BloggeRhythms

Unless a majority of voters truly suffer from dementia, and/or dedicated self-destruction, today’s news portends huge setbacks for the Democrat party, and particularly bleeding-heart liberals.  

According to Don Lee Contact Reporter @latimes.com via Drudge, a Pew Research Center report released Wednesday, shows that: “The nation's middle class, long a pillar of the U.S. economy and foundation of the American dream, has shrunk to the point where it no longer constitutes the majority of the adult population, according to a new major study.” 

While the nation's increasing income divide is certain to be a central issue in the 2016 presidential race, many analysts and policymakers regard the shift as worrisome for economic and social stability. That’s because: “Middle-income households have been the bedrock of consumer spending, and many liberals in particular view the declining middle as part of a troubling trend of skewed income gains among the nation's richest families.” 

Mr. Lee explains: “Median-income voters, particularly non-college-educated men, are also at the core of billionaire Donald Trump's surprising surge in the Republican presidential campaign. His supporters' sense that their once-secure middle-class standing is in danger of slipping appears to be fueling much of the anger against the government and immigrant groups.” 

However, any Republican in the presidential race would surely reverse the trends predominately caused by the POTUS and his anti-business, anti-growth dedication, not just Trump by any means.   

What’s most remarkable though, is that while the POTUS promised when campaigning, to get the lowest citizens out of poverty and open the way for them to gain from the wealthiest, the absolute reverse has taken place. “As of this year, 9% of Americans are in what Pew called the highest-income category — up from 4% in 1971 and 5% in 1991. A household with three people had to have an income of more than $188,000 last year to be in this highest bracket.” 

And on the other end: “In contrast, the share of American adults in the very lowest income category — a three-person household making less than $31,000 — rose to 20% of the U.S. adult population this year from 16% in 1971.” 

Which goes to underline and prove unequivocally, when it comes to any aspect of the economy, most Democrats and particularly one’s such as the POTUS, Pelosi, Clinton and certainly Sanders, haven’t an iota of a clue as to what they’re talking about.  

And, if that isn’t enough, a new non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report today says, “ObamaCare will reduce work hours equivalent to 2 million jobs in the next decade amid a host of incentives not to work or to work less.” 

“The report estimates the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, will make the labor supply shrink by 0.86 percent in 2025. This amounts to a shrinkage equivalent to approximately 2 million full-time workers.” 

It’s estimated that the decline will come primarily due to workers responding to changes made by the law to federal programs and tax policy. “The agency points to the introduction of health care subsidies tied to income as a key factor -- which in turn raises effective tax rates as someone’s earnings rise, therefore reducing the amount of work Americans choose to do. 

“Subsidies decline as income increases, reducing the return on earning additional income,” the report says. “That decline is effectively an increase in recipients’ effective marginal tax rate, so it generally reduces their work incentives through the substitution effect. 

“Since the subsidies also reduce the burdens attached to unemployment, the CBO predicts that the law will create additional “work disincentives” for those who are unemployed for part of the year. It concludes that the exchange subsidies will contribute to half of the overall reduction of the labor supply.” 

Additionally: “The report also points to direct taxes, such as ACA’s hike of the payroll tax on high earners for Medicare’s Hospital Insurance Program, as a reason for discouraging some from working. Another pressure on wages will come from the employer mandate, which imposes a penalty on employers if they have more than 50 employees and do not provide insurance. The CBO predicts that within a few years this charge will be passed on to employees in the form of lower wages.”

Therefore, for anyone still believing that there are any long-term benefits to socialism in any style, manner or form, they can now travel freely to Cuba. And when there, they can observe the miserable, hopeless conditions the vast majority of that population lives under. Which will help visualization considerably, whereas that’s what typical Democrats want the U.S. to become ASAP.  

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife. This one from the New York Post Editorial Board @nypost.com.

The article begins with a short paragraph, illustrating their point: “Liar, liar, pantsuit on fire: Hillary Clinton still insists she didn’t tell the grieving families of the Benghazi victims that an anti-Islam video was to blame.”

From there the story goes on, presenting quotes she made to George Stephanopoulos who asked her Sunday if she’d told the victims it was about the film. Clinton gave a flat “no.”

She added: “I said very clearly there had been a terrorist group, uh, that had taken responsibility on Facebook, um . . .” 

However, at least four family members disagree, including Tyrone Woods’ father who said he hugged Clinton and shook her hand. Then “she said we are going to have the filmmaker arrested who was responsible for the death of my son . . . She said ‘the filmmaker who was responsible for the death of your son.’ ” 

Sean Smith’s mother said Hillary is “absolutely lying . . . She said it was because of the video. Smith’s uncle backs her up."

Glen Doherty’s sister agreed: “When I think back now to that day and what she knew, it shows me a lot about her character that she would choose in that moment to basically perpetuate what she knew was untrue.”

The editor’s closed the piece by opining: “Just why the administration united around this lie is another editorial. The disgrace here is Clinton’s refusal to admit her role — even pushing the fib to “comfort” the bereaved. Stiff as the competition is, this has to count as her lowest-down, dirtiest lie of all.” 

So, what we have here is another major media source pointedly presenting their dislike and distrust of Bill’s wife, likely reflecting the feelings of significant numbers of Democrat voters. Which raises the ongoing question, once again: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?   

And lastly, a friend posted this on Facebook this morning. 

That’s it for today folks. 

Adios