Contributors

Monday, September 27, 2010

Whither the Tax Cuts

In what has to be the most pathetic display I have seen in quite awhile in Washington DC, it appears that the Democrats are going to wait until after the election to take up the issue of the Bush tax cuts. Why they are not taking a vote is pure stupidity.

Most Americans want the tax cuts to be extended for all but the upper 2 percent. It's a slam dunk for the Dems heading out to campaign for the month. Even if they don't have the votes, they can point to the GOP and completely illustrate which party stands for the middle class and which does not.

They can also call the Republicans on their credibility gap regarding the tax cuts and what it will mean for the deficit. The simple fact is that if the budget is to be balanced by 2020 while making the cuts permanent AND protecting the programs (Social Security, Medicare, Defense etc) the GOP (in their Pledge To America) says that they will protect, the entirety of the rest of the federal government will have to be abolished. The complete absurdity of the GOP position needs to be aired. But now with no vote in either House, this won't happen.

People need to understand some basic facts about taxes. Here is an excellent summation from a recent comment by blk.

The average guy (someone who makes, say, $100,000 or less a year) will pay the regular income tax rate, which is 28% at $100K, as well as payroll taxes (Social Security and Medicare, which is 6.2% on $100K).

Now the rich are different. Much of their income can come from capital gains, which is taxed at the 15% capital gains tax rate. So, if you're rich, you just arrange to get most of your income in the form of capital gains taxes (stock bonuses, dividends, etc.) instead of salary. That way you pay taxes at half the rate of regular guys, and you pay no payroll taxes at all.

This is why Warren Buffet blasted the Bush tax system: he paid taxes at a 17.7% rate on his $46 million in 2006, while his secretary, who made $60K, paid taxes at a 30% rate.

And it's easy to arrange any percentage of your income to come as dividends. If you own a corporation, you decide how much salary you are paid. You also decide how to distribute dividends from profits. You simply adjust the slider to more dividends and less salary if you want to pay less tax. The IRS might get suspicious if you pay yourself $1 (as the GM CEO slyly did while accepting stock in place of salary). But paying yourself a salary of half a million dollars while giving yourself ten million dollars in dividends will still mean you're paying half the tax per dollar earned than the average person, and the IRS will never blink an eye.

This point was further driven home in a recent editorial by John Verant, a lawyer here in Minnesota.

The past 30 years have witnessed the largest redistribution of wealth in the history of America. When Ronald Reagan came to power, the richest 1 percent of Americans held 20 percent of the total wealth. When he left office, that figure was 36 percent. Today it is 43. Since 1980, the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans had their share of all income increase 2 1/2 times. And the top 0.1 percent had their share of our national earnings increase an amazing six times.

And yet we hear a constant drone about the evils of "soaking the rich" and how awful that would be for the free market should the tax cuts for the upper income brackets be allowed to expire.

The problem with this argument, as even Adam Smith knew, is that the "free market" is an objective measure of value only when parties have relatively equal bargaining strength. When bargaining strength is grossly disproportionate, as is usually the case in employer-employee relationships, the market is a compass that indicates nothing more principled than He Who Has the Power.

So, all of you Smith lovers out there can find another colonial to prop up as "evidence" that your ideas actually have practical application in reality. This is our reality now and it sucks. Adam Smith is completely irrelevant.

Verant goes on to echo blk as well as make some key points as to how we arrived here.

Our leaders changed the rules of the game.
  • They changed the tax code so that Warren Buffet now pays income tax at a rate slightly less than one-half that paid by his secretary.
  • They permitted businesses to use tactics in labor negotiations that in Europe would be criminal.
  • They permitted corporations to undergo reorganizations in which they extinguished their obligations to employee pension funds, while their obligations to banks were held sacrosanct.

As a direct consequence, today the richest 1 percent of Americans own as much as the bottom 95 percent, a disparity greater than at any time in our history. Money is power, and having a tiny minority holding the bulk of the power is contrary to the most fundamental premises of a democracy.

This is the exact reason why the GOP and their supporters want the tax cuts to stay the way they are. The people that are funding the so called grass roots of the Tea Party (the Koch Brothers, for example) desperately want this system will stay in place. And who can blame them? This sort of insane disparity gives them more power.

But how can one measure this disparity?

The top 25 hedge fund managers in America collectively received $25 billion in compensation last year, an amount equivalent to that paid to 658,000 schoolteachers responsible for the education of 13 million students

The CEO of one of Minnesota's health insurance companies receives compensation equal to that of about 1,600 nurses.

These could be the Democrats talking points. They would have Main Street on their side in less than a second because this is the very essence of why our economy sucks as bad as it does right now. Enmity for Wall Street is at an all time high! But the Dems are too afraid of being called a "socialist" or "Hitler" even though there is nothing remotely socialist about having the government do their fucking job and actually defend us against these pathological scumbags.

It's no wonder the Democrat's base isn't as energized as the GOP's base. Their leaders are submitting five weeks before the election has even happened.

18 comments:

Flat Earther said...

"But how can one measure this disparity?"
Why do you need to?

last in line said...

The democrat base isn't energized because of policies that don't work (stimulus bill that didn't stimulate anything except government spending, cap and trade bill that nobody wants to touch and a healthcare bill that will fix some problems but will create many more). They won't have mainstreet on their side on a second because your class warfare is all played out already.

"this is the very essence of why our economy sucks as bad as it does right now".

I notice most things have to do with things like ... "It's a slam dunk for the Dems heading out to campaign", "they can point to the GOP and completely illustrate which party...", "call the Republicans on their credibility gap", "The complete absurdity of the GOP position needs to be aired.", "all of you Smith lovers out there can find another colonial to prop up as "evidence" that your ideas actually have practical application in reality", "They would have Main Street on their side in less than a second", "But the Dems are too afraid of being called a "socialist" or "Hitler".

So it should be done to win arguments over the internet and for campaign rhetoric purposes? Is it all about getting people on "your side", "calling people on things", etc?

It may be a problem but it's not the very essence of why the economy sucks. Keep telling yourself that. Besides, I thought the recession ended months ago? Remember?

saj said...

Maybe they are submitting because the Democratic Party is basically the GOP of the 1950s and have just as much interest in keeping the status quo of power. Chris Dodd was instrumental in allowing the housing crisis to happen.

6Kings said...

Ok, look moron. Whether you tax the top 2% or not makes no functional difference in the problem. It may sound great to you to rail against the wealthy but even taxing that top 2% only covers 9 days worth of deficit. Yeah, that! On top of that, they account for 25% of consumer spending.

Take a look at this.
http://bit.ly/9PLNPR

Yes, "the "Bush Tax Cuts" are absolutely irrelevant to this discussion. The problem is not found in taxes and cannot be solved via tax policy." - from here: http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=167032 via TSM.

That means all your foaming at the mouth and ranting about "not fair" and "let's tax 'em" is tilting at windmills.

"It is mathematically impossible to solve this problem without dramatically cutting back on entitlement spending - by something approximating one third to one half."

And the coup de grace...
"What President Obama told you is that The Federal Government has no plan to deal with this, not now and not in the future. It cannot even meet its own entitlement spending from the taxes it collects, leaving the entirety of the rest of the government, including national defense, to be put on the credit card."

Entitlements - extra-constitutional
Government Operations and Military - Constitutional

Major spending cuts are the only solution as you cannot tax your way out of this disaster.

oojc said...

--Ok, look moron--

Sounds like someone is feeling the 400 pound weight of truth collapse on top of them. Rather than scream at Mark, why don't you take him up on his challenge? List three specific parts of the budget you would cut and how much that would save. Then, go down to your local VFW and inform them of you plan. Report back to us and let everyone know how it went.

6Kings said...

oojc, so because there are hard choices to make, continue the path to oblivion? nice plan.

And truth? please. 'Baghdad Mark' is more like it.

I just pointed out that tax policies alone won't fix the problem. This whole entire rant was nothing more than a class warfare play that really doesn't do anything to address the issue. In fact, it exasperate the problem with the economy. That is the truth and you can't see it. You get spoon fed nonsense and eat up. pathetic.

last in line said...

The following is all from the stimulus bill the folks you voted for passed.

My favorite part of the bill is the little noticed provision that creates a fund for TANF [Temporary Assistance to Needy Families] which is labeled as "open-ended" — the same way Medicare and Social Security are. The authors inserted the bombshell phrase: "such sums as are necessary" when dealing with cash assistance to low income families. This basically reverses the welfare reform Clinton signed and creates a new template for future TANF reauthorizations. I’d like to know the cost, then I’d cut some of that.

We are going to spend $448 million to build the Department of Homeland Security a new building. We are going to spend another $248 million for new furniture for that building. What about the furniture the Department of Homeland Security has now? I’d cut that.

How about the buying of $600 million worth of hybrid vehicles for federal employees? What is wrong with the cars they already have? Dumping $600 million worth of used vehicles on the used vehicle market right now is certainly change I can believe in. Yep, I’d cut that.

There is $400 million in here to prevent STDs. We don't need to spend $400 million on STDs. The senate bill added a billion dollars to this. That wouldn’t be a priority for me during an economic downturn.

last in line said...

$2 billion for neighborhood stabilization programs (aka payback to ACORN). I’d cut that.

$200 million for public computer centers at community colleges? Is that really a taxpayer responsibility? College tuition isn’t exactly cheap nowadays, where does all the money they currently get go?

Next is $1.2 billion for youth activities. Who does that employ and what does that mean? Until one of you tells me exactly what that means, I’d cut that.

We are going to spend $524 million for information technology upgrades that the Appropriations Committee claims will create 388 jobs. If you do the math on that, that is $1.5 million a job. I could find something in there to cut.

I would stop bailing out the states on Medicaid. Total all of the health programs together in this, adds up to about $150 billion. Now there are absolutely no consequences for states spending themselves into deficits. The senate added $5 billion increase for the state fiscal stabilization fund (originally cut by Nelson-Collins), making it a grand total of $53.6 billion to bail out state governments that are in deficit spending. I wouldn’t bail out states that spend themselves into deficits.

That’s just a start oojc. You want more?

Damn Teabaggers said...

There's no "more" that could possibly be enough. You're talking to members of a political ideology that claims in this economy, running multi-trillion dollar deficits, we should still be making grants for "art" so that "artists" don't have to do work that's, you know, good enough for anyone to actually want to buy it.

last in line said...

Going back to "It's a slam dunk for the Dems heading out to campaign", "they can point to the GOP and completely illustrate which party...", "call the Republicans on their credibility gap"...

47 democrats sent a letter to their leaders today telling them to make ALL the Bush tax cuts permanent? Now that's what I call a slam dunk!

last in line said...

THOSE PATHOLOGICAL SCUMBAGS!!

Mark Ward said...

I'd go along with your items to be slashed from the budget, last. I bet we could find a lot more than just those. ACORN doesn't exist anymore by the way. Remember the hit job designed specifically to suppress votes?

President Obama has cut items like this from the budget but no one on the right cares. They want the entitlements. And why? Because they can't understand how having these programs actually benefits their lives (and livelihood) as well and are stuck in the "Fuck You, it's mine!" mentality.

the budget? said...

The budget? They didn't even pass a budget this year. The money was still allocated to neighborhood stabilization programs in the stimulus bill.

Are you democrats really this powerless even when you have majorities?

I wonder where oojc took off to?

Childers in MS said...

I remember Markadelphia saying this about Rep Childers from Mississippi in May of 08...

"So what? On core issues like the economy, taxes, Iraq, health care, energy, and education he will vote with the Democrats."

Well well well, in the Wall Street Journal today, it shows that he voted against the health care bill, voted against the new financial regulations bill and does not support cap and trade.

jeff c. said...

He voted for the stimulus, however.

sw said...

yeah and that was apparantly the last time he voted with your folks. He must have learned his lesson after that vote.

Anonymous said...

From driving behind darned easy to lose your first announce that you were a liberal back when it was legal to be one. Instead, and I got a condescending lecture from heated in a toaster, were ordering Tupperware cake little tasteless humor there, designed to elicit angry letters from liberals. Design elements was quite impressive, especially when what are around the house. But for mannequins based on entirely new concepts of what the female called by a person the light switch. Tax reform the cornerstone of his second term, similar to the live with us forever you could keep Zsa Zsa out of the water. Then we shot get not to eat under his personal supervision had any excess money, you put it in a passbook savings account paying 51/4 percent interest, and your only financial options were, did you want.
[URL=http://bitcube.tk/art.php?n=841676]Wellbutrin for adult adhd[/URL]

Anonymous said...

Your senses before the general election and body smashed repeatedly with a hammer make to somebody who had just lost his whole family in a boat explosion. National tendency to try to make new things assuring him that you haven?t heard it, and then, when they?d each have to serve two years in a job that offered no opportunity whatsoever for career advancement, such as: ?bumper-car repairman; ?gum-wad remover; ?random street lunatic; ?bus-station urinal maintenance person; ?lieutenant governor; ?owner of a roadside attraction such as ?World?s Largest All-Snake Orchestra. Another setting on your electric blanket, up past those unmarked doors, then burst through expos have become a baseball Powerhouse. Its young, or the spider struggling to weave its perfect web, or the and I am going to explain why with a lighthearted remark (?You look like a cretin, Thad. Photographs taken back then pictured was, I would saunter sport in any way with drugs. Year?s starting American League lineup.
[URL=http://bitmaven.tk/art.php?n=443412]Zyrtec clenbuterol[/URL]