Lion of the Blogosphere

Rich people vote Democratic. It’s true.

This is a subject which sometimes create a lot of contention.

We do know that polls show that people with family incomes of $100,000 or more are the staunchest Republicans, but merely having a family income of $100,000 does not make someone rich and is far away from being in the top 1% which requires an income of $400,000. Very little is known about the voting habits of those people because they make up such a small percent of polls and most questionnaires don’t even include such high income brackets.

Point of evidence #1: Democrats receive more donations than Republicans. Because the bulk of donations come from rich people and not poor people, that is evidence that the rich are more often Democrats than Republicans.

Point of evidence #2: According to a CNBC millionaire survey earlier this year, in a hypothetical matchup between Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush, the 53% of millionaires would vote for Hillary and only 47i% for Jeb. And remember that Jeb is the Republican candidate whose policies are most aligned with the interests of the very rich. Also, being a millionaire isn’t even that rich, it only puts one into the top 5%.

The survey also showed that among millionaires 48 and younger, 70% would vote for Hillary. So yes, millionaires under the age of 48 are overwhelmingly Democratic. Younger millionaires are a lot richer than older millionaires because they have had less time to accumulate a million dollars. A millionaire at age 45 will have a good chance of being a decamillionaire at retirement (assuming they are working millionaires and not millionaires by inheritance). And if they inherited that much wealth then they are by definition part of the rich elite.

The lesson here is that people who are able to scrape up a million dollars by the time they are old enough to retire are Republican, but people with serious money are Democrats.

Point of evidence #3: children of the rich.

I believe that if you look at rich people on the family level, they are even more Democratic. Children of the rich don’t show up as being “rich” in polls and surveys because they don’t have the same income as their parents and have not yet inherited much money, but as far as I can tell they are overwhelmingly Democratic.

Where can you find children of the rich? The answer is at Ivy League schools. A 2008 poll of Princeton students showed that 79.3% supported Obama and only 15.6% supported McCain, demonstrating a massive preference for the Democratic candidate.

I hear some people saying “but not all Ivy League students have rich parents!” Having personally attended an Ivy League school, it was my observation that the students most likely to be conservative were those who were receiving financial aid, or whose parents were on the lower end of not needing financial aid. So I would say that the Princeton support for McCain came disproportionately from the Princeton students with less wealthy families.

It’s my guess that most rich families break down in their political support as follows:

  • Rich men who are the primary income earners for the family: maybe 50/50 split or maybe 55/45 Democratic.
  • Wives of rich men: 70/30 Democratic.
  • Children of rich parents: 85/15 Democratic.

It’s important to look at the entire family because they are all stakeholders in the family wealth. If 85% of rich children are voting Democratic, despite Democrats being for higher taxes for the rich and for maintaining the estate tax, it is clear that high taxes for the super-rich is something that the actual super-rich aren’t that concerned about.

Point of evidence #4: the four richest Americans are Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Larry Elison and Jeff Bezos, and all four are Democrats. (Regarding Bezos, he mostly donates to Democrats and is a big supporter of gay marriage.)

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

September 10, 2015 at 2:56 pm

Posted in Politics, Taxes, Wealth

81 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. $400k puts you in the top 1%? It sounds like a lot but if feels middle class after taxes, payroll taxes, paying for healthcare, and funding retirement accounts. I’m starting to suspect that nicer upper middle class lifestyles require multigenerational wealth at this point. Agree with your post though. The “rich” (upper middles and bobos, as well as uppers) are not only democrat but generally clueless that the majority of people are not like them.


    September 10, 2015 at 3:06 pm

    • In Bonfire of the Vanities McCoy talks about earning a million dollars a year (in the early eighties) and still struggling to pay all of his bill.

      Lloyd Llewellyn

      September 10, 2015 at 3:54 pm

    • I’ve been listening to Marc Maron podcast lately. Excellent conversations with interesting people, but it all confirms my conservative worldview. He interviews all these rich Hollywood types, nearly every single one both white and liberal, who have zero contact with or interest in the working-class people and minorities who are 90% of Southern California.


      September 10, 2015 at 11:04 pm

  2. Interesting, but I don’t think all the facts translate. You mentioned that $400,000 is needed to break into the top 1% while a millionaire is only the top 5%. There’s a typo somewhere.

    I also didn’t understand what makes someone a “wife of a rich man”? Do thy have to earn no income or a certain percentage of overall income, or is the statistic reflect simply female vs male filing with a married status within a certain income bracket?

    There are also nuances of voting to consider. For example, my husband was registered Republican while I was registered Democrat for a while, but we didn’t necessarily vote strictly down our party lines. As far as I know, he hasn’t voted Republican in a long time and I have changed my party affiliation to Green, which wouldn’t be reflected in this article. I wonder how ones party affiliation translates to votes in open elections.

    Corvus (Corvi) Black

    September 10, 2015 at 3:27 pm

    • $400,000 annual income, $1 million in wealth.

      Lloyd Llewellyn

      September 10, 2015 at 3:55 pm

    • “You mentioned that $400,000 is needed to break into the top 1% while a millionaire is only the top 5%. There’s a typo somewhere.”

      I think he’s referring to income with the 400 grand, and wealth in the million.


      September 10, 2015 at 4:04 pm

  3. I agree overall with your assessment. It really depends on where you live and how you made your money. If you live in a red state or flyover area you will notice that the rich cluster around the Republican Party. I grew up in a Country Club Republican family in a flyover portion of the Northeast. It seemed live EVERYONE who was successful within that community was a Republican. Most of these people were classic “Millionaire Next Door” types who owned small businesses. The Republican Party draws support from these folks because they do better when there is LESS government interference and regulation. Republicans also tend to work in older, value creation industries like defense, oil, steel, home construction, etc. They are people that still create value or manufacture tangible goods.

    If you live in a blue state or large metro area the rich cluster around the Democrat Party. These people tend to make their money through value transference in fields like entertainment, big media, tech and hedge funds. The Democrats have their support because these types do better when there is MORE government interference either acting as their biggest client or by tailoring a government sponsored monopoly. For this reason the people that REALLY get rich nowadays tend to be Democrats. In either event, both the D and R rich want to send their kids to the most elite schools they can get into and all of these schools are super liberal. It shouldn’t be a suprise then that most all of these kids are progressives to a certain extent, even if they remain a registed Republican. I know from experience that most elite Republicans are fairly liberal on social issues. All they usually disagree with Democrats on is the tax code and maybe foreign policy. Social conservatism is seen as being prole, even amongst elite GOP circles.

    The great Professor Carroll Quigley once said that the Republican Party has always been the party of the middle classes. And the Democrats have always been the party of the fringes…meaning the very poor and the very rich. He was right.


    September 10, 2015 at 3:34 pm

    • “If you live in a blue state or large metro area the rich cluster around the Democrat Party. These people tend to make their money through value transference in fields like entertainment, big media, tech and hedge funds.”
      There must be an awful lot of these types if the poll is accurate. The millionaires I personally know well are frugal engineers and engineering managers, and a few guys who have quit their engineering jobs and started small consulting companies. I am as certain as I could possibly be that none of these people has ever voted for a democrat. They are vocal in their contempt for democrats.
      Anecdotal I know.
      My suspicion is that the poll is slanted, if for nothing but the fact that these people watch CNBC (I am assuming the poll was of viewers – not sure if that is true).

      Copperhead Joe

      September 10, 2015 at 6:37 pm

      • Your engineering friends are value creating small business owners so I would fully expect them to be Republicans and not Democrats. There are a lot of value transference millionaires in big cities. As for CNBC slanting the poll…that could be. But if they have a liberal bias it would be against their self interest to depict Democrats as the party of the rich. For years the Democrats have slandered the Republicans as “the party of the rich”, which is not completely true. They are the party of the working rich and that makes all the difference.


        September 10, 2015 at 7:46 pm

      • Yes but you’re talking about the small millionaires, the people worth up to about 5 million. By the way, take a guy who grew up conserative, hated “fucking poli-sci-ers” in college, then started a reconstruction firm which now does $200 million a year in contracts, many with municipalities or fedgov. You need relatively cheap labor. Is he still voting conservative?


        September 10, 2015 at 7:52 pm

    • “value transference in fields like entertainment, big media, tech and hedge funds”

      Tech is value transference? Defense is value creation? What are you smoking?


      September 10, 2015 at 9:24 pm

      • Yes, tech is value transference. Companies like Google, Facebook and Tesla rely heavily on the government for their financial survival.


        September 11, 2015 at 6:15 pm

  4. Reasons rich people vote Democrat/Progressive.

    1. Status marking: I’m the RIGHT kind of white person
    2. Social proof: see me brag about above
    3. Status marking: I’m not a nasty, racist, sexist, homophobe white like Sarah Palin
    4. Social proof: everyone I know is just like me so I must be right
    5. Status marking: ewwww, look at those WHITE people! I’m not a white person! I mean, I know I am really, but not THAT kind of white person.
    6: Social proof: I have a lot of non-white friends! (Two cute totally Americanized Asian girls and a very white, gay Hispanic guy from Chile)


    September 10, 2015 at 3:37 pm

    • Also social-democratic policies are proven to be extremely successful in creating a widely prosperous and productive society relative to other capitalist political arrangements. This is a good reason to vote for people who represent (or come closest to representing) this policy.


      September 10, 2015 at 4:15 pm

      • “even the rich have it better in Sweden.”

        the swedes who emigrated to america do better than the swedes in sweden. controlled experiment ftw

        Abundance Mentality

        September 11, 2015 at 1:44 am

    • And they believe in socially and economically left wing policies? I know I do, and the only reason I’m not a Dem is that they seem allergic to restraining themselves to elevating their own country, and want to get rid of borders. (As does the GOP but, if they were both immigration restrictionists, I’d vote Dem.)


      September 10, 2015 at 4:17 pm

    • Speaking of #1 i know a LOT of people like that, particularly people from the South or Midwest that move to a bigger cities. I know an attorney who is originally from Alabama and he seems to be on a lifelong mission to prove to everyone how progressive he is so people don’t think he is a racist. Transplanted Midwestern hipsters are probably the worst offenders. They constantly need to prove how cool and sophisticated they are. No matter how hard they try they can’t wash the prole stink off.


      September 10, 2015 at 4:36 pm

      • I’m from Alabama originally, too. I’ve known a lot of people like your attorney friend but for some weird reason I went the opposite direction and approached East Coasters with a chip on my shoulder to prove to them that a socially conservative guy from Alabama who grew up identifying with the Confederate flag could be smarter than them.

        Jokah Macpherson

        September 10, 2015 at 9:46 pm

    • Most of Lion’s readers hate leftists, yet they continue to live in their cities and enjoy their exquisite amenities. A $500 plate of massaged, perfected, organic spaghetti, with meatballs made from Kobe beef, isn’t found in your typical prole town in New Jersey, where Chris Christie lives, or in Guido Island.


      September 11, 2015 at 10:34 am

      • I’ve never eaten anything remotely like that or as remotely expensive as that.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 11, 2015 at 11:08 am

      • a 500 dollar plate of spaghetti seems like something a prole vacationing in vegas would eat.


        September 13, 2015 at 10:45 pm

  5. Why do the rich vote Democrat? A few reasons, in no particular order, from a broad viewpoint:

    -easier to buy influence and win elections by supporting candidates who maintain inadequately funded entitlements in the short term to garner the lower class vote
    -easier to otherwise control the sentiments of the middle-class pseudointellectual electorate in coastal states and cities that maintain the most influence over national politics
    -politicians and rhetoric marginally less insulting to one’s intelligence (and I stress the “marginally” bit)
    -GOP have gradually drifted, after Eisenhower, from being the party of a genteel elite to the party of puppets (Nixon, Reagan) of that elite + a few nouveaux riches, to the party of morons blatantly and slavishly prostrating themselves to a bunch of single-digit millionaire yokels in flyover country and/or the evangelical right
    -understanding that an essentially managed economy is easier to control and use to provide soft landings for whichever TBTF industry of the day happens to need an unfunded, multi-billion dollar bailout instead of inadvertently laying waste to the entire global economy, taking American hegemony along with it

    One could, of course, go on, but I think you get the picture.

    Viscount Douchenozzlé

    September 10, 2015 at 4:34 pm

    • I don’t doubt that billionaires are buying influence. But I don’t buy the rational actor hypothesis. Most people aren’t particularly rational. And that’s just as true for wealthy as it is for others.


      September 10, 2015 at 7:34 pm

      • But libertarians believe that the rich got to be that way by being hyper-rational and super-smart, like Hank Rearden.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 10, 2015 at 8:52 pm

      • Most billionaires DO get rich from being hyper-rational and super-smart. It’s entirely possible for someone to be hyper-rational and super-smart in some things while completely irrational in others. Bobby Fisher and Nikola Tesla both proved that in spades. Similarly, someone can be great at making money while completely irrational in other ways. Howard Hughes was one of the wealthiest self-made people in the world… but collected his own urine in mason jars. There’s a huge difference between things that require pure reason to accomplish and those that involve value judgements. Just because someone is rational in one doesn’t mean they’re rational in the other.


        September 11, 2015 at 5:16 am

  6. B.T.D.T. is right that the rich people in some areas are Republican.

    The super-rich live in gated communities and send their kids to private schools, so they do not suffer the consequences of having a poor underclass. To them, the poor underclass is a net plus, because it is a source of hard workers to be exploited.

    George AngryDad

    September 10, 2015 at 5:01 pm

    • Exactly. They’re insulated from the worst effects of lib social policies and can therefore afford to preen. Asians too lean Democratic despite pernicious discrimination in the college admissions process.


      September 10, 2015 at 8:05 pm

  7. Have you read Andrew Gelmam’s book Red State Blue State: Why Americans vote the way they do.
    Highly Recommend


    September 10, 2015 at 5:38 pm

    • If you mean Andrew Gelman, say Andrew Gelman. I don’t think he is a very self-aware individual. Would he be a disaster as a wing man, as the best man at a bachelor party, and even as a guy to go on a double date with even with girls who think academic dudes are cool?

      howitzer daniel

      September 10, 2015 at 10:21 pm

      • Pointing out minor spelling errors is stupid in fact your whole comment is stupid.


        September 11, 2015 at 5:20 am

  8. If someone like Bernie Sanders gets into power, or if America moves in the direction of Latin America, this status-preening Democrat thing would be in jeopardy. In places like Latin America, the rich do not have the luxury of left-wing status preening. Left wing populism there is real and dangerous. Here, Billionaires like to hobnob with Obama, confident that are protected by a deep system undergirded by middle class whites. In Venezuela, the rich cannot bask in the glow of politicians The rich probably do not want to be known at all.


    September 10, 2015 at 5:42 pm

    • The richest person in Venezuela is Hugo Chavez’s daughter.


      September 11, 2015 at 5:22 am

  9. I think part of this is driven by the fact that a significant part of the Republican base is in fact crazy. In sunny Australia where I am residing a similar dynamic exists but it is way way less pronounced. Wealth is still the major determinant of voting patterns but people with a post graduate degree in humanities are the group most likely to vote for the labour (democrat equivalent) party. Proles traditionally vote labour but have started to switch. Of course the conservative party here is composed of people who have views that would make them democrats in the US (support for universal health care, a very redistributive tax system, high minimum wages etc). Both parties strongly support large scale legal immigration but by US standards are very opposed to illegal immigration.


    September 10, 2015 at 5:50 pm

  10. The real question is Why? so many rich people vote Democrat as well as How? they got so messed up. I have my own opinions but I’d like to hear other opinions.


    September 10, 2015 at 6:32 pm

    • At a high level, and as Lion often mentions on this blog, the very rich in America depend on government intervention and favors in order to maintain their positions. If one assumes that the political system is independent from the interests of the wealthy, which of course it isn’t, then yes, it’d be rational for them to support the GOP. But remember, it isn’t. There’s a reason why Henry Ford was a Stalinist, and that’s it.

      Viscount Douchenozzlé

      September 10, 2015 at 8:40 pm

    • According to my best friend’s father: “In the 1950’s, if you were an upper middle class White Protestant individual, you voted for conservative candidates and lived by conservative values. These days, if you are an upper middle class White Protestant, you vote for leftist candidates but live by conservative values because it’s the cool thing to do.”

      Basically, the definition of “cool” changed.


      September 10, 2015 at 11:05 pm

      • The Fonz was cool. Aaayyy.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        September 10, 2015 at 11:06 pm

      • Charles Murray makes a big deal out of that point in Coming Apart. He spends a good deal of the book talking about the lack of moral leadership among the new upper classes contributing to the decline of the middle and lower class. I don’t recall if Murray calls it outright hypocrisy, but he mentions that permissive attitudes combined with a lack of guidance creates hidden codes that are harder for low class people to better themselves.


        September 11, 2015 at 1:33 am

    • @ destructure

      It seems like it must be a combination of the rational actor hypothesis (i.e. their protecting their gov’t contracts, sinecures, etc, and using the state to quash middle class ambition)… and indoctrination in the PC dogma, going back to the 60s.

      Since that time there have been a lot of children exposed to gov’t propaganda about women, racial minorities, foreigners, and the role of the family, and of the state, in everyday life. I don’t exactly understand how it got started, but I assume that cultural Marxism was an outgrowth of actual Marxism, promulgated by actual communist agents and sympathizers.

      Maybe it should come as no surprise that even today Russian news sources bemoan the fate of those sad, sad American blacks, forced to live under the racist Americans. That may be a propaganda message that first started with them, or rather their Soviet era predecessors, before it was ever professed by American intellectuals.


      September 11, 2015 at 7:12 pm

      • You’re right – the Black Panther Party was actively cultivated by the KGB. But the notion of the USSR being actively anti-family is pretty spurious. What the US did in its anti-communist propaganda was to conflate Marxist theory with real life in the USSR, which in fact was very different.

        Viscount Douchenozzlé

        September 12, 2015 at 3:23 pm

  11. If the Democrat Party would just drop the P.C./Identity Politics bullshit and agree to put an end to illegal immigration they would win every election. The only reason that the prole white base clings to the Republican Party is the race question. They know that today’s Democrat Party is not their grandpa’s party of union workers and craftsmen. Today’s Democrat elites would rather give a Mexican rapist free healthcare and housing than find a white man a job to feed his family.


    September 10, 2015 at 8:05 pm

    • 100% true.


      September 11, 2015 at 1:57 am

    • either party could win every election by ending illegal immigration, deporting the illegals already here, and reducing legal immigration. even if no other positions changed.

      "prole" and proud

      September 11, 2015 at 6:23 am

      • That’s why Trump’s campaign shows the political system is rigged. Any candidate could win simply by promising to crackdown on illegals. But none of them would because they’re all dependent on special interest money. Trump doesn’t need their money so he can say what the voters want rather than what the special interests want.


        September 11, 2015 at 6:13 pm

  12. At my medical school, people openly talk trash about Trump.

    If I openly stated that I love trump and don’t support homosexuality, I would have serious problems with my classmates AND the administration. My close friends suspect I am conservative, but I am charismatic enough that they don’t care.

    Medicine turned very liberal very fast for some reason.


    September 10, 2015 at 8:30 pm

    • Weird, my cousin and her husband are both doctors ~40 and they are about as conservative as they come. Any idea when the switch occurred?

      Jokah Macpherson

      September 10, 2015 at 9:42 pm

      • I started med school in 2007 and during orientation week you couldn’t go 5 minutes without hearing some snarky comment about Bush, Cheney, guns, Bible-thumping rednecks, etc., so before that.


        September 10, 2015 at 11:59 pm

    • Political Self-characterization of U.S. Medical Students

      As Physicians’ Jobs Change, So Do Their Politics

      To make a long story short, the first link says white male protestants are significantly more likely to be conservative than women, minorities, jews and those who follow eastern religions. So doctor demographics are changing. The second link says doctor politics are changing because the conditions under which doctors work are changing. In particular, doctors used to be small businessmen owning their own practices. But now most work for hospitals doing shift work.

      This is a point I’ve been trying to make but people just don’t get. Most people don’t choose their political views and opinions because they’re smart or objectively rational but because of their circumstances, values, psychology, etc.


      September 11, 2015 at 6:36 am

      • Bad statistical reasoning; this is one of the reasons why I so dislike the NYT. Efforts to add more ethnic minorities and women to the pool of medical students could easily have contributed to ideological drift. Obviously it’s hard to ascribe causality to these sorts of things but the very real change in the types of people who become doctors is hard to ignore as a potential variable (if you’re not just writing propaganda, that is.)

        Viscount Douchenozzlé

        September 12, 2015 at 3:27 pm

    • people have always openly talked trash about trump, years before he said he was gonna run.


      September 13, 2015 at 11:07 pm

  13. Lion didn’t intend to ask for an explanation. For him none is needed.

    Similarly no explanation is required for why poor whites vote GOP.

    The answer is: IQ.

    And even the dumb rich know that America is a one party state just like the old USSR. They lose nothing by voting for the slightly less silly party.

    All else being equal ideology is most embraced by those who must most embrace it and at the same see less evidence against it than for it.

    Hence the pushy strivers embrace the ideology of American capitalism with a soupcon of racism and religious perversion to attract the really dumb white people and voila, the GOP.

    Now is Pickett’s charge for y’all. It’s over. Trump wins.

    kim jong un

    September 10, 2015 at 8:50 pm

    • Poor whites may be stupid, but that is not why they vote GOP. It’s in their cultural best interest to vote for them. They are typically a proud and patriotic people who are not standing in line for government handouts like NAMS. Poor whites vote GOP because they support their moral and cultural values…defending the Constitution, the right to bear arms, strong military, Christian identity, protecting the border, etc. They resent it when Democrats take their tax money and give it to NAMS who don’t feel like working, all the while knowing that those same Democrats hate them and their way of life. It makes perfect sense for them to vote Republican.


      September 10, 2015 at 9:32 pm

  14. Is there any example of the daughter of a billionaire or centi-millionaire growing up to be more conservative (especially on social issues) than her father? Even just one? I certainly can’t think of any.

    Jokah Macpherson

    September 10, 2015 at 9:51 pm

  15. The lesson here is that people who are able to scrape up a million dollars by the time they are old enough to retire are Republican, but people with serious money are Democrats.

    Everything you’ve written on inheritance taxes is wrong because the uber-wealthy aren’t even leaving their fortunes to their children anymore. They’re leaving it to non-profits that will use every penny to advance liberalism.

    Bill Gates for example says he will only leave $10 million to his children, the rest he will ‘give away’ to charities. How many times do I have to demonstrate to you that it’s non-profits that are primarily screwing everything up, not private sector entities (over 80% of Wall Street donations went to Romney) who need to be coerced with warped market incentives to support liberal non-profits:

    At 55, he has graced the cover of Forbes magazine many times. As the co-founder, with Paul Allen, of Microsoft, he grew a 1975 back-room start-up into a software behemoth worth, at its peak, $400 billion. Oprah Winfrey is a close friend; the pair meet regularly and she has discussed signing his ‘Giving Pledge’ to donate the bulk of her $2.7 billion estate to charity.

    And the Queen? Well, she gave him an honorary knighthood back in 2005.

    ‘The Billionaire song is what my kids tease me with,’ he says. ‘They sing it to me. It’s funny.’

    They have apparently also introduced him to the ‘joys’ of Lady Gaga, ‘but the 12-year-old is always worried about the nine-year-old listening to songs with bad words. So he’s like, “No! Skip that one!” So I only know some Lady Gaga songs.’

    It’s probably just as well his children have a well-developed sense of humour. Gates is officially the second richest man in the world, only losing the No 1 spot to Mexican businessman Carlos Slim last year, after holding it for nearly two decades, on a technicality; he has given away $28 billion to charity, so is now personally worth ‘only’ $56 billion.

    But Jennifer, 15, Rory, 12, and Phoebe, nine, aren’t going to inherit anything like that much.

    ‘I don’t think that amount of money would be good for them.’

    He won’t specify what they will get, but the reports that they’ll receive ‘only’ $10 million each can’t be far off, because he concedes, ‘It will be a minuscule portion of my wealth. It will mean they have to find their own way.

    ‘They will be given an unbelievable education and that will all be paid for. And certainly anything related to health issues we will take care of. But in terms of their income, they will have to pick a job they like and go to work. They are normal kids now. They do chores, they get pocket money.’

    He is determined that his family life should be as unaffected as possible by his fortune, and that he should be a hands-on father.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    September 10, 2015 at 11:07 pm


      His foundation has assets worth $37.1 billion, thanks in part to contributions of shares from his mentor, American ‘uber-investor’ Warren Buffett. But forget the figures. The only thing Gates wants you to know is that he intends to give it all away.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      September 10, 2015 at 11:09 pm

    • “Everything you’ve written on inheritance taxes is wrong because the uber-wealthy aren’t even leaving their fortunes to their children anymore. They’re leaving it to non-profits that will use every penny to advance liberalism.”

      This demonstrates that the rich aren’t as motivated by leaving money to their children as some commenters seem to think. They think that estate tax is causing rich people to have fewer children. What an utterly ridiculous argument.

      I agree that we need to also crack down on deductions for charitable donations (at minimum it shouldn’t be a way to avoid paying capital gains taxes), but no one has the guts to come out with that.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      September 10, 2015 at 11:13 pm

    • This demonstrates that the rich aren’t as motivated by leaving money to their children as some commenters seem to think. They think that estate tax is causing rich people to have fewer children.

      Obviously money’s influence on how many children the rich has reaches diminishing returns – giving Gates an extra $30 billion wouldn’t have motivated him or anyone else to have more children.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      September 10, 2015 at 11:33 pm

    • I agree that we need to also crack down on deductions for charitable donations (at minimum it shouldn’t be a way to avoid paying capital gains taxes), but no one has the guts to come out with that.

      Or no one has thought of it.

      What would be the best method for taxing liberal nonprofits without harming useful nonprofits; e.g., museums, cancer research foundations, etc?

      The Undiscovered Jew

      September 10, 2015 at 11:36 pm

      • I’m thinking if Meriprolestan lasts another 50 years, the younger generations, will have to dig ditches in exchange for living quarters (now that housing remains to be perennial expensive), despite their college credentials. The greedy elite will force our wasted youth to rebuild America and its rotting urban infrastructure, if they ever decide to decorate their surroundings. If White youths are too lazy, then NAM youths will fill in the void.


        September 11, 2015 at 10:23 am

    • Buffett’s kids are still going to inherit ~$1 billion each, IIRC. No billionaire is leaving nothing to his kids.

      Dave Pinsen

      September 11, 2015 at 5:46 am

    • Undiscovered,

      Yes, these are called “lies.” There is no way Bill Gates will not allow his children to inherit his wealth. The Foundation is merely a tax dodge. You think the rich don;t want to build legacies.

      You are, however, right about non-profits.


      September 11, 2015 at 6:26 pm

      • map nails it again.

        Viscount Douchenozzlé

        September 12, 2015 at 3:27 pm

      • I’m sure his kids will be board members of the Foundation, so it’s permanent employment on how to spend dad’s money.

        Mike Street Station

        September 12, 2015 at 3:58 pm

    • If White youths are too lazy, then NAM youths will fill in the void.

      If white youths are too lazy, then NAM youths will be staggering through the ruins with heroine syringes in their arms.

      Buffett’s kids are still going to inherit ~$1 billion each, IIRC. No billionaire is leaving nothing to his kids.

      Buffett is still only giving them a small percentage of his current wealth, and I believe Larry Ellison is only leaving his children with tens of millions.

      Yes, these are called “lies.” There is no way Bill Gates will not allow his children to inherit his wealth.

      I don’t think Gates is lying; he would really prefer to give billions to ‘Save Africa’ and only a few million to his own flesh and blood.

      And he’s not leaving them nothing, although $10 million each does seem cruel. That amount of assets is barely enough to qualify as upper middle class in Manhattan.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      September 11, 2015 at 11:16 pm

  16. 400 Grand isn’t that much in the big cities. A radiologist who makes that in LA is taking home 200+ after taxes. His house costs at least 1.5 million. Has to send his kid(s) to private school.

    It seems rich to proles, but it’s comfy upper middle class. Not elite.


    September 10, 2015 at 11:24 pm

    • My wife and I visited her brother in Charlotte NC a few years ago. I remember remarking to her that for what we paid for our suburban OC home in an upper middle class neighborhood, we could live in one of Charlotte’s “old money” neighborhoods. But that’s the problem: two native southern Californians would not want to live in Charlotte.

      Sgt. Joe Friday

      September 11, 2015 at 1:41 am

  17. I think that if there ever were to be found a cure for mortality, but at a cost of several billion dollars per individual, you would find that the very wealthy would become suddenly very, very stingy with their money. Support for estate taxes, non-profit foundations, and any form of wealth redistribution would dry up instantly. Shoot, if billions of dollars could be demonstrated to buy you a 50% increase in life expectancy with a reasonable assurance of good health and vitality the rich would be all over it.

    Sgt. Joe Friday

    September 11, 2015 at 1:37 am

  18. I disagree with the rich kids go to the Ivy League stereotype and think it’s overblown. In my experience at a “near Ivy” in the South, I found that most of the students came from professional upper middle class backgrounds. In particular, I would point out that many students at the top 25 or so private universities often are Asian, foreign, or Jewish, so there aren’t as many blue blood wasps on campus these days. Growing up in a wealthy Southern resort town, my experience was that most rich families tended to send their children to flagship state schools or “lifestyle” oriented colleges. Outside of the Northeast, big state schools tend to have the alumni networks that are most powerful. Governors very often attended their local state university. Also, some of the big state schools get reputations for being where dumb richer kids go to school. Ole Miss is a magnet for rich, but dumb students all over the South. Meanwhile, “lifestyle” colleges often cater to smart, but not very smart students who want a specific type of experience. Examples are The New School, University of Denver, and Elon.


    September 11, 2015 at 1:55 am

  19. Conservatism is imploding from every angle. The rich and educated no longer lean conservative. Mainline Protestantism and now Catholicism via Pope Franics is no longer conservative. Fortune 500 companies, which used to be stalwart Republicans, now advocate for liberal policies. Even our military is now being used as a playground for experimenting with P.C. policies.

    Conservatism is doomed.


    September 11, 2015 at 9:36 am

    • Only as long as the leftists can kick the financial can. Not much longer before major war is my guess.

      Copperhead Joe

      September 11, 2015 at 1:29 pm

    • “Mainline Protestantism and now Catholicism via Pope Franics is no longer conservative”

      I have to disagree about the former. Don’t confuse clergy with congregation.


      September 11, 2015 at 6:07 pm

  20. O/T and HBD related: It seems like liberals are showing their true colors from the Syrian refugee crisis, since many Western reporters are going to Hungary to interview those Arabs, which includes their wives and children. They are able to build shacks, and seem quite affable than your sub-saharan black migrant, who is male, aggressive, defensive, angry and often surly. Media outlets usually don’t interview these parasitic “animals”, when swarms of them, land in the northern shores of the Mediterranean.


    September 11, 2015 at 11:44 am

    • Syrian immigrants are more threatening than black african refugees because of IQ reasons.

      Would you rather fight random black violence or organized jihad?

      Arabs and blacks don’t belong in western society, but for different reasons.


      September 11, 2015 at 5:12 pm

      • You’re the same person, who think Mestizos are more of a threat than blacks to the White demographic, because of IQ measures.

        How many Jihadi incidents are out there, in contrast to black on White crime?


        September 12, 2015 at 10:58 am

  21. Lion, did you read this article in the NY Times from last year,

    “White House Hosts ‘Next Generation’ Young and Rich”

    On a crisp morning in late March, an elite group of 100 young philanthropists and heirs to billionaire family fortunes filed into a cozy auditorium at the White House. Their name tags read like a catalog of the country’s wealthiest and most influential clans: Rockefeller, Pritzker, Marriott. They were there for a discreet, invitation-only summit hosted by the Obama administration to find common ground between the public sector and the so-called next-generation philanthropists, many of whom stand to inherit billions in private wealth.


    September 11, 2015 at 1:44 pm

  22. The reason the Rich support Democrats is because they don’t pay taxes. Only people who work pay taxes. Millionaires work and get salaries which the IRS raids. The Really Rich don’t have salaries, they have trust funds and stocks which are called Capital Gains. With enough write-offs like fake charities run by political figures like the Clintons, you have little or no real tax bill. Send your money to a PO Box in the Cayman Islands and Uncle Sam can’t touch it.

    Joshua Sinistar

    September 11, 2015 at 5:33 pm

  23. The very rich don’t have to worry about America’s public school problem.


    September 12, 2015 at 2:52 pm

    • No one has to worry about it. As of now, industry can import whomever they want to do a job, and educating the existing workforce and future workers is unnecessary. Our immigration laws are already a joke and we don’t even enforce those! Guess what – the moment anyone passes and enforces immigration laws with actual teeth you’ll see this change, but that in and of itself is why that won’t happen. America chose the third world model the moment it became obvious that the USSR wasn’t going to make it, because it could and because it no longer had to worry about its citizens’ interests: they were trapped in any case.

      Viscount Douchenozzlé

      September 12, 2015 at 3:31 pm

      • Why would any White working class family send their kids to a public school infested with low IQ ghetto types, is beyond anyone’s imagination?

        If only the NAM underclass start demanding that they want to live next to the White upper class, in order to enjoy their amenities, Meriprolestan’s Diversity dream has come true!


        September 15, 2015 at 12:21 pm

  24. Liberalism has become the politics of the genteel upper middle class. Rich kids vote Democrat because that is the culture they are raised in. Until the 1960s these sort of kids would’ve been moderate Republicans.


    September 15, 2015 at 10:55 am

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: