The term ‘real wages’ is defined as wages after inflation, so you can’t whine about ‘real wages’ falling AND inflation as if they are two separate evils. It makes you look ignorant.

Furthermore, the inflation rate over the whole period of Bush has been 25%, and will edge a bit higher by the end of the year. The prior eight years was 22.8%. Given the shocks to the economy of 9/11, and the oil price differences in the two time periods, should the difference in inflation over the two different periods really be the basis for any sort of histrionics?

Finally, the changing demographics in who gets paid what are hard to factor into a generic ‘real wage’. Is it affected by or does it ignore the 12 to 20 million illegals? What about the changing workforce, with increasing numbers of individuals beginning to go into retirement, etc. The only ‘official’ real-wage numbers I could find go through 2004, and don’t show any sort of drop over time. The most you can say for the 2000-2004 period is that the rate of increase had lessened.

She bought a successful franchise that basically did elder-sitting — NOT nursing care, not medical care of any sort. She thought, and still thinks this is exactly the kind of thing she would like to do, but…

Shortly after starting the business, along with all the standard tax and regulation stuff mentioned by others in this thread, she had to deal with medical and nursing associations lobbying the state legislature to create new regulations that affected elderly-sitting. Suddenly she and all her employees had to have all sorts of training and certifications to simply undertake the task of ‘elderly-sitting’, never mind that they never intended to provide any sort of medical care or assistance. This was all because high-priced nurses and nursing homes were seeing a portion of their business go to lower cost providers, so regulatory hurdles were erected to make such business far less viable. The result for people like us that need someone to watch an elderly relative for a weekend at the house is that it can cost almost as much as just hiring a freaking nurse.

Unfortunately, this isn’t an isolated case or unusual story. The same thing goes on across the US in all manners of services and industries. Always, the regulations are for the ‘good of the people’. Can’t have untrained, uncertified people baby-sitting our elderly relatives! Can’t have ‘uncertified’ people selling coffins for less online. Oops, it’s not enough to have a degree in physics and education, either. YOU can’t be a teacher until you get ‘certified’. (I’ll put ANY 10 home schooled kids up against any 10 kids taught by ‘certified’ teachers using a state curriculum any day of the week.)

It’s very interesting that for almost the entire time that ‘outsourcing’ has been an scape-goat issue, the US has been at what most economists consider ‘full employment’, and that is while we’ve had between 12 and 20 million illegal aliens doing the ‘jobs Americans won’t do’. All the while, America has still continued to manufacture more than ever with mfg. output rising almost exponentially ever since the end of the Great Depression, and productivity has continued to rise. We have seen a ‘loss’ of manufacturing jobs, but it is inaccurate to say that they’ve all gone ‘overseas’. A majority of lost manufacturing jobs has been due to industrial automation, not ‘outsourcing’.

Since people like Perot, on both the left and right, pay less in taxes as a percentage of their ‘real’ income than even the lowest brackets, what we effectively have is a regressive tax system, and putting people like Pelosi or other rich people in charge of ‘reforming’ the tax system is not going to ever result in ‘real change’.

Obama is not a great speaker. AT ALL. He is a great teleprompter reader, and there is a difference.

Kennedy could speak in any venue–extemporaneously, in small groups, to large audiences–anytime, anywhere. He could connect on all levels. He was WITTY.

Obama needs the words in front of him on the little magic machine, so he can read them in a ponderous, hectoring, UP and DOWN, UP and DOWN tone. Waaah, waaah, waaaah. And WAAH!!!! His is a performance–you watch it, from afar, but you aren’t part of it. It’s the same shit, over and over and over again, like a poodle jumping through a hoop at the circus–the poodle is never going to do anything new or different.

You know damned well it doesn’t matter if you’re there or not, because Obama’s not speaking to you, or ANYONE in the audience, really–he is just digging the sound of his own voice.

And if Obama really wants to be JFK, he’s gotta grow a spine, get some geopolitical education, support a more HAWKISH national security policy (JFK was NOT the Kumbayah Kid), and stop APOLOGIZING, as if America is guilty of every wrong in the world. JFK was not a whining WEAKLING. Obama is.

He’s also shy about 13 years experience in the US House and Senate, as well as time in military service in a leadership position.

We knew JFK, and he’s no JFK. The attempted comparison is a load of bullshit, aside from being an insult.

So should we stop pretending we have a ‘progressive’ tax system, and that we can make it ‘more progressive’ by raising the tax rates of the highest brackets (usually jacking the middle brackets up higher as well in the process).

Median income per household member (incl. non-working members) is $23.5K and median household income is $46.3K. But I’m sure we could cherry-pick some different numbers if we wanted.

A single person has to pay 25% of their income at a paltry $32.5K, and a ‘head of household’ pays 25% at only $43.6K of income.

When, on average, the US population watches over 40 hours of TV a week, then, yes, maybe people could make a lot more income if they really wanted to. (Men +4 hrs/day, women +5 hrs/day, total TV each day per household: +8 hrs.)

But when that puts them up in a higher bracket, and they go from paying 15% on their total taxable income to 25% on their total taxable income, then maybe it’s not such a good idea after all.

In the case that I’m married, filing separately, and I have just under $32.5K taxable income, my federal taxes are right at $3250. If I make just over $32.5K taxable, then my taxes are at least $4890. If I make an additional $10,000 more, I only clear about $6K more after taxes, comparing after tax income in the 15% bracket and my new after tax income in the next higher bracket.

But hey, I’m paying my ‘fair, patriotic share’, helping out all those other people who are still sitting at home watching 40+ hrs of TV a week.

John: “You’re a moron. I’m a teacher.” “I can’t believe I’m even responding to you, it’s like trying to talk to a child.”

John, I hope you don’t ‘teach’ the way you ‘argue’.

“In 2004, the SEC gave five banks (and only five banks) the ability to lever up 30 or even 40 to 1 (from 12 to 1 previously). Bet you can guess the five banks. Bear, Lehman, Merrill, Morgan and Goldman. Three down.” – John Mauldin

I believe that playing that card will backfire and be unsuccessful. I also believe that playing that card is where decent Democrats and independents must decisively draw the line and censue those individuals and organizations that make that play.

We’ll see what happens.