Comments on: Lucky Duckies

By: Rojo

Rojo — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 06:56:06 +0000

Also, I’d like to observe–and this is the implicit message of Bolling’s cartoon, I think–that class warfare is ongoing. It’s time to long past time to draw up battle plans.

By: Rojo

Rojo — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 06:51:54 +0000

I currently live off about 13,000 a year, here in Portland. Unfortunately I’m classified as an “independent contractor” (even though I have one client, i.e. my bosses) and so get screwed on self-employment taxes (the percentage of my income these grab, I think I would consider scandalous even if I was filthy rich, but yes I’m biased).

I’m not complaining (anymore in this particular comment), but the idea of someone living in NYC at the same income level is unimaginable to me.

By: Rojo

Rojo — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 06:45:50 +0000

I agree that Brooks is writing in bad faith. Him and Friedman and, well, almost anyone writing for the Times (excepting Anthony Shadid, my ex-girlfriend’s sister, and perhaps a handful of others) are generally writing from bad faith. Their function, usually, is not even to fool the rubes, but to supply the talking points to make people think they’re fooling the rubes.

By: Kevin Moore

Kevin Moore — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:00:11 +0000

I remember living off of $5K a year. I don’t know how that was accomplished. The rent was really cheap. Of course, I was a college student, lived with at least 4 other people, and worked in restaurants and pizza joints where I could eat for free. Still had money for beer and smokes, somehow. Minimum wage was $3.35/hr then, too.

God, that sucked. Ahhhh, memory lane.

By: Kevin Hayden

Kevin Hayden — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 11:41:16 +0000

Yep, that $1,000/mo earner is already making only 80% of the minimum wage. So after his employer’s illegally underpaid him, he gets to pay 4% of it in taxes.

Oh wait, that was from 2002, when the minimum wage was nearing its lowest buying power ever because of GOP reluctance to raise it.

By: Kevin Moore

Kevin Moore — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 02:42:54 +0000

A grand a month is tough enough in Portland, but doable. I’ve done it before, and even with kids now, I could do it, albeit on food stamps. In New York? In the 5 burroughs? Well, I’m sure some folks are doing it, too, but not w/out serious public assistance.

The WSJ editorial board is famously out-to-lunch-on-another-planet-while-wearing-diapers. David Brooks is almost as batty, but I actually think he’s too smart not to know that he is full of shit. His whole “reasonable” dodge reflects a guilty conscience, a bad faith. He must have a really scary porn collection.

By: caleb

caleb — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 02:34:13 +0000

that lucky ducky stuff is batty. i love how the example of the lucky ducky in the wsj editorial is someone who makes $1,000/month. presumably the people who wrote that live in new york, so it is even more baffling. how can you both promote an economy that makes people poor and resent them for it? i do not really want to understand “conservative thinking”