The Republican Civil War...by a Black Republican

[trof]

By John Meredith, president and CEO of Meredith Advocacy Group in Huntsville. Meredith was recently named among the top 100 Most Influential African American Republicans.


Few know and fewer care to bring attention to the fact that the Republican party was, not that long ago, for all practical purposes, not that distinguishable from the Democratic party.

Both sought and achieved governance through the middle with Democrats leaning left toward American workers while Republicans tilted right in the direction of business. Bipartisanship routinely lead to win-win scenarios for both constituencies and, as a result, all Americans prospered.

All that changed when South Carolina-based industrialist Roger Milliken began using his vast fortune to fund what we know today as the conservative movement. He sponsored two of their most influential institutions, the National Review and the Heritage Foundation.

He made possible Sen. Strom Thurmond's defection from the Democratic Party that ushered in the GOP's Southern Strategy as well as supporting the Presidential campaign of Sen. Barry Goldwater that conservatives cite as the birth of their political ideology— personal freedom, fiscal responsibility and limited government.

Although the power building technique had been employed sporadically by conservatives before, it was not until the Republican take over of Congress in the 1990s and the rise of Tom Delay that gerrymandering became the preferred method for securing Republican dominance in that legislative body.

The systematic rigging of uncompetitive districts to ensure their majority laid the groundwork for a purge of the remaining moderate, pro-governance Republican lawmakers and their supporters started by Karl Rove and Dick Cheney during the administration of President George W. Bush.
Much more at link. He covers all the bases as to what's wrong with today's Republican party.
http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/10/the_republican_civil_war_guest.html#incart_river

[KG]

1. this guy lives in a fantasy world.

[HooptieWagon]

7. Did you read the linked opinion piece?

The guy is mostly correct. I expect his moderate republican views will be savaged by the Tealibornagain.

[beac]

3. He certainly lays it all out there with one GLARING exception.

Why is HE a Republican???

Rich and wants to pay fewer taxes, I assume. Which makes him a selfish asshole, in my book.

[Reter]

5. Depends just how rich he is to be selfish

If he's filthy rich, then yes he is a greedy bastard. But I have a friend in NC, who grossed over $700,000 last year. He says he paid over $200,000 in taxes, which he says is insane (and he's right). Those types of guys who vote Republican I can understand. Everyone else though, should vote progressive.

[beac]

6. Sorry, can't agree.

Whining that you cannot live on a half a million dollars a year and therefore you will vote for the party of racism, climate destruction, and government gridlock so that you can keep a few thousand more dollars makes you a selfish asshole.

[Reter]

8. Sure he can live with $500,000 easily

But $200,000 is an awful lot. I can totally understand why he would vote for someone to save $100k a year. I make $50,000 for the record.

He's not a big political guy. He'll vote, but he's clearly not ideological. He's not a racist at all, but doesn't care about climate change and probably doesn't even know there is gridlock in Congress, because he has no idea who's even Speaker.

[beac]

10. He's sounding like more of an asshole all the time.

If anything, he should be asking why billionaires are taxed at a lower rate than he is and trying to get them to pay their fair share. The GOP is not working to help him. He is not the 1%.

I know he is your friend, so please don't take this as a criticism of you, but his ignorance is just the kind of thing that keeps the GOP in business.

[stone space]

9. 28.57% tax rate doesn't seem all that bad if you are making 700,000 a year. (nt)

[ProfessorGAC]

12. You Do Realize. . .

. . .that 200k is 28.6% income taxation and that people like my wife and i pay 27% or so on my income and i only make a little more than 20% of that?

An extra 550,000 plus dollars and he pays 1.6% more than we do, and that's insane? You're kidding, right?

Ono top of that, i pay social security on roughly 90% of my income. He's paying social security on less than 20%, so proporationally i pay a higher rate overall than your friend. And his tax level is insane?

I don't think you've thought this position all the way through.

[drray23]

16. i agree with your premise

However I suspect your numbers are off. I too am in the 28 % tax bracket (we make around 160K combined which just puts us above the 151K threshold for the 28% bracket). However, my effective tax rate is closer to 19%. Remember, you only pay the percentage in each bracket that is filled up. So, if you just make it to 28 % tax bracket, its only going to affect whats over that threshold.

Regarding the post you were replying to, this man is in thhe highest bracket (39.6%) and mainly paid in salary or such. The very rich have most of their income in investments which are taxed at 15% hence the low taxes..

source:

http://www.irs.com/articles/2014-federal-tax-rates-personal-exemptions-and-standard-deductions


So, from the link above $700,000 would make him pay:

$127962.50 + 39.6*(700000-457601)/100=195834 or so close to the 200K as stated in the post above with an effective 28% tax rate.


For your case of 200K, that would be 28925+0.28*(200000-148850)=43K or around 21% effective tax and thats with standard deductions.

[ProfessorGAC]

17. Fair Enough

It actually is higher than that, so the terminology is what we dispute, not the math.

I know what i pay, and i don't have enough money, even with long term retirement savings to hire and accountant to assure i pay a minimum.

Besides, neither of us are including sales tax, and since you and i are likely to spend a higher percentage of our gross income on living expenses, the effective tax rate there is higher.

And, since people like us pay SS on nearly all of our income (or at least some very high percentage) that raises the effective tax rate.

I think where we differ is that what you call an effective tax rate and what i call it are including different pieces.

[procon]

13. It's not insane, that guy is in the top 0.5% income group and only pays a 28% tax rate?

That's less tax than other people pay with a lower income. There was a time when the super rich paid 50%, or even 70%, and at one time 90%. And the country was juggernaut.

[KamaAina]

14. He needs a better accountant

[Darb]

18. He's a whiner. I know people like him.

They look at the amount of taxes and say , holy shit, $200K. Yet their effective rate is about right. His effective rate, if what he says is even true, is 28%. What rate does he think he should pay? His effective rate for SS and MC is approximately 1% while yours is 6%. Does that seem fair to you?

You should be pointing that out to him, not agreeing with him and advocating for his greedy ass on the DU.

What does this guy do to earn $700K?

[hatrack]

4. So why is he still a Republican?

Oh, money, that's right - of course.

[Bradical79]

11. He's right about a lot

but I think a big problem is that this is the natural direction that conservative principles lead to. And as to his statement at the end, what is this "middle" that he thinks the Democrats could be pushed to? What conservative principles do conservative leaning minorities have that wouldn't alienate another group (like women?). And where's the plan to deal with climate change? It's a huge problem that only becomes worse every day it is not dealt with.

[procon]

15. This was a very good political essay.

The article outlines the orchestrated demise of a political party that has outlived its shelf life.