Angry White Working Class - See Them Write

I enjoy reading letters to the editor and even more so reader comments.

The writers may think that they are showing off their individualism, but I see them as fitting into categories. There are the local lights (local politicians, college professors, member of the clergy), then there are the gasbag/know-it-alls (these are the folks who write all the time, and get published too - I fit into this goup); there are the ingénues – new at the game and excited to be published. Then we a fairly new category, these are members of the right wing echo chamber.

Today’s post will focus on the echo chamber.

They are very interested in keeping taxes low, and reducing government spending. They see global warming as a conspiracy and environmentalists as tree huggers and sissies. They believe that the free market will solve all our problems. Oh, they also love guns and hunting. Their letters reflect a modest education and limited intellectual tools. If they have more than a high school diploma, they don’t show it.

When they write about taxation, their defense of the rich is amusing – will someone tell them that the rich are never going to return the favor?

This week, our local Gannett paper in Morris County NJ (The Daily Record) ran a long letter from a member of the echo chamber. Here is my extract:

What is the purpose of taxing those Americans who are financially more successful? Is it to … balance the budget?

For argument’s sake, let’s say that is the intended purpose. The (higher tax rate will pay for) … about 5-6 days (at the) current levels of government spending. Even higher taxes may cover a month or so.

We are currently spending $1 trillion per year more than taxes collected at the federal level. You do not have to be a mathematician to realize that the problem is out-of-control spending and not a tax problem.

In fact, when taxes were considered low, the federal government spent more than received and when taxes were considered high, once again, the government spent more than received. This has gone on so long that we now have a $16-plus trillion national debt.

We are now facing a fiscal cliff because of the federal government’s out-of-control spending. How can additional taxes stop the government from this spending? Our history shows that every time the government receives more revenues, they spend even more than the additional revenues, thus adding to the national debt.

Folks, the federal government has a spending problem which has nothing to do with taxing the wealthiest or any other Americans.

… there was more, but I cut it short.

The writer thinks he has scored here. But his argument against raising the marginal tax rates is lame. First he says that we won’t raise much money – then he adds that we never pay debt with taxes anyway. But the 5 – 6 days is $50 billion, so worth collecting; and over 10 years, ½ a $ trillion! And we have paid down debt in the past, and were doing so under Bill Clinton too.

In any case, I wrote the following retort:

By the way, the writer is wrong. We have used tax revenues in the past to pay down debt. We did this after WW2 and we did it in previous eras (like that after the Civil War).

The writer warns us against raising taxes pointing to Europe – but he fails to grasp that the rates that led the rich (in Europe) to leave are much higher than what has been proposed.

So let’s raise taxes a little. Let’s also work on the entitlements. But revenue first – that’s the easy part.

Someone else added the following:

It's almost not worth the effort to correct (the writer’s) idiocy. Let's try something simple: George W. Bush inherited a budget surplus. It took him two years to run up a major deficit. He then started an unnecessary war (I won't touch Afghanistan) and initiated major tax cuts on the wealthiest Americans. By his last year in office, when the recession was just starting, the deficit was nearly $800 billion. In 2009, Obama's first year in office, BEFORE ANY NEW GOVERNMENT SPENDING, it was $1.2 trillion. It doesn't take a genius to see that it is reduced revenue and not increased spending that's causing the shortfalls. But if that isn't enough - consider that during the longest, uninterrupted period of economic growth in the 20th century (1947-67), the average tax rates on the wealthiest Americans were 60%.

I added this:

The only reason to fight the idiocy is that these idiots vote.

This letter drew only two comments for much of the day. Then a member of the echo chamber stepped up to defend a brother:

The writer is simply stating that a tax increase on the wealthy would mean ABSOLUTELY nothing in the grand scheme of things-maybe a little balm to the people who voted for Obama and his social agenda. The debt was paid down during the Clinton years because we were in the middle of a tech revolution and it filled the coffers. A monkey could have been the president and gotten the same results-or maybe even Terry could have done it; actually no because Clinton was a centrist and you are so far left we'd all be wearing potato sacks and the people would think that's ok …

Note the tone of the third comment. He assumes that I am a member of the far left (I’d love him to listen to Noam Chomsky). And note his use of ABSOLUTELY. Sorry, $50 billion is not nothing.

Then we have the last comment of the day. Another from the echo chamber. This one attacked both myself and the second commenter.

I am guessing you two brainiacs are business owners and know what motivates the job creators of this country. I am glad you think it is so simple to solve these issues. You can not take 2012'S economy and tax rates to those of post WW2 or the Civil War. I am glad you have it all figured out, especially when the brightest of today's economists have been unable to predict any of the recessions we have had much less the severity.

With his use of brainiacs, he shows his defensiveness toward his educational betters. I see a now aging baby boomer. A tradesman perhaps, who graduated from high school with a C+ average. If he still works, he is near retirement. He hated the “brains” in high school, and since then has seen all educated folks as members of an elite club that he cannot join.

Haven’t seen Brainiac in decades.

So why do I care? Why do I seem to be sneering at the ignorance of others?

The answer is that these folks are voters. Their opinions are given to them by right wing media. And the rest of us suffer.

We depend upon mediators to help us form opinions on the issues. Outside of our own field (mine is insurance) we need help to understand the issues. Until the 1980s, broadcast media were forced to present all sides of any controversial issue, so no matter how slanted the broadcast, it had to make an effort to include what was considered balance. No more.

The current era of extreme partisanship has been made worse by right wing media. The democrats have no similar institution. Nor do Democrats face the sort of challenges that Republicans do, where if they moderate at all, they will be clobbered in the primary by a challenge from the extreme right. So while Democrats can compromise when it comes to policy, Republicans cannot.

It is not that the echo chamber do not also have real gripes. Their world has contracted over the decades. They probably graduated HS with the notion that they could get as good job in a factory and be set for life, or learn a good trade (and similarly be set for life). But that era is over. Although manufacturing has picked up recently, they are looking for very skilled workers. Even the skilled trades have struggled. Yes, electricians and plumber still do ok. But carpenters have been undercut by unskilled workers, so have painters and dry wallers. And linesman too.

And then there is the issue of race. For them, they read a story about Newark NJ or Camden (both cities almost entirely black and Hispanic and desperately poor) and they think of lazy, drug abusing moochers. While overstated, these cities seem to suck up public funds – in NJ, most state aid that could be used to reduce our high local property taxes is sent to our poorest cities. They see this money as wasted. I don’t entirely disagree – I guess I throw up my hands.

So when Rush Limbaugh goes on about lazy over paid teachers and government workers who can retire at 55, they agree and know which way to vote.

What to do? I don’t know. But time heals all wounds, so I will wait and see.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Twins

Image
The Twins  When I was a child, I was known as one of “the twins.”    I am a twin.  This was the most important fact of my childhood. My brother Jerry and I were same sex twins and we looked identical to everyone.  Still being identical was fraught.   The party line was that we were not identical. My mother explained this by explaining the when we were born, there were two placenta.  This fact was huge in the world of my child raising; it reflected my mother’s status as a nurse.  So despite the many signs of our being identical, we accepted the statements of my mother, that held doubt about our status.   Still we were very much alike.  More so than any other fraternal twins that I knew or that I learned about.  We appeared alike to everyone, even a dachshund that lived next door to my wife and I when we lived in Dayton, Ohio - we lived there from 1978-1981.   This annoying dog would bark incessantly at all strangers, yet when my brother visited us from New Jersey, he was quiet.  At the
Read more

Are Catholics Idolators?

Image
Raised a Catholic, I attended Catholic school through high school.   When I started high school, the Catholic Church was just emerging from the tumult of Vatican II.   We considered our Church modern and enlightened.   So the Mass was now in English.   Science was ok, as was liberal democracy.   The old superstitions that came to the US from Europe were supposedly left behind.   When the council ended, there was a real hope that the Church was soon allow birth control.   This was before birth control and abortion galvanized conservatives so much so that many bishops support a pussy grabbing twice divorced thug for president.     In my day, we Catholics were sensitive to criticisms from Jews and Protestants that we were idolaters, with our statues and holy pictures.   Fortunately the post Vatican II suburban Church had mostly left this behind, to be encountered only when we visited grandma in the old neighborhood.   For me the older generation began to die off when my mother’s mother di
Read more
Image
I was leaving church after singing at a special mass where the bishop officiated.  Satisfied that the choir performed well, it was time for me to zone out. As my car left the parking lot a man’s  voice boomed, “What the bleep was that?” The voice came from the empty passenger’s seat, about where a man’s head would be.  Slowly a man appeared filling the seat  He was dressed in robes and had long hair and a beard.  It was Jesus! Me: So are you really Jesus?  JC:  Yes, neat trick to materialize out of nothing.  But let’s talk about what we just witnessed.   They treated the statue of Our Lady of Fatima as an idol. I thought you Catholics were sensitive to accusations that you put too much importance on statues and pictures.   Well that went out the window today! And then there is Fatima itself.  You know that Fatima was meant to be a joke.  A few guardian angels were bored so they thought they would play a trick on the kids.  But the joke got out of hand.  There is no “the Angel of Peace.
Read more