2016 election

I, Virginia Bergman, pledge not to vote for a male presidential candidate in 2016 just because he's male.

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Stimulus Package Takes Care of the Affluent


You only need to read the screaming banner headlines on the front page of the Huffington Post to get the picture of what happened with the stimulus bill today:


PELOSI: WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT


White House Has Yet To Speak... $789 Billion Bill Preserves Obama's Signature Tax Cut... House Vote Possible Thursday... Senate Will Follow...Payback: Dems Strip Business Tax Cuts... Big Winners: The Upper-Middle Class


Got that? The big winners are the upper middle class.


Thomas Edsall writes:

When President Obama outlined on January 8 the rationale for the economic stimulus bill, "The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act," he clearly identified the men and women most in trouble:


Nearly two million jobs have now been lost, and on Friday we are likely to learn that we lost more jobs last year than at any time since World War II. Just in the past year, another 2.8 million Americans who want and need full-time work have had to settle for part-time jobs.


The House-Senate compromise, however, cuts funds for extended health care coverage for the unemployed; cuts $30 billion in aid to state governments to prevent reductions in social services to the poor and out-of-work; and also cuts a special "Making Work Pay" tax holiday from $500 to $400 for an individual, and from $1,000 to $800 for a couple, for low-to-middle-income workers still hanging on to their jobs.


Amid all the cutting, however, one group emerged unscathed: the upper-middle class, the not-quite-super-rich, but certainly not on the ropes. Most of these folks, in terms of income and employment, are what could be called the un-needy, a group clearly distinct from those Obama identified as the core target of the legislation. The "compromise" legislation includes $70 billion, or just under 10 percent of the whole package, to be used expressly to take care of these affluent people.


Read more:


3 comments:

  1. I guess I should rejoice.... cuz that would be me!

    But, I am sad for the ones who do not have the comforts I do. How are they to get ahead?

    I wonder about the logic of the decision??

    ReplyDelete
  2. Upscale, well-educated Left-wing Democrats have been a nucleus of Obama supporters since the primary - this gang led the vicious attacks against Hillary Clinton in an all out effort to destroy both her and Bill and crown Obama king.

    Stray Yellar Dog, you're not among that ethically and morally challenged group!

    I'm afraid the middle class and low income people will continue to suffer for some time to come.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, I guess I should qualify and say... I do not consider myself "affluent." But I am technically upper-middle class. Not cuz I was born into it, either. Cuz I worked hard... all my life. And so did my DH.

    All that said, I really have nothing against helping the upper-middles.... but I don't like to see it done at the expense of helping the truly needy.

    And one more thing... if we could just provide health care for all.... the gradient between "upper middle," and "truly needy" would be halved, or more. So that should have been the first thrust, IMO.

    And, with Hillary I believe it would have been.

    ReplyDelete