Comments on: Obama’s Wealthy, Educated Supporters

By: Bob

Bob — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:15:13 +0000

Actually gerryf, that’s exactly what Kansas was talking about. The whole theory was that working class people were going against their economic interests. My big problem with that was always that how does someone who is rich getting a tax break actually go against my own economic interest. That and I believe people can vote for things besides money.

By: wj

wj — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:19:12 +0000

In addition to Tully’s excellent point (why worry about higher taxes if you already have more than you can ever spend?), consider. Some people actually believe in the virtue of fairness, even if it is not in their personal economic interest. I can (and do) believe that the capital gains tax rate ought to be identical to the tax rate for wages and salaries. And that SS taxes ought not to cap out at $100,000 (or wherever it is this year).

Would it raise my personal taxes? Yup. Some years, it would raise them substantially, even though I haven’t managed to achieve the “more than he can ever spend” position. But it would still be the right thing to do. (Pretty much Buffett’s position on the subject to — especially when he discovered that a secretary in his company paid a higher rate than he did.)

By: meg

meg — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:37:14 +0000

For a more accurate analysis of the numbers Brooks uses so erroneously, see our original report here: http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/analysis/321

By: Justin Gardner

Justin Gardner — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:07:17 +0000

@Jill – Alan Stewart Carl wrote this post.

By: Jill

Jill — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:07:34 +0000

Justin - how would this research influence what you've written re: the value of small donors?

By: Tunde

Tunde — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 13:58:25 +0000

I guess in Mr. Brooks’ world you should always vote for the politician who lets you keep most of your money. How very innovative and evolved.

By: michael reynolds

michael reynolds — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 13:56:22 +0000

Working class people have been voting against their economic interests, why shouldn’t the rich? Why should it surprise us that wealthy, educated people care about issues other than money?

By: gerryf

gerryf — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 13:52:41 +0000

I don’t know–perhaps these people realize that a a system that only favors the richand greedy is detrimental to the nation as a whole.

When you trot out your Kansas analogy, your problem here is that you are equating “personal interest”" with money.

What’s the Matter with Kansas postulates that the people of Kansas are voting against ALL of their interests.

Maybe this information technology class (Google executives, as you called them), can see beyond ONLY selfish personal needs and can see the bigger picture.

By: Tully

Tully — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 13:49:33 +0000

The uber-wealthy aren’t all that bothered by higher taxes. They already have more than they can spend, and lots of ways to reduce their “income” to near nothing, as Warren Buffet does. The effective rate of taxation on the very wealthy will never be higher than the corporate tax rate, and usually closer to the capital gains rate.

And once out of the $100k/yr or so limit on SS taxes, the marginal rate automatically drops.

Just something to think about.