Saturday, January 26, 2008

This is just precious.

My original stimulus posting from yesterday elicited this comment from Reuven (good to see people actually reading my blog):

Those "rich" people you hate so much, the people actually working and adding value to America, also pay your taxes for you! The Pelosi "stimulus" package makes me feel like I've been robbed. Some guy in Watsonville will be able to get new Rims for his car, or put a down payment on a new Hummer while I'm busy building businesses and creating jobs.

I won't see a penny of this "stimulus package", and I'm being taxed twice for it. Once because I have absolutely no tax deductions (they all phase out) and twice with these lower interest rates and inflationary policy that prevents me from earning a decent fixed income on my savings.

See for some constructive suggestions.

This problem was caused by irresponsible people borrowing money they could never pay back to buy houses and cars. America decided not to treat it's citizens like babies and give them access to financial tools. And what does Joe Sixpack do? He buys a house he can only afford the "teaser payments on", two SUVs with 6 year loans, and goes BOO HOO HOO! HELP ME NANCY when he can't pay.

Be a MAN, Joe Sixpack! Sell all your crap and share an apartment with 6 people. That's what my family did when they came to this country and had no money.

So I typed up a comment of my own and checked out his link. (Dildo alert; no, literally.)

Oh, Lord. For those who don't know (I didn't), Watsonville is predominantly Hispanic/Latino. So he's covered a number of bases in one fell swoop:

  1. Racism
  2. Misogyny
  3. Classism
At the link, the posts a picture of a dildo and suggests that she buy that "stimulus package" vice her legislative one. Then he refers to the rich as "the few hard-working Americans who actually pay taxes and are productive" and the middle class as the "non-taxpaying class". He also suggests a stimulus package that will go to the wealthy ($200 for every $100,000 in savings), apparently for no other reason than to suggest a way to flip the bird to the other 99% of the country.

Okay, once we've all had a good laugh at his expense (assuming he's even serious), let me point out a few things:

  1. The bulk of the "rebates" go to middle class citizens who are likely to put this away into savings or pay off debt, and that the middle class who benefit from this (ask Krugman pointed out), most certainly do pay taxes. As part of the class of citizens who make less than $75,000 a year, I can attest to that.
  2. We're supposed to be sympathetic to this guy being "robbed" while he suggests that "Joe Sixpack" go live in an apartment with six other people? Fuck you.
  3. Finally, it's pretty clear that you view the victims of predatory lending practices as the bad guys here. "Blame the victim" type thinking typically reveals a pretty loathsome mindset, as do racism, misogyny, and classism. I don't entirely disagree with your point about living outside one's means, but I do think that you have some strange misconceptions about who pays taxes in this country, and I'm wondering if this isn't actually satire.
All that aside, thank you for reading my blog and sharing your thoughts, even if they are rather dickish.


Reuven said...

Finally, it's pretty clear that you view the victims of predatory lending practices as the bad guys here.

The latest economic crisis has its bad guys and its victims.

The "bad guys" are the people who peddled these crazy loans *AND* the folks who took out mortgages that they couldn't pay back with the hope of getting rich quick in real estate

The VICTIMS are the people who pay most of the taxes (the top 5% of wage earners), anyone trying to live off interest/dividend income (a minorty because the US has a negative savings rate), and folks whose property taxes went up because of phony valuations caused by the specu-vestors.

My blood boils when the government continues to want to prop up house prices and shower money on the very people who cased this mess.

Also, maybe if you worked harder instead of wasting your time on blogs nobody reads, you'd make more than 75K a year.

Katie said...

If this blog is a waste of time, why are you bothering to respond to it? Are you saying that you are a nobody, reuven, since you clearly read this blog?

Also, it's good to see that you think that people who make time to invest their country's future by researching the politics and policies that govern it, as well as participating in the democratic process (as we were meant to) are such nobodies as well.

Has it ever occurred to you that working to fix the current housing mess has greater import than just 'showering money on the very people who caused this mess'? Such an economic disaster has an effect on everyone, whether we make 75k or not.

I also have to laugh that you think the difference between 75k is a simple matter of 'working harder'. How hard are people who live off interest/divident income really working? It must be stressful.

To the moderator: please post or not as you see fit.

CarbonDate said...

Well, Reuven, I'm sorry that my current military service isn't "hard working" enough for you, but after a summer of working twelve hours a day, six days a week and occasionally getting rocketed in Iraq, I think I can safely say that I work harder than people who live off of interest/dividend income. By definition, if people are "living off of" that income, they don't work at all. But given your elitist attitudes toward the working class, I don't expect I'll change your mind much.

But again, thank you for visiting my blog. It's always stimulating to converse with people who share divergent viewpoints from my own.

CarbonDate said...

Point of interest: I'm not especially concerned with making more money than I do. I make more than enough money to support my current lifestyle, which is minimalist, and while you are correct that have a low readership, writing gives me a sense of satisfaction that money apparently gives to you. To each their own, but I'll continue my blogging.