Today I've seen the following headline or a permutation thereof several times: Obama plans to help a middle class 'under assault.' I can't help but wonder the irony of it; isn't he at least partly to blame for whatever the middle class has suffered, this so-called assault?
And yet another question. I have read that one of the problems with today's middle class is that they are reaping the consequences of living beyond their means, some way way way beyond . . . . Is that really "assault"? I think not. I know there are those out there truly suffering, and the times are hard, but if having to tighten one's belt to the point of thinking twice before going to Olive Garden for dinner is suffering, then we haven't a clue.
And if you read the attending article, what stands out to me is all the tax breaks for households with two working parents and child care costs. Nothing there that will benefit this middle class family. Not that we need any tax breaks . . . . but again, are we funding the designer wardrobes, the brand new SUVs, the weekend splurges at the bowling alley and dinner out, the trips to Disneyland . . . . or are we benefitting those who truly are having trouble making ends meet? We choose to forgo those things in order to live within our means. Enabling the middle class to continue to avoid blame and responsibility for spending money they don't have is not in anyone's best interest.
No comments:
Post a Comment