• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Which Party values the middle class more?

Which party values the middle class more?


  • Total voters
    27
  • Poll closed .

tarheel

Banned
Joined
Jun 14, 2015
Messages
60
Reaction score
15
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Personally I think neither care about the middle class.

The Left needs the poor to remain poor, to retain their vote.

The Right needs the rich to remain rich, to retain their vote.

We keep voting for these politicians. We keep getting lied to. They keep breaking their promises. Our national debt is still rising. It wouldn't surprise me that Independants are increasing in number because they're disillusioned with both Wings. Oh, and the attack ads are still ridiculously disgusting, petty, and dishonest.

Why should we settle for voting for the lesser of two evils? Don't we deserve better than that? So no, I'm not voting, because both candidates tow their party lines while smearing their opposing party and lying to the fools who routinely vote them into office.
 
Personally I think neither care about the middle class.

The Left needs the poor to remain poor, to retain their vote.

The Right needs the rich to remain rich, to retain their vote.

We keep voting for these politicians. We keep getting lied to. They keep breaking their promises. Our national debt is still rising. It wouldn't surprise me that Independants are increasing in number because they're disillusioned with both Wings. Oh, and the attack ads are still ridiculously disgusting, petty, and dishonest.

Why should we settle for voting for the lesser of two evils? Don't we deserve better than that? So no, I'm not voting, because both candidates tow their party lines while smearing their opposing party and lying to the fools who routinely vote them into office.

What do you mean with "middle class'? The people paying the taxes?
 
Personally I think neither care about the middle class.

The Left needs the poor to remain poor, to retain their vote.

The Right needs the rich to remain rich, to retain their vote.

We keep voting for these politicians. We keep getting lied to. They keep breaking their promises. Our national debt is still rising. It wouldn't surprise me that Independants are increasing in number because they're disillusioned with both Wings. Oh, and the attack ads are still ridiculously disgusting, petty, and dishonest.

Why should we settle for voting for the lesser of two evils? Don't we deserve better than that? So no, I'm not voting, because both candidates tow their party lines while smearing their opposing party and lying to the fools who routinely vote them into office.

I'm afraid you must first define the "Middle Class." The Middle class has been shrinking as incomes of the wealthy have been increasing. The lower end of the Middle Class is now in the poor class and the upper end of the Middle class is all that's left of the Middle Class. The numbers have shrunk. Define the numbers that we might use actual numerical data.
 
None, they need middle class votes in order to get elected, but both parties screw them over in the name of their special interests.
 
Personally I think neither care about the middle class.

The Left needs the poor to remain poor, to retain their vote.

The Right needs the rich to remain rich, to retain their vote.

We keep voting for these politicians. We keep getting lied to. They keep breaking their promises. Our national debt is still rising. It wouldn't surprise me that Independants are increasing in number because they're disillusioned with both Wings. Oh, and the attack ads are still ridiculously disgusting, petty, and dishonest.

Why should we settle for voting for the lesser of two evils? Don't we deserve better than that? So no, I'm not voting, because both candidates tow their party lines while smearing their opposing party and lying to the fools who routinely vote them into office.

Well you're partially correct, in the end neither care because politicians of any stripe need their rich donors. So Dems aren't trying to keep the poor poor as much as they're doing exactly the same as the Repubs, keeping the rich donating to their every whim.
 
Personally I think neither care about the middle class.

The Left needs the poor to remain poor, to retain their vote.

The Right needs the rich to remain rich, to retain their vote.

We keep voting for these politicians. We keep getting lied to. They keep breaking their promises. Our national debt is still rising. It wouldn't surprise me that Independants are increasing in number because they're disillusioned with both Wings. Oh, and the attack ads are still ridiculously disgusting, petty, and dishonest.

Why should we settle for voting for the lesser of two evils? Don't we deserve better than that? So no, I'm not voting, because both candidates tow their party lines while smearing their opposing party and lying to the fools who routinely vote them into office.

I don't think any of them care one way or the other. As long as most are too lacking in critical thinking to substantively evaluate their claims (and many people are, even the wealthy), it's all gravy to them.

The majority of people in the majority of socioeconomic classes are well-groomed to accept the premise of either party's claims, in the sense that they accept the implied limitations of advancement true of both of their worldviews, and they accept that hating each other means they have some kind of democratic freedom. As long as that remains true, either party is perfectly content, because the people remain distracted from calling out the self-interested nature of pretty much all mainstream politicians, and willing to vote against their own self-interests and community interests.

I imagine what drives libertarian and communist politicians will be different, since neither have a major stake in the American political pie. But I find both to be divorced from reality, at least in the way they're conceived. Libertarianism seems to be kind of self-interested and loathing of others, to the point of treating one's neighbors as the enemy. Communism, in this day and age, is just as divorced from reality as believing in unicorns.
 
I voted "other" simply because neither one of them "care" about any class. They care about themselves, and getting votes, and gaining and keeping power.
 
I'm afraid you must first define the "Middle Class." The Middle class has been shrinking as incomes of the wealthy have been increasing. The lower end of the Middle Class is now in the poor class and the upper end of the Middle class is all that's left of the Middle Class. The numbers have shrunk. Define the numbers that we might use actual numerical data.

The middle class encompasses a group of workers whose income surrounds the median income. It never shrinks. It just rises and falls as median income rises and falls. Median income has decreased in the last few years so middle class income has decreased but it hasn't gotten smaller.
 
I think there's probably less need for a middle class with so many social programs and tax credits for those with families who otherwise would've had to earn all of that money.
 
I voted "other" simply because neither one of them "care" about any class. They care about themselves, and getting votes, and gaining and keeping power.

Greetings, tres borrachos. :2wave:

Tres, the only reason they put up with us is because we pay the bills in this Country - including their salaries and any perks they can dream up! How we got to this point I'm not sure, but here we are, like chickens waiting to be plucked! :lol: If there were longer terms, maybe ten years, where they couldn't blame their predecessors for everything, we'd all be better off, and it sure would eliminate any excuse making, since we'd know better, plus saving the tedium and expense of going through an election every few years. *I'm only being half jocular here, BTW!* :lamo:
 
Middle class is really a minimum of 50k a year. Upper class is 100k a year or more. Lower class is anything under 40k a year.


Most Americans are middle class or verging on being middle class (50k or near it a year).


Many Republicans have the misconception that they are middle class when in fact if you're making 100k+ a year you are point in fact upper class or top 10% income nationally. What most Republicans do is insist they're middle class with their 100k+ incomes when the truth is they are upper class and refuse to accept that because they have a neighbor who makes 300k a year and they don't so they don't feel upper class even though they point in fact are.


That said I do believe the Republican party is more pro middle class simply via its policy. Democratic policy helps the lower class (under 40k a year). It doesn't do anything for anybody else other than tax them harder.
 
Last edited:
The Democratic party of the USA!

The best bet, everytime.
 
None of the above. The Democratic party is less bad than the Republican party. I have no idea who the "Democrat party" is other than an infantile strawman of the Right.

So since you couldn't get this basic spelling right, I guess I'll give those Commie bastards a hand. ;)
 
Personally I think neither care about the middle class.

The Left needs the poor to remain poor, to retain their vote.

The Right needs the rich to remain rich, to retain their vote.

We keep voting for these politicians. We keep getting lied to. They keep breaking their promises. Our national debt is still rising. It wouldn't surprise me that Independants are increasing in number because they're disillusioned with both Wings. Oh, and the attack ads are still ridiculously disgusting, petty, and dishonest.

Why should we settle for voting for the lesser of two evils? Don't we deserve better than that? So no, I'm not voting, because both candidates tow their party lines while smearing their opposing party and lying to the fools who routinely vote them into office.



There are three constants in North American politics, the right will press for deregulation, the left will press for some king of income leveling or "higher minimum wage" and both will leverage the "middle class" and neither will do either in a good way if done at all.

The best first hand illustration I have is the 1970's when the mantra was "the small family farm" and protecting that aspect of the "middle class".

And they both de-regulated (Jimmy Carter), added tax incentives (Jimmy Carter) and huge tax concessions (Canada and Jimmy Carter) while every jurisdiction in Canada de-regulated.

And the changes were universal, applied to all. That's why we never see small family farms any more, big agra got richer and the small farmer had to sell.

Please, do not ask any government to "help" the middle class, we are really tired of having to pay for our own KY jelly.
 
Personally I think neither care about the middle class.

Then why didn't you offer "neither" as an option? Because that's how I was coming in to vote. :lol:

And welcome to the board.
 
I'll have to go with the democrats as still being for the working man. They'll help you when you're down. A republican will kick you when you're down and call you a useless eater if you're jobless and trying to get some help. Around election time I usually ask people what's a republican ever done for you. They can't come up with a good answer other than family values or freedom or some such answer. The safety nets and many other programs to help the poor, needy, jobless, hungry children etc., always given to us by democrats are still intact but always attacked by republicans. Myself, never used the safety nets except when I was young, dad died, mom sick, we received social security to get our lives going. I've been an FDR fan ever since.
The government was there for Paul Ryan and and Ben Carson also, although they now seem to have forgotten who helped them in their time of need and are now pushing the republican b.s.
 
I went with other, mainly because even mildly organized political parties generally operate as the "factions" that our founders warned us about. Which means they operate for their own intentions, their own ideals, and for their own outcome which does not necessarily mean the middle class is in focus.

The harsh truth here is a "strong middle class" is a distortion of both a market and planned economic model. It explains well why we go with a mixed economic model, and it also explains well why certain elements of socialism prop up a middle class. Another way of saying that it is not the highest income quintile that drives economic growth, it boils down to the middle income quintile that handles the production, manufacturing, construction, etc. of our basic economic function indicators.

Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Communists, etc. all have their own ideologies when it comes to an economic model.

Republicans are outright oligarchs, interested in political security of wealth holding while pushing for key terms like trickle down or supply side economics. We know most of their economic theories are failures when we look at the wealth gap, or look at real hourly earning vs. GDP, or look at labor rate vs. productivity, or look at labor participation rate, etc. Democrats are outright union protectionists, interested in the political security of another concentration of wealth. Union funds mainly. Does have a middle class impact but at an economic expense. Either the need for less of them over time, or the development of unfunded condition of promised benefit. We know their failures. Their motives do not lead to more productivity, it leads to more system dependence. Hardcore Libertarians want an economic model so close to a market model that there would cease to be a middle class in any regard. The ultimate have and have not model. Communists (and socialists for that matter) have a similar problem, wanting a government model pushing the economic model so far towards a planned model that the same result occurs, the elimination of the middle class.

What we need is practical tax policy in concert with practical economic policy, but there is no way that will pass by our dominated (D) and (R) political system. This nation's strongest middle class historically happened to coincide with strong periods of small business entrepreneurship (tax policy,) the usage of strong infrastructure and technology investment (economic policy,) and treating the 3rd and 4th income quintile as if they were in a union without forcing them to be in a union (social policy.) Then the oligarchs (both left and right) and big unions rolled in and ultra ****ed that all up with their influence on the policy coming off the hill.

How we handle debt, how we handle international trade (and labor competition,) how we handle taxation, how we handle our own avenues of business movement, and how we handle our own economic model has suffered ever since. Stands to reason. All the charts, all the empirical data, and all economic indicators support that we harmed our middle class as we moved from a production and export economic model to an import and consumer debt economic model. Big business, big wealth, and big union won... everyone else lost.
 
If you're asking about politicians, they're all slime, regardless of party.

If you're asking about the voters, the vast majority have good intentions, regardless of party.

A better question would be; which party's policies are better for the middle class?
 
Back
Top Bottom