Pages

Saturday, September 24, 2011

Michael Keegan: The Imaginary Class War

A huge share of the nation's economic growth over the past 30 years has gone to the top one-hundredth of one percent, who now make an average of $27 million per household. The average income for the bottom 90 percent of us? $31,244



Michael Keegan sums up perfectly what the vast majority of Americans know when the words "Class Warfare" are invoked. They know that the upper class is waging this war on the middle class - and the have been for decades. Worse, clearly the rich are winning and the GOP is continuing to ensure they keep winning. When do we stand up to this outrage?

From Keegan's article:


The Republicans' "class warfare" accusation is both ironic and cynical.
It's ironic because, in the midst of the current economic and jobs crisis, where a huge number of Americans are desperately hurting -- with homes underwater, with unemployment insurance running out and health insurance gone, with kids in over-crowded classrooms in buildings that are decaying -- the rich are getting richer and large corporations are sitting on record profitsIncome inequality in the U.S. is at its highest since the precarious days of the late 1920s. One third of Americans who were raised in middle class households can fall out of the middle class as adults. A political elite beholden to the wealthiest CEOs has pursued policies that take money out of the pockets of the neediest to create ever-larger tax breaks for the wealthy. The richest one percent of Americans now earn almost a quarter of the country's income and control 40 percent of its wealth -- a level of inequality not seen since the days before Social Security and Medicare and the social safety net as we know it. If there is "warfare" going on between the "haves" and the "have nots" it's pretty clear who is waging war on whom.
Even more, this claim of "class warfare" that Republicans are touting is something quite dangerous. It's an expression of a deeply cynical vision of our country, in which everyone is out for themselves, the suffering of the least fortunate is of no consequence to the most fortunate, and the American dream is off-limits to those who have lost their footing in a devastating economy. 

Fortunately, this is a vision that most people wholeheartedly reject. The task of our elected officials is to stop assuming the worst about their constituents' insensitivity to the plight of their fellow Americans, to stop trying to pit us against each other and to start working toward an economic policy that works for everyone. Struggling Americans don't want to take the American dream away from those who have achieved it and successful Americans don't want to see their fellow citizens slip into permanent poverty.
The "class warfare" Republicans decry is all in the heads -- and the destructive policies -- of a small number of political leaders. While all but a few Republicans in Congress have signed a pledge to never raise taxes on corporations or the wealthy, the majority of Americans are much more pragmatic. According to a recent New York Times/CBS News poll, a whopping 71 percent of Americans -- including 86 percent of moderates and 74 percent of independents -- think that any plan to reduce the deficit should include both spending cuts and tax increases. 56 percent, including large majorities of moderates and independents said that wealthier Americans should pitch in and pay higher taxes to help reduce the deficit. A Gallup poll this week found that 53 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaners support the president's plan to eliminate corporate tax loopholes (a major element of the alleged "class warfare"), and majorities of GOP respondents supported spending that extra revenue on hiring public employees, funding public works projects and cutting payroll taxes on small businesses.
The Republicans' invocation of "class warfare" is a political ploy that the vast majority of Americans want no part of. Warren Buffett is not alone. 

2 comments:

  1. This type of tax a particular group reminds me of the origination of the AMT tax. A tax on the rich to capture revenue from about 100 people. Today AMT now affects most upper middle class. Once a tax is instituted it is rarely if ever adjust for changing conditions like inflation.

    If you really want to affect the just use of efficient tax revenues then you need to look at combinations of eliminating loop holes; subsidies to industry that should be market driven and reducing expenditures where many should depend on work rather than a hand out. The last thing you want to do is add an additional burden to productive members of our community.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for the comment Peter. I agree that we need to reduce loopholes, adjust others for inflation, and eliminate many, many industry subsidies. But what interests me is your last comment on additional burden to the productive members of our community. When the choice is between a 5%-6% increase on the most successful in our community, or to tear down social safety nets on the vast majority who struggle, I find that a pretty easy choice. Surely the most productive will continue to be productive with this rather small increase - the productivity numbers during the Clinton years show this is a sustainable rate. But gutting the last line of defense for the middle-class is the only other option, and that cannot be done without much greater harm. It's like a surgeon - I can cut off your leg and you'll live, or leave it on - and you'll probably die. I think our country would rather live.

    ReplyDelete