Social Question

JLeslie's avatar

Do you think a working Republican thinks Romney was talking about him/her regarding this whole 47% video?

Asked by JLeslie (47251 points ) September 19th, 2012

I had a discussion yesterday with someone who believed Romney really screwed himself with the comments he made regarding the 47%. That blue collar republicans who fall into this catagory of “not paying taxes” will be offended and will be worried about Romney’s policies and now Romney has lost their vote.

I argued that Republicans who have a job, but don’t pay federal income tax, don’t think they are who Romney is talking about. They believe in their minds they work, so they take personal responsibility, Romney is not talking about them. It has little to do with the details amd facts, and everything to do with how someone perceives themselves.

Who do you think is right? The person I was discussing it with or me?

If you are aware of any polling that might be interesting. Or, if you have seen any interviews with Republicans who fall into the category Romney refers to.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

72 Answers

DigitalBlue's avatar

I’m inclined to agree with you, but of course I don’t know for sure.

Response moderated (Obscene)
zenvelo's avatar

I think a Republican who is out of a job and dependent on the system would think Romney is talking about someone else. It’s called being out of touch with reality. People don’t identify themselves that way.

wonderingwhy's avatar

Based solely on people I know, in this category, who vote Republican because of tax/economy issues (which I admit is only a handful); I don’t believe they would not see themselves as part of the 47%. Granted, I haven’t discussed this specific issue with any of them yet, but similar things in the past have a pretty predictable response, “yeah, yeah, but I’m not who he’s talking about” or “you don’t understand [the issues, what’s at stake, what he’s saying, how it fits]”. I do know a few “social” Republicans who I couldn’t say but suspect would disagree with him and at least one who’d consider “them’s fightin’ words!”

In general, with Republicans or Democrats or anyone who identifies strongly with an ideology, people tend to side with “their” person/group. And when that person/group says something “wrong” the individuals tend to be able to rationalize or dismiss it very simply, and the more tightly they identify the more prevalent that seems to be. It’s like having a fundamental belief shaken, it’s easier to dismiss the problem than risk that base. One or even a few incongruities can be explained away, the tighter we cling the more cracks it takes to get us free.

Ron_C's avatar

Since Romney stated that he thought that the middle class was about $250k. That means that I and everybody I know are poor. Shit, all this time I thought I was middle class. Thank god we have the human corporations to save us!

JLeslie's avatar

@Ron_C He stated Middle class is $250k and up? The old definition, which seems to be still used by congress is $250k and up is upper class, which would make middle class below that number.

tedd's avatar

I doubt few if any blue-collar republicans will be swayed away from Romney by this. Most people on the Republican side who fall into the lower brackets that are receiving government aid don’t see themselves as people who fall into the category Romney is speaking of, even though they are.

I find wholesale offense with Romney’s classification of 47% of the population as lazy moochers. The vast majority of those people have jobs, or are retired, or are in someway infirmed and can’t work… and when you factor in payroll tax only 18% of the population pays zero anyways.

It was a stupid remark to make IMO. But I doubt it in and of itself causes any major swings in the election. Now in conjunction with his other mess ups lately, I could see a “death by 1000 cuts” scenario.

wundayatta's avatar

I read something yesterday on one of the election sites saying that this kind of event usually does not have a lasting effect. As others have said, Republicans who don’t pay income tax will not think of themselves as the irresponsible type (who will?) and will believe Romney is talking about someone else. Indeed, it seems that even Romney doesn’t think he is talking about people like the elderly and military folks who fit in this category.

So Romney’s number (47%) is not really what he is using, in my opinion. You have to take out the people like the “responsible” unemployed and the elderly and military and even the rich who pay no income tax, before you get to the actual number of people who he might reasonably think of as irresponsible due to his way of thinking.

But I don’t think Republicans think Romney is talking about them. And while I hope this event has a lasting effect, I would not be surprised if it doesn’t have any measurable effect.

glacial's avatar

@wundayatta ”...and even the rich who pay no income tax”

This is the one that kills me. Do you think anyone has explained the irony to him yet?

JLeslie's avatar

@jca I saw Mitt Romney in Meet The Press last weekend, or maybe it was two weeks ago, and he said at one point to David Gregory, no conversation is private, there is always someone who might be taping you. I don’t believe this video had been released yet, but I am betting he knew it was coming out. He was talking about talking to an audience I think though in conversation, likethe difference between speaking at a religious coalition or a public town meeting (I wish I still had it recorded) not a very private meeting like the Boca one.

wundayatta's avatar

Someone should ask a question: Mit Romney pays 13% of his AGI in income taxes. What do you pay? Or better yet, just do the research.

KNOWITALL's avatar

Of course they/we don’t think he’s talking about us, I include myself because I’m making less than $250k. He is talking about the 47% who bilk the govt and assistance programs when they could get a job and work and pay taxes like the rest of us. He will probably gain votes imo because a lot of us Republicans feel the same way.

JLeslie's avatar

@KNOWITALL I am not talking about people who make $100k, I am talking about those who are poor or lower middle class who pay none or next to nothing in taxes. That as long as they have a job they don’t self identify as a lazy, non contributing, entitled loser.

Probably there are people out there who don’t even realize they pay no taxes, because they get it back as a refund, and don’t understand how much they actually totally paid in and how much they received back. People, both parties, are extremely ignorant about taxation. I include myself as not knowing all the ins and outs, but I am constantly stunned by some basic misconceptions about taxes. People who pay taxes. They have no idea what they pay, or how the calculations are made.

wundayatta's avatar

Yes. This idea appeals to people like @KNOWITALL who believe that anyone getting government assistance must be bilking the system, and be a lazy SOB; people who have no clue what it is like to be poor and the obstacles you face. That’s why some pundits are encouraging Romney to go all in or double down or whatever gambling metaphor you have on this, to try to bring people with such ignorant beliefs out to the ballot boxes. They believe more people believe in the perfidy of the poor than there are poor and other sympathizers who would like to see a rising tide raise all boats.

glacial's avatar

Hmm…. just saw this tape this morning. Evidently, Romney’s mother didn’t equate social assistance with a lack of responsibility.

JLeslie's avatar

I don’t understand how not paying taxes equates with getting public assistance? Do they always work together? I don’t think so.

ragingloli's avatar

@KNOWNOTHINGATALL
“He is talking about the 47% who bilk the govt and assistance programs when they could get a job and work and pay taxes like the rest of us.”
The unemployment rate is not 47%.

KNOWITALL's avatar

Wow, except for Jleslie, you people love to twist words to suit your purposes and demean others…this forum has really showed me that I’m voting correctly. Have you ever actually tried to convince a Republican to switch sides with rational arguments…without namecalling…without defending Obama’s lies (close Gitmo, renewing Bush cuts, etc…) I mean use your brain’s to convince us rather than berate us. Whether we are smart or not, make more money or pay taxes, we are voters so you’re only doing yourselves and your country a disservice by this juvenile behavior…I’m just saying, think about what you’re saying a little bit before hitting the Answer button.

*I owe taxes almost every year, no refund.
*I never said all people on assistance are lazy.
*I never said the ‘47%’ Romney mentioned was the unemployment rate.

tedd's avatar

@ragingloli @KNOWITALL When you factor in payroll tax, which last I checked is a tax… it ends up being 18% of the population who pays no taxes. Out of that 18% you still have the elderly with no income, and the infirmed, and working people who simply have enough children or what have you that they do not have taxes in the end.

I don’t discount that there are people out there mooching off the system, but I think the problem is far less drastic than @KNOWITALL or other conservatives would paint it.

JLeslie's avatar

@KNOWITALL I don’t think anyone was asking if you owe taxes or not. Romney basically said the 47% are all lazy, entitled, and dependent on the government, so if you agree with what he said, well, then you are agreeing. I said I don’t think it is that big of a deal that he said it, he was talking to a small group about strategy, but I think his explanation of the people within this statistic is way off, I don’t even agree with the number 47% until I find out for sure that is people who have incomes. @ragingloli‘s point was you and Romney can’t accuse all 47% of being lazy and entitled when the majority work, or had worked during most of their lifetime. Romney was implying all in the 47% are lazy.

ragingloli's avatar

@KNOWITALL
What exactly do you think this means?:
“He is talking about the 47% who bilk the govt and assistance programs when they could get a job and work and pay taxes like the rest of us.”

*I never said the ‘47%’ Romney mentioned was the unemployment rate.
Yes you did.

wonderingwhy's avatar

@KNOWITALL “He is talking about the 47% who bilk the govt and assistance programs” Really? So you’re saying nearly half the people who receive entitlements are bilking the government? Care to back that up? Even the Cato Institute won’t go that far (1).

KNOWITALL's avatar

Here we go again, am I the only Republican in these forums? lol

I should have put quotes around the 47% I suppose because that’s his number not mine and I don’t know where he got those stats, the fact-checkers I suppose. I do feel like the statistics don’t lie….do I need to find a liberal website that admits there’s fraud in assitance programs before you’ll accept it as truth? Because lots of liberals, the smart ones, will admit there’s some fraud like tedd above….

Sometimes I really wonder why you get so defensive if you can’t prove him wrong. Don’t throw it at me to prove him right because you blow off anything I say as b.s. (which is childish btw), you PROVE HIM WRONG, that’s it, end of story.

JLeslie's avatar

I thought several people admitted there is some fraud? Maybe that was the other Q. There are always some abusing a government system, or taking advantage of the expense accounts at a company, or someone getting a kickback in the private or public sector. It isn’t just government.

So, you agree 47% of people don’t pay taxes. I question the stat, but I also see that many of the liberals here in the collective are saying the 47% breaks down n a way that does not support what Romney said. Some are on social security and are elderly (but likely worked their whole lives).

I saw a post recently that said it is ironic people defend Romney for the small percentage of taxes he pays because he is following the tax law. I defended him on that point. Well, people who are poor and not paying taxes are following current tax law also, can we fault them? I don’t think Romney would increase taxes on the poor, I really really doubt it, I don’t know if he has said as much. He was talking about voters and getting votes.

KNOWITALL's avatar

Hopefully some do, I’m no expert on liberal thinking but I am an expert on liberal denial.

I don’t necessarily agree or disagree with the 47% comment, but I and most other people are sick and tired of being held financially responsible for broken public assistance programs.

What happens with all this hate is that the President and Congress get in stalemates where making progress and real change becomes impossible. If we can’t even have mature discussions here, what makes you think the people in Washington, getting tempted daily with kickbacks and campaign dollars a/k/a selling out for money, can get along?

Why is it so wrong for Reps to not want their taxes to support abortion or broken programs? I have a heart, I want to help people and I do help people even though I’m broke from paying my own bills each month….but to support people like the ones I personally know in my area (which were called lies and anecdotes by Libs) to me is wrong. I would think that normal thinking people would agree.

I also don’t give money to people pandering on the side of the road that I see everyday, I’ll give them food or cigarettes, but not money, is that wrong too? I will buy someone clothes for their children for school but I won’t give them cash they can spend on drugs and booze.

I guess I just don’t understand the liberal way of thinking on these subjects but I’d be happy to listen if someone can explain things calmly….I don’t even require proof, I just want to understand why you feel the way you do because thus far no one has explained it fully or peacefully.

wundayatta's avatar

I’ll agree there is some fraud in assistance programs. I was just reading about Medicare scams in Consumer Reports yesterday. Well, that’s an entitlement program, but I’m sure they hit up Medicaid recipients as well.

Unfortunately, there is no logical leap from finding that there is fraud in assistance programs and entitlement programs and even in private insurance programs and heck, in giant investment banks and energy companies—to saying that all people in such programs commit fraud or are shiftless and lazy.

As a Republican, do you defend the fraud the investment banks perpetrated on us? Do you say that all banks commit fraud? I hope not. I hope you would do the same for people who receive assistance.

Liberal denial, as you call it, is a red herring. Typically, conservatives use arguments like this to shift people’s focus, hoping they won’t notice there is no logic in the argument.

KNOWITALL's avatar

I think there are bad people on both sides, and some bad people in between. There are always people willing to screw everyone else to take something for themselves.

It’s kind of like the Bush tax cuts. Libs bashed Bush for that then and do still now, yet Obama renewed them twice and we’re getting dire predictions for what happens now if they are not renewed again, soooooo is Bush the devil or did he do the right thing? And is Obama the devil for lying during his campaign or not?

I’m not shifting focus off of anything, it is what it is and I don’t think either party is taking acceptable responsbility for the situation we’re now in. I would have more respect for a nominee who simply stated ‘it’s broken, I’ll fix it’ with no additional bs but I’m not sure it’s possible for them to do that…lol

wonderingwhy's avatar

@KNOWITALL Of course there’s fraud, that goes entirely without saying. I thought I was being pretty clear, I don’t believe that it’s 47% when even right wing publications won’t commit to that (1). If you’re saying it is, back it up, there’s nothing defensive about that, I’m encouraging you to prove your claim. Here’s some fact-checking (2) 22% receive senior tax benefits – standard deductions, SS exclusion, and credit. From what you said they are bilking the government, it’s not on me (or anyone else) to prove your claims for you. Here’s a little more concerning DI fraud where out of $9.8B in payments out of that they found $410M in fraud – that’s less than 5% from over 40,000 allegations. Even if you attribute $1.8B in overpayments all as fraud that’s still 25% (and SSA won’t go that far, counting 64% as failure to notify). (3). That’s a lot of waste, fraud, and abuse but it hardly constitutes as truth to Romney’s claim and certainly doesn’t lay it all at the feet of non-income tax payers.

…that’s his number not mine and I don’t know where he got those stats, the fact-checkers I suppose. Perhaps you should investigate his numbers and not just take them at face value. To that end yes, you need to find at least something to back that up.

KNOWITALL's avatar

And as I said that’s his number not mine, I don’t agree or disagree with it (again as I stated above). He has a lot of people paid to work the numbers and research for him, I’m discussing this while at work and they don’t pay me to spin numbers, WW.

BTW- Romney is not the most popular person even with Reps right now. He’s waffled on a few things as I again have stated before. He was Pro-Choice at one time now he’s Pro-Life to get the conservative votes….what do you want from me?

wundayatta's avatar

@KNOWITALL I hear you. It must be hard to have to listen to all this and not get a clear message from a candidate about what he will do, specifically. Who is this guy? When he says he changed, is that real or is that just what he’s saying for the campaign? What will he really do if he gets into office? Especially when he thinks that’s a major thing he has to do to turn the economy around.

It must be troubling for a lot of Republicans, especially those in the center. Especially those who are libertarians. People must be wondering just who he is, exactly, and I don’t know what he can do to get people to trust his word now.

JLeslie's avatar

@KNOWITALL For the record I was pissed Obama did not let the Bush tax cuts expire. Most democrats disagree with me, not all. If the Bush tax cuts are so great, and if tax cuts help rev the economy and create jobs, then why isn’t that happening? The tax cuts are still at play as you pointed it, and middle class has had even more tax cuts while Obama has been in office.

RandomMrAdam's avatar

@KNOWITALL He has a lot of people paid to work the numbers and research for him

According to Neil Newhouse, chief pollster for Romney, he and fellow candidate aides were “not going to let (their) campaign be dictated by fact checkers.”

I feel bad for all the Republicans in the center of the isle as I’m afraid the GOP has shifted so far to the right that they don’t even let fact-checking shape their platform.

KNOWITALL's avatar

Whoa, calm and rational statement 3x in a row, I love and appreciate it. This is what will change our country!

I can promise you that a LOT of Reps, not just me, question a lot of things about Romney. It’s harder this year because it really is a crap-shoot. We know (Reps I mean) that Obama has done what he can do with limited power, and to us there hasn’t been enough improvement to re-elect him. Meanwhile we have this corporate guy who is shady as he//, a Mormon with a stepford family who won’t divulge financial info. If you want a transparent govt do you really want to elect someone who can’t be transparent personally, not at all.

We feel damned either way, tbh, but we will almost always vote Republican because of abortion and other issues we feel strongly about, otherwise we wouldn’t be Reps. I’m more liberal in that I believe in SSM, I am Pro-Choice but the killing of babies is deplorable to me, I don’t enjoy war but I appreciate our military for supporting the President’s directives…there are many more issues at stake than whether we like a guy or not.

Obama is likeable, I will agree with that in most circumstances.

RandomMrAdam's avatar

@KNOWITALL – I definitely feel for you… It’s a bold move on Fluther to be a Conservative or a Republican as it seems the majority do not feel that same way.

I went ahead and did the research for you, which wasn’t hard, here is a link (Politifact) that basically states Romney’s 47% is inaccurate. Romney won’t rebuke it though, because as I said before—he won’t let fact-checkers dictate his campaign message.

wonderingwhy's avatar

@KNOWITALL When Bush put those tax cuts into effect the economy hadn’t tanked yet. When Obama renewed them the economy was down the tubes. But let’s remember he’s not keen on keeping all of them. Just for those making <$250K and I wager it’s questionable how long after a recovery was clearly underway those even those would last then again we’re talking politicians. Obama shouldn’t have made promises he couldn’t keep, it pisses me of that he did, though I can’t lay all the blame at his feet, same goes for any politician.

I don’t agree or disagree with it (again as I stated above) I and several others have provide data that suggests quite strongly that his number is at best meaningless and at worst being used as nothing more than to garner votes through fearmongering with barely the pretense of truth. When you say I don’t necessarily agree or disagree with the 47% comment, but I and most other people are sick and tired of being held financially responsible for broken public assistance programs. that GOOD, I agree these programs are abused and wasteful but don’t backslide on a good worthwhile position by relying on numbers that even his (and your) own party doesn’t seem to back up.

If we can’t even have mature discussions here… We certainly can but when we disagree the only way through is either with reason or evidence and when you base your reason on claims that others provide evidence may be mistaken, it’s up to you to correct them or adjust your reasoning.

Why is it so wrong for Reps to not want their taxes to support abortion or broken programs? Yes. Because in the first instance, that’s not how it works. Maybe it should but until we all get a say into which programs our tax dollars are fed it’s hard to see how it’s reasonable why that particular program should be exempted. In the second because there’s nothing else to replace it. I’ve no problem scraping the existing system but without a means to replace it that’s asking for trouble an order of magnitude worse than what we’ve got.

As to the liberal way of thinking; maybe ask a question (that’s rich coming from me) of liberals to explain why they hold their positions on specific topics; I don’t have the slightest idea what you’d get for answers, but I can’t believe people would back down if you challenged their answers with your own positions.

I suck, Fluther isn’t loading comments without reloading the page
To your last (that I saw post).
If you disagree with Romney, and much of what you say is the same way I see him, then why support him? When you talk abortion, Obama’s not going to change anything with that that can’t be undone in the future – he can’t. And it’s not like Romney’s going to over turn RvW, again he can’t. This isn’t directed at you @KNOWITALL, but just all of us in general – this business of voting for an issue is fine when everyone is doing well, but when we have problems that everyone acknowledges what is it that’s made it us all so polarized that we can’t work with each other to solve them? I don’t honestly expect an answer but it’s something I don’t feel is addressed by our politicians or by us as voters.

KNOWITALL's avatar

Thanks, RMA. But don’t feel bad for me because I am unapologetic in my beliefs and feel very comfortable stating them. The flip side of that is I have always been willing to be convinced, and as I’ve stated before, I voted for Clinton twice – lol

WW – Because Bush could see it coming, they have a lot of information none of us do as we all should know by now.

I hate hearing BHO talked about like he’s a God. They are fallible humans as are the rest of us, and I agree politicians make promises they don’t keep but most libs won’t even acknowledge that known and proven fact.

I have tried to clarify that although I believe the fraud happens in large amounts, Random above is the first to post anything proving they’re wrong and I admit I haven’t had time to look at it yet, perhaps later today.

Mature discussions happen when adults tell each other why they feel like they do. When I’m called a liar for sharing stories of fraud perpetrated on the American taxpayer, I take it as an insult as I should. If you pay taxes and you listen to any of this real life fraud you should be as disgusted as I am imo. Again, I have no reason to lie to anyone it serves no purpose at all.

When PP got Federal Funding they lost a lot of voters to the Republican ticket, it’s the truth. People don’t like to be associated with dead babies, that’s truth, let alone Christians or conservatives. There has to be a little give and take.

I have asked questions but for some reason, I never get too many answers. I’m just saying, instead of calling Reps liars and elitists or ppl calling Libs baby-killers and hippies, why don’t we actually talk and convince each other with rational conversations.

JLeslie's avatar

@KNOWITALL As far as PP, I believe the federal funds did not go to abortion services. I don’t understand why anyone is against PP. I saw the other day that Ann Romney has given money to PP. Hospitals all over America do abortions and probably receive some government funds, why is PP being picked on? I want a place that young girls can go to and get health care and do it behind their mom’s back quite honestly. I am not even talking about abortion. I want girls to be able to be healthy, even if they have made an ignorant teenage mistake and now find something isn’t right. I want poor people to have access too. I have middle class friends who use PP as their main place for their GYN care.

wonderingwhy's avatar

@KNOWITALL Oh, he’s fallible alright, there’s a lot he’s managed to not do that I’d like to see done and things he’s done I’m not amused with. You’ll get no disagreement from me there.

Check out the three I posted as well, one is just another source of what Random posted, the pdf (reference 3) at the end actually supports you nicely when arguing fraud, it just uses “more backable” numbers.

Yeah, I agree with you, the lying thing is a little below the belt. I hope you haven’t said that or implied it, I may not believe you in some cases – that is to say I think you’re wrong – but that’s a far cry from calling you a liar, which I’ve not intended.

All I can say is try again, maybe with all the political questions and news this time of year you’ll get a little closer to what you’re looking for. Maybe ask a mod to babysit for flame bait etc. (can we even do that?) just to keep people focused on reasoning their points rather than just tit-for-tatting.

Jaxk's avatar

Just to answer the original question, Romney was talking about whether his tax plan would affect those voters. If you don’t pay income tax, a plan to lower income tax would not resonate with you. That seems to be a logical point. The 47% of Americans that don’t pay any income tax is a valid number. It was 47% in 2010 and 46% in 2011. I haven’t seen anyone really dispute those numbers. It seems we want to argue that those are not all the taxes but Romney did say all taxes, he said income taxes because his tax plan pertains to income taxes.

There should be some concern about that number being so high. I don’t think that just because you fall into that category (no income tax), you can’t still be very concerned about the number being so high. Hell, 49% of the population live in households that get some sort of government assistance (welfare food stamps, etc.). That number is also scary. If half the population pay no income tax and half the population gets government assistance, we have a problem. The argument seems to be whether they deserve or not but the number is the problem. If I pay no income tax and I hear Romney tell me that half the population pays no income tax, it doesn’t make me hate him for that. I like the fact that he wants to address that issue.

JLeslie's avatar

@Jaxk Where is that 49% number from? I haven’t heard it. Is social security and medicare included in it?

KNOWITALL's avatar

@JLeslie Oh no, I like you so I really don’t want to go there. My uncle is pretty high up in the Pro-Life movement and has been for years so I know all the arguments backwards and forwards, and since you’re all Libs and it’s been a long day let’s save that for another Q okay?!

RandomMrAdam's avatar

@KNOWITALL—Agreed, lets stick to the OP, not Planned Parenthood.

JLeslie's avatar

@KNOWITALL Sure, I wasn’t trying to put you on the spot to explain. No problem.

stark's avatar

If the 47% are exempt from federal income tax that means they’re poor enough to collect welfare, i.e. food-stamps, healthcare, section 8 housing. You can work and be on welfare. We call this the-working-poor. I believe you need to make less than 15k to be exempt and to qualify.

Romney is correct in that they’re dependent on government, obviously. They’re also sucking more than they’e contributing since the benefits outweigh the salary.

Jaxk's avatar

@JLeslie

The 49% comes from the census data. It is counting households that get some government assistance by at least one member of the household. And yes it includes everything. I’m not trying to get into a discussion of whether or not each individual deserve that assistance, merely stating that when virtually half the country has some dependence on government assistance, we have a problem. Whether it’s warranted or not.

wonderingwhy's avatar

@KNOWITALL Sorry, when I said “I hope you haven’t said that or implied it” I meant to say “I hope I haven’t said that or implied it”; too much typing not enough proofreading. >.< Again, apologies.

JLeslie's avatar

@Jaxk Ok, thanks for the link. We don’t have to debate about each program, I just don’t count medicare and regular social security in the same category as other programs.

Jaxk's avatar

@JLeslie

I agree, I try not to look at them the same either. Unfortunately, the government has abused those programs to the point that they resemble welfare. Social security had surpluses for 85 years. Now it is becoming a deficit and there is no lock box. The shortfall becomes just more debt. The only way we make the current payments is from the current taxpayers. half of our country is supporting the other half, regardless of how you look at these programs.

KNOWITALL's avatar

On a positive note, I just got my new SSI statement and I get @1200 a month if I retire at age 67…..lol, I can’t wait!!! (that’s sarcasm)

JLeslie's avatar

@KNOWITALL I will be very happy to receive my $1200 a month. That is about a quarter of what I live on now (not including my husband’s racing, which is not what I consider a regular expense) I think the SS will be very helpful. Of course my husband will collect his also, assuming we are still married, it will pay for around 75% of my regular expenses if there is not big inflation by then. Of course, it is so far in the future who knows what money will be worth, but still the number is pretty good. I assume your husband will collect also.

I have a relative who only gets $200 a month SS, and we are happy about that. Ironically, he took advantage of many tax loopholes and write-offs as a small business owner, so his taxable income wound up being very low when he was younger. It was great during the years he was working, but what it means is in his oldish age is he gets very little in SS benefit. If he had saved well it would have been ok, but in the end it will probably mean he and his wife will have to be supported by his family. It’s not that the family will resent it, but it will suck for them to feel dependent. At least with the $200 they will have some of their own spending money. I think SS helps people maintain their dignity and not feel like they are a burden on their families.

@jaxk Yeah, from what I understand the politicians have robbed SS, it makes me sick.

bkcunningham's avatar

@KNOWITALL, I am conservative and I’m learning not to waste my breath with most political “discussions” here.

jerv's avatar

@bkcunningham I think I speak for many of us when I say that it’s not the Conservative ideology that offends us so much as the provable lies being construed as an insult to our intelligence. It’s hard to respect somebody who insults you, and it’s hard to respect the opinions of a person you don’t respect.

@Jaxk The part about half our country being supported by the other half is why I have such an issue with the Republican’s push to amplify wealth/income disparity. The reason I seem to come across as a Liberal at times is because I don’t want 10% of the country to have to support the other 90%, but we are heading in that direction. It’s sad to see people say they want something and then fight tooth and nail to go in the opposite direction, and frustrating when they drag us with them.

@KNOWITALL To my knowledge, no blood relative of mine has lived that long, so the only reason I have to plan any sort of retirement funds really is survivor’s benefits for my wife

ETpro's avatar

@JLeslie Regarding the polling part of your question, Gallup has done a quick poll on the results. It’s hurt Romney. 36% say they will be less likely to vote for Romney due to his comments while 20% say more likely and 43% say it makes no difference. Among the independents Romney desperately needs to woo, 29% said it made them less likely to vote for him while 15% said more likely. In an election where he was already trailing, that’s a huge self-inflicted wound.

KNOWITALL's avatar

I was telling the truth about the amount and just getting my statement, what irritates me is that we keep getting told we should rely on it and instead invest in 401k’s…so why bother to keep wasting postage to send me statements about what I more than likely will never get…it’s annoying.

JLeslie's avatar

@KNOWITALL 401k’s are not instead, they are in addition to. 401k’s are tax shelters. Well, if you earn too much income, I think over $150k, you still pay the tax on the money you put into the 401k, but the money grows without paying on the growth, until you start taking out the money.

I do think they should have an option to stop getting the SS notice and just view it online. Maybe they do, and I just am unaware of it.

ETpro's avatar

@KNOWITALL We are still the richest nation on Earth. Our problem is that for the last 30 years, we’ve not been getting poor, we’ve been getting robbed so multi-millionaires and billionaires could get far, far richer and so corporate CEOs can earn 475 times as much as their average workers instead of the 11 or 12 times worker pay that our most successful competitors afford their CEOs. If we went back to the sort of progressive tax and wage system we had during the post-war boom, we could easily fund our safety net and invest in the research and education needed for the future. Far from being anti business, in that period, our GDP grew at its rapidest pace in our nation’s history, we had the longest sustained growth, we created the world’s first great middle class, and we made plenty of new millionaires as well.

Instead, we are deliberately converting the nation into a banana republic to make a handful of oligarchs rich enough their families can rule as the padrones for perpetuity. It’s just a policy decision which future we want.

Business Week gives a thoughtful and accurate breakdown of the 47% Romney wrongly dismissed as parasites he wouldn’t concern himself with. The majority of that 47% are in red states and are actually going to vote for him even after he insulted them, because they do not read or follow the news, and Fox isn’t going to tell them how he actually feels about those beneath him in life.

KNOWITALL's avatar

I agree, that’s why Romney scares me and a lot of Reps as I’ve mentioned before. But that doesn’t mean Obama is the answer. If you think he is the answer, I’d like to know why you feel that way please, sir.

jerv's avatar

@KNOWITALL Well, that gets into how the two-party system is a failure, but since we are stuck with either Romney or Obama, you are stuck picking between “not the answer” and “scary”. I think @ETpro is of the same opinion as me; Obama may not be the best, but he definitely is better than the only alternative on the ballot this year.

Ron_C's avatar

@JLeslie ” why is PP being picked on? I want a place that young girls can go to and get health care and do it behind their mom’s back quite honestly. I am not even talking about abortion. I want girls to be able to be healthy” The new republicans are approaching fascism. A fascist government needs an enemy to give people a cause and distract from noticing what they’re government and secret police are doing to them.

Romney’s position is just another step in the progress towards a complete corporate take-over. He creates new classes of people that are “dragging down the economy”,distracts people from real issues, and siphons money from the treasury to benefit “friendly corporations’. They already have dictatorships running school districts and “failed” towns in Michigan, after Romney wins we will see a new avalanche of law that encourage dictatorships in cities around the country. Remember, to Romney, corporations are people too.

GracieT's avatar

I think that actually, Romney doesn’t think that corporations are people too. Corporations are people. Flesh and blood people- well, most us in the
US, anyway, are sniveling wimps that expect to be
permitted to eat, given health care, and places to live. (How dare we!) I think that Romney is flummoxed because we don’t all just accept his word as true, that we have opinions. I know that Obama hasn’t lived up to all of his promises, but really, what politician does? He has done a lot, given what he faces, and our two party political system is flawed at its base.

Ron_C's avatar

@GracieT so you’re ok with giving Romney the keys to the nation? Remember, what he does to business he wants to do to government. He has no idea how he lower classes suffer based on his decisions. Maybe he isn’t mean and ignorant but is definitely shows signs of being a sociopath because he has no feeling of guilt or shame for the people harmed by his decisions.

GracieT's avatar

@Ron_C, I tried to not let my derision for Romney color that response, I guess I succeeded! To answer you: Good God, I hope not! I was trying to make
the point that Romney holds
contempt for the rest of us-
“the little people,” those of us
without the money or the title.

Edit: You were kidding?

JLeslie's avatar

@Ron_C What do you mean regarding MI having dictatorships in their school districts?

ETpro's avatar

@KNOWITALL The words @jerv spoke for me show that he understands me pretty well. I’m very far from an Obama acolyte. But given the choice at hand, Obama is clearly going to do more to get the economy back on track and shift some of the redistribution of wealth from its current direction flowing only to the wealthiest back to a more balanced approach where it also builds the middle class. Without a strong middle class, we are not going to recover from Bush’s Great Recession. Giving money to The Creators may sound very biblical, but they can’t create jobs when the consumers that drive our economy are broke.

We don’t have a Supply Side crisis, we have a Demand Side crisis. We will only make it worse by going back the the Bush era Supply Side policies that created it, and doubling down on them.

I truly wish I had a superior alternative to vote for, but none of the third parties have any possibility of winning, so I won’t waste my vote on them. I will, however, continue to push to see a viable alternative party arise.

jerv's avatar

@ETpro We’re both natural-born US citizens over 35, so how about you and I start our 2016 campaign?

tedd's avatar

Does anyone realize the irony… that for a good chunk of his life Mitt Romney was included in that 47%... as he only paid capital gains tax?

Ron_C's avatar

@JLeslie I don’t have much time now but the legislature in Michigan worked with the governor to push through a bill that allowed the governor to appoint an “administrator” for towns and school destricts he deemed to be failing. Those “administrators” (dictators) have absolute power to hire and fire at their pleasure. The override city counsels, school boards, and principles. Definably not democratic.

JLeslie's avatar

@Ron_C And, it isn’t working to improve schools? I asked a questions once sort of on the topic of school boards being elected or appointed I see you answered actually. I guess the person has absolute power until the governor changes and then he/she can appoint someone new. I think it is worth a try if nothing else is working.

ragingloli's avatar

They were called “Gauleiter” 70 years ago.

ETpro's avatar

@jerv You got a birth certificate to prove that? :-)

I’d stand even less chance than Donald Trump getting elected when they opened my closet and pulled all the skeletons out.

@tedd It’s fairly easy for someone in Romney’s class to set up off-shore bank accounts in places like Switzerland and dummy post-office-box corporations in tax havens like the Bahamas and the Cayman Islands, have the dummy corporations bill their US profit center enough to wipe out all its paper profits, and pay no US taxes of any kind other than perhaps some excise tax on gasoline for the limousines. Set up a hobby farm, say to raise and train dressage horses that don’t win any prize money, and you can even get $50 thousand back from Uncle Sam in farm subsidies.

Hey, wait a minute! No freaking wonder Romney won’t release his back taxes!

jerv's avatar

@ETpro It may be wise to keep my birth certificate hidden; thanks to Romney, I’m embarrassed to have actually been born in MA.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther