Absolutely great writing on this one Bill. Completely agree.
Unfortunately, every time the Republicans propose something really dumb, Democrats become bi-partisan and vote for it.
a) All of Ronald Reagan's programs that began the dismantling of the postwar middle class were passed with lots of Dem votes. See Wikipedia for exact breakout.
b) When Bush decided to give Haliburton thousands of no bid contracts in Iraq by using the US Army to clear the way, the only vote against that invasion of Iraq was Barbara Lee.
c) When the banks, having gambled with "derivatives"; legalized in 2001 by Bush and Republicans and some Dems, ........
Bush AND Obama bailed out the banks not the homeowners who were in the street. Trillions of dollars of bonds are still on the Fed's "books" from that time. Whenever they try to unload them the entire bond market gets dicey.
The real truth of America is: Both parties and almost all politicians end up rich after their stints in DC. The reason: Doing the bidding of the rich and the corporations.
I drag myself out to vote and always vote Dem, although, I had to really grit my teeth to vote for Hillary, but, guess what?
Mostly, nothing changes. Sure, the American rescue plan did some infrastructure stuff....all well and good. But, it also jacked up the deficit.
Maybe, if you and I were in DC, we would be chasing skirts and money too? A lot of both categories in that town now.
Actually, the American Deficit Plan did not jack up the deficit. Trumpscum is inheriting a very strong economy, very much stronger than Joe Biden inherited from him. Trumpscum's plans for an authoritarian regime, deporting "millions of immigrants" (read necessary workers to keep our food prices down - which only the greed of corporate America has forced to rise) and extending his 2017 tax breaks for the uber-wealthy with even lower capital gains tax - will shoot the deficit so high we may never recover. Remember Uraguay?
I have said this before: I don’t begrudge anyone’s success, but nothing worth anything comes at the expense of others. I think a more fundamental problem with our tax structure is the loopholes created by and for the wealthy that allow them to shield their true income and resultant growing net worth from taxes, forcing those of us in the middle to subsidize them. I don’t advocate a tax on net worth, but perhaps a requirement that a certain percentage of capital gains must be realized each year would turn some of it into taxable income.
I’m going to go out on a limb with a chainsaw and disagree that there should be a low end cutoff for income taxes. In my opinion, everybody should have skin in the game, even if it’s nominal. Everybody should have the right to demand their fair share of government services “as a taxpayer.” I realize everybody pays other taxes, but income tax is the one that carries the greatest clout.
I hear you Bob. I like the "everyone has skin in the game" concept. So completely eliminating taxes for the working poor might be psychologically wrong. So tax them a little and tax the rich a lot. And then offer some balancing factors like the child tax credit or help with elder home care.
The marginal tax rate for the rich under Eisenhower was over 90%. The economy grew. The rich were still rich. The middle class was rising.
My point of posting this from the Patriotic Millionaires was to show that there ARE affluent people who understand that the system is currently rigged and needs to be fixed.
I don't have the experience or the bandwidth to design tax codes :) But I know a bad one when I see it.
Thanks Bill. I like the balancing idea. I’m not sure how the Eisenhower taxation worked, but I suspect it had a lot of loopholes that allowed the rich to hide their income. In fact, it may be why we have so many now, and even though the rates have dropped, the loopholes probably remained.
Quite right Bob, a 'net worth' tax is indeterminate and unenforceable. Far better, and operationally if not politically much easier to 1) remove the income cap on OASDI tax while keeping the benefit structure the same, 2) end the deduction for interest on business loans, and 3) restore the tax rate on incomes over $5 million to at least 50%. It will be hard to argue than anyone taking in $5MM annually can't live quite well on $2.5MM.
I agree conceptually with your comments on an income tax floor, but the practical limit is if someone has no money to pay rent or buy food, they're unlikely to have enough to pay taxes and the formula Bill presents at least makes sense from a current economic and policy standpoint because the necessary measures and statistics are already in place.
Thanks, Dave. I don’t think I’m in favor of removing the income cap on OASDI since those paying more wouldn’t get a greater benefit. Perhaps the company share could increase and have no cap - that would seem more fair. Absolutely end the carried interest deduction. If we take a bigger bite out of the wealthy, I suspect they’ll find a way to increase their compensation to make up for it and then some. I’d rather start with closing loopholes.
Fairness is the central issue regarding the income cap vs benefits and while I agree in theory, the there appears to be a necessary trade-off between fairness to people who are already well off and maintaining a social or societal contract with people who are less fortunate. It is unquestionably a coerced transfer of wealth, but seems reasonable in the interest of overall equity.
I agree completely with closing any loopholes we can find and, if that does it, stopping there.
Thank you Bill, This goes straight to the roots of this overwhelming problem with our economy. My only disagreement "SHIFTS the responsibility for these revenues onto taxpayers making more than $1 million a year by implementing a 3% surtax on annual incomes over $1,000,000 and an 8% surtax on annual incomes over $15 million" Billionaires and a several millionaires have no 'reportable income' they have capital gains which are taxed at a pittance of what the rest of America pays.
We don't need a raise in "income tax" we need a wealth tax. To the 'average Joe' this plan sounds wonderful but in reality it does nothing to switch the tremendous re-distribution of wealth from the working classes to the ultra wealthy class since the so-called 1986 tax reform sold as a trickle down theory. Bull@#$%. It was clearly and simply a redistribution from the people who did that actual work to the already wealthy class.
The mark was missed, ignored, or dismissed as too difficult to fix this time. While Joe Biden was a productive president, I'm mad that he went back on his word to be a one-term president. However, I don't know if the extra time and ability to choose a replacement candidate would have made a difference if they were still shooting at the wrong target.
Absolutely great writing on this one Bill. Completely agree.
Unfortunately, every time the Republicans propose something really dumb, Democrats become bi-partisan and vote for it.
a) All of Ronald Reagan's programs that began the dismantling of the postwar middle class were passed with lots of Dem votes. See Wikipedia for exact breakout.
b) When Bush decided to give Haliburton thousands of no bid contracts in Iraq by using the US Army to clear the way, the only vote against that invasion of Iraq was Barbara Lee.
c) When the banks, having gambled with "derivatives"; legalized in 2001 by Bush and Republicans and some Dems, ........
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2009/07/21/how-deregulating-derivatives-led-to-disaster/
Bush AND Obama bailed out the banks not the homeowners who were in the street. Trillions of dollars of bonds are still on the Fed's "books" from that time. Whenever they try to unload them the entire bond market gets dicey.
The real truth of America is: Both parties and almost all politicians end up rich after their stints in DC. The reason: Doing the bidding of the rich and the corporations.
I drag myself out to vote and always vote Dem, although, I had to really grit my teeth to vote for Hillary, but, guess what?
Mostly, nothing changes. Sure, the American rescue plan did some infrastructure stuff....all well and good. But, it also jacked up the deficit.
Maybe, if you and I were in DC, we would be chasing skirts and money too? A lot of both categories in that town now.
Actually, the American Deficit Plan did not jack up the deficit. Trumpscum is inheriting a very strong economy, very much stronger than Joe Biden inherited from him. Trumpscum's plans for an authoritarian regime, deporting "millions of immigrants" (read necessary workers to keep our food prices down - which only the greed of corporate America has forced to rise) and extending his 2017 tax breaks for the uber-wealthy with even lower capital gains tax - will shoot the deficit so high we may never recover. Remember Uraguay?
Outstanding Mike, and you taking the time to provide documentation and links to more data is very helpful and too often not done (including by me).
I have said this before: I don’t begrudge anyone’s success, but nothing worth anything comes at the expense of others. I think a more fundamental problem with our tax structure is the loopholes created by and for the wealthy that allow them to shield their true income and resultant growing net worth from taxes, forcing those of us in the middle to subsidize them. I don’t advocate a tax on net worth, but perhaps a requirement that a certain percentage of capital gains must be realized each year would turn some of it into taxable income.
I’m going to go out on a limb with a chainsaw and disagree that there should be a low end cutoff for income taxes. In my opinion, everybody should have skin in the game, even if it’s nominal. Everybody should have the right to demand their fair share of government services “as a taxpayer.” I realize everybody pays other taxes, but income tax is the one that carries the greatest clout.
I hear you Bob. I like the "everyone has skin in the game" concept. So completely eliminating taxes for the working poor might be psychologically wrong. So tax them a little and tax the rich a lot. And then offer some balancing factors like the child tax credit or help with elder home care.
The marginal tax rate for the rich under Eisenhower was over 90%. The economy grew. The rich were still rich. The middle class was rising.
My point of posting this from the Patriotic Millionaires was to show that there ARE affluent people who understand that the system is currently rigged and needs to be fixed.
I don't have the experience or the bandwidth to design tax codes :) But I know a bad one when I see it.
Thanks Bill. I like the balancing idea. I’m not sure how the Eisenhower taxation worked, but I suspect it had a lot of loopholes that allowed the rich to hide their income. In fact, it may be why we have so many now, and even though the rates have dropped, the loopholes probably remained.
Quite right Bob, a 'net worth' tax is indeterminate and unenforceable. Far better, and operationally if not politically much easier to 1) remove the income cap on OASDI tax while keeping the benefit structure the same, 2) end the deduction for interest on business loans, and 3) restore the tax rate on incomes over $5 million to at least 50%. It will be hard to argue than anyone taking in $5MM annually can't live quite well on $2.5MM.
I agree conceptually with your comments on an income tax floor, but the practical limit is if someone has no money to pay rent or buy food, they're unlikely to have enough to pay taxes and the formula Bill presents at least makes sense from a current economic and policy standpoint because the necessary measures and statistics are already in place.
Thanks, Dave. I don’t think I’m in favor of removing the income cap on OASDI since those paying more wouldn’t get a greater benefit. Perhaps the company share could increase and have no cap - that would seem more fair. Absolutely end the carried interest deduction. If we take a bigger bite out of the wealthy, I suspect they’ll find a way to increase their compensation to make up for it and then some. I’d rather start with closing loopholes.
Fairness is the central issue regarding the income cap vs benefits and while I agree in theory, the there appears to be a necessary trade-off between fairness to people who are already well off and maintaining a social or societal contract with people who are less fortunate. It is unquestionably a coerced transfer of wealth, but seems reasonable in the interest of overall equity.
I agree completely with closing any loopholes we can find and, if that does it, stopping there.
Thank you Bill, This goes straight to the roots of this overwhelming problem with our economy. My only disagreement "SHIFTS the responsibility for these revenues onto taxpayers making more than $1 million a year by implementing a 3% surtax on annual incomes over $1,000,000 and an 8% surtax on annual incomes over $15 million" Billionaires and a several millionaires have no 'reportable income' they have capital gains which are taxed at a pittance of what the rest of America pays.
We don't need a raise in "income tax" we need a wealth tax. To the 'average Joe' this plan sounds wonderful but in reality it does nothing to switch the tremendous re-distribution of wealth from the working classes to the ultra wealthy class since the so-called 1986 tax reform sold as a trickle down theory. Bull@#$%. It was clearly and simply a redistribution from the people who did that actual work to the already wealthy class.
Fay, thanks for joining in. We are on the same page.
But for what it is worth, take a deep dive into the Patriotic Millionaires and what they are promoting beyond this proposal.
Tell me what you think after you explore their total approach.
Will do, I do read most of their posts.
The mark was missed, ignored, or dismissed as too difficult to fix this time. While Joe Biden was a productive president, I'm mad that he went back on his word to be a one-term president. However, I don't know if the extra time and ability to choose a replacement candidate would have made a difference if they were still shooting at the wrong target.
Interesting. I didn't think there WERE any millionaires and billionaires with a heart. I hope they add a few more!
Brilliant Bill, especially in light of Robert Hubbell's peon to the elite and the Democratic status quo this morning.