John Edwards vs. his "Two Americas".

[Charade]

http://bluestarchronicles.com/2007/01/28/john-edwards-and-his-six-million-dollar-mansion/

Presidential Candidate John Edwards is building his presidential campaign on the values of socialism, redistribution of wealth and the like. He talks about the two Americas, the very wealthy and the very poor. He has pledged to alleviate poverty and help the working poor.

He has gotten off to a good start by giving a whole lot of people jobs in construction. Surely it was Americans that built his house. They had jobs anyway.

The Breck Girl candidate has built himself a 29,000-square-foot mansion. TWENTY-NINE THOUSAND SQUARE FEET!!!!

Elizabeth Edwards says it’s not pretentious though ….

She said there is nothing “grandiose” about the house and that it was designed to be a functional home with room for her children to play outdoors and a large kitchen to entertain friends and family.

“This house is a truly fabulous family home,” she said. “The house has one fireplace, no grand staircase. It’s not unlike our lives in smaller quarters for over 30 years, starting with John’s apartment in Oakwood.”

She portrayed their lifestyle as lacking pretension.

“We don’t take fancy vacations,” she said. “When the kids were young, we used frequent flyer miles to take a trip to Europe. We don’t have jewelry. We don’t have furs. We don’t have fancy cars. Those kinds of accoutrements don’t matter to him. What matters to him is home.”

That’s good - it’s just a nice family home

From the Carolina Journal Online

The rambling structure sits in the middle of a 102-acre estate on Old Greensboro Road west of Chapel Hill. The heavily wooded site and winding driveway ensure that the home is not visible from the road. “No Trespassing” signs discourage passersby from venturing past the gate.

Ambulance chasing has obviously paid quite well!! I hope he doesn’t lose votes on account of this. I’m thinking the tree huggers are going to be a little upset because of all the trees that had to be laid to waste so that he’d have enough room for this non-pretentious structure. And what about PETA?? Think of all the displaced animals who’ll have to find another home somewhere to make room for the Edwardses’ new digs.

One thing I have not ever understood about socialism in America, the people who want to re-distribute wealth the most are the wealthiest. I would think that was noble on their part except they don’t seem to ever be thinking of re-distributing their own wealth.

They just want you and me to pay more to help alleviated poverty. I guess their contribution is in telling us how much we are obligated to give to other people.

The upside is that no one in the family will ever have to see anyone else in the family if they don’t want to.

 

[BuckNaked]

I think the hubbub over John Edwards' home is a non-issue, but I'm sure that it will affect some voters in the primaries.


As far as I'm concerned, his money, his house, his decision. I do wish, however, that he were as eager to let spend my money as I see fit, rather than try to take more of it to spend as he sees fit.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

Tell you one thing, regardless of the size of the home the Edwards family owns, his populist message must have legs. If you listened to the President's State of the Economy speech at Wall Street last week, Bush scolded business leaders for the enormous "executive compensation packages" they have been receiving in recent years and called for more transparency in business. Knowing the President's record over the past 6 years, this was obviously empty rhetoric, but when your approval ratings are in the toilet, I guess you'll say anything to try and get back into America's good graces. If hypocrisy is what you're looking for, you not not look any further than our dear Commander-in-Chief.

 

[honeymom]

Seeing JE's house, I think it is appropriate that he wants to pay more taxes. There is a huge disparity between what the working class, middle class, and very wealthy make. I haven't heard anything in JE's rhetoric that says to me that he is going to raise taxes on the middle class. Are you really so wealthy that you need to worry?

I used to work with a woman who was extremely wealthy (she makes a ton, and her husband who coincidentally sits on Disney's board makes even more - all of you sleuths can probably figure out who it is). She was the most down to earth person that I have ever worked for and I was shocked to learn how successful/wealthy they were (I must have worked 2 years for her before I knew). I worked for her back when the first President Bush was in office. She told me that she really wanted to get a Democrat back in office (she is a Dem) because she felt that wealthy people could afford a bigger tax burden.

There is also a Democratic saying that goes something like "When you have a Democrat in office, you will make money like a Republican." All I know is that despite trickle down economics, our country has really run up a deficit that will catch up to us someday. I don't know about you, but I don't really like owing money to China.

 

[yeartolate]

Let me get this straight. In your world it is not ok for a wealthy person to spend is wealth and it is not ok for a wealthy person to fight for the rights of the poor?

 

[Charade]

I think the hubbub over John Edwards' home is a non-issue, but I'm sure that it will affect some voters in the primaries.

You're probably right.

As far as I'm concerned, his money, his house, his decision. I do wish, however, that he were as eager to let spend my money as I see fit, rather than try to take more of it to spend as he sees fit.

That's how I feel too. I don't expect him to live a moderate life to set an example.

 

[Charade]

Let me get this straight. In your world it is not ok for a wealthy person to spend is wealth and it is not ok for a wealthy person to fight for the rights of the poor?

My world?? In my world a rich lawyer, ex-Senator and Presidential wannabe doesn't confiscate my money and redistribute it to others. That's what happens in my world.

I don't care what people spend their money on. He should extend us working folks the same courtesy.

What has Edwards done for the poor (as a Senator, not a lawyer)? Does he pay more in taxes than he's legally obligated to? I asked that question to the DIS and only one person seriously said they wouldn't mind paying more in taxes as long as it went to things they felt were worthy. Key point, what they felt worthy.


If he's willing to tax the rich more and pay along with them, then fine, at least he's consistent. No one can call him a hypocrite.

 

[BuckNaked]

Seeing JE's house, I think it is appropriate that he wants to pay more taxes. There is a huge disparity between what the working class, middle class, and very wealthy make. I haven't heard anything in JE's rhetoric that says to me that he is going to raise taxes on the middle class. Are you really so wealthy that you need to worry?

Unless John Edwards has changed his threshold from 2004, the wealthy, i.e., those he wanted to see pay more taxes, consisted of anyone making more than $200,000/year. He may well have modified his definition, but I can't find any specifics on his website, so all I have to go on is what he said on the matter when he was running for President in 2004. But to me, $200,000 is not wealthy.

 

[Charade]

Unless John Edwards has changed his threshold from 2004, the wealthy, i.e., those he wanted to see pay more taxes, consisted of anyone making more than $200,000/year. He may well have modified his definition, but I can't find any specifics on his website, so all I have to go on is what he said on the matter when he was running for President in 2004. But to me, $200,000 is not wealthy.

Adjusted for inflation, it's now $205,366.11 (don't forget the 11 cents!)

 

[BuckNaked]

Adjusted for inflation, it's now $205,366.11 (don't forget the 11 cents!)

Thanks for the correction!

Not to mention the fact that if all of the tax cuts are allowed to expire, EVERYONE'S taxes go up, except of course for the EITCers.

***DISCLAIMER: If you are an EITCer, of course you should take the money. My gripe is not with people taking it that qualify, my gripe is that it exists at all***

 

[Charade]

Not to mention the fact that if all of the tax cuts are allowed to expire, EVERYONE'S taxes go up, except of course for the EITCers.

***DISCLAIMER: If you are an EITCer, of course you should take the money. My gripe is not with people taking it that qualify, my gripe is that it exists at all***

I just did my dfi's taxes. She qualified for the EITC. We took it. Have NO problems taking what the law allows. But I'm like you, I don't think it should be there.

 

[BuckNaked]

I just did my dfi's taxes. She qualified for the EITC. We took it. Have NO problems taking what the law allows. But I'm like you, I don't think it should be there.

Yep. In fact, I think that all refundable credits should be eliminated.

 

[SwedishMeatball]

Yep. In fact, I think that all refundable credits should be eliminated.

I remember taking EITC back in college. Why do you think they should all be eliminated??

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

Unless John Edwards has changed his threshold from 2004, the wealthy, i.e., those he wanted to see pay more taxes, consisted of anyone making more than $200,000/year. He may well have modified his definition, but I can't find any specifics on his website, so all I have to go on is what he said on the matter when he was running for President in 2004. But to me, $200,000 is not wealthy.

Kinda off topic, but seeing that roughly 95% of Americans make less than $200K, what kind of income do you feel a person has to earn to be considered wealthy? No judgements, I'm always interested as to different peoples' opinions to this question. The question is posed to anyone who would like to answer.

 

[BuckNaked]

I remember taking EITC back in college. Why do you think they should all be eliminated??

Because I don't believe that anyone that has no income tax liability should get a refund of more than they paid in for withholding. To me, it's a welfare payment, pure and simple. People that qualify for it should take it, however I would love to see it eliminated.

 

[BuckNaked]

Kinda off topic, but seeing that roughly 95% of Americans make less than $200K, what kind of income do you feel a person has to earn to be considered wealthy? No judgements, I'm always interested as to different peoples' opinions to this question. The question is posed to anyone who would like to answer.

The quick and easy answer is that there is no quick and easy answer. Not trying to go into double-speak mode, but I don't have a number. I know that where I live (Northern Virginia), $200,000/year certainly doesn't qualify as wealthy, whereas in Alabama, where I lived for many years, $200,000 goes a long way.

This is one of the reasons I don't want to see an income tax increase on the wealthy. The top marginal bracket is currenty 35%, which kicks in at around $336,000. $42,000 plus 35% of anything over $336,000 is quite enough of anyone's income, don't you think? Especially when you take into account that the top 5% already pays ~50% of the federal income tax burden in this country.

***Edited to add: I'm not in favor of tax policy based on envy and class warfare, which I believe John Edwards is trying to push***

 

[Charade]

The quick and easy answer is that there is no quick and easy answer. Not trying to go into double-speak mode, but I don't have a number. I know that where I live (Northern Virginia), $200,000/year certainly doesn't qualify as wealthy, whereas in Alabama, where I lived for many years, $200,000 goes a long way.

This is one of the reasons I don't want to see an income tax increase on the wealthy. The top marginal bracket is currenty 35%, which kicks in at around $336,000. $42,000 plus 35% of anything over $336,000 is quite enough of anyone's income, don't you think? Especially when you take into account that the top 5% already pays ~50% of the federal income tax burden in this country.

***Edited to add: I'm not in favor of tax policy based on envy and class warfare, which I believe John Edwards is trying to push***

If Taxpayer's Income Is... Then Estimated Taxes Are...

Between...But Not Over....Base Tax.....+ Rate...Of the Amount Over

$0...........$7,550.............$0...............10%..........$0
$7,550.....$30,650............$755.00........15%..........$7,550
$30,650....$74,200...........$4,220.00......25%..........$30,650
$74,200....$154,800..........$15,107.50....28%..........$74,200
$154,800...$336,550.........$37,675.50.....33%.........$154,800
$336,550...- - - - - .........$97,653.00......35%.........$346,550

 

[DawnCt1]

The "clear cutting" of the forest must be so "One of the Americas" can see the "Other America" coming.

 

[BuckNaked]

If Taxpayer's Income Is... Then Estimated Taxes Are...

Between...But Not Over....Base Tax.....+ Rate...Of the Amount Over

$0...........$7,550.............$0...............10%..........$0
$7,550.....$30,650............$755.00........15%..........$7,550
$30,650....$74,200...........$4,220.00......25%..........$30,650
$74,200....$154,800..........$15,107.50....28%..........$74,200
$154,800...$336,550.........$37,675.50.....33%.........$154,800
$336,550...- - - - - .........$97,653.00......35%.........$346,550

Thank you for the correction - I got the $42,000 from the married filing jointly table, and was looking at the 33% bracket rather than the 35% bracket. Sorry about that!

 

[DawnCt1]

I think the hubbub over John Edwards' home is a non-issue, but I'm sure that it will affect some voters in the primaries.


As far as I'm concerned, his money, his house, his decision. I do wish, however, that he were as eager to let spend my money as I see fit, rather than try to take more of it to spend as he sees fit.

While I absolutely agree with your sentiments, "his money, his house,etc." Don't you think its just a bit disingenous for Mrs. Edwards to try and convince us that there is nothing pretentious about a 29,000 square foot house?