patrick.net

The way you divide groups, and the way you made your bet, all those are interesting.
I don't dispute group A and D, but for B and C... it looks like something chunky is missing there. The group A would be super rich class that is representing less than 5% of US population, group B would be upper class rather than middle class, and this would be 10%. Group C would be lower middle class or just those blue collar class. So actual middle class is missing in your groups.

Anyway, if actual war broke out b/w classes, group A and B won't get a chance. Group A will flee to the other country with their money. Why the hell this kinda people would fight? Group B will be outnumbered and they can't fight. In fact, aren't they earning bread with thier lip service? That's great money earning tool in peaceful world with little aid of the system, but that's one of the useless skill in the war time. I can hardly think they can be a good match for whole those "nothing to loose" people and "crime" experts.

Oh, man. this looks like a reason to tax the riches. :P

seaside says

The group A would be super rich class that is representing less than 5% of US population, group B would be upper class rather than middle class, and this would be 10%. Group C would be lower middle class or just those blue collar class. So actual middle class is missing in your groups.

I'm actually using the traditional definitions of upper, middle, and lower class. I make a distinction between "poor" and "working class" though, because the traditional definition doesn't fit (the bottom class would have been slaves or dead in years past).

"upper class" has never meant "top third" -- traditionally it referred to royalty and the like.

There is a huge difference between people who are struggling to get by and living paycheck to paycheck and people who are actually getting ahead in the world. There is an even bigger difference between those people and the people who have so much money that they'll never have to work at all.

So many people seem to thirst for a violent overthrow. A "French Revolution" probably replete with guillotines. I just can't see it happening here. The French radicals of the time had Enlightenment, they had ideas about citizenship and inalienable rights to pitch, against a monarchy that had centuries of feeling blessed by God in their position over the peasants. Over here, the rich lay claim to the SAME sorts of ideas as the peasants, they just are "more equal" in practice. I rather expect if it started to come down to someone being dragged to a guillotine, some political compromise would appear tout de suite.

You can be sure that quadruple redundant precautions are in place that would prevent the people from ever having control of our military. There is only one group that could do that. And ummm...as was said earlier...

Kevin says

I guess that’s not so far off of present politics.

thunderlips11 says

One thing that struck me in your post, is that in “Classic America” - 1950s, 1960s, 1970s - truckers, secretaries, factory workers, etc. were considered “Middle Class” because they owned a home, had pension benefits, etc. By the definition you posted, today they would be considered “Working Class” because it’s increasing rare to see non-professionals with enough income and benefits to equal that of former generations - and also, they don’t have that technical expertise that Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers, etc. have.

Yep, that pretty much sums up what happened to the middle class over the last 30-40 years. There used to be both white collar and blue collar middle class people. These days, it's very difficult to be blue collar and really be middle class. We all know what happened so it's no use rehashing.

Probably the only remaining blue collar work that will still secure you a comfortable middle class lifestyle are the trade skills (plumbers, electricians, etc.) Unfortunately, kids don't seem interested in trades anymore.

Nomo, "52.6% of Americans recieve significant income from government programs" according to a study by Gary Shilling, an economist in Springfield NJ. 1 in 5 have a government job that PRODUCES NOTHING. 1 in 5 recieve socialized insecurity payments, 19 M recieve food stamps, 5 M get subsidized housing, 2 M get educational grants, millions of farmers get government subsidies, etc, etc, etc. And a majority of Americans say federal income taxes are too high (Gallop poll - April 2010). Being as smart as you are, how come you don't know this stuff???

Honest Abe says

1 in 5 have a government job that PRODUCES NOTHING

huh? Who defines what NOTHING is?

Honest Abe says

1 in 5 recieve socialized insecurity payments,

That's clever. You inserted "in" in front of security. Well done.

Honest Abe says

And a majority of Americans say federal income taxes are too high (Gallop poll - April 2010).

I thought half of Americans didn't pay any Federal income taxes? So that means everyone who paid income taxes at all thought they were too high. Sounds like a very important and well thought out survey.

Produce something...like a product, that can be sold. You know - a widget, a car, a buggy whip. Government does not produce anything that it sells. It simply sucks off those who are producing products.

I see you like my "socialized insecurity", thank you. Its becoming true, isn't it? A smaller and smaller group of workers are being forced to support a much larger and aging group of people. You've seen some of the comparisons from 30 - 40 years ago to today, haven't you?

And you accidentally (or intentionally) missed the point that a majority of Americans say federal income taxes are too high. Yes, approximately 50% of Americans pay no federal income tax. Of those who do pay federal taxes, a majority say federal income taxes are too high. How on earth would you conclude "So that means everyone who paid income taxes at all thought they were too high"...no, it means a majority of Americans say federal income taxes are too high. You appear to be failing or refusing to understand that simple statement. Come on, you can do better than that.

Honest Abe says

And you accidentally (or intentionally) missed the point that a majority of Americans say federal income taxes are too high. Yes, approximately 50% of Americans pay no federal income tax. Of those who do pay federal taxes, a majority say federal income taxes are too high. How on earth would you conclude “So that means everyone who paid income taxes at all thought they were too high”…no, it means a majority of Americans say federal income taxes are too high. You appear to be failing or refusing to understand that simple statement. Come on, you can do better than that.

No--I don't think I missed the point at all. Did you mean to say "A majority of Federal Income taxpaying Americans think taxes are too high"? Because that's not what you said. Otherwise it's simple logic. 50% of Americans don't pay taxes, so that means 50% do pay taxes. So far so good, right? Next you said 50% of Americans think taxes are too high. Now, if you pay no taxes, I'm not sure how you could think your taxes are too high. So that means the entire 50% that do pay taxes must think they are too high, right?

Okay- you didn't miss the point, you attempted to manipulate the point. Again, the statement was that "a majority of Americans say Federal income taxes are too high". As I said, this was the result of a Gallup poll from April of this year. Go ahead, spin it all you want, it won't change the results.

Is your frustration due to the fact "your side" does not represent the majority of Americans? Your side is a small, bitter, manipulative, divisive, very vocal part of America. Is that the problem?

Honest Abe says

Is your frustration due to the fact “your side” does not represent the majority of Americans? Your side is a small, bitter, manipulative, divisive, very vocal part of America. Is that the problem?

I was just having some fun with you Abe and trying to show how ridiculous that survey was..

Okay. I don't know how Gallop conducts polls. Maybe they poll just taxpayers. Maybe they just randomly sample several thousand people without knowing whether they are federal taxpayers, or not. I don't know.

BTW, just out of curiosity, do you think Gallop is a credible source?

Honest Abe says

Okay. I don’t know how Gallop conducts polls. Maybe they poll just taxpayers. Maybe they just randomly sample several thousand people without knowing whether they are federal taxpayers, or not. I don’t know.
BTW, just out of curiosity, do you think Gallop is a credible source?

Good question. I think studies of poll accuracy haven't shown Gallup to be particularly reliable. But I would need to do some research before really drawing any conclusion.

Nomo, good point - drilling down a little deeper - so why is it you won't drill down on issues?
Oh, I don't know, like why doesn't our currency have a definition? There is no definition, no code, no statute anywhere in the law that defines what a dollar is. That in itself is dishonest, just as having no definition of "a gallon" would be dishonest. Why not drill down on that for awhile?

I know what Nomo wants to say...

Honest Abe says

so why is it you won’t drill down on issues?

Right back atcha.

Americans thinking their taxes are too high is irrelevant. "Most Americans" believe a lot of shit that isn't true.

Why not poll americans to ask what their taxes should be? I'll bet that almost all of them give a number that is in direct conflict with what they believe the government should provide.

Seriously. The American people LOVE social security (dedicated tax), LOVE medicare (dedicated tax), and LOVE the mlitary. They won't cut any of those things, so instead they'll bitch about needing to cut some bullshit program that has a tiny budget.

Most americans know jack fucking shit about the federal (or local, for that matter) budget.

This is because most human beings operate this way. The same idiotic protests against spending cuts at the same time as protests against tax increases are happening all across all wealthy countries right now.