# Rebublican use of the term "class warfare" **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 18, 2011, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727 "2011-09-18T18:12:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2011, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/21 "2011-09-18T22:08:22Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > It’s 0.5% of the population or so. No, you are wrong. It’s closer to 0.1% of the population. You are off by a factor of 5. [according to the Wall street Journal,](http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2007/02/01/the-rich-o-meter/) INCOME GROUPS IN THE U.S .Median — $25,076 Top 10% — $87,334 Top 5% — $120,212 Top 1% — $277,983 Top 0.5% — $397,949 Top 0.1% — $1,134,849 Top 0.01% — $5,349,795 ---
**Author:** ![user\_hostile](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/user_hostile/32/474_2.png) [@user\_hostile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/user_hostile)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2011, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/22 "2011-09-18T22:19:14Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > What strikes me most about the phrase is exactly that, it harkens to another era. Its like appealing to the “John Birch” element of the GOP, but Shirley they are all dead by now? Is this a whoosh? You don’t think the Tea Party is just a re-packaged version of John Birchers? I don’t see a difference other than what’s on today’s agenda; they’ve changed from commies in government, fluoridation, and rock roll to socialism, class-warfare, and universal healthcare. The baseline ideology is still the same from the 50’s: the totalitarian threat is from your fellow godless, unpatriotic Americans who want to destroy this country. The paranoia and fear mongering that the John Birch Society promulgated in Arizona when I was kid in the 60’s seems no different from today’s Tea Party on the national level. And start calling me surly! ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2011, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/23 "2011-09-18T22:27:50Z")
> [@joebuck20](#): > > “Class warfare” has about as much validity as the bullshit term “job creators.” But will these terms work for the Republicans? In other words, will using these terms get them elected? Will the American public buy the term “class warfare” when it refers to a small tax increase for the top one-tenth of one percent income earners of the population? Will this tax increase destroy these folks? Damage them? Inconvenience them? Would someone making, say $1,250,000/year be crushed if they were asked to pay a bit more tax on $250,000 of that? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2011, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/24 "2011-09-18T22:40:28Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > No, you are wrong. It’s closer to 0.1% of the population. You are off by a factor of 5. > > [according to the Wall street Journal,](http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2007/02/01/the-rich-o-meter/) > > INCOME GROUPS IN THE U.S > .Median — $25,076 > Top 10% — $87,334 > Top 5% — $120,212 > Top 1% — $277,983 > Top 0.5% — $397,949 > Top 0.1% — $1,134,849 > Top 0.01% — $5,349,795 No, you’re wrong. [http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/07in11si.xls](http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/07in11si.xls) Row 56: 390,820 returns that show income $1M+ out of the total of 96.25M That’s 0.4% - ok, I was a little off. But way more precise than your number. ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2011, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/25 "2011-09-18T22:48:27Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > No, you’re wrong. > > [http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/07in11si.xls](http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/07in11si.xls) > > Row 56: 390,820 returns that show income $1M+ out of the total of 96.25M > > That’s 0.4% - ok, I was a little off. But way more precise than your number. Back to you being wrong. You said as a percentage of population not as a percentage of filers. So unless you can prove to the rest of us there are only 96.25 million people in the US you remain wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2011, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/26 "2011-09-18T22:50:27Z")
> [@boytyperanma](#): > > Back to you being wrong. You said as a percentage of population not as a percentage of filers. So unless you can prove to the rest of us there are only 96.25 million people in the US you remain wrong. How is “percentage of population” relevant? Do you count all the newborns, toddlers and 80-year-olds too? ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2011, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/27 "2011-09-18T22:55:40Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > How is “percentage of population” relevant? Do you count all the newborns, toddlers and 80-year-olds too? Hey your the one that brought up percentage of population, I’m just pointing out your mathematical error. Sure you can exclude the newborns and toddlers. Why on earth should 80y/o’s not be included? ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2011, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/28 "2011-09-18T22:57:07Z")
> [@joebuck20](#): > > “Class warfare” has about as much validity as the bullshit term “job creators.” This is the doublespeak that burns me. “Job Creators” :rolleyes:. You know who the job creators are? _Consumers_. Not business owners. Business owners aren’t motivated by creating jobs, they only create jobs when consumers create a need. If I open a restaurant, I’m not creating any jobs unless I have people come eat there. _They_ create the need for waitstaff, cooks, dishwashers, food distributors, farmers, ranchers, etc. Want to create jobs? Don’t cut taxes for the wealthiest 2%. _Raise_ taxes for them. If they want to make money they have to “create jobs” anyway! Put money in the hands of the middle class and below, who have to spend their money on _actually_ creating jobs. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2011, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/29 "2011-09-18T22:57:44Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > How is “percentage of population” relevant? Do you count all the newborns, toddlers and 80-year-olds too? It’s relevant because you said "top 0.5% of the POPULATION, and I said no, it’s top 0.01% of the POPULATION, and then you moved the goalposts to be “percent of filers”. > [@Terr](#): > > The deficit is $1.5T. That extra tax on high earners will bring in $100B. That reduces the deficit by 7%. > > How are you going to tackle the remaining 93%? The point of the OP, in case you missed it is that Paul Ryan is NOT saying "Gee that tax on millionaires will not tackle enough of the deficit. He IS saying “OMG Class Warfare has broken out against our poor downtrodden millionaires!!!11one1!!” ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2011, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/30 "2011-09-18T23:00:20Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > How is “percentage of population” relevant? Do you count all the newborns, toddlers and 80-year-olds too? I’d wager that some of the folks making in excess of $1,000,000 would be over 65, and even 80 years old! Just because you’re 80 does not mean that your wealth disappears, and you stop making an income on your investments. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2011, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/31 "2011-09-18T23:48:10Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > OK, assuming those categories are all independent: > Minorities: 27.6% > Women: 50.7% > Gays: Less precise figures are available, but let’s be conservative and call it 5% > Poor: Again, let’s be conservative and restrict this just to the poverty line. That makes it 14.3% > Other groups: This is poorly defined, of course, but let’s just say college students (about 4%) and non-Christians (24%). > > Put it all together, and you find that Democrats are representing only 79% of the country, leaving that 21% of Real Americans nowhere to turn but the Republicans. You are assuming that by courting one group you don’t alienate another. If you are a white, straight, middle class, religious woman which of those is more a part of your self identity? If they walked into a group with white men and black women who would they be more comfortable with? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2011, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/32 "2011-09-19T00:25:13Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > It’s relevant because you said "top 0.5% of the POPULATION, and I said no, it’s top 0.01% of the POPULATION, and then you moved the goalposts to be “percent of filers”. It’s pretty obvious that “% of population” is irrelevant in the context of paying taxes. % of filers is. > [@](#): > > The point of the OP, in case you missed it is that Paul Ryan is NOT saying "Gee that tax on millionaires will not tackle enough of the deficit. He IS saying “OMG Class Warfare has broken out against our poor downtrodden millionaires!!!11one1!!” When you advocate raising taxes on only one particular group, you’re penalizing that group. You can call it “warfare” or “penalizing” but the meaning is the same. I am sure if Obama advocated raising taxes across the board, INCLUDING the “millionaires”, there would be no talk of “class warfare”. Because there wouldn’t be any. ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2011, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/33 "2011-09-19T00:32:10Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > It’s pretty obvious that “% of population” is irrelevant in the context of paying taxes. % of filers is. If it’s so obvious why didn’t you make the distinction in your post? Population and filers being different things you know is pretty obvious to the rest of us. You could say oops my mistake and move on or you could go on insisting everyone else was wrong and look like a fool. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2011, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/34 "2011-09-19T00:43:41Z")
> [@boytyperanma](#): > > If it’s so obvious why didn’t you make the distinction in your post? Population and filers being different things you know is pretty obvious to the rest of us. > > You could say oops my mistake and move on or you could go on insisting everyone else was wrong and look like a fool. “Euphonious” cited WSJ’s article to support his numbers which said nothing about percent of population. Why? Because it’s irrelevant to the subject matter. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2011, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/35 "2011-09-19T01:37:16Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > When you advocate raising taxes on only one particular group, you’re penalizing that group. You can call it “warfare” or “penalizing” but the meaning is the same. > > I am sure if Obama advocated raising taxes across the board, INCLUDING the “millionaires”, there would be no talk of “class warfare”. Because there wouldn’t be any. I’m not convinced that “penalizing” has the same meaning as “warfare”. In fact, I’m quite confident that they have quite different meanings. It may have escaped your attention, but there is currently a progressive tax system in place in the United States, whereby marginal tax rates increase with increasing income. I am given to understand that there are currently 6 income brackets and tax rates, ranging from 10% to 35% with the top rate of 35% being applied to that income which is above $379,151. So I guess you would say there is currently “class warfare” going on right now, with those making over $379,151 per year the victims of said warfare. But then again, you’re probably on board with the “income tax is theft” meme as well. I really don’t see how the Republicans can continue to vigorously defend those making over $1 million/year in the next election cycle. So, is it advantageous to the Republicans to vigorously defend the group or “class” of multimillionaires? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2011, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/36 "2011-09-19T01:59:53Z")
That seems to be how they’re betting, that with enough money to flood the airwaves, they can make it happen. I wish I was sure it wouldn’t work. But they are going to have a metric buttload of money. They can make sure enough people are pissed off and miserable, all they have to do is pin the blame on Obama. Might help if they can trim the Dem turnout a bit. Yeah. It can be done. And they are damned sure going to try. We live in interesting times. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2011, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/37 "2011-09-19T02:04:57Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > I’m not convinced that “penalizing” has the same meaning as “warfare”. In fact, I’m quite confident that they have quite different meanings. > > It may have escaped your attention, but there is currently a progressive tax system in place in the United States, whereby marginal tax rates increase with increasing income. I am given to understand that there are currently 6 income brackets and tax rates, ranging from 10% to 35% with the top rate of 35% being applied to that income which is above $379,151. So I guess you would say there is currently “class warfare” going on right now, with those making over $379,151 per year the victims of said warfare. Yes, but that war has been fought already. When you’re increasing just one of those brackets, and leave others the same, you’re starting a new war. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2011, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/38 "2011-09-19T02:42:16Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Yes, but that war has been fought already. When you’re increasing just one of those brackets, and leave others the same, you’re starting a new war. Jesus, get a grip on reality, wouldja? It’s not a “war” to ask a tiny percentage to pay more taxes. Particularly when that tiny percentage has done very, very well (disproportionately well) over the past 20 years. It is too much to get them to help keep their country from heading into the toilet? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2011, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/39 "2011-09-19T02:51:19Z")
Careful, Pubs. Repeat “Class War!” often enough and a lot of Americans are going to start looking for the recruiting center. And not to enlist on **your** side. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2011, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727/40 "2011-09-19T05:11:59Z")
Most Americans are still comfortable, but worried. All the Republicans have to do is convince them that there is no help possible for the poor, that they don’t deserve it anyway, and if they don’t turn their backs, then they will become poor as well. So if you don’t want your kids to grow up to be toothless meth freaks in trailers, vote Republican. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rebublican-use-of-the-term-class-warfare/596727.md?page=3)