Advertisement

LJWorld.com weblogs Loyal Opposition

What is the Matter with Kansas – no Liberal Kansans?

Advertisement

In what seems like eons ago I posted what I thought was an innocuous blog copied from the NYT defining the 1%. In a response to a post in that thread I observed that Mr. Obama was favoring the “poor” at the expense of the middle class. I was challenged and deferred a response to a future blog because the topic is not answered by a thirty second sound bite. . This is the start of that blog. More will follow;

First of all when I suggest that Mr. Obama is doing this I mean he is doing it in his role as the head of the Democratic Party implementing party policy planks from their convention. He represents a philosophy, acting not as an individual but in support of a group. Secondly I am not referring exclusively to federal income tax. I am addressing all taxes, policies, regulations and the like. Third I am addressing wealth in the traditional sense where a lifetime of experience and education yields a growth in income and savings to be supplemented by social security. This is not about the "haves" and the "have-nots". It is about you today and you thirty years from now.

As a first example and as a matter of public policy we have been trying to hold down all interest rates. The stated purpose is to try to encourage job growth through cheap financing of business expansion (and the cost of government borrowing). An intended side consequence of this policy is to reduce the wealth of those in the $50K to $250K income group – the group that over a lifetime makes small investments to provide for a meaningful retirement.

How so you ask? Simple. People nearing and in retirement tend to make low risk investments as they are most reluctant to risk their hard earned nest egg so late in life. The government policy has resulted in those investments experiencing a zero to 1% return. How does that mater you ask, as inflation has been low. Nor really. Health care, fuel and taxes to mention a few cost components have increased significantly but those increase are little reflected in inflation calculations The results is that appropriate investment opportunities for those in the $50 to $250K income group are losing value compared to the cost of living.

Bottom line is that to help people in the $0 to $50K income group find jobs today we are reducing the future retirement standard of living of many more Americans in the $50K to $250K income group (might even be the same people). The 1% of course can invest in opportunities not as secure and essentially not available to the smaller investor. Some are seeing 20% returns.

It has been suggested we go further and start to means test social security as a way to reduce the costs of contributions by the lower income participants in the near term (or providing for a payroll tax reduction). Doing so will of course even further erode the standard of living of the $50K to $250K group essentially transferring wealth from them to the $0 to $50 crowd.

Now by no stretch of the imagination or ideological motivation can we argue that this is not a policy that favors the “poor” at the expense of the “middle” while holding the “rich” contributors harmless. It is not isolated and more examples will follow.

Comments

tange 2 years, 10 months ago

"How so you ask?"

How so?

"How does that mater you ask...?"

How does that mater?

/ it's uncanny

George Lippencott 2 years, 10 months ago

Anything useful to say or do you support the action? If so, why?

Mike Ford 2 years, 10 months ago

why do so many of you speak nonsense to provoke reactions? when I name people I get removed so you know who you are.....you are not worth having conversations with because you come publically with this nonsense. I know plenty of liberals in Kansas. I'm one of them. My dad's one of them. His neighbors are liberals. His former preaching colleagues are liberals. His former college professors at Baker are liberals. You speak such nonsense. I know liberals who work in county jails in Douglas County. You speak such nonsense.....

George Lippencott 2 years, 10 months ago

Excuse me! Is the word liberal tied to a person or to a group with a common political philosophy

storm 2 years, 10 months ago

The talk pundits incorrectly use terms interchangably...To clarify, If one believes the law should be applied liberally, then one is probably Democrat. A Democrat can be anti-choice, anti-same gender marriage, pro- environment as long as the law is applied across the Nation. If one believes laws should be applied to small units of governance, then one is Republican. A Republican can have liberal ways of thinking but believes the law should be applied conservatively. This explains why many Republicans are pro-choice and why some communities allow legalized prostitution.

George Lippencott 2 years, 10 months ago

I am writing exactly that and providing an example. Sorry I left you in the dust. Perhaps the future blogs on this topic will help.

jhawkinsf 2 years, 10 months ago

On some issues, my views would be seen as liberal. On other issues, my views would be considered conservative. There are some issues I guess would be considered middle of the road and there are still other issues that I don't seem to be able to make up my mind about. But if forced to label myself, I would just say I'm, me.

George Lippencott 2 years, 10 months ago

smile

I see that my title has eclipsed my content again!

jhawkinsf 2 years, 10 months ago

Well, after so many other comments along those lines, I couldn't resist.

Boston_Corbett 2 years, 10 months ago

I know lots of Liberals. They are rightly proud of their Dorothy's House, and they love to run down the road flipping their flapjacks.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.