How Do You STart a Movement?

[tarcone]

The events of the last 120 years have brought me to a conclusion. The middle class suffers for everything. The poor get federal help, the rich get federal help. The rich get freedom even if they are gulty, the poor get judged guilty even if they are innocent. Yet, the middle class pays fro it all.

Hey a federal bailout? guess who pays. Hey, we need more mpony for this. Guess who pays.

How do I start a movement rto protest the abuse of the middle class. Im talking 40k to 120k. We are the forgotten and the abused. White, black, borwn, yellow, whatever. We pay for EVERYTHONG.

I want to start a protest. Maybe a sick out.

What do I want? Recognition freedom. Equality. Thise things that the rich get. And the poor need.

If the middle class is successful, everyone prospers.


How do I tart a movement?

[ISiddiqui]

Literally every campaign for President caters to the Middle Class. It's all about the Middle Class. It seems like the issue is that the Middle Class, who make up the most of the voters, tend to vote for people who cater to the rich (and the poor get screwed - just enough federal aid that they don't die on the streets but that's it - no real spending for advancement). Middle class just get bamboozled and vote to end protections for themselves. For example, how many middle class folk are against unions, even though unions built the middle class?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Literally every campaign for President caters to the Middle Class. It's all about the Middle Class. It seems like the issue is that the Middle Class, who make up the most of the voters, tend to vote for people who cater to the rich (and the poor get screwed - just enough federal aid that they don't die on the streets but that's it - no real spending for advancement)

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

I see where you are going. But really does the party that caters to the rich care about the middle class (MC) and does the party that cater s to the MC but tries to prop up the poor, who support the poor, reall y care about the MC?

When does the middle class step up and understand they are the backbone of this country.

We pay the majority of the taxes, but get little in return. Why are we not recognized and catered to? When do the rich realize they cannot do anything without the shlubs that do the dirty work? When do the poor realize they get no welfare if the middleclass goes away?

This should not be a political divid. This should be a movement. Take care fo the middle class and the country runs pretty smoothly.

I feel like it is stupid to forget the most important class.

[jbergey22]

A middle class movement would be more of a rebellion I think.

*Get some supporters and get your idea's to change things out there would be a start*

Start your own party?

People have tried this without much success.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by tarcone

This should not be a political divid. This should be a movement. Take care fo the middle class and the country runs pretty smoothly.

One of the issues is that even among people who would agree with you in general, there's a great deal of division on what that would actually mean. The devil's in the details, always. What does 'recognition freedom equality' look like in this context, specifically? A big part of the reason for the divide is that people disagree on what policies are best for the middle class, even when they agree this is a problem.

I don't think it's at all true that the middle class suffers for everything. I think there's a lack of perspective here, but leaving that to the side reality unfortunately just isn't that simple.

[GrantDawg]

Eat a lot of bran.

[Qwikshot]

You don't.

[CrimsonFox]

First you eat lots of chili...

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Eat a lot of bran.

damnit grant you stole my joke! I'll KILL YOU!!!!

[Kodos]

The sad truth is, most movements end up in the toilet.

[sterlingice]

So, there was this time I was with my coworkers driving back from lunch through one of the less than nice parts of Houston and they were complaining about how rough their lives were and how great the poor have it. I mean, they get their food stamps and their Obamaphones and their medicaid and need-based college scholarships for their kids. Keep in mind that my coworkers have all been in their current IT job at least 5 years and make upper 5 figures or low 6 figures and have employer provided health care - so we're talking upper middle class, by most definitions. Me, being the smartass I am, asked if they would trade spots and reminded them they could get Section 8 housing, as well. The conversation went in a different direction after that.

Something something about the history of the US being one where the rich turn everyone else against each other to keep their power.

SI

[ISiddiqui]

As I alluded to, one way the Middle Class can gain some power is by backing greater Union rights. They can also demand universal health care (the rich don't need it and the poor don't have money to pay insurance or bills and hospitals end up writing it off). But too many of said middle class believe those to be socialism so they don't get anything.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[spleen1015]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

As I alluded to, one way the Middle Class can gain some power is by backing greater Union rights. They can also demand universal health care (the rich don't need it and the poor don't have money to pay insurance or bills and hospitals end up writing it off). But too many of said middle class believe those to be socialism so they don't get anything.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

What happens to the insurance of the middle class when there is universal health care? I assume employers would no longer provide good insurance and they would be thrown in the pool with everyone else.

If that is the case, why would they want to do that?

[tarcone]

I think there would be a big raise in taxes. Which brings up the IRS tax code.
Why is that so large? Oh yeah to protect the rich.

We need to go to a straight tax rate for all. Not on income but earnings.

20% across the board? 15%? nothing less than that.

Then you help everyone. And the rich dont get away with the shenanigans.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

What happens to the insurance of the middle class when there is universal health care? I assume employers would no longer provide good insurance and they would be thrown in the pool with everyone else.



If that is the case, why would they want to do that?

Because for the vast majority of middle class people it'd be better. Look at British NHS or German healthcare. And middle class people wouldn't be so tied to their employer.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Because for the vast majority of middle class people it'd be better. Look at British NHS or German healthcare. And middle class people wouldn't be so tied to their employer.

I'm not a fan of the country's healthcare system being handed over to Trump to run.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I'm not a fan of the country's healthcare system being handed over to Trump to run.

I do not disagree. But there are ways to ,make this happen without politics. But tht is pie in the sky thinking.

Think abouta flat tax rate that pays for everything

[JPhillips]

A flat income tax will mean the middle class pays a lot more.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

A flat income tax will mean the middle class pays a lot more.

True, but they get a lot more, right? Fre health care for example.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I think there would be a big raise in taxes. Which brings up the IRS tax code.
Why is that so large? Oh yeah to protect the rich.

We need to go to a straight tax rate for all. Not on income but earnings.

20% across the board? 15%? nothing less than that.

Then you help everyone. And the rich dont get away with the shenanigans.

This is a good, specific proposal, but also a good example of how things really aren't that simple in reality. The tax code is large for a lot of reasons, and protecting the rich is only part of why.

It's also there to protect the poor. People who have very little and can't afford it would get squeezed by this. That means you either need a lot more from others to help them or you are ok with taking away some of what little they have. Taxing all earnings would depress investment. That makes the economy less agile when dealing with shifting market realities, that everybody with a retirement account, college fund for their children, etc. is now going to see those grow a lot slower. Jobs for everyone, including the middle class get created slower along with a myriad of other such ripple effects. This is all without getting into the part where a lot of people think part of fairness is having the poor pay less and the rich pay more. These kinds of considerations are all a significant part of why the tax code is complex.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by tarcone

True, but they get a lot more, right? Fre health care for example.

I'm talking about keeping income tax revenue equal to what it is currently. The income tax is the one tax that is progressive, that's why the rich want a flat tax. That will shift a lot of tax burden away from the wealthy and onto the middle class.

[ISiddiqui]

People do realize that governmental agencies typically run government entitlements with not that much hand to hand interference by the current administration? Like Trump is running Social Security and Medicare. Should we scrap those too since we don't want him running those programs? I don't like Trump 'running' Social Security, but I still want to keep the program and think it still works well.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[tarcone]

As I sit her and thinh about this topic and see medicare brought up (I dont pay into SS, so Im not counting that), I understand that I need other insurance programs when I retire because this program I have paid into fro my entire life doesnt cover me completely. I will have to pay a lot of money to continue my health care.

I get the government isnt the way to go for things. But, damn, what is the answer? Who can we count on to take care of US? The back bone, the drivers of the economy, the blue collar guys and the cops and the teachers and the fire fighters and the nurses and and and?

Capitalism is what it is, but the is a government for the people, by the people .

[RendeR]

I don't know about you guys but the first thing I do to start a movement is pull my pants down and sit on the john......

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I get the government isnt the way to go for things. But, damn, what is the answer? Who can we count on to take care of US? The back bone, the drivers of the economy, the blue collar guys and the cops and the teachers and the fire fighters and the nurses and and and?

Capitalism is what it is, but the is a government for the people, by the people .

Government can be the way to go, I just think it's important to understand what that means. It means higher taxes on everybody including the middle class, and more loss of freedom. A steadily increasing number of people are in favor of that. The key point though is that it's not going to happen for a 15-20% flat tax. It would have to be a lot higher than that.

The other option is that people and communities can take responsibility for themselves. That means living on less than their means and investing for the future. That's well within the range of anyone in middle class or above; a lot of the poor can't do it because there's only so much you can cut costs, but there's no good reason why most Americans can't be millionaries or better by the time they retire with the investment options available with a modest amount of regular, consistent saving throughout their working lives.

The final piece I would refer back to is perspective. It is a happy anomaly in the human experience to even have such a thing as retirement and be considering how best to handle it, having high-quality health care available at any price, etc. This is still something only available as a consideration in the richest countries in very recent modern history.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

People do realize that governmental agencies typically run government entitlements with not that much hand to hand interference by the current administration? Like Trump is running Social Security and Medicare. Should we scrap those too since we don't want him running those programs? I don't like Trump 'running' Social Security, but I still want to keep the program and think it still works well.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Social Security runs well? It's projected to be broke by 2034. It's a Ponzi scheme I wish I could opt out of and collect what I've paid in (with interest)

[JPhillips]

No. The absolute worst case scenario for SS has it able to pay 79% of benefits through 2090. If the trust fund runs out of money, there's still a big pool of tax revenue from FICA.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

No. The absolute worst case scenario for SS has it able to pay 79% of benefits through 2090. If the trust fund runs out of money, there's still a big pool of tax revenue from FICA.

Did that "absolute worst case" model of yours include pandemics?

[ISiddiqui]

Social Security is projected to "go broke" only because Congress kept raiding it for budgetary reasons. Remember when Al Gore tab on a "lockbox" to prevent that from happening? Besides, what's probably going to happen is they'll just take from budget and put it back into SS - because old people vote in high numbers.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JPhillips]

It won't go broke unless they repeal FICA taxes. If there's no trust fund and taxes aren't raised, benefits will still be paid at 79%. The pandemic won't change the amount of FICA tax revenue in a decade. The SS folks have been historically pessimistic about those numbers, too. I remember when the trust fund was going to run out by now and the % of benefits was @70%.

What Imran says about old people is important, too. That's why "reform" bills for SS always kick in for people in their fifties and younger. Nobody has the courage to cut benefits to current retirees.