Why was it so easy for republicans to gather support from the middle class for laws tht benefit the rich?
360901
Because the GOP has been more successful than the Democrats at using social issues to attract people - most who wouldn't benefit from Republican economic policies. \n\nPeople do vote against their economic self-interest, if they have a compelling enough reason. Last election cycle, the GOP made it imperative to include a gay marriage initiative on most ballots. This was their main focus, and it caused people who hated gay marriage to vote, often for the Republican party. \n\nAnother example was under the first Bush, who made flag-burning a political issue - it was an unsuccessful attempt to turn out morally conscious people to vote for the GOP, even if under close inspection, their economic policies would not have directly benefited them as much as rich voters.
706623
The tough thing here is we have a lot of definitions of "middle class", much less wealthy. \n\nPoor or low income=Under $20,000\nMiddle is somewhere between $20,000 and $75,000 but \nUpper Income is generally defined as over $200,000\nWealthy are those that make over $1,000,000 a year\n\nFormerly in the financial wealth management(financial planning) biz, I can tell you everyone uses different standards. But, in general, wealth is determined by a mix of net worth and annual income. (Someone making $100,000 yet has $1,000,000 in assets or someone who makes $800,000 yet has only $200,000 in assets would both be potential clients-as yes, they both exist.\n\nI've also noted that the more money one makes, the more tax deductions and credits they can take advantage of-there are few deductions for most middle class excepting mortgage interest or child credits yet at $200,000 and up, believe me, there are many!\nI've seen a $500,000 income reduced to $38,000 "taxable". If you have a nice income, pay for a good tax attorney!  \n\nAs to the Democrats, the estate tax only benefits the "rich"-those with over $2,000,000 in assets and will increase to 3.5 million so I believe that will be back on the table. I believe they will concentrate first on the obvious-the upper rates of $200,000 and above. We somehow have to pay for this debt we've accumulated from the lowering of taxes(revenue) and the cost of the war. It really matters not whether Republican or Democrat-when a business(or the government) loses a source of income and costs go up, you must find a way to pay! The US Govt has a lot better credit than most but sooner or later....so I'd personally be willing to give my tax break back-it wasn't much at my $40,000 a year income-and I hate to pass on the debt to my son.\n\nAnd a piece of advice-the 401k is one of the best savings vehicles ever-contribute all you can up to the limit but especially whatever your employer matches.A great deal for any income bracket!
1107462
At least you  have thought intelligently about how we middle class citizens can survive with all the burdens that hard work costs us personally!  It's a pretty innovative concept, but you are over-looking the fact that this possible solution would effect the wealthier portion of our population and really what does wealth go hand in hand with.........?.....\nPOWER, my friend...the rich would never allow such a solution!  Keep brainstorming.....perhaps a workable idea to save the debacle our government calls "retirement"...........We pay and pay and research shows that our medicare/retirement benefits (which enable us to dine on dog food) will virtually become non-existent before too long!!
1059642
Was it not the lower and lower middle class? Because education was becoming more wide spread and labor laws were appearing, more people could afford to learn how to read. Thus, periodicals and novels became more popular. \nThe lower class was powerful because it was the majority, too. Unless the question means a different sort of powerful, in which case I am confused, too. The middle class was just emerging, also... The wealthy of course had the most money. Hmmm...
1108237
The implication is oxymoronic. Like I say to all working class republicans, "You're not rich enough to be a Republican!"
142370
Bush and his running mate are for keeping the money in there small circle of the wealthy.(Big business and corporations.)The middle to low income makeing republicans foolishly believe the money will flow downhill!Bushonomics (the rich get richer and the poor,well, they just stay poor.
982073
The Democratic approach to foreign policy it that militaristic force is always the last resort and that diplomacy should be utilized more often then is currently shown. The GOP (grand old party, republicans) outwardly do not help the middle and lower class, however through lobbyists and tax cuts for the upper class (earning class of More than $200,000 a year) the GOP consistently helps the rich.
219643
For a REAL answer...Republicans generally tend to want the power to go to the states and don't believe in big government (hence the tax cuts).  Democrats generally DO want lots of federal power and believe that government-sponsored programs will cure everything.  Obviously my answer is biased too, but at least I put some thought into it.  Also, Republicans tend to be much more conservative in their moral views than Democrats.\n\nOne more thing- Both parties are made up of the rich and the poor.  Hollywood tends to be Democratic (uber rich), and people who USE government programs (uber poor) are also usually Democrats.  Republicans are made up of uber rich CEO types as well as working class people who just want to be able to use their money the way they see fit rather than have the government support the afore mentioned group of Democrats.\n\nI can't stay away from this thread!  3rd time today...I'm a teacher in a public school- not at all rich...and I'm Republican.  So it's not all about rich people vs poor people (as I mentioned above).
969766
democrats used to stand for the working class - the tried and true american while the repiublicans for the "rich".  that, however is no longer the case.  the democrats stand for the hand outs - keeping people in the same rut instead of getting them off their butts and helping them up from the poverty or low income levels.  the republican's are now standing for what the dem's used too - conservative values.  i think to my grandfather - staunch union worker and democrat. he would be utterly dusgusted with the fact that the dem's are so liberal in the values and cut and run tactics in the war on terror.
406798
Because our country is currently run by Republicans, who historically could care less about the plight of the poor and helpless.  The mindset is: "If I can be wealthy without government handouts, then everyone else can too."  They can't see that the American dream does NOT exist for a lot of people, especially minorities, and that some people have many more obstacles than White Anglo-Saxon Protestants.  It's really sad.  Hopefully we can get some Democrats in office who can help provide good legislation to help the poor and suffering.
369113
Why should a person who owns MORE than $60,000 per year support the views of the Republican Party? \n\nThe Republican Party works for the big industrials, ensuring that US Government policy is manipulated to meet the requirements of the corporations. There is no way that can be said to be Government for the people - no matter how much people earn!
1186017
Do you think they care? Republicans are greedy, self-righteous, arrogant bastards who only care about their rich, corporate buddies, their superior morality, and money!  They believe the rich are important and the rest of us should just obey their every demand, because they know what is best. Hope for a Democratic victory this election in both houses of Congress, so we restore common-sense and concern for the average Joe.
584559
If you want stuff, there will be bills.  \n\nWant more stuff? Get ready to pay more, unless you can get someone else to pay for it.  That's what rich people do.\n\nUsually it's the middle class that finances everything.  Get in line; it's milking time.  But sometimes this is worth it.  Somebody's gotta pay.
885234
you have a great point. you could consider anyone in the middle class(which is disappearing) a slave b/c the national cost of living is exceeding the value of our printed money. everyone knows that the middle/lower class works for the upper class to get rich, history hasn't changed that and i don't think anything will.
850803
First, let me editorialize my comments.\n\nI am not a wealthy person, financially. I was born and raised in Chicago, a heavily democratic city. I hate the Republican party, but, hate the Democratic party more. \n\nThat said and done, here's my response to your statement:\n\n1. Make laws to help people acheive their goals.\nThat's the republican idea. But, you cant make people make goals. Instead, this has to be taught. \n\n2. Create a stronger middle class. (Dont be afraid to tax the rich).\nThat's what democrats claim as their idea.\nProblem is, they want to tax everyone. They have what i call the "Poor people" tax: its called "Smog". Upper middle class to rich people are pretty much unaffected by smog penalties. They tend to (stereotypically) buy a new car every year. \nMy idea: Do as WE have to do: live within your means. I dont wish ANYONE'S taxes to be raised. Just because I am unaffected by it, doesn't make it ok. In fact, it then becomes a potentially illegal tax, as it discriminates against a certain group. \nI'm in favor of a 2-5% flat rate tax, on everyone. Until they want to raise it.\nThe fact is, there is much too much waste in governmental spending, and I should not have to pay for it. \n3. Seperate the church and state, without infringing on the Church's rights.\nInteresting. It seems as if the Church is being persecuted by the state. It seems the Church is persecuting the State. \nFact is, Just because someone is a christian, and runs for office, does not make a conflict. When their religion dictates what everyone else does, it becomes a problem.\n\n4. Always support your community at large and not just party affilliates. \nI so agree. I get tired of this "Bush' war, bring home the troops" nonsense, and the moral indignancy from the Republican party. \nI get tired of the Democrats degrading what the republicans have done, knowing full well, if it were their idea, they'd be praising their candidate. I get tired of the Republicans blaming the Democrats for what they do. Its nauseating. \n\n5. You owe lobbyists nothing... you owe your community everything.\nI totally agree. \nIdea for a new bill: Accepting ANY money from anyone is illegal for politicians, and public servants. \n\n6. Single, childless, young people and elderly have family and friends too.\nNot sure what this is about.\n\n7. What can we do to reduce our depenance on fossil fuels?\nIts what we apparently want. hybrid and electric cars dont seem to sell a lot.\n\nI'd like our leaders to know they are supposed to serve US, not their own interests. Easy-in, easier out. \n\nOh, and, yes, keep the troops in. No matter what party wins, we have to keep the fight going.\n\nAnd, leave my damn money alone. You make more than youre worth as it is.
788958
It has to do with the way the economy works.  George Bush has given tax cuts to the rich.  He did this because he believes (as his father and Reagan did) that if the rich have more money, they will use it to create more businesses so that they can get richer; a theory known as "trickle-down economics."  The natural side effect of more business should have been more jobs, because you need people to run those businesses.  Makes sense on the surface.  And it worked to a point, there are more businesses and the ones already there have more money.\n\nWhat this theory doesn't take into account is how businesses operate.  Businesses by nature struggle to hold onto as much money as they can.  They hire as few employees as they can at as low a rate as they can to put together the cheapest materials they can get without risking a lawsuit into a product that the businesses force the employees to make as quickly as possible (to avoid overtime) that they will then charge as much as the possibly can at the market.  So very little money is trickling down into the middle and lower classes.  Added to that, the businesses are charging outrageous prices but on products we need, so we are also having to pay more even though wages have stagnated.\n\nThis creates a huge problem.  Those formerly of the middle class having had no wage increase but definitely having price increase have slipped more and more into the lower class.  That is why the rich/poor gap is getting wider.  The businesses have money, which is attracting the rich shareholders and so that bumps the Stock market way high; and yet the money isn't getting to the consumer and so the economy is still very sluggish, because the consumer (who is also the employee) has no money to put into the system.\n\nWhich will soon provide another problem.  Pretty soon now the middle class (which will essentially be a poor class) will no longer have the money no matter what they do and the products being bought will drop off.  This will damage the businesses, and the people will begin to starve or be without clothing or shelter.  It may even have the potential to create a new Great Depression, because the money will no longer be going through the system.  Incidentally, the first Great Depression (which occurred in the 1930's) started immediately after one of America's stock market hit very high in the 1920's.  This is a bad sign actually that the market went so high so quickly, if something isn't done soon we will be in that Depression again.\n\nWhat we need to do is get the money to the poor and middle classes.  They have to spend the money to clothe and feed themselves (something businesses don't have to do).  We do this by taxing the businesses with capital gains taxes and estate taxes, while dropping property taxes (which still help the rich, but help the middle class far more).  We need to raise the minimum wage so that more employees have more buying power.  And I know this is counterintuitive, but welfare helps.  Giving money to the poor ends with them using that money to give to businesses to get their food also, so it still gets back to businesses who can then use it to pay more employees.  No matter where you cut taxes, it always gets back to the companies; but if you give it to the rich it will only help the rich.  If you give to it to the poor, it helps everyone.\n\nImmigration strangely enough helps out as well.  Those immigrants don't use welfare (no matter what you are told) because they don't want to be on a government list that is checked often and could end in their deportation (which they avoid at all costs).  So they work because they have to.  They take that money and immediately put it into businesses so they can feed and clothe themselves, so it always goes back to creating more business which helps everyone.  But it does so by forcing the businesses to put money back into the system (which they wouldn't do on their own).  Bush is
142367
diamond dave is wrong. studies do show a tendency of college educatoin level-or higher-to vote liberally; however, there are other studies that show the more wealthy an individual becomes, the higher the tendency is to vote republican. The republican party seems to help out the elites while running on moral platforms supported by uneducated bible belters who think-for some reason liberals can't figure out-that those issues are important matters for congress to discuss: these people usually vote against their self-interests. Diamond D was right about the part on asking the government for assistance, though. Democrats are more likely to ask for some kid of aid.