Deepest Republican Fears-- per Joe Scarborough

"...but they start talking about economics, income redistribution, get--you know, taking from the most productive members of society and giving tax breaks to people who don't pay taxes. This is what we're going to see."

Let's take 30 seconds and unpack this, shall we?

Here are the hidden assumptions: if I earn over 250,000 a year I am one of the "most productive members of society". If I earn less than 250,000 a year, I am someone who doesn't pay taxes.

Yeah, I know it's stupid, but let's really break it down. Just to see how Republican talking points really work.

First up, a question: are folks who make more than $250,000 dollars a year actually more productive than those who make less?

Most studies and academically valid evidence suggest this is not just false, but an incredibly stupid assumption.

The median hourly wage for American workers has declined 2 percent since 2003, after factoring in inflation. The drop has been especially notable, economists say, because productivity — the amount that an average worker produces in an hour and the basic wellspring of a nation’s living standards — has risen steadily over the same period.

So what we're seeing--take note Joe--is an INVERSE relation between wages and productivity. There's also empirical evidence that the more you work, physically, the LESS you make.

But what about intellectual work? It's true that advanced degrees correlate with higher salaries up to a point--and that point is right around 100,000 dollars. After that, salaries for advanced degrees especially in academia, flatline. Advanced professional degrees continue to inch upward and a 'productive' lawyer or doctor might make lots more money than a lazy one, true, but this is an utterly one dimensional analysis.

What about doctors who work in poor rural areas? Is there a valid 'productive' correlation between their wealth and the wealth of someone working as a plastic surgeon in Hollywood? Is the plastic surgeon actually more productive or just lucky enough to work for a wealthier community?

Big question, the answer tends to be obvious after a few seconds of thought.

Or let's take a little bit more concrete example. Let's take what you do for a living, Joe.

Try working a UPS shift unloading a truck for say, 10 bucks an hour and compare that labor / value to what you make for spouting ridiculous ideological fantasies for less than an hour every morning.

In that scenario who is actually more 'productive'? The lying fabulist (you) or the UPS trucker unloading his truck for four hours?

I believe a valid argument can be made that Joe Scarborough is actually destroying the intellect of the middle class by lying to individuals who are sadly still watching him, while the guy unloading the UPS truck might not be terribly enlightening, but at least he's moving boxes and not twisting reality into those bizarre rightwing fantasies that have no relation to reality. In short, he's far, far more productive vis a vis the middle class than a Joe Scarborough will ever be.

If you're wealthy, that's no guarantee you have been actually more productive in any meaningful sense for the middle class or the larger community. But it does tell us much about the community you serve, Joe--and it ain't the middle class.

Conversely, what millions and millions of hard working 'Joes' across this country can attest to--if you're truly productive at the nuts and bolts level of society--that bears little or no relation to the amount of real money you might be making when compared across all classes. When compared merely within the limits of the middle class--say those make below 250,000 and above 35,000 dollars you could make an argument that there's a correlation but it's not especially strong, considering the variations across communities in terms of wealth, etc. that I've already mentioned. But this gets particularly bizarre if you compare across classes, because once you move across the million dollar mark, money is generally not even tied to individual 'work day' productivity in any meaningful sense. There are excpetions, of course, but 'earning' wealth at that level is typically tied directly to investment strategies; in Bush's infamous diction, doin 'bidness. That's not productivity, Joe. That's speculative profiteering, gambling, or, depending on the investment strategy, usury.

Next up, is the utterly ludicrous notion that if I make less than $250,000 I'm essentially tax free.

Oh, Joe, Joe, Joe, Joe, Joe.

This should be tatooed on your forehead so you will never earn a cent spouting nonsense on national television again.

All of us...every single one of us poor bastards making less than $250,000 a year, all the millions and millions of us down to those poor suckers barely scraping by on $25,000 a year ... PAY TAXES.

You insufferable idiot.

In one sentence you've managed to insult millions and millions of people in the middle class, about 96% of this country, in fact, which is the number of folks who make less than $250,000 and are tax payers.

So do us all a favor and shut your pie hole, Joe. Your an embarassment to wealthy autocrats everywhere.