ISSUE Thread: The Middle Class

[shugah]

Hillary Clinton

Economic blueprint to restore the American middle class includes:

* Lowering taxes for middle class families.
* Providing quality, affordable health care to every American.
* Making college accessible and affordable.
* Confronting the growing problems in the housing market.
* Bolstering retirement security by promoting savings and investment.
* Returning to fiscal responsibility and moving towards balanced budgets.
* Harnessing innovation to create the high-wage jobs of the 21st century.
* Creating a $50 billion Strategic Energy Fund to jumpstart research and development of alternative energies.
* Strengthening unions and ensuring our trade laws work for all Americans.

Details: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/middleclass/

Barack Obama:

Provide Middle Class Americans Tax Relief
* Provide a Tax Cut for Working Families
* Simplify Tax Filings for Middle Class Americans

Trade
Obama believes that trade with foreign nations should strengthen the American economy and create more American jobs. He will stand firm against agreements that undermine our economic security.

Technology, Innovation and Creating Jobs
Obama will encourage the deployment of the most modern communications infrastructure to reduce the costs of health care, help solve our energy crisis, create new jobs, and fuel our economic growth.

Labor
Obama will strengthen the ability of workers to organize unions. He will fight for passage of the Employee Free Choice Act. Obama will ensure that his labor appointees support workers' rights and will work to ban the permanent replacement of striking workers. Obama will also increase the minimum wage and index it to inflation to ensure it rises every year.

Details: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/

[rinsd]

1. K&R for issues discussion though I think there may be too many elements for decent discussion.

[shugah]

3. i know

i do grow weary of GD: P, so i'm perusing the candidates websites again, and it really is all very interesting where they stand on the issues that will really affect you and me, our kids, our parents, etc.

the economy is the issue that is most mentioned as "the important issue, the issue that voters are most concerned about." it's interesting and (to me, anyway) important to see what the candidates propose.

thanks for the K&R! :hi:

[panAmerican]

2. I'd like us to make headway in the national debt as well

We've deferred too long on this issue, and that makes us much more vulnerable to the whims of sovereign wealth funds, or ultra-wealthy individuals.

[shugah]

4. fiscal policy (Obama)

Barack Obama's Plan

Restore Fiscal Discipline to Washington
* Reinstate PAYGO Rules
* Reverse Bush Tax Cuts for the Wealthy
* Cut Pork Barrel Spending
* Make Government Spending More Accountable and Efficient
* End Wasteful Government Spending

Make the Tax System More Fair and Efficient
* End Tax Haven Abuse
* Close Special Interest Corporate Loopholes

Details: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/fiscal/

[shugah]

6. Clinton's Economic Plan

HILLARY CLINTON’S ECONOMIC PLAN:

As President, Hillary Clinton will be a responsible steward of the economy and address the challenges facing the middle class. Hillary has laid out her economic blueprint for the 21st century, a comprehensive agenda that

* Creates good jobs essential to broad-based prosperity;
* Restores fairness to our economy;
* Renews the basic bargain that if you work hard, you can get ahead; and
* Puts America’s fiscal house in order again.

Details: http://hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=4283

[shugah]

11. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton about Fiscal Policy & Economy

this site describes views and positions of both candidates side by side on fiscal policy:

http://www.vote-usa.org/Issue.aspx?Issue=BUSEconomy&Office=USPresident&Election=20081104AU1000000D

(the site is vote-usa.org and they state that they are non-partisan.)

[panAmerican]

17. Cool, thanks

[Romulox]

5. Both sets of policy points seem bland and non-committal to me...

"...ensuring our trade laws work for all Americans."

"He will stand firm against agreements that undermine our economic security."

Not much meat on them bones. :wtf: does any of this mean in concrete terms?

[shugah]

9. there is much more detail on the website

Trade

Obama believes that trade with foreign nations should strengthen the American economy and create more American jobs. He will stand firm against agreements that undermine our economic security.
* Fight for Fair Trade: Obama will fight for a trade policy that opens up foreign markets to support good American jobs. He will use trade agreements to spread good labor and environmental standards around the world and stand firm against agreements like the Central American Free Trade Agreement that fail to live up to those important benchmarks. Obama will also pressure the World Trade Organization to enforce trade agreements and stop countries from continuing unfair government subsidies to foreign exporters and nontariff barriers on U.S. exports.
* Amend the North American Free Trade Agreement: Obama believes that NAFTA and its potential were oversold to the American people. Obama will work with the leaders of Canada and Mexico to fix NAFTA so that it works for American workers.
* Improve Transition Assistance: To help all workers adapt to a rapidly changing economy, Obama would update the existing system of Trade Adjustment Assistance by extending it to service industries, creating flexible education accounts to help workers retrain, and providing retraining assistance for workers in sectors of the economy vulnerable to dislocation before they lose their jobs.

More: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/

edit: typo

[Romulox]

37. "Obama will work with the leaders of Canada and Mexico to fix NAFTA..."

Again, how will Senator Obama propose to "fix" NAFTA? In what ways does he believe it is deficient? Which groups of Americans have been most affected?

And, at long last, is his answer really to tell displaced workers to "get more training"? That's W. Bush's economic policy on trade, too.

[shugah]

38. a few articles re:Obama & NAFTA

Barack Obama on Monday made an aggressive pitch at Ohio’s blue-collar workers by proposing a “Patriot Employers” plan that would lower corporate taxes for companies that did not ship jobs overseas.
Patriot Employer Plan
The proposal, which came two weeks before the critical Ohio primary and just before on Tuesday’s nominating contest in Wisconsin, is the most radical any presidential candidate has put forward so far to mitigate the perceived effects of globalisation on US manufacturing.

~snip~

Mr Obama’s plan would lower the corporate tax rate for companies that met criteria including maintaining their headquarters in the US, maintaining or increasing their US workforce relative to their overseas workforce, holding a neutral position in union drives among their employees and providing decent healthcare.

The lowered rate would be paid for by the abolition of tax breaks that encourage companies to shift jobs overseas. “In the last year alone, 93 plants have closed in Ohio,” Mr Obama said. “And yet, year after year, politicians in Washington sign trade agreements that are riddled with perks for big corporations but have absolutely no protections for American workers.”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3fd059b8-de7b-11dc-9de3-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1

The economics of Barack Obama

On healthcare and on trade, argues Koffler, Obama is "moving more and more in the direction of economic freedom, competition and individual choice." This reflects the influence of Goolsbee, "who agrees with the liberal consensus on the need to address concerns such as income inequality, disparate educational opportunities and, of course, disparate access to healthcare, but breaks sharply from liberal orthodoxy on both the causes of these social ills and the optimal strategy for ameliorating them."
http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/02/04/economics_of_barack_obama/

Clinton, Obama and NAFTA: A Non-Issue?

All Things Considered, February 26, 2008 · Illinois Sen. Barack Obama wants to make something clear: When it comes to hating NAFTA — the North American Free Trade Agreement — he's way out in front of his rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton.

"Sen. Clinton, as part of the Clinton administration, supported NAFTA," Obama says. "In her book, she called it one of the administration's successes."

The very suggestion that she might like NAFTA made Clinton furious.

"This is wrong," Clinton says. "And every Democrat should be outraged. So shame on you, Barack Obama."

The two candidates seem to really hate NAFTA. And they both seem to hate even more the idea that someone might get the impression that they don't hate NAFTA, or that one of them hates NAFTA a bit less than the other. To some, it's a bit odd that a 14-year-old trade agreement has suddenly become such a hot issue as the Democrats campaign in the run-up to the Ohio primary.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=38185288

Workers at the plant questioned Obama on whether NAFTA could be repealed, and he said that it could not though he wants to renegotiate parts of it to include better labor and environmental protections. He said that it when to came to trade, he believed in it deeply but that "the rules of the road have to be fair to everybody."

He argued that if trade agreements do not contain better worker and environmental and safety protections, the country would start seeing protectionist rhetoric not just from Democrats but also from Republicans.

"So what I'm trying to do is, you know, not strangling the goose that lays the golden egg. The benefits of trade apply to everybody and the burdens apply to everybody instead of just you know making some people very wealthy and a lot of people hurting," he said.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/02/24/698371.aspx

[Romulox]

39. Thanks, I've seen most of this--sounds like more Clintonian "third way" economics to me.

Obama obviously supports free trade, as evidenced by his selection of Austan Goolsbee, who also happens to be the head economist for the Democratic Leadership Counsel and the Progressive Policy Institute, as his top economic advisor.

So where's the contrast between he and Clinton? :shrug:

[smalll]

7. Pastor Wright, of course, thinks that "middle-classness" should be avoided.

That's another view on this issue. :shrug:

[shugah]

10. there are several threads about reverend wright currently active in GD: P

perhaps your concern is addressed in one of those?

i did not see any reference to Jeremiah Wright's thoughts on "middle-classness" (middle-classness???) on either of the dem candidates web sites. perhaps if it is an important issue to you you could query both or either Obama or Clinton via email or some other method?

[Patchuli]

20. I didn't realize Rev. Wright was on the ticket

but if he's not, WTF does that have to do with where the presidential candidates stand?!

[cottonseed]

8. Issues? How boring!

Seriously though, thanks for posting. For a second there, I almost forgot what we elect Presidents to do.

[shugah]

12. i know

not as hot as the distraction d'jour, but what the heck! :hi:

[knixphan]

13. indeed!

[LSK]

14. "Returning to fiscal responsibility and moving towards balanced budgets."

By endorsing McCain's gas tax holiday idea???

[shugah]

15. i don't get the gas tax holiday

at least not the mccain version. if i recall, hillary "adopted" it, but with some protection for infrastructure funding? i do not recall the details (i'll have to look, unless someone chimes in on this thread with the info). the gas tax holiday - what would it be 5 cents a gallon or so? - would not, in my opinion, be sufficient to really help with our woes. gas has gone too high too fast, and with everything else rising in price the tiny savings on gas wouldn't make much difference.

edit: 18 cent gas tax. more than 5 cents, but i still maintain that it would not be enough to make a difference.

[LSK]

16. its simple pandering because neither candidate can actually enable this

[Zodiak]

18. Thanks fortrying to steer this big, boisterous ship in the right direction with this thread

I have been reading through all of these issues (the side-by-side needs more homework...especially more recent statements) for the last 15-20 minutes.

While I appreciate that the stated demarcation of this thread is "middle class", it is specifically the addressing of the many issues of the poor as well that has contributed to my support for Obama. I believe the focus on "middle class" in the mainstream political culture is myopic and classist. The poor seem to always be excluded, but not in Barack's policies.

This is the reason I used to be an Edwards supporter. Populism. Every one of us is American, not just the middle class and up.

[shugah]

23. i only got 3 posts a day!

thank you for your input. i'm trying to add various info from various sources to these threads because it would actually be kind of cool to discuss the issues (so far, the issue threads are tending to sink, despite the cries of "let's discuss the ISSUES!" no surprise there, then. ;-) )

i'm actually learning more about the candidates while trying to explore, in a little more depth, the policies and positions of both Obama and Clinton.

the next issue thread i start will be poverty because i'm glad that you took the time to read this thread, and comment on it.

:hi:

[Zodiak]

24. I read your links, too

I try to be an informed voter, and while the latest shiny, manufactured outrage needs a little counter-argument, I do like to exercise my citizenship in the Jeffersonian sense, as well by getting informed.

Keep doing what you are doing...one of the nobler efforts in GDP, I would say.

[Prophet 451]

19. Where's the tax hike for the rich and corporations?

I notice that neither list presented here includes the much-needed hike in corporate tax. There was a time when corporations paid around half of the US government's revenue. Today, it's down to around 7%.

While I appreciate that campaign platforms are usually long on generality and short on specifics, there's a few questions that need to be addressed. For example, when Senator Clinton talks about make college affordable and accessable, how does she plan to do so? I can think of a dozen different ways to do that. Also, maybe this is the cynic in me but "Bolstering retirement security by promoting savings and investment" sounds horribly like the return of privatising Social Security.

Also, while I don't dispute it's necessity, why if HRC's healthcare plan under "Economy"?

[Zodiak]

25. Well, here is the current political climate on that issue

Our raw corporate rates are higher than Europe right now, and that little fact gets thrown in our faces every time we talk about tax hikes for corporations. (I think it is like 35% for the US and 30% for Europe).

Now you and I both know that our corporations do NOT pay their full 35% because of numerous tax loopholes and the Europeans do, but that raw number is what the frame of the argument will be. Hence, you will note the absence of the corporate tax rate as an issue in our body politic.

You will also note that Obama has mentioned closing tax loopholes for corporations that offshore, which may not drive the raw rate higher, but it will get that revenue percentage higher than 7%, which at present is a fucking travesty of justice against the people since corporations use and put more wear and tear on our infrastructure.

I am afraid that right now in the US, the most we can hope for is a tepid attempt to reign in corporate interests. For a populist like me, it sucks to see us so far down the corporatist trail, but that is where we are.

[Prophet 451]

26. In fairness, we're only two steps behind you

I'm a Brit. Thanks to Thatcher and Blair's "free market uber alles" approach, we're only a couple of steps behind teh US in terms of corporatism.

According to last week's Independent, the average corporate tax rate in Europe is around 33%. That's misleading though since many nations (such as France) demand that corporations make large contributions to the healthcare of their employees (effectively, the corporation pays X Francs to the government for each employee). You're right in that simply closing the more egregious loopholes would drive that revenue percentage way higher. Apparently, at present, teh tax code contains so many loopholes that only around a quarter of US corporations pay tax at all and a significant few have arranged matters so the government owes them money.

Incidently, I figured out why HRC's healthcare plan is under "Economy". *kicking self* I'm going to call that one a senior moment.

EDITED for typos

[shugah]

29. i agree that something needs to be done about corporate taxes

i'll see if i can find anything that addresses it from the candidates.

neither of the candidates makes clear in all cases how they plan to fund their proposed plans - i make assumptions that getting out of iraq will free up lotsa $.

wouldn't it be cool if someone had asked about a tax hike for corporations in one of the brazillion debates?

[Prophet 451]

33. Getting out of Iraq will cost a fortune in the short-term

Logistically, the sheer amoutn of troops and equipment to be moved will make it expensive in the short-term. Of course, once they're out, that should free up the estimated $341 million a day (from costofwar.com). Even if we assume that a fair amount of that will have to go to paying down the staggering defecit, that's a lot of cash to play with. If we assume some cuts to the positively obscene military budget (just eliminating the obsolete programs saves around 13 billion a year) then you end up with a pretty hefty chunk of change.

[shugah]

21. Obama Interview in Indiana

Obama says his first issue is putting people back to work.

"600 workers were left without jobs. Unemployment here in Anderson is about seven percent. Anderson, dramatically outpacing the rest of the country," said Obama.

During an exclusive one-on-one after the town hall meeting, Obama outlined his three-part plan for the nation. It begins with a focus on foreclosures.

Obama began, "Until we get our housing market stabilized, we're going to continue to see problems and that's why I've got a $10 billion home foreclosure prevention fund that I've proposed to get homeowners to stay in their homes."

"Number two - we have to invest in infrastructure, roads, bridges, broadband lines in rural communities and under served communities. That puts people back to work immediately but also makes our economy more competitive."

"Number 3 - green energy. We've got a serious energy problem. Everybody knows it from high gas prices. It's also an opportunity. Because if we transition to solar and wind and bio diesel energy efficient buildings, energy efficient cars, we're going to have to create new jobs to harness those new technologies and I'm going to invest $150 billion ever single year over ten years to make sure we're creating these new jobs for the future," he said.

More: http://www.wthr.com/Global/story.asp?S=8239846&nav=menu188_2

[shugah]

22. Interesting commentary from the Guardian

Hard times
Fear of recession has suddenly changed the landscape of electoral politics. In both the US and the UK, the parties of the left are scrambling to adjust
April 24, 2008

But you can see something similar happening in Democratic presidential candidacy race in the United States too, where the politics of the pre-lapsarian economic order - the pre-sub-prime America that was dominated by arguments about George Bush and Iraq and embodied by the Barack Obama campaign - are struggling to maintain momentum in the post-lapsarian conditions of 2008, where jobs and incomes and prices suddenly matter much more and to which Hillary Clinton gives a voice.

~snip~
The American problem takes a different form, but it is rooted in the same reality of economic downturn. When the primary season began in 2007, the dominant issue, just as in the 2006 midterms, was still the Iraq war. As a result, Obama generated immense and unexpected political traction around the issue of rejecting not just Iraq, but the politics of those who had sanctioned Iraq - principally the Republicans, but also those Democrats who had rallied behind Bush in 2001-03, either out of conviction or tactical calculation, Clinton prominent among them.

That sense of offering an inspiring break from not just one tarnished past but several remains a potent dynamic of Obama's campaign, and is strong enough in all probability, to carry him to the nomination. Yet, if Americans had felt economically secure, he would almost certainly have had the nomination wrapped up several months ago. The reason he has not is because, as several primaries, most recently the one in Pennsylvania, have shown, the context of the campaign has changed. In Pennsylvania, the key issues for Democratic voters this week were: the economy 55%, Iraq 27% and health care 14%. And the candidate who speaks more consistently to these priorities is Clinton.

More: http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/martin_kettle/2008/04/hard_times.html

[Prophet 451]

27. Labour is no longer a party of the Left

Since Blair's adoption of the "New Labour" platform, the Labour party have taken a swing to the centre-right. The Liberals are the only one of the three national parties that still reside on the left.

[shugah]

28. another similarity between us

while the dem party has never been as left as i am, it has taken a definite turn to the right of late. you're luckier over there - at least you have some representation on the left.

[Prophet 451]

30. True enough

I'm fairly lucky in that my local council has gone from 100% Labour to mostly Liberal in the last five years.

The other difference is that it's a lot easier to hold our MPs to account. It's not an enforceable rule but it's expected that any MP will hold a surgery for his constituents at least once a month. A surgery is an open meeting where any constituent can turn up and ask questions or state their opinion so if they do something wrong, they can expect to catch hell about it at their next surgery. The PM and Cabinet don't hold them (for obvious reasons) but virtually all other MPs do. Our local MP here used to hold his in the university coffee shop and caught hell for voting against our version of the IWR (although he was quickly proved right on that one).

[Prophet 451]

31. self-delete, dupe

[Duder]

32. With regards to middle class voting...

I don’t know anything about this site but it has both our candidates scoring well with voting on middle class issues.

Obama’s 2008 year to date score is 75% -
http://www.themiddleclass.org/legislator/barack-obama-511

Clinton’s 2008 year to date score is 67% -
http://www.themiddleclass.org/legislator/hillary-clinton-424

McCain’s 2008 year to date score is 50% -
http://www.themiddleclass.org/legislator/john-mccain-468

[shugah]

35. that is a good "votes at a glance"

summary.

thanks! :hi:

[Armstead]

34. Thank you for posting this....In my opinion...

The candidate who actually takes the bolder steps to address the systemic inequities of Wealth and Power is the one we should support.

We have to reverse the trend towards monopolization of the economy, and restore some sense of balance between the profit motive and the economic interests of the majority.

[shugah]

36. the economic interests of the majority

are a part of the profit motive that seems to get missed in the current monopolization of the economy. wall street and the repubs really seem to think that the $300 checks are going to stimulate the economy. :eyes: