5 ms·

This is getting off-topic, but it's possible to oppose taxes to the rich without fancying oneself to be rich. The above Joe the Plumber description paints a pic

This is getting off-topic, but it's possible to oppose taxes to the rich without fancying oneself to be rich. The above Joe the Plumber description paints a picture of a delusional redneck. That's not necessary to debate taxation policy. EDIT: to bring this closer to topic: is it really "transfer of wealth" if the wealth was never really there? Most new cool gadgets get commoditized. If anything, Android is probably one of the better-designed systems under the hood (at least as far as the app API goes). Either way, the first smartphones were themselves incremental improvements and iterations over prior things like PDAs, etc.

Tichy 15y ago
Wasn't Joe the Plumber a real person?
- uxp 15y ago
  He was, and was actually upset that Obama was going to raise taxes on wealthy people (250k+ incomes), and actually raised a stink about it. Later on, the media dug into his life and realized that he had a very basic plumbing license, did not actually intend to buy a business he had mentioned he was going to do, and only made about 40k per year (and had a judgement lien against his income for failure to pay taxes). The same link as above: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_the_Plumber#Personal_controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_the_Plumber#Personal_contro... The comparison to Obama's tax plan was not off topic, because "Joe the Plumber" was in fact characterized and quoted by the media as someone who was going to have his life changed for the worse due to Obama's tax plan, when in reality, nothing in his life would have changed, but he still argued against the tax plan.
  - grannyg00se 15y ago
    One doesn't have to be rich to oppose taxes for the rich. Even if those higher taxes would somehow benefit you through a reduction in your taxes. You can disagree with an increase in taxes in principle. For instance, I don't think more taxation is necessary in any income group. How about reducing military or social insurance spending? Problems abound, but the point is, it's not totally outrageous to oppose taxes for the rich even if you only make an average income.
    - rmrm 15y ago
      of course not -- but the subject was Joe the Plumber. He certainly framed his question as one of self-interest rather than one of principle, so the question of misunderstanding ones self interest is applicable. ""I'm getting ready to buy a company that makes 250 to 280 thousand dollars a year. Your new tax plan's going to tax me more, isn't it?"" The answer to his question is A.) No, you're not buying that company. And B.) Yes, each dollar you made above 250K would be taxed at a 3% higher rate than normal, if you did. So $3,000 per $100,000. Misunderstandings abound about economics. It does not mean all opinions flow from misunderstandings, but many are colored by them. Most people (regardless of their opinion on taxes and spending) do not realize that federal revenues as a percent of GDP are at 20 year lows. Which is not surprising, as taxes have been cut systematically over the years. Yet people generally "feel" like the federal gov't is taking in more than ever as a percentage.
      - mmatants 15y ago
        I now see why my post got downvotes. I was unaware that JtP as a specific situation was about mistaken self-interest (originally I thought it was solely about generic blue-collar appeal for McCain/Palin).
    - vacri 15y ago
      The problem isn't that he's supporting cuts for someone in a different bracket, it's that his own reasoning has him in the bracket which he's not in. He's opposing tax laws that don't directly affect him based on the misunderstanding that they do directly affect him.
mmatants 15y ago
I would like to point out that I have no political allegiance to Joe the Plumber myself, and found that whole stunt quite pointless and populist. My criticism is towards the parent's specific argument. I saw a strawman, and felt that it was doing a disservice to the topic.

Tichy 15y ago

Wasn't Joe the Plumber a real person?

uxp 15y ago
He was, and was actually upset that Obama was going to raise taxes on wealthy people (250k+ incomes), and actually raised a stink about it. Later on, the media dug into his life and realized that he had a very basic plumbing license, did not actually intend to buy a business he had mentioned he was going to do, and only made about 40k per year (and had a judgement lien against his income for failure to pay taxes). The same link as above: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_the_Plumber#Personal_controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_the_Plumber#Personal_contro... The comparison to Obama's tax plan was not off topic, because "Joe the Plumber" was in fact characterized and quoted by the media as someone who was going to have his life changed for the worse due to Obama's tax plan, when in reality, nothing in his life would have changed, but he still argued against the tax plan.
- grannyg00se 15y ago
  One doesn't have to be rich to oppose taxes for the rich. Even if those higher taxes would somehow benefit you through a reduction in your taxes. You can disagree with an increase in taxes in principle. For instance, I don't think more taxation is necessary in any income group. How about reducing military or social insurance spending? Problems abound, but the point is, it's not totally outrageous to oppose taxes for the rich even if you only make an average income.
  - rmrm 15y ago
    of course not -- but the subject was Joe the Plumber. He certainly framed his question as one of self-interest rather than one of principle, so the question of misunderstanding ones self interest is applicable. ""I'm getting ready to buy a company that makes 250 to 280 thousand dollars a year. Your new tax plan's going to tax me more, isn't it?"" The answer to his question is A.) No, you're not buying that company. And B.) Yes, each dollar you made above 250K would be taxed at a 3% higher rate than normal, if you did. So $3,000 per $100,000. Misunderstandings abound about economics. It does not mean all opinions flow from misunderstandings, but many are colored by them. Most people (regardless of their opinion on taxes and spending) do not realize that federal revenues as a percent of GDP are at 20 year lows. Which is not surprising, as taxes have been cut systematically over the years. Yet people generally "feel" like the federal gov't is taking in more than ever as a percentage.
    - mmatants 15y ago
      I now see why my post got downvotes. I was unaware that JtP as a specific situation was about mistaken self-interest (originally I thought it was solely about generic blue-collar appeal for McCain/Palin).
  - vacri 15y ago
    The problem isn't that he's supporting cuts for someone in a different bracket, it's that his own reasoning has him in the bracket which he's not in. He's opposing tax laws that don't directly affect him based on the misunderstanding that they do directly affect him.

mmatants 15y ago

I would like to point out that I have no political allegiance to Joe the Plumber myself, and found that whole stunt quite pointless and populist. My criticism is towards the parent's specific argument. I saw a strawman, and felt that it was doing a disservice to the topic.