Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SeekAndFind

I’ve seen a lot of ignorant responses on this thread that just shows you how Obama has managed to stoke the famous leftist “class envy,” not to mention hatred and resentment of urban residents by rural or small-town people. Ya done good, Bambi!

This couple works in the financial services industry, which is located in New York or a few other big cities. Ignorant Freepers may not believe that the financial industry is very important to them, but how do they think the economy survives, their pensions stay invested properly, and money moves around? I guess they believe Maw and Paw hop in their car and carry bags of money from one place to another. And of course they keep the money in their mattress the rest of the time.


20 posted on 12/06/2012 9:18:32 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: livius

Yes I’m disturbed at the responses to this thread. A very leftist jealousy towards a young couple who worked hard through school in majors that allowed them to get good paying jobs.
These jobs in large extent do reside in NYC.

The they got it coming, if you don’t like it move or they don’t know how to budjet are pretty much the same responses you’d see if this was posted in a leftist rag.


32 posted on 12/06/2012 9:29:52 AM PST by Blackirish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: livius

Indeed. Sour grapes.


33 posted on 12/06/2012 9:33:56 AM PST by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: livius

You sound like you don’t think that the “financial services industry” exists outside of NYC?


52 posted on 12/06/2012 10:01:53 AM PST by NEMDF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: livius
+1.

These are the type of working people the GOP should be actively recruiting to our way of thinking.

High marginal tax rates are not a tax on “the rich” but upon those attempting to accumulate assets. I have long noticed that the better your financial situation the less of a tax bite you get on your income. Once I could afford a house, I paid taxes at a much lower rate. Someone who makes the majority of their income from investments rather than work pays at a much lower rate.

For wealthy liberals it must be nice to be at the top, pull up the ladder behind you, and pat yourself on the back for being so “giving” advocating higher marginal tax rates - when they have already accumulated a huge amount of assets - and the taxes are on those attempting to accumulate assets over their working life.

58 posted on 12/06/2012 10:15:07 AM PST by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: livius

“This couple works in the financial services industry, which is located in New York or a few other big cities.”
NYC is not the only place for people who work in this industry so knock it off. You say yourself other big cities in other places have offerings,,and guess what? It would be hard pressed to find another big city in a different state that is going to tax them MORE...

(San Fran,,maybe)

They are not chained and even if they are, it could not have been a surprise..so they are whining pure and simple


64 posted on 12/06/2012 10:44:25 AM PST by austinaero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: livius; Blackirish
You two have touched upon something that's had me scratching my head recently, in the jealousy area. Why is is there are so many who begrudge the earnings of CEOs today, while no-one makes a big deal over the earnings differential between A-list stars and average actors? Or, for that matter, the pay differential between NHL stars and the average minor-league player?

Why is it that no-one pines for the "good old days" when NHL stars pulled in ten grand a year (less than $100,000 in today's dollars?)

It's a telling inconsistency. One the one hand, CEO salaries have skyrocketed. On the other hand, an NFL or NBA star has enough swag to become next-door neighbours with the CEO of a major listed company. Back in the "good old days" of the '50s and '60s, their chances of moving into the CEO part of town were zero. Only top-level Hollywood actors could - and they didn't, preferring Hollywood.

It's an inconsistency we take for granted. The only rancour over high Hollywood salaries I've seen here is because of their left-liberalism and support for higher taxes plus the economic jealousy that fuels them. That's not really jealousy of the rich actors, it's the calling-out of performative hypocrisy.

And yet, even for some here, there's a lot of rancor over high CEO salaries. It's one of those taken-for-granted inconsistencies that's hard to spot and puzzling when it's spotted. No-one here, including me, begrudges any star athlete his/her good fortune - even though pay packets for the best have risen longer and stronger than CEO pay packs. The pro-athlete and Hollywood-star "pay revolution" got rolling in the 1970s, not the 1980s.

Is there a professor-level economic historian in the house? If so, you've got a "cool"-level paper waiting to be written. "The Pay Revolution 1970-2000: How Top Pro Athletes, Hollywood Stars And CEOs Skyrocketed Their Income And Jacked Up The Pay Differential Between Their Select Top-Level Group And The Norm."

88 posted on 12/06/2012 5:37:11 PM PST by danielmryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson