0

Republicans focusing on welfare of the wealthy

The experts who predicted landslide victory for Romney were in shock and unable to accept or explain Obama’s decisive victory. They are analyzing voting stats of various groups and have been giving advice on how to win this or that group. They are not considering the group responsible for Obama’s victory — the middle class, which Romney and his party had ignored. Romney was trying to convince voters that giving a 20 percent tax cut and similar amount of spending cut was good for the country. But the middle class saw through it, that the tax cut would primarily help the wealthy and eliminating deductions would mostly hurt them.

On the other hand, Obama reached out to the middle class, showed he cares for them and is willing to raise taxes on the wealthy while protecting the middle class tax cut. He was able to convince the middle class that Romney didn’t care about them. Even little reminders, like Romney wants to “kill Big Bird” made a strong emotional connection with the middle class.

The Republicans appear to be so concerned about the plight of the wealthy that they are determined to oppose any tax hike for the wealthy while more than willing to eliminate deductions, like home mortgage, that mostly help the middle class. They propose to eliminate “loopholes” to raise revenue so that they can further lower tax rates, but never identify which loopholes should be closed.

Even after the election, Obama continues to focus on the middle class by repeatedly stating that he is ready to sign the bill extending the tax cut for the middle class as soon as Republican-controlled Congress passes it. The GOP continues to oppose any increase in tax rate on the top 2 percent, showing little concern for the 98 percent, which only distances them further from the middle class.

SURENDRA N. PANDEY, Ph.D.

Albany

Comments

ObjectiveEyes 1 year, 9 months ago

I don't have a problem with raising taxes on the "rich." Unfortunately, it doesn't accomplish much. The fact is, if the rich were taxed at 100%, it would fund the federal government for...would you like to guess? Two and one-half months! There simply are not enough millionaires and billionaires to pay the bills.

And, as for Big Bird...it should be defunded along with 10,000 similar tax drains.

0

waltspecht 1 year, 8 months ago

I believe the re-election of the President was the result of people saying what is in it for me, instead of what does this Country truely need. As a famous man once said. "Ask not what your Country can do for you, ask what you can do for your Country." For we have reached the point where those that are of such a mind can vote themselves a paycheck on the backs of those actually working and producing a sellable product. That is how he won.

0

TrixibelleBento 1 year, 8 months ago

Where is the proposal for cutting spending? I keep hearing on the news that Obama wants to go ahead and raise the taxes and we'll get back to the cuts later. NO, DO IT NOW, MR. PRESIDENT. You get what you want and the rest of us have to wait while you continually tell us that you're going to cut something in 2018. CUT PROGRAMS NOW. It's time for everyone to hurt, not just the rich. This must be a shared sacrifice for it to be effective. As Objective noted above, even if we tax the rich at 100%, it isn't going to mean anything.

It's beyond me why anyone would want to strive to be the next Buffett or Trump, when all the Government wants is your money, and doesn't care how long and how hard you had to work to get what you got.

We're starting to circle the drain...

0

Sign in to comment