based on any other random criteria. So, instead of
> targeting randomly wealthy people, target those who worked to pass
> those laws. Target the laws themselves.
>
> It's the difference between saying "I hate you because you are
> rich" and "I hate you specifically because you made a deal with a
> congressman to get a special tax benefit that no others have so
> you could unfairly increase your profits on the backs of all tax
> payers". One requires actually thinking about the problem and
> doing some research in an effort to fix it. The other is just
> lashing out because someone is doing well while they are not.
>
> Target the greedy, not the well-to-do. They overlap a lot, but
> not completely.
>
> I'd love for the Occupy Idaho folks to scour the State tax code
> looking for unfair tax benefits and expose them. Much more
> beneficial than just making a statement.
>
> Paul
>
>
> On 11/13/2011 02:00 PM, Sunil Ramalingam wrote:
>> Paul,
>>
>> You say, 'Condemn the laws that encourage it, such as the ability
>> of shareholders to sue if a company is making a decision that
>> affects short-term profits in favor of long-term growth or the
>> various tax dodges written into the tax code to benefit specific
>> companies over their competition (making for a non-free trade
>> market).'
>>
>> Do you think those laws are somehow disconnected from the
>> institutions that pass and sign them? Did they just spring up,
>> somehow disconnected from their beneficiaries and sponsors?
>>
>> Of course there's a direct connection between a ruling class this
>> wealthy, and legislation that benefits others in their group, and
>> in whose pockets they so comfortably dwell.
>>
>> How come that's not class warfare? How come it's only class
>> warfare when someone says, 'Those guys are screwing us?'
>>
>> Sunil
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 09:09:18 -0800
>> From: godshatter at yahoo.com <mailto:godshatter at yahoo.com>
>> To: rforce2003 at yahoo.com <mailto:rforce2003 at yahoo.com>
>> CC: vision2020 at moscow.com <mailto:vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The 1% in Congress
>>
>>
>> This kind of thing is a good illustration of what concerns me
>> about this whole 1% / 99% metric. Here is a list of people who
>> are in Congress who have a lot of money. So what? There is no
>> indication as to how these people got their money. No
>> condemnation of certain Congressmen because they passed
>> legislation that directly helped their bottom line. No effort to
>> separate the wheat from the chaff. How many of these people came
>> into their wealth and decided they wanted to do something good
>> with it but also understand the idea behind the phrase "free milk
>> and a cow"? The only thing we can say is that they are doing well.
>>
>> it looks vaguely like a target list, frankly. What ever happened
>> to the good old American Dream(tm)?
>>
>> What we should be focused on is unmitigated greed. It exists in
>> all levels of society, not just in the most wealthy. Condemn the
>> laws that encourage it, such as the ability of shareholders to
>> sue if a company is making a decision that affects short-term
>> profits in favor of long-term growth or the various tax dodges
>> written into the tax code to benefit specific companies over
>> their competition (making for a non-free trade market). There
>> are plenty other examples of outright greed that we could be
>> focusing on. Instead, we are focusing on net wealth as some kind
>> of metric of Good vs. Evil. Sure, the wealthy could be doing
>> more to help the poor, but so could each one of us.
>>
>> While we're on the subject of the seven deadly sins, why not take
>> a close look at "envy" while we're at it?
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> On 11/11/2011 04:34 PM, Ron Force wrote:
>>
>> *Table 2: All members of Congress with average net worth
>> above $9 million, from 2009*
>> Name Minimum Wealth Maximum Wealth Average Chamber
>> Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) $156,050,022 $451,100,000
>> $303,575,011 House
>> John Kerry (D-Mass.) $182,755,534 $294,869,059
>> $238,812,296 Senate
>> Mark Warner (D-Va.) $65,692,210 $283,077,995
>> $174,385,102 Senate
>> Jared Polis (D-Colo.) $36,694,140 $285,123,996
>> $160,909,068 House
>> Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) $89,358,027 $231,245,995 $160,302,011
>> Senate
>> Vernon Buchanan (R-Fla.) -$69,434,661 $366,180,982
>> $148,373,160 House
>> Michael McCaul (R-Texas) $73,685,086 $201,537,000
>> $137,611,043 House
>> James E. Risch (R-Idaho) $38,936,114 $179,131,990
>> $109,034,052 Senate
>> Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) $61,446,018 $136,218,002
>> $98,832,010 Senate
>> Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) $64,210,256 $125,529,976
>> $94,870,116 Senate
>> Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) $46,055,250 $108,109,018
>> $77,082,134 Senate
>> Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.) $49,083,204 $104,690,018
>> $76,886,611 Senate
>> Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) -$7,356,915 $124,229,990
>> $58,436,537 House
>> Gary Miller (R-Calif.) $19,365,053 $84,302,000
>> $51,833,526 House
>> Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) $9,778,047 $91,656,998 $50,717,522
>> Senate
>> Diane Lynn Black (R-Tenn.) $14,673,049 $84,145,990
>> $49,409,519 House
>> Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.) $19,898,179 $67,697,000
>> $43,797,589 House
>> Rick Berg (R-N.D.) $19,347,579 $58,981,451 $39,164,515 House
>> Nita M. Lowey (D-N.Y.) $14,900,036 $63,125,000
>> $39,012,518 House
>> Kenny Marchant (R-Texas) $13,303,385 $63,106,351
>> $38,204,868 House
>> Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) $6,598,014 $56,244,997
>> $31,421,505 House
>> Scott Rigell (R-Va.) $11,618,078 $48,200,000 $29,909,039
>> House
>> Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine) $12,556,055 $44,669,000
>> $28,612,527 Senate
>> James B. Renacci (R-Ohio) $17,571,131 $39,297,044
>> $28,434,087 House
>> Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) $11,522,909 $44,209,871
>> $27,866,390 Senate
>> Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) $7,045,017 $41,899,994
>> $24,472,505 House
>> Tom Petri (R-Wis.) $5,111,026 $43,765,999 $24,438,512 House
>> John Campbell (R-Calif.) $9,227,063 $37,282,000
>> $23,254,531 House
>> Steve Pearce (R-N.M.) $8,368,014 $37,945,000 $23,156,507
>> House
>> Richard L Hanna (R-N.Y.) $10,960,117 $33,276,000
>> $22,118,058 House
>> Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) $15,681,206 $27,543,006
>> $21,612,106 Senate
>> Blake Farenthold (R-Texas) $10,359,086 $31,381,997
>> $20,870,541 House
>> John Hoeven (R-N.D.) -$12,829,960 $52,851,999
>> $20,011,019 Senate
>> Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) $7,102,036 $32,756,000
>> $19,929,018 Senate
>> Kay R. Hagan (D-N.C.) $3,549,596 $33,149,981 $18,349,788
>> Senate
>> F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) $14,990,621
>> $20,923,567 $17,957,094 House
>> Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) $1,056,768 $34,566,596 $17,811,682
>> Senate
>> Michael F Bennet (D-Colo.) $6,217,020 $27,780,000
>> $16,998,510 Senate
>> Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) $10,447,125 $23,082,001 $16,764,563
>> Senate
>> Nan Hayworth (R-N.Y.) $9,542,219 $23,259,000 $16,400,609
>> House
>> Fred Upton (R-Mich.) $7,010,173 $25,651,000 $16,330,586
>> House
>> Rosa L. DeLauro (D-Conn.) $5,429,018 $26,697,997
>> $16,063,507 House
>> John McCain (R-Ariz.) $9,769,247 $22,072,994 $15,921,120
>> Senate
>> Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) $7,790,095 $20,949,999
>> $14,370,047 House
>> Cynthia Marie Lummis (R-Wyo.) $4,939,028 $23,591,999
>> $14,265,513 House
>> Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) $6,393,295 $20,874,000
>> $13,633,647 Senate
>> Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.) $6,593,088 $20,654,033
>> $13,623,560 House
>> Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) $4,561,077 $20,503,000
>> $12,532,038 House
>> Tom Price (R-Ga.) $7,653,606 $17,121,588 $12,387,597 House
>> Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) $8,010,107 $16,623,001 $12,316,554
>> Senate
>> Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) $4,100,005 $20,250,000
>> $12,175,002 House
>> Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas) $6,126,070 $18,078,998
>> $12,102,534 House
>> Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) $6,407,085 $17,427,999
>> $11,917,542 Senate
>> Rob Portman (R-Ohio) $5,544,075 $17,468,999 $11,506,537
>> Senate
>> David Dreier (R-Calif.) $5,264,092 $17,715,000
>> $11,489,546 House
>> David B. McKinley (R-W.Va.) $5,216,060 $14,316,000
>> $9,766,030 House
>> John A. Yarmuth (D-Ky.) $2,850,009 $16,349,999
>> $9,600,004 House
>> John Fleming (R-La.) $2,153,834 $16,797,770 $9,475,802 House
>> Jon Runyan (R-N.J.) $5,000,034 $13,674,999 $9,337,516 House
>>
>> Source: Center for Responsive Politics
>> <http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/index.php>
>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> http://www.fsr.net
>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>>
>>
>>
>> ======================================================= List
>> services made available by First Step Internet, serving the
>> communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net
>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> http://www.fsr.net
>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> =======================================================
>
>
>
>
> --
> There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly
> what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly
> disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and
> inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has
> already happened.
>
> Douglas Adams
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20111113/1938dbaa/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list