Subscribe to liberalviewbymichael

Powered by

Saturday, September 4, 2010

“Middle Class in America”

Ok, I read somewhere that some people believe that President Obama hasn't helped the Middle class.

Now, my question to you has two parts.

Please place your answers as comments so we can have a discussion about this.

1st -- What do you think the definitions of “Middle Class in America” should be? Please include how much money a person and/or family needs to make to be a part of “Middle Class in America”.

2nd -- How do you think President Obama has helped those included in “Middle Class in America”

Don't forget to post your comments below.


Please join our group at facebook Liberal View! By Michael

also join us at MySpace Liberal View By Michael


  1. Middle Class is most accurately described as the class above lower class, but beneath upper class. In other words, it's a relative state of being. From an income standpoint, currently I would say that family with a combined total income of $50 to $125 thousand would be middle class.
    Obviously in various parts of the country the buying power of this money will vary greatly. $100,000 a year in Arkansas is a damn good living...In New York, not so much.
    In terms of how Obama has helped the middle class, the plain truth is that he hasn't. Although we were devaluing the dollar before Obama was elected, his Keynesian economic policies have further devalued the dollar. This means that each dollar now has less buying power than the day Obama took office. That hurts all classes.
    Also, we are at a NET loss in jobs, most of those were middle class income jobs. Clearly, if the Bush Tax cuts are repealed the middle class will be hurt even more. In President Obama’s State of the Union Address, he said the following in reference to Cap and Trade legislation, “I know there have been questions about whether we can afford such changes in a tough economy; and I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change.
    But even if you doubt the evidence, providing incentives for energy efficiency and clean energy are the right thing to do for our future – because the nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy.”
    In this statement, the President flatly acknowledges that the Cap and Trade legislation will immediately have a negative effect on the American economy, but writes this off by saying that it is the right thing for our future, saying that it will encourage further investment in clean energy. Surprisingly, the President is concerned about the future of the economy. All signs were indicating that otherwise being that he has proven to be an active participant in Washington’s out-of-control spending habits.
    All-in-all, it is a close call in determining what is worse: the legislation itself or the principle behind the legislation. This proposal amounts to little more than a hefty, additional tax on businesses, which, naturally, will lead to job losses and a higher cost of living. It has been established that businesses pass tax increases directly to the consumer, and this proposed legislation will be no difference. The principle behind this legislation is also of great concern.
    There are essentially two ways for the government to encourage further investment in a particular sector or sub-sector of the economy. One way is to raise taxes on companies who do not do exactly what Washington wants them to do. The other option is to offer tax breaks for companies who invest in what the government wants them to, which, in this case, is clean energy. By offering tax breaks, you are doing almost the same thing as if you went the route of raising taxes except the cost of the particular product does not go up because the business is not taking on an addition tax burden. Unfortunately, the President does not understand this rather simple economic concept.
    President Obama needs to look at the real facts of Cap and Trade. This legislation is bad for American businesses and for the American people. In a time when many are losing their jobs, this type of legislation, which leads to job cuts and a rise in the cost of living, proves unbearable. If the President is serious about making the United States a leader in clean energy, he would leave partisan politics out of it and encourage investment in clean energy by offering tax breaks for doing so. This would lead to real, sustainable progress in the way of clean energy.
    I still recall Obama stating that "under my plan (Cap and Tax) electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket"..Sounds like yet another blow to the middle class.

  2. My definiton of the middle class would be "the foder of our nation", the section of our country that is most abused and ignored at the same time.
    The Obama administration has help the middle class just by acknowledging it still exists. The fact is that even to his own detriment he has tried to improve the standard of living for the MAJORITY of the people not just the 2%. To turn this country around after 30+ years of killing off the middle class, moving production of everything overseas, waiting for something to trickle down, and 2 wars of choice is not going to happen over night. Even if Obama were to fail totally, going back to trickle down policies that got us here will most likely cause the revolt the tea baggers seem to want. Republicans want this country politically undefended. Their goal is to tear down any control the people have over their government and give it to corporations. If and when the middle class in their party figure this out we can have hope.

  3. First of all, I’m not for sure where you got your NET Loss in jobs from.

    At Bureau of Labor Statistics,
    Employment Situation News Release on Friday, September 3, 2010.

    Table B-1. Employees on nonfarm payrolls by industry sector and selected industry detail

    Seasonally adjusted [In thousands]

    Total nonfarm
    Aug 2010 -- 130,311
    Aug 2009 -- 130,082 = +229

    Total private
    Aug 2010 -- 107,870
    Aug 2009 -- 107,563 = +307

    Aug 2010 -- 18,031
    Aug 2009 -- 18,646 = -214

    229 + 307 - 214 = + 392

    -- this is a positive number in a years time -- it’s still positive if you look at the numbers given for July 2010 and Aug 2010.

  4. “I’ll save by ending George Bush’s tax breaks for people making more than $250,000 a year. They’ll go back to paying similar rates to what they paid when Bill Clinton was President. So we’ll get this done responsibly without blowing a hole in our deficit.”

    Obama said this in his speech at Newport News, Va., Saturday Oct. 4, 2008.

    President Obama was voted into office in Nov 2008 -- He never hid the fact that his plan was to end “George Bush’s tax breaks for people making more than $250,000 a year” -- and yet he got elected by a large margin.

    I would not believe anyone saying that someone making over $250,000 is Middle Class; THERFORE, the tax breaks he’s trying to end is not on the Middle Class, but on the RICH and they can afford it.

    Of course we all know that the Republicans will always work for the Upper Class and not the Lower Class, where the average person fits going with the lower end of $50,000 for Middle class that you yourself {Vincent Gore} wrote above.