Is Romney really THIS stupid?

“‘You know, I think it’s about envy. I think it’s about class warfare,’ the leading Republican presidential candidate said Wednesday on The Today Show.” (See Article)

While there is class warfarism, and it is played heavily in politics. I think the Republican candidates need to quit with the universal deniability.

When Hermain Cain said “they just need to go out and get a job”. He demonstrated how far he was from reality. Romney is doing the same here. When McDonald’s had their “hiring spree” last year, they hired 62,000 new employees (probably at $8/hr). But the scary part was that they received something around 980,000 applications. That means nearly a million people were unable to get a job even at the largest fast food chain.

The stark reality is that most of those 900,000+ individuals need a job that pays better than an entry level fast food wage in order to survive and provide for their families. Could you live on $20,000 a year? And that’s assuming a $10/hr wage with a 40 hour week. I can bet you most of those 60,000 new hires did not see that. Most probably received an $8-$9/hr and were probably allocated part time hours scattered every which way of the week.

Meanwhile, the middle class and the working class have seen their places greatly eroded. The role of company man, working 30+ years and retiring with a pension is gone, and has been gone for a while. We were sold the 401K/IRA retirement funds.

Many saw those savings decimated, especially those close to retirement. Most of us never saw the promised gains. I started my retirement fund immediately after the dot com stock crash. I bought low, and should have seen good growth over the decade before the next downward cycle. But it never materialized. And for many, what little growth they had in the retirement savings was cashed out during prolonged periods of unemployment, leaving many individuals with a meager present and a bleak future.

Meanwhile, we reportedly see CEOs of failing & bailed out companies receiving huge bonuses. We see banks adding fees and engaging in unscrupilous practices. The truth is that the deck is stacked against the workers. And people are frustrated that their retirement funds have been decimated, their home values deciminated, their net worth, incomes, savings all decimated. While the elite are earning higher profits than ever.


I am all for capitalism, but I am also for stiff protections against fraud, theft, and unscrupolous practices. I believe that is the only true role of government in commerce.

So no Mr. Romney, this isn’t just about envy. It’s about frustration. it’s about a deck that is pretty well stacked in your favor, and the favor of other uber-elites.

A simple example. Take the Social Security tax (and that’s what it is, a tax and nothing more). All the elite get to stop paying at $250,000. Why? Why do we have a tax that ends when you make enough money?

For Mr. Romney to be so out of touch with the average working American, shows an inability on his part to perform the role of President of the United States.

We can admit that there are serious flaws in our system without blaming it on capitalism. But we can’t laud capitalism and blame the current problems that exist in our system merely on envy. If you can’t even see the problems Mr. Romney, how can you fix them?

How can we tell people to just quit being lazy and get a job, if a hundreds of thousands of people couldn’t even get a job at McDonald’s?

Published in: on January 13, 2012 at 3:37 pm  Comments (2)  
Tags: , , , , , ,

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

2 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. For those that wonder my opinion on taxes and how things should be done.

    I am leery of the so called trickle-down economics. While I believe the rich need their wealth to cause growth, I suspect that the current trend among the wealthy is consolidation and control.

    I support a flat tax. With a simplified deduction system. For those that wonder my opinion on taxes and how things should be done.

    I am leery of the so called trickle-down economics. While I believe the rich need their wealth to cause growth, I suspect that the current trend among the wealthy is consolidation and control.

    I support a flat tax. With a simplified deduction system.

    For businesses a Very simple flat tax rate. Only a couple of deductions would be available. The business tax rate would be significantly higher, but with a re-investment deduction.

    1. Think 50% tax rate, but with a 25% deduction on re-investment of profits into new hires, research and development.

    In other words, the tax system would be designed to encourage businesses to grow, start new ventures, launch new subsidiaries rather than use their profits to consolidate and buy out competition.

    For individuals:

    1. Base deduction that all individuals get. Adjusted based on inflation from year 2000. (ie: $20,000 deduction equivalent to a year’s salary on minimum wage)

    2. Deduction for children. Each child earns two deduction points which can be divided in cases of divorced/broken homes. (ie: $10,000 per child)

    3. Medical expenses deduction.

    4. Militia Deduction – $500 ($1,000 for family) annual tax credit if you can show the following regarding the individual:
    – owns a rifle chambered in one of the current primary calibers of U.S. defense forces (ie: 223, 508).
    – possess 1,000 rounds of ammo
    – holds a current certification in CPR, & first aid

    [Basis being that you’ve shown yourself to be “well regulated”. And are part of the assurance of America’s defense. If we’re all armed, then we do not need as large of a standing army and the defense expenditure can be reduced and funds returned to the citizenry. I know some would be concerned with registration. But I think the benefit of the encouraging Americans to take the defense of themselves and their country into their own hands, and the fact that it’d be optional, outweight the concerns. (You could always just turn down the deduction.) ]

    These would be the only deductions to an individual. However, not everything would be taxed or recognized as income. Certain death/inheritance assets, life insurance payments, retirement benefits, etc. would not be considered income.

    Please note the numbers I toss out (ie: 25% , 50% are just place-holders and the actual figures would have to be determined by mathematicians and economists).

  2. *sigh* The lack of sanity today’s politicians never fails to amaze me. It seems you can only be for or against regulations–not for good regulations and against bad ones. It seems you can only be for or against taxing and spending–not for only those taxes and spending programs which empirical evidence shows will improve the economy as a whole.

    I still want to know why no one’s talking about Jon Huntsman. He managed to institute a flat tax, double Utah’s exports market, AND do more for the state’s education, and environmental protections than Clinton did for the whole U.S.. How is no one talking about him?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: