Joe the plumber, tragic figure

Much has been made of Samuel J. Wurzel­bacher since his repeated men­tion in the third and final 2008 pres­i­den­tial debate. Despite John McCain’s prop­ping him up as an every­day Amer­i­can who would be hurt by Obama’s tax pol­icy, the truth has turned out to be any­thing but.

We now know that Wurzel­bacher is not licensed as a plumber and can’t do any plumb­ing legally. He’s instead a gen­eral con­trac­tor. The busi­ness he said he’d been plan­ning to buy, cur­rently owned by his boss, doesn’t make the $250,000 a year that would bump up into a higher tax bracket as he claimed. Instead it makes less than half that, about $100,000 a year. Joe him­self only makes about $40,000 a year, and couldn’t afford to buy the busi­ness any­way, even at the lower valuation.

In short, Joe Wurzel­bacher lied on the national stage, mis­rep­re­sent­ing him­self in order to pose what John McCain might term a “gotcha ques­tion” to Obama.

What’s really tragic about this is that Joe is just a poor dupe conned by the Repub­li­can party into act­ing against his own best inter­ests. At his cur­rent rate of income, Joe would actu­ally get a tax cut under the Obama plan, allow­ing him to save more to buy a busi­ness of his own some­day. But Joe isn’t work­ing towards that. Instead, he’s work­ing to pay more in taxes (since McCain will tax his med­ical ben­e­fits) and get fur­ther and fur­ther from his stated dream.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If you make less than a mil­lion dol­lars a year, you have no busi­ness being a Repub­li­can. They are not look­ing out for you.

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

8 Responses to Joe the plumber, tragic figure

  1. Rob says:

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If you make less than a mil­lion dol­lars a year, you have no busi­ness being a Repub­li­can. They are not look­ing out for you.”

    That’s it in a nutshell.

    –Rob

  2. 14 More Days says:

    All due respect to Joe. . but he has become the lat­est dis­trac­tion in this elec­tion. It seems like the closer we get to vot­ing the less peo­ple talk about the issues that are impor­tant to the future of the country…like the economy.

    Regard­less of who is elected pres­i­dent, the next Pres­i­dent has to make the econ­omy his first pri­or­ity. . I signed this peti­tion to the 44th President. .

    http://friendsoftheuschamber.com/email/44_email.html

    . . the mes­sage is clear — the econ­omy has to come first

  3. David Behrns says:

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If you make less than a mil­lion dol­lars a year, you have no busi­ness being a Repub­li­can. They are not look­ing out for you

    Accord­ing to McCain’s lit­tle joke you can make that 5 mil­lion :)

  4. David Behrns says:

    Doing a lit­tle more research:

    1. His name isn’t Joe it is Samuel.

    2. He isn’t a plumber, he is “oper­at­ing under” his boss’ license, basi­cally exploit­ing a loop­hole in the law.

    3. The com­pany he is “get­ting ready to buy” isn’t worth $250,000.

    4. He isn’t “get­ting ready” to buy it any­way. It is a long term goal/​dream he has for himself.

    5. He owes $1182.98 in back taxes for 2007 (That would be under W’s tax plan. Why would Obama’s answer mat­ter, He isn’t pay­ing his taxes anyhow?)

    6. Obama’s plan would not raise his taxes a penny until the com­pany made over $250,000.

    6. He, him­self, told ABC he was “not even close” to earn­ing $250,000 but wor­ried that Obama would raise taxes for those mak­ing less. (So his argu­ment was based on fear not facts by his own admission)

    The most amaz­ing part of this whole thing is: his own can­di­date throws him under the bus by mak­ing him a house­hold name. The pop­u­lar­ity brings the reporters down on him who sys­tem­at­i­cally tear apart his life. After ALL this, the guy is STILL vot­ing republican?

    Is there any part of this “Joe the Plumber” story that makes sense? Well he IS a reg­is­tered voter. I guess that counts for something.

  5. Sam says:

    1. His name isn’t Joe it is Samuel.“
    False. That’s like say­ing, his name isn’t Wurzel­bacher; it’s Samuel.

    His mid­dle name is Joseph, and he called him­self Joe. Why is this even an issue???

    2. He isn’t a plumber, he is “oper­at­ing under” his boss’ license, basi­cally exploit­ing a loop­hole in the law.“
    Does he fix toi­lets? Is that his pro­fes­sion? Did he lie about his pro­fes­sion? Again, why is this even rel­e­vant to any­thing? He’s a plumber.

    3. The com­pany he is “get­ting ready to buy” isn’t worth $250,000.“
    The value of the com­pany is irrelevant.

    4. He isn’t “get­ting ready” to buy it any­way. It is a long term goal/​dream he has for him­self.“
    Actu­ally, he said he’s “look­ing to buy” the com­pany. You’re con­tra­dict­ing a made-​up quote.

    5. He owes $1182.98 in back taxes for 2007 (That would be under W’s tax plan. Why would Obama’s answer mat­ter, He isn’t pay­ing his taxes any­how?)“
    His ques­tion was posed specif­i­cally as a hypo­thet­i­cal for his sit­u­a­tion after he buys the busi­ness. His cur­rent income is irrelevant.

    6. Obama’s plan would not raise his taxes a penny until the com­pany made over $250,000.“
    They keep talk­ing about $250K, but I believe the thresh­old for busi­nesses is $200K. And the only actual source I’ve seen any­where on the income of Joe’s employer is a USA Today arti­cle which quoted some expert who relied on a “com­mer­cial busi­ness data­base.” Those data­bases make up fig­ures based on # of employ­ees, indus­try, loca­tion, etc.

    6. He, him­self, told ABC he was “not even close” to earn­ing $250,000 but wor­ried that Obama would raise taxes for those mak­ing less. (So his argu­ment was based on fear not facts by his own admis­sion)“
    No, if you lis­ten to his actual ques­tion on YouTube, he’s not talk­ing about his cur­rent income OR any fear about Obama doing some­thing more than he’s promised. Joe’s con­cern is the prin­ci­ple of pun­ish­ing suc­cess. He doesn’t like the idea that if he suc­ceeds, he’d have to pay higher taxes. There’s noth­ing irra­tional about that position.

    Btw, I’m prob­a­bly vot­ing for Obama. I just hate the fact that the media (and blog) reac­tion to Joe was so irrel­e­vant, dis­hon­est, and per­sonal. He’s a plumber, and his name is Joe.

  6. Jeff says:

    I don’t think of it as pun­ish­ing suc­cess. I think of it as hav­ing a soci­ety where we’re all in this together, where peo­ple suc­ceed in con­cert with oth­ers and are expected to help oth­ers become suc­cess­ful as they were helped.

    The great Amer­i­can dream of a gutsy Joe mak­ing it on his own, ris­ing from hum­ble begin­nings to fab­u­lous wealth through just his own unbeat­able moxie, is Hol­ly­wood bull­shit. Every­one gets where they are through inter­ac­tion with oth­ers, help or hin­drance. Pay­ing more in taxes so that oth­ers can get a leg up on their own Amer­i­can dream is a small price to pay for peo­ple who have ben­e­fited so much from the very same (or inher­ited wealth from fore­bears who benefited).

    We’re all in this together, and a ris­ing tide lifts all boats. The sooner Repub­li­cans get this and drop the idea that life is a zero sum game where for them to win some­one else has to lose, the bet­ter off we’ll all be.

  7. Sam says:

    In the case of Joe the Plumber, it’s the Democ­rats who are view­ing it as a zero sum game, while Joe is view­ing it as a mat­ter of principle.

    Note all the argu­ments made about Joe’s cur­rent income and how Obama’s plan might impact his cur­rent sit­u­a­tion. The pre­vail­ing mind­set is, “how will I ben­e­fit?” Note Obama’s mes­sage that 95% of Amer­i­cans will get a tax cut under his plan, and only rich peo­ple will suf­fer. Note your own blog post argu­ing that peo­ple should favor what’s in their imme­di­ate self inter­est and that the rich have too much money. You’re a cham­pion of zero sum.

    On the other hand, Joe and oth­ers believe that every­one will be bet­ter off if we have the right incen­tives in place. The more gov­ern­ment hands out, the less incen­tive there is to work hard. The more we tax busi­nesses, the more they’ll cut jobs and move jobs and invest­ments over­seas. The more we tax invest­ments, the less invest­ment dol­lars will flow into the US. These are non zero sum principles.

    Redis­trib­ut­ing the wealth doesn’t grow the pie. Set­ting up the right incen­tives does.

  8. Jeff says:

    Except that Obama is actu­ally going to set up tax incen­tives for busi­nesses to keep jobs here in the US rather than move them over­seas. We’re not talk­ing about hand­outs, we’re talk­ing about cre­at­ing more oppor­tu­ni­ties for peo­ple other than the already rich.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>