Supporters Of $1.3 Trillion Bush Tax Cuts In 2001 Now Call $900 Billion Recovery Plan Billion ‘Too Much’
Supporters Of $1.3 Trillion Bush Tax Cuts In 2001 Now Call $900 Billion Recovery Plan Billion ‘Too Much’
As the senate version of the economic recovery package makes its way through Congress, a significant (though misguided) criticism of the package from Senate Republicans is that it is “too big.” For example, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) claimed, “from the very first moment of this debate, there’s been strong bipartisan agreement on one thing: the original version of this bill was too big.”
Similarly, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) lamented, “[T]his bill spends far too much,” while Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) said, “It’s very wasteful…if you throw in the interest it’s about $1.3 trillion.” Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) called passing such a large package this week “just unthinkable.” Watch a compilation of these and other complaints about the size of the package:
Such objections are indeed ironic coming from some of the greatest advocates for President Bush’s $1.35 trillion tax cut package in 2001. Indeed, when Bush introduced his tax cuts he declared, “A warning light is flashing on the dashboard of our economy, and we just can’t drive on and hope for the best. We need tax relief now.” The Republicans who now call the $800 billion recovery package “too big” jumped on the Bush bandwagon claiming his $1.35 trillion in tax cuts were just what was needed to jump start a sluggish economy:
Kyl: “I was there when the president signed into law the tax cut. … [I]f that isn’t one of the best things we can do to get this economy going again, then it seems to me that the American people might well lose confidence in what we’re doing, which would be the worst thing to do for the economy.” [Finance Committee Hearing, 10/3/2001]
Ensign: “Well, I don’t know that we’re going to get to the — you know, the total $1.3 trillion tax cut. I do think the tax cuts are necessary right now.” [CNN, 1/3/2001]
Graham thought the cuts were so effective he wanted to make them permanent. But the tax cuts they championed proved to be extremely ineffective, leading to the slowest period of economic growth in decades.
If you compare the condition of the economy in 2001 to the current state of the economy, the numbers show that those who now call the recovery package too big, were willing to spend far more when the economic situation wasn’t nearly as precarious:
| 2001 | 2009 | |
| Cost of package: | $1.35 trillion | $900 billion |
| Unemployment: | 4% | 7.6% |
| Percent of Population Living In Poverty: | 12.7% | 17% |
| Foreclosure Rates: | .48% | 1.19% |
| Americans Relying On Food Stamps: | 17 million | Over 30 million |
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Why does any respectable news source even quote lispy graham anymore? everyone knows he was and continues to be 43’s personal nuthugger eventhough that train left the station a month ago.
February 7th, 2009 at 9:15 amhttp://www.awitness.org/journal/political_conservatism_as_motivated_social_cognition_summary.html
February 7th, 2009 at 9:25 amI’m disappointed that Obama let the Republicans get the upper hand controlling the debate on this. He has a mandate that is fueled by 8 years of failed Republican economic policies, and yet they are actually getting leverage by essentially screeching “what we need is more of the same”!
Hope he learns a lesson about how to use his bully pulpit to frame the debate.
February 7th, 2009 at 9:28 amThis strong arming by the Republicans is like the strong arming that South Carolina exerted during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 in Philadelphia.
February 7th, 2009 at 9:29 amLet’s see what the House will do with this bill and if the final product is acceptable to Obama. He could threaten a veto if the bill is not to his liking.
February 7th, 2009 at 9:31 amSo saith the Hoover Republicans.
Do they say “It’s too big” in the context that ‘A smaller bill will do the job?’ WEll, know, you’re not going to catch them saying that. Not promising anyrhing like results, no sir. No, they’re just saying “It’s too big because you could circle the globe with $100 bills, oh my!
There’s no rational argument here.
Tell you what, Mr. McConnell: if we put in this massive spending in place and the economy comes roaring back full throttle by 2010, we’ll cancel the rest of it, OK? Cuz that would be wasteful.
What you’re saying though, is as the doctor is about to administer a blood transfusion, is ‘Oh! that’s too much blood!’
And why should we listen to a group one of whom has said publicly he wants this to fail?
February 7th, 2009 at 9:31 amIt is really frustrating that Repugs are able to command such attention, despite the hypicrisy of their assertions.
When is the end of IOKIYAR?
February 7th, 2009 at 9:33 amDel Capslock, spot on, chimpy stole 2 elections by the thinnest of margins and proclaimed he had a “mandate”. and the dems did what he said.
February 7th, 2009 at 9:33 amIwatt – interesting article. I bookmarked it so that I can read it when I have more time.
February 7th, 2009 at 9:35 amBush’s tax cuts worked! They helped all Americans. But you have to look at the numbers the Right way.
Unemployment nearly doubled. That means twice as many Americans are now no longer burdened with payroll taxes. But that tax relief was never factored into the equation, was it? So really, the cost of the package was much higher than $1.35 trillion, but ThinkProgress is hiding the true amount? Why? Because if we knew the true cost of the package, we’d know it was that much more successful at bringing tax relief to even the common worker.
And just look at how much vacation time they’re getting! Everyone complains about the life of leisure of the very rich, but what about the unemployed? They get to enjoy a more-or-less permanent “stay-cation.” But does anyone complain about that? No. Well, ok. Just a little bit. But that’s because they get to stay at home and get paid government benifits for not working!
And look at those foreclosure rates! Look at how many more people are now relieved of the burden of paying property taxes! Who said “trickle-down economics” doesn’t work. These former homeowners are getting tax breaks, too. But again, that isn’t factored into the cost of the packages. Noooo. All ThinkProgress complains about is the cost of the tax breaks given the very rich. They never point out the tax breaks given to the very poor. Those people are benefitting, too!
Meanwhile, the number of people getting free food, at taxpayer expense, mind you, has nearly doubled to 30 million people! ThinkProgress complains about a few dozen high-ranking CEOs and business leaders getting a free lunch at a multi-million dollar party, but is curiously silent when 30 million Americans are fed by the largesse of the Liberals in government.
Why, even the number of people living in poverty nearly doubled under Bush! If you want to talk about income tax relief, why don’t you include those folks?
It’s easy to sit back and complain about the tax breaks given to the wealthiest 2%. But please remember, when you do, don’t ignore the tax breaks given to the poorest of our nation as well. If it wasn’t for them, our economy wouldn’t be in the shape it’s in today!
February 7th, 2009 at 9:37 amThis is all about ideology for the GOP. Fiscal conservatism is a joke.
http://www.pufferfishblog.com/
February 7th, 2009 at 9:41 amMarie, there will be no end of IOKIYAR until people decide they have had enough and organize boycotts of the handful of global corporations that control the vast majority of the MSM.
May take some boycotts of those that sponsor the lying liars too, but it has to be organized and we need to talk about why we are doing it.
They don’t care if any of us personally choose to spend our money elsewhere. They will care if we organize withholding our money and freely talk about it though.
February 7th, 2009 at 9:42 amHey, where’s Don’tFreadOnMe2009 to “discuss” the prosperity brought forth by Bush’s tax incentives?
Followed by the inevitable “You guys are mean to me” ploy.
Heh.
February 7th, 2009 at 9:51 amWhen Repigs are in power, the sky is the limit on spending as we’ve sadly learned with them being wholly responsible for this hideous budget deficit; what hypocrites they become when they’re not in the WH or in power….suddenly they develop a faux conscience.
The one thing these Repigs have shown us is that they do not deserve to be in office and certainly should never get their hands on any form of power in the future.
These dramatic “charades” by Kyl, Graham, McCain and the rest of the pigs has been nothing short of sickening to the american people.
Collectively, each time we see demented, “Depends-ed” and senile McCain ranting and raving like a lunatic, we all take a huge sigh of relief that he is not our president. He looked like a total buffoon as he bloviated and over-reacted yesterday. Good riddance to this bad rubbish!
February 7th, 2009 at 9:57 amThese Republican senators played as a ‘rubber stamp’ agents for Bush and Cheney for so many years.
Now they are crying waste and big spending.!!!
Where were these senators when Bush asked and got every dollar he wanted and then some?
Do they think we forgot that fast that they were Bush’s
February 7th, 2009 at 9:58 am‘Yes, Sir’ buddies giving him every dollar he asked for?
This “gang of thugs” in the GOP have plenty of fatcats they have to pay off for campaign money. That’s what these tax cuts to them are all about.
As for Obama, he can now say (and america witnessed) his myriad attempts at bipartisanship and reaching across the aisle. Time to shut these thugs out now. Obama will be vindicated by the american people as the one who rose above their bull$hit games.
This gang of GOP thugs will be the big losers. They look like a group of schoolyard bullies who slap the hand that feeds them.
Despite the fact that this was altruistic and honest on Obama’s part, it’s now become a “masterstroke of genius” as the very predictable, sickos within the GOP have shown their a$$ to the american people. Obama wins again.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:00 amDid a single Republican say “too much” when funding the war?
February 7th, 2009 at 10:02 amtarazan: When these named senators were “rubber stamping” for Bush, it was because Bush had the goods on them via his warantless wiretapping – it’s called “blackmail”. Time to begin digging into the closets of this gang of vocal thugs in the GOP. No doubt there’s plenty of criminal behavior and dirt to be had on each of them.
Vitter’s “scum” speaks for itself as he is a whoremonger extraordinaire; Graham’s caught in several scandals (Abramoff not the least of his problems); McCain has cheated the IRS with Cindy’s tax returns and has the Vicky Iseman business to still explain….and the list of criminal behavior by these thugs goes on…and on.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:02 amIn the words of SuperBig Limbaugh: This gang of GOP thugs were bent over hugging their ankles while Herr Bush screwed them to the wall with blackmail.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:03 amoops….freudian slip. Meant to call Limbaugh “SuperPig” but as we all know he’s super big (fatso) as well.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:04 amThese ankle-hugging GOPigs have such a short memory. In 2001, with the inherited surplus given by Clinton to the new administration, these thugs readily rubber-stamped a $1.4 trillion economic package for Bush.
Do they really think americans are stupid?
The inherited $1.2 trillion “deficit” passed on by Herr Bush to Obama makes the case even greater for this stim package.
These morons in the GOP really are showing how corrupt and irresponsible they are.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:09 amI just want to give a big shout-out to all those who voted Republican in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008.
There are your precious Republican tax cuts at work. Most of you got a $300 rebate whilst the wealthiest got tens or hundreds of thousands they could easily have lived without.
Whilst your rebate check paid for one month’s worth of gas, or an x-box, or one visit to the doctor, the rebates of the wealthiest allowed them to buy another car (probably foreign) or unnecessary antiques (probably foreign), or house redecoration (mostly foreign products) or a terrific foreign vacation—any and all of which they could already afford anyway. or they could invest some more in, say, the rising price of oil or pharmaceuticals or real estate.
So their rebates used YOUR tax contributions to gamble with or else buy products that the US doesn’t make,or that at best only employs a tiny fraction of US workers.
And then with less income and no savings, when some emergency comes along, the Government has whip out it’s credit card. But whilst the Govt owns the card, the bill and the interest is YOUR responsibility.
But that’s okay because anyone who voted AGAINST this scheme HAS to pay too.
Remember that 250 billion surplus and 22 million jobs that the ‘tax and spend’ Democratic policies generated? That you all voted AGAINST? Well you BENEFITED from all that.
And that’s because the Democrats INVEST in the nation, NOT in selective get-rich-quick schemes. The Democrats use the people’s money FOR the people, not just their golfing buddies and biggest campaign contributors. They know what and who to tax, and how to spend those taxes for the common good.
So,Republicans, can you finally admit that on economics, it’s your own Party who are the ‘welfare queens’? And it’s YOUR party that is the cause of your own problems (and ours too!). Either stop voting Republican, or find your self some new political leaders who at least have a basic understanding of economics?
Because if you want a better life it all comes down to money, and if all your Republican leadership understands is how to make money just for themselves and their exclusive circle of friends–if all they understand is how to spend your money and my money and stick ALL of us with the bill, reduced wages and higher expenses–then you had better wise-up, or just shut up.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:10 amWhere were these keepers of the cash when billions went missing in Iraq? And what is the real story behind Rumsfeld revelation of $2 trillion missing at the Pentagon on September 10th 2001? Team Obama, let’s start digging?
PEACE
February 7th, 2009 at 10:10 amCats r Flyfishn Says:
This strongarming by the Republicans is like the strong arming that South Carolina exerted during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 in Philadelphia.
____________
Careful… w/ talk like this, you might end up summoning the” J Davis” troll back from whatever hell he’s gone back to for the time being. Gotta admit, he is kinda entertaining when he’s busy slamming Lincoln. Crazy, but entertaining.
Hmmm… do I hear a lone banjo in the distance, playing “Dixie”?
February 7th, 2009 at 10:12 am5th Estate Says:
I just want to give a big shout-out to all those who voted Republican in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008.
____________
Shorter 5th Estate: Get nearest GOOPer by the scruff of the neck, drag over to nearest steaming pile, rub the GOOPer’s nose in it, whilst shouting “Bad GOOPer, bad GOOPer” over and over again. Repeat until satisfied.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:15 am5th Estate,
My sentiments exactly. I’ve told my wife that anyone who voted(s) republican is not worth the time of day (that’s not exactly what I said). I have genuine disdain for these people. They can’t make the connection between voting for a republican in a local and state election and how it effects a national election (were they to vote republican or not). The whole party from the top down is morally bankrupt. I don’t care if the mayor of your little town is a republican and you like him for whatever reason – don’t vote for him (or her)!
February 7th, 2009 at 10:23 amI was listening to Air America yesterday and they had Charlie Daniels explaining why he is against the Stimulus bill, maybe he and Joe the shi*head could get together and explain it to all the southerners who seem to be stuck in a time warp.
May the entire lot of GOPers and their supporters rot for all eternity in the warming fires of Hell.
Nothin but hypocritical, lying pieces of greedy shit.
St. Peter will be sending back down the long, cold escalator to meet your maker.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:25 amThe problem is that their re-puke speak won`t allow them to see the truth about tax cuts and that they create more welfare than anything that the Dems do……..go figure!
February 7th, 2009 at 10:25 amrimhotep Says:
Do they really think americans are stupid?
They got away with virtually everything they wanted for 8 years. Who’s the stupid ones here?
And now they appear to be forcing the hand of one of the most popular new presidents in all time and demanding more of the same policies that created the financial mess.
So who are the dummies?
February 7th, 2009 at 10:27 amrimhotep Says: Do they really think americans are stupid?
After reconnecting with old high school friends on Facebook, I can understand why they’d think that. Though, I think ignorant and misinformed might be more fitting…
I’ve been having polite ‘debates’ with these people who believe and regurgitate the crap the MSM is feeding them. It’s truly alarming to hear what many of these people and their friends believe.
Fortunately, they are just a minority group – and they seem to be willing to listen to what I’ve had to say. Maybe there is hope yet?
February 7th, 2009 at 10:32 amThe inconvenient facts always rub the republicans the wrong way.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:38 amI saw that lackey Joe Scarborough this morning bragging about how the Newt Gingrich bunch cut spending and balanced the budget until W and Rove destroyed it and now the Democrats are worse than W and Rove. He gives no consideration to the rethuglicans who voted in lock step with W and Rove for eight long years or the war that was financed with debt to China. They are hoping for failure so they can win in 2010. I have news for them, I know why we have to do the sitmulus plan…I am out of work.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:38 am5th Estate Says:
I just want to give a big shout-out to all those who voted Republican in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008.
EXCELLENT post!
February 7th, 2009 at 10:39 amRich H Says: I have genuine disdain for these people. They can’t make the connection between voting for a republican in a local and state election and how it effects a national election (were they to vote republican or not).
They are this way because they were taught to be.
In school, they are taught to find the nearest authority figure, do what that figure tells them to do, think, believe, etc. or else they are punished.
When they graduate, th turn to the nearest ‘authority figure’ to find out what to do, think, believe, etc. Usually, that figure is the current talking head on their television set.
We have to make public education about teaching people to think, rather than how to become a sheep. When we do, we’ll follow the same path of process all other industrialized nations have followed toward the elimination of Puritanical and Ignorant Conservatism.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:44 amJoe, I admit that they are trying but they are not succeeding.
The simulus passed the house without the reps but they are not going to stop it in the senate. We started with a big package knowing there would be some deals made…….
So far the reps have made a lot of noise but they haven’t controlled anything since the election…..
The republicans are hurting themselves more than they are hurting anyone except the American people and they are not popular for it.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:44 amKyl: … [Finance Committee Hearing, 10/3/2009]
we’re not there yet…
“Kyl” is underlined, but doesn’t seem to be a link…
would that be “1/3/2009″ perhaps?
February 7th, 2009 at 10:45 amRepublicans trying to make this fail, otherwise the nation will become more democratic in orientation. Why not just let them filibuster so everyone knows how ignorantly stubborn they are being?
February 7th, 2009 at 10:50 amDel Capslock Says: I’m disappointed that Obama let the Republicans get the upper hand controlling the debate on this.
Obama’s bipartisan messaging and idealism really bothered me during the campaigns and for anyone who shared that concern (and got shouted down by the most passionate ‘hope-warriors’) an “I told you so” might be in order.
Indeed, I’m more than disappointed, I’m quite pissed-off because whilst power in the capital (and Capitol) changed hands, power in the media (which frames public debate and perceptions)did not (as evidenced by recent media analysis).
Obama showed some appreciation of the media-scape in how he handled FOX News, for example, during his campaign.
Of course he’s got one hell of a lot on his plate so who the f–k am I to judge?
The fact is that his staff should have a working media strategy and a firm grasp of the fact that the MSM is still mostly stacked against him (not to mention all the industry lobbyists and vested interests that seem to have tenure on TV).
He’s also not being helped by some of the Democratic Congressman and Senators or its leadership–I’m looking at you, Harry Reid/Steny Hoyer, you invertebrates!. For christ’s sake Newt Gingrich gets a thousand times more airtime than Hoyer!
Precisely BECAUSE things are so damn serious doing actual work more than talking about the work being done may seem reasonable, admirable—but without strong and clear communication with the public the effect of all that hard work will be diluted (and IS being diluted).
Just this week Obama has dropped his nice rhetoric and come out with some pointed remarks–but his very salient words have seen very little broadcast distribution ( as far as I can tell) and more importantly those words haven;t been discussed by the TV talking heads.
In summary I don;t think it’s Obama who is failing on this issue so much as it is his staff. I think they are dropping the ball.
Oh one thing Obama could and should do is replace Gibbs. PLEASE! He’s not fit to wipe the flop-sweat from Scott McClellan’s brow! ( I know I’m being cruel, but the guy is a terrible frontman).
February 7th, 2009 at 10:51 ampast tax cuts may have ‘cost’ more than today’s stimulus package, but I don’t think government spending and tax cuts are apples to apples issues.
If the government proposes new spending, the plan is to take money they don’t currently have and use government to decide where it will best be spent, instead of letting people decide how to spend the money on an individual level.
If the government decides to cut taxes, it is foregone revenue – but I don’t think it’s really spending.
A better analogy would be war spending. That was expensive and a better comparison because it’s an example government using the collective purse to solve problems our leadership feels can’t be solved by individuals.
February 7th, 2009 at 10:59 am5th estate says: Oh one thing Obama could and should do is replace Gibbs.
I don’t know if he should replace him yet. Perhaps he’s just trying to find his stride. I agree that he has not been impressive so far, though.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:03 amsemantics that are irrelivant. The money that you spend on a haircut is no longer available to pay legitimate bills and so it is spending…..actually it’s irrisponsible spending.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:08 ambackup Says:
past tax cuts may have ‘cost’ more than today’s stimulus package, but I don’t think government spending and tax cuts are apples to apples issues.
_________
That may be true, AND, those F-in’ Botch tax cuts only accomplished ONE thing… they made the rich richer. Haven’t created jobs, or bolstered the economy, ‘cept mebbe for luxury cars, or put more pool cleaners to work.
__________
A better analogy would be war spending.
_________
Righto, Capt… an even WORSE idea than the tax cuts, and even more damaging to the country. That Botch. What a one-two combination to hit us all w/!!!!
February 7th, 2009 at 11:14 ambacked up, you make broad statments that make no sense. The article is about the fact that republicans favor tax cuts and claim(still)that they will stimulate the economy.
Want to address that instead of spinning? Seriously, how did the tax cuts and loss of all of that revenue help?
February 7th, 2009 at 11:15 amFred – they did get some of the 350 million tax cuts, at the expense of job creation, and took over 100 million out of the bill.
Some say even the original proposal did not do enough to turn this around – I don’t know, don’t have all the answers.
They have succeeded in creating a meme that the package is becoming unpopular.
I will let Obama try to work with them, maybe he needs to show that, unlike chimpy, he reaches to the other side.
I just want his actions to match his rhetorics. And as Josh Marshall (TPM) points out, “Why no calls for an up or down vote on the real bill?”
Atleast make the repugs take a stand on record so that the public can hold them accountable in the next cycle.
The negotiating and posturing is not done – hopefully the bill will eventually pass essentially as initially proposed.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:17 amRepubpricks are dead set on sending this country into a full fledged depression.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:17 amHmm, maybe we rebrand them the Obstructicans…
February 7th, 2009 at 11:17 amLooks like the two Senators from Maine and Sen Spector from PA are going to join with the Dems and pass this. So up yours, the rest of the Obstructionist party.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:17 amRemember, folks, this bill has to get reconciled with the House, where Obama gave them some chits, and got squat for it…
February 7th, 2009 at 11:19 amIn summary I don;t think it’s Obama who is failing on this issue so much as it is his staff. I think they are dropping the ball.
It is really the media that is failing us – that is how we got dur chimpfurher and his disastrous economic policies.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:19 amWhat backed up means when he says “instead of letting people decide how to spend the money on an individual level.”
is
“I am clueless that people who’ve been laid off don’t have money to spend on an individual level”…
February 7th, 2009 at 11:21 amB-cup, your point is worthy,as far as it goes, but it’s kind of irrelevant for two reasons; one it’s subtle, and subtlety isn’t part of this game, and certainly not a part of Republican strategy and two, a tax cut that leaves the government short on revenue for spending already committed to, as a practical matter, is every bit as much “irresponsible” as spending money you don’t have.
okay, so there is a difference in how one can categorize it. but it’s the same poor money management.
The difference between 2001 and today is, back then, we didn’t need to do anything drastic. The economy had slowed, but we had a surplus, full employment and a peacetime economy. Need I enumerate the differences with today?
February 7th, 2009 at 11:28 amI agree, but I am finally seeing pressure on the media to change the way it has been behaving. The right wing nuts on the radio have been going bonkers over something(I don’t know what yet) that has happened that threatens their monopoly in the media……..
If they are screaming about it then I know it’s a good thing.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:30 amMaybe, fred, but reports are showing that now repugs dominate the airwaves, especially when it comes to talk about the economic passage.
If we just sit back and wait for them to implode, ain’t gonna happen. And screaming is just what they do – their stranglehold on the media is structural.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:37 amBnFaire… #10
You just blew my mind!Scary!
February 7th, 2009 at 11:39 amalph the wonder llama Says:
Need I enumerate the differences with today?
__________
It would appear that b-cup realized just what a pile of GOOP brand doody he stepped in this morning and is momentarily unavailable for comment. He’s busy cleaning the soles of his Guccis in the grass.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:42 am5th Estate… Not scary. Very funny in a very, very sad way.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:44 amarrowpg...Very funny in a very, very sad way.
rather very funny in a very, very scary way.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:52 amThere’s a site called World O’ Crap
http://world-o-crap.com/blog/
that has run a few “Write Like a Wingnut” contests that you might enjoy. Scroll down until you see ‘Categories’ in the right-hand column and click on ‘Contests’.
I guarantee you will laugh with sadness! :D
From 5th’s link……dripping with sarcasm:
February 7th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
5th estate
February 7th, 2009 at 12:05 pmGreat post!
And this being awards season I’ like to take this opportunity to give another shout–out and mad props to:
Bozo The Neoclown, Del Capslock, Cats R Flyfishin, spencers mom, Zooey, RUCerious, unbelievable,Uncle Ho, Marie,nwmuse, house of Roberts, Briseadh na Faire, DrxJ, rimhotep . tarazan, the Republic of Stupidy. Fred, Freedom rebel, Ralph the Wonder Lllama. El Bruce, tombaker. Mr Evil, Max-1. gummitch, hanshiro, kasinca and oh so many others you know who you are (pause for laughter)
And a special nod goes to backup especially for sticking with it all, like gaffer tape,humble and helpful, stretchy and sticky and always ready and able to contribute.
But I have to give an extra special mention to Darryl and RaptureReady who have been such an inspiration; whose imaginings and inventions have revealed so much about the human condition and who have challenged us all to ponder fundamental questions, not least of which is WTF? Like Zombies and sequels, they will never go away! (scattered applause and sincere nodding from c-listers and seat fillers–oh look it’s Chuck Norris!)
Oh, there’s the wrap-up music, I have to go! Thanks Think Progress for all you do, and thanks voting America, I love approximately 57 per cent of you!
February 7th, 2009 at 12:06 pmFred…glad you liked it.
The site authors are brilliant writers and the regular commenters are a pretty sharp bunch too. I recommend World O’ crap to everyone here (except for Rapture Ready and Darryl), not least for their movie reviews.
February 7th, 2009 at 12:14 pmLook, the GOP invited Joe the Plumber to give his views on policy, their real leader is the blustery self-parody Rush Limbaugh and Limbaugh actually says in public–without laughing–that Sarah Palin is the future of that wretched party.
The potential for a blockbuster political comedy is huge!
If times weren’t so tenuous my self of humor would be on fire.
http://jackrabbitcafe.blogspot.com/2009/02/this-is-not-stimulus-bill-it-is.html
February 7th, 2009 at 12:14 pmGOP motto: Failed Policies R Us.
February 7th, 2009 at 12:38 pmJohnnyRussia…
Ah yes, Palin/Limbaugh/Plunger is indeed comedic gold, but don’t forget they also clearly represent a not insignificant portion of the voting public and have considerable financial backing too.
Sure it all looks like fun and games, but in the end more than one person is going lose an eye (or worse) from all their rambunctious shenanigans and horseplay.
February 7th, 2009 at 12:39 pm5th Estate… Thanks for setting me straight. Great site! Sorry I didn’t get your snark.
February 7th, 2009 at 12:40 pmWell, tax cuts have been done in the past (Reagan, Kennedy, etc) and seen as having a positive effect on economic activity.
A tax cut is a different way to stimulate than government spending.
But, it is a way to stimulate.
If the government normally taxes, for example, $5000 from you for taxes, and then decides to take only $3000 – it’s pretty much like you getting a $2000 raise.
You then have $2000 extra dollars to manage your affairs. I don’t think that it is unrealistic to believe that if people have more of their own money, they are more likely to spend some.
The difference is whether the individual decides how the money gets spent or if government is going to make that decision.
It is not a black and white issue. For government to operate, it needs funding. The question is how much funding does it need. And which avenue provides the most stimulus. Too little funding, government cannot operate effectively. And too much funding the money is wasted.
People have decided to move towards a progressive ideal of government. But, that change in sentiment does not invalidate the idea of tax cuts as means to stimulus – it shows that the idea is out of favor. It also doesn’t change the level at which too much government spending becomes wasteful.
The ongoing question is how much. And the pendulum is swinging progressive.
February 7th, 2009 at 12:41 pmIs President Obama the only honest politician left in America? America is going down in flames and these Republican Senators want to throw gasoline on the fire.
God help us.
February 7th, 2009 at 12:43 pm“Darryl and RaptureReady” are one and the same, 5th…
Daryll the RaptureReady Parodyll…
though more and more i’m thinking it just may be real…
should’ve been worn out by now… still comes bach for more…
easy to scroll on past at least…
February 7th, 2009 at 1:29 pmbackup – your first sentence @66 – couldn’t get past it…
reagan cut taxes his first year, bad consequences, had to raise them every year after – on the middle/lower classes.
bushI also…
only when clinton rescinded those cuts for the wealthy – which all the righties screamed about – did things get straight again…
and somehow, bushII was allowed to try the failed policies again…
what does that tell you?
are you that rich?
February 7th, 2009 at 1:35 pmBackup, we’ve had 8 years of Bush tax cuts. If they work why are we in the situation we’re in?
February 7th, 2009 at 2:07 pmthanks for that info, hate…
it’s real, huh… now THAT’s scary…
February 7th, 2009 at 2:17 pmbackup:
Well, tax cuts have been done in the past (Reagan, Kennedy, etc) and seen as having a positive effect on economic activity.
It all comes down to WHICH taxes are cut (or increased), and HOW the remaining tax income is spent (or HOW the reduced income is spent).
“The difference is whether the individual decides how the money gets spent or if government is going to make that decision.”
Not really.
First of all the individual effectively decides how their taxes get spent by voting.
Once their votes are cast individuals have to trust that the Government will spend those taxes according to the individuals desires and needs.
Whilst an individual might prefer their taxes to be spent more on more affordable health care, another might prefer more on defense,for example.
But though we all ostensibly vote as individuals, we also vote as collectives. Taxes are SUPPOSED to serve the collective as a whole, not each individuals and the tax structure is such that each individual pays for things they don’t really want, as well as the things they DO want, regardless of which party is in power or which policy is enacted.
The trope of individual versus state is a fantasy—individuals collectively enable the State and its policies, by voting for whichever Party they feel best represents their individual interests, and on the assumption that those individual interests are actually common—so common, it is assumed, that all will benefit by default, despite opposition.
The key to all this is the decisions we make, every day, as individuals, but our individual choices affect most significantly only ourselves and/or our limited spheres of influence (a local store for instance) and those influences take time to affect the rest of our world.
Government decisions on the other hand, affect millions very quickly.
A bad individual decision has a limited affect, a bad collective decision has a massive effective and Government is essentially a collective–its decisions have massive affects, so choosing one’s government is not an individual choice with individual consequences so much as an individual choice with collective consequences.
Moving on from the general discussion to something more specific, you argue:
“If the government normally taxes, for example, $5000 from you for taxes, and then decides to take only $3000 – it’s pretty much like you getting a $2000 raise.”
True, As long as the ONLY taxes one is subjected to are income taxes, and as long as any other expenses remain the same. IF due to some other policy, like invading an oil-rich country increases the market price of oil and thus gasoline, and if gas-guzzling vehicles are made more available through financial incentives to consumers and encouraged by manufacturers, then that $2,000 ‘raise’ does nothing more than cover an expense increase–leaving the individual with no net profit.
“You then have $2000 extra dollars to manage your affairs. I don’t think that it is unrealistic to believe that if people have more of their own money, they are more likely to spend some.”
Also true, but what do they spend it on? DO they spend it on what they WANT, or on what they HAVE to spend it on?
Ideally a government is supposed to spend its income (which is essentially an enforced tithe) wisely for the common good.
Of course regardless of fundamental political philosophy, every government wastes public money on fanciful things, just as individuals do, often in the expectation that any money spent is an investment in future reward (or at least a break-even benefit).
But just look at the facts, provided by Government auditors over the past 30 or 40 years (or 60 or 80 if you care to do the research) of changing governments and thus of their fundamental approaches and the results of their approaches to economics.
The Republicans, for as long as anyone 60 and under can remember, have touted fiscal responsibility, ’smaller government’ and income tax cuts as the key to perpetual increased wealth for ALL–for the individuals who voted for them AND for the nation which would by default include even their skeptics and political opponents.
But instead every tax-cut driven ’surge’ initiated by the Republicans that was promised to enrich everyone has resulted in short term gains (and invariably for the already wealthy) precisely because their economic philosophy has not been ‘tax everyone and then spend on everyone’, but rather ‘don’t tax the people with the most money and then spend borrowed money and give everyone who isn’t rich the bill which has to be paid back with interest?)followed by recession which the Democrats then conveniently seem to have to deal with.
(Note that when Reagan and Bush Sr. were in competition for the GOP nomination, Bush Sr. called Reagan’s proposed economic policies “Voodoo economics”, but when Reagan became president Bush Sr, as VP kept his mouth shut. And then when he became Bush41 he inherited a recession as the bills for Reagan’s income-reducing tax cuts and increased national credit-card spending bills came due—and HE had enough sense to realize that he HAD TO RAISE TAXES TO PAY THE BILLS—and he lost the 92 election because a)suddenly reversed himdself on the Republican mantra, losing the Republican vote and b) the Independents had had enough of a suddenly failing Republican economic policy).
The Bush43 Republicans took Reaganomics to a whole new level with not only with more sweeping tax cuts but with addition of the expense of two wars which HAD to be financed by (foreign) borrowed money.
The current economic crisis is entirely due to the fiction that income tax-cuts are a sacrosanct device for endless national prosperity, and that “individuals know best how to spend their money”. History and the facts say otherwise and the US wouldn’t be in the mess its in know if it weren’t for the mindless acceptance and promotion of this ridiculous trope.
(I should add though that the current dire situation would be somewhat relieved were it not for other mindless Republican Bush43 policies that have had an economic effect too. (AND lest I forget, there has been a Democratic Party contingent deserves some blame as well).
So please, chew on that if you would.
February 7th, 2009 at 2:59 pmkaty @ 67…Darryl/Rapture Ready
I prefer to think of them as Larry Craig/Ted Haggard, so different, but the same, but different, but the same. I find it easier to address the self-identified personalities as individual psyches—it spreads-out the derangement a bit. :D
oh and you @ 68…
Pithy! Bravo!
February 7th, 2009 at 3:09 pmOh, and thanks Marie for the kind praise.
February 7th, 2009 at 3:12 pmIn addition 5th. It’s not a raise if states have to raise taxes and counties need to raise sales taxes which has been happening steadily for the last 8 years. And now one of the cuts from this bill is aid to states. So even if we the middle class get an income tax refund we’ll be paying it to our states which are virtually all broke.
February 7th, 2009 at 3:28 pmPresident Obama has gone more than the extra mile in his dealings with the GOP. It seems they resent being blamed for the problems, having their conservative ideology proved defective and losing the White House. It makes me wonder if they are mad at America, Rush sure seems to be and they must follow his lead.
February 7th, 2009 at 4:16 pmThe sooner the Republicons are in prison for treason and war crimes, the sooner America will begin to be restored. Until the Republicons and their Wall Street Gangsters are in jail, and not allowed to run free and continue their crimes; America will remain a criminal nation.
February 7th, 2009 at 5:09 pmRepublican leaders add to the cost of the recovery bill their estimate of the amount of interest that will be paid on loans to fund the bill but dishonestly neglect to subtract from the cost of the bill the augmented income tax receipts that will ensue from increased national employment.
February 7th, 2009 at 5:38 pmYes. And where were they when Bush was spending trillions to kill people in Iraq?
Where were they when tens of billions were simply disappearing in Iraq?
Hey, Mr. Republican. We are GOING to spend some money on this country now. Get over it.
February 7th, 2009 at 6:05 pmrimhotep Says:
….Collectively, each time we see demented, “Depends-ed” and senile McCain ranting and raving like a lunatic, we all take a huge sigh of relief that he is not our president. He looked like a total buffoon as he bloviated and over-reacted yesterday. Good riddance to this bad rubbish!
Amen to that.
How many times I have reflected since November how profoundly ugly that would have been? End of days indeed.
And the Whore of Wasilla (WOW) just hovering by the codgers deathbed waiting for the green-light.
February 7th, 2009 at 8:47 pmThe table needs one more line (below data is for example. Fill in the correct numbers):
2001 2009
February 7th, 2009 at 9:46 pmMedianIncome
of recipients 300k 50k
barack obomber Says:
What is really sad you sack of stupid is that is about the most cogent post you have ever made
February 7th, 2009 at 10:51 pmTrue to form, the GOP continues to regard any spending as “pork” that does not directly end up in the pockets of corporate America or the ultra-wealthy.
Tax breaks do NOT result in more jobs. Total myth perpetuated by the GOP for the past 30 years.
Leading economists (both liberal and conservative) agree that tax breaks will do little to stimulate the economy, but federal spending on infrastructural projects, assistance for the unemployed and those facing foreclosure, and funding for vocational training and other forms of education will have the biggest positive impact.
We need to remember that, from the perspective of the Republicans in Congress, if Obama is unsuccessful with his efforts at rejuvenating the economy, it is a positive outcome with respect to their prospects during the next election cycle.
It is a matter of self-preservation; they simply do not have the interests of the American public at heart.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:00 pmenough Says:
Yes. And where were they when Bush was spending trillions to kill people in Iraq?
Where were they when tens of billions were simply disappearing in Iraq?
Hey, Mr. Republican. We are GOING to spend some money on this country now. Get over it.
You go right on and do that. Your in power now. It’s all yours.
OBTW where did you get,
“Bush was spending trillions to kill people in Iraq”? One of your fantasies?
I think you have had enough.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:14 pmlabman57 Says:
True to form, the GOP continues to regard any spending as “pork” that does not directly end up in the pockets of corporate America or the ultra-wealthy.
Tax breaks do NOT result in more jobs. Total myth perpetuated by the GOP for the past 30 years.
Leading economists (both liberal and conservative) agree that tax breaks will do little to stimulate the economy, but federal spending on infrastructural projects, assistance for the unemployed and those facing foreclosure, and funding for vocational training and other forms of education will have the biggest positive impact.
We need to remember that, from the perspective of the Republicans in Congress, if Obama is unsuccessful with his efforts at rejuvenating the economy, it is a positive outcome with respect to their prospects during the next election cycle.
It is a matter of self-preservation; they simply do not have the interests of the American public at heart.
The Japanese have been trying to spend their way out of trouble for almost 20 years now.
As far as tax cuts creating jobs. I’ll make it simple to understand for you.
You see you get to keep more of your hard earned money to spend without having the Government as a middle man.
Having more money to spend you actually spend it on something you need. Then when the company’s get increases in their orders for products they actually manufacture more. They hire people to keep up with the demand. Those people have a job and more money to buy things they actually need. Cutting out the Government as the middle man again.
Now there are more people keeping their own money so they buy more things that they need. Cutting out the middle man again.
Well now the companies open a new plant to keep up with the demand for the things that the people are buying. Well it’s sort of the trickle up theory. Soon enough there are people with their own money looking to buy a house and a car. The auto companies put on more workers to handle the demand. The housing industry starts to build again. People are paying their bills and taking vacations now. The airlines put on more people to handle the traffic. All this because people are allowed to keep their hard earned money instead of giving it to the Government.
How my doing? Of course you should support infrastructure programs that will also help matters. Some money should be used to directly help the Housing industry but we already voted 800 billion for that in the TARP bill.
I really can’t see a need for increased condom distributions or more money to do more studies on Global warming. I’m sure the scientists would hire some people but how many assistants does a scientist need.
I disagree with giving massive amounts of money to people who are being investigated by the FBI like ACORN. I think that the Government can do without green cars for a couple of years until we get things taken care of. I think we can postpone the hundreds of millions of dollars to fix the screens in the rivers so the fish can swim up river.
Lets see what else we can postpone for a couple of years while we work this problem out. How about you? Don’t you have some suggestions on what can wait just a little while while we repair our economy?
February 7th, 2009 at 11:36 pmbiocon Says:
Republican leaders add to the cost of the recovery bill their estimate of the amount of interest that will be paid on loans to fund the bill but dishonestly neglect to subtract from the cost of the bill the augmented income tax receipts that will ensue from increased national employment
That is included in the figure. You see we already have a deficit. We spend more than we take in. Wait until you liberals are asked to pay all this back. How you may ask? Why the only way that this Government of ours gets money.
More taxes. Eventually we have to pay more taxes. Don’t rely on the upper 5% of rich people to pay for it. They don’t have a fraction of the total in this spending bill.
You all know that, Don’t you? Maybe you don’t. You don’t talk like you know these simple facts.
February 7th, 2009 at 11:48 pmBush had turned the surplus into a horrible deficit.
Bush is like an idiot.
Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993
“GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY” BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG
ONLINE ANTI-BUSH SCHOLASTIC RESEARCH: LISTING OF MAJOR ISSUES
http://andrewyu-jenwang.blogspot.com/2008/10/bush-is-worst-president-in-american.html
February 8th, 2009 at 12:21 amprofessorj Says:
As far as tax cuts creating jobs. I’ll make it simple to understand for you.
You see you get to keep more of your hard earned money to spend without having the Government as a middle man.
So ideally, we’d have 0% taxes and therefore $0 government, in a pure, natural state of… what’s that called? Oh yeah, anarchy. Anarchy would be the most effective economy. Except that doesn’t make any sense.
All I’m saying is that there are certain types of human endeavor which are better done collectively (ie. through government) and the rest are best done competitively (ie. through private enterprise). There are also some that vary by the situation – if private enterprise can do them, it should, but if it can’t, then government should pick it up at least temporarily.
For example, there’s no one company that would be willing to take on building and maintaining the roads in my city, because no one company benefits enough, although all the companies in my city benefit from there being roads. How does a perfectly free market get over that hurdle? Answer: it doesn’t. Perfectly free markets don’t have paved roads. Or electrical grids. Or urban planning. Or educated workforces. Or pollution controls. They’re called “third world economies” in practice, and I’d rather America not become one.
.
professorj Says:
I disagree with giving massive amounts of money to people who are being investigated by the FBI like ACORN.
And you were doing so well there, too. However, there is no line item in either version of the stimulus bill that gives money to ACORN. Also, ACORN does good work and is innocent of whatever it is you’re trying to insinuate they’re guilty of.
.
professorj Says:
That is included in the figure. You see we already have a deficit. We spend more than we take in. Wait until you liberals are asked to pay all this back. How you may ask? Why the only way that this Government of ours gets money.
More taxes. Eventually we have to pay more taxes.
If the bill is successful in reparing the economy, then the tax rate of the repaired economy would amount to much more revenue in dollars than it would now.
“More taxes” can either mean a higher tax rate, and/or a larger total revenue on the same rate due to increased GDP. You are attempting to imply the former. You have failed.
February 8th, 2009 at 2:15 amUS Tax Code & Cheap Credit: Culprits of the 2008 Crash
The 2008 financial collapse has two sources: US Federal tax code and unregulated, cheap credit.
Though most of the press highlight the faults of deregulation for the current financial collapse, none of the deregulation would have in itself created this fiasco unless supported by the easy use of credit supported by low interest rates and a tax code that favors speculators over investors. The equity markets in their origin were to be a means for individual investors to take a capital stake in corporations, not a roulette wheel. In short, Wall Street has morphed into Las Vegas.
The tax changes under Reagan and again under Bush-2 lowered capital gains tax on short term trades (under a year), and added special low tax rates for certain option/futures contracts and real estate investments. Even conservatives will admit that taxes influence economic behavior. The US economy was geared for a bubble when the tax code benefited speculators relative to long term investors, and ultimately at the expense of the long term investor.
All financial bubbles and their subsequent collapse have their basis in the excess use of credit. As soon as a speculator can start borrowing cheaply and lever up to buy assets (or short them), a bubble is beginning. Under Greenspan the Federal Reserve never raised margin requirements (the % the speculator must put up of his OWN money) and allowed unregulated funds (the hedge fund world) to even bypass the standard margin requirements (50%). Additionally, Greenspan lowered interest rates to 30 year lows, making it cheaper and cheaper to borrow money. Even in 2003 when signs already existed that the real estate market was in a bubble, Greenspan chose to pump the economy with cheap money to ensure a boom economy and a Bush re-election in 2004.
The extreme compensation and the unregulated use of credit has made hedge funds the preferred investment vehicle for anyone wanting to get rich quickly on Wall Street. What is not said is that middle America provides the savings that fund the hedge. How? Through employee pension plans. CALPERS, NJ State Pension, NY State Pension, Union Pensions, etc. are all sending billions to hedge funds. The revolving door of pension trustees and hedge fund employees (or consultants the advise pensions) is ripe for fraud and lack of oversight.
Additionally, the little depositor at the local bank is actually providing the funds the bank loans out to the hedge funds. So middle America making only 1% or lower on their deposits is providing cheap funds to the super wealthy to speculate with.
Now the tax code.
Before the Reagan tax revolution, short term capital gains (money made on an investment held under one year) were taxed at 60% thus making it very expensive for a speculator to trade short term. Before the 1980’s, options and derivatives were very rare and only used by institutions to truly hedge against a loss or large exposure. In the 1980’s option pricing was standardized and a national option clearing house was created making option trading available for the first time to individual investors. Many market observers blame the 1987 October Crash to the overuse of options by speculators who did not understand the risks involved. (Greenspan chose to ignore this warning sign as well).
Tax treatment for most option trades is either income or capital gains. For the wealthy their income tax rates went down from nearly 70% to 35% (50% reduction) and short term capital gains taxes dropped by nearly the same amount. The tax bracket for the Speculator was now the same as a family man making $50,000/year. Additionally, in the 1990’s lobbies from Wall Street were able to introduce special tax treatments for certain options and futures that lowered taxes down to 15% and 10% – literally the lowest tax bracket for any gain or income.
While deductions for credit card interest and student loan interest were eliminated by the Reagan tax revolution, deductions for margin interest (interest paid to borrowed money used to buy stocks) and mortgage interest were retained. So the little American borrowing to go to school or to buy clothes for their children had to pay more taxes, the speculator in the stock and real estate markets kept their preferential treatment.
The tax code since Reagan has steadily benefited speculators at the expense of long-term investors. In our system today, certain option sellers pay only 10% in taxes while the old lady selling her Exxon after 30 years pay 15%. In short, investors are being short changed by the leveraged traders and funds, who in turn are ruining the prospects for long term, stable investments.
Additionally, the real estate lobby after losing their tax exemptions in real estate limited partnerships (a major method for the super wealthy in the 1970s to avoid taxes) had Congress pass a law that allowed gains on the sale of an investment property to be deferred if the proceeds were re-invested in another real estate investment within six months. Huge amount of taxes are deferred in the real estate sector which other businesses and individuals have to make up with higher tax assessments. Great fortunes are growing in real estate, and practically never does Uncle Sam share in the gains.
Now the little widow who sells her IBM Stock for $100,000 that she bought in the 1950s for $20,000 will still pay 15% of her gain of $80,000. She pays $12,000 in taxes to sell a stock she has held for 30 years while the real estate investor pays nothing.
Now we can understand one reason why real estate prices became so inflated – preferred tax treatment, plus the abundance of cheap credit.
The Federal Tax Code is one of the prime causes for the collapse of the financial system, by favoring speculation at the expense of “real investment”.
While hard working middle class have seen Social Security taxes triple in the last 25 years, speculators have seen short term cap gains taxes drop from 60% to 28% and in some cases down to 15%. On top of that, excessive salaries above $10 million are taxed at the same rate as a couple making $350,000.
Democrats need to bring back the tax code of the 1970s without the tax breaks for real estate, speculators and reward long term investors. Only then will we have a stable economic environment. The next big step is for both Democrats and Republicans to come up with a fair system to pay for it.
Tax legislation should be attached to any authorization bill. And those taxes should target the sector of American citizens who have reaped the most from this credit bubble: the super wealthy 0.1% of the population that own nearly 70% of US assets and saw their incomes double under Bush-2.
My proposal is simple.
1. Intangibles Tax on Super Wealthy.
Any family, individual, or taxpaying entity with a worldwide net worth exceeding $5.0 million would pay an annual 2% “intangibles” tax. The tax rate would graduate up for higher brackets, so that those with a net worth over $1.0 billion would pay up to 5%. The revenue from this excise tax would go to fund the RTC, pay its expenses and remain in place until the RTC has accomplished its mission.
About 99% of Americans will never experience this tax, yet the Federal government could see an additional $1.14 billion a year in revenue. If the IRS tracks true worldwide net worth, including art collections, trust, PICS, commercial real estate, etc., the amount could be over a $trillion.
2. Higher Income brackets.
Income for a family of four even at $350,000 to $500,000 isn’t superweathy. However, they are thrown into the same bracket as a corporate president making up to $10 million, and a hedge fund manager earning $1.0 billion. The IRS income brackets need additional higher income classifications with higher and higher rates, perhaps up to 80%. Even after taxes, 80% of $1.0 billion is take home of $200,000 million – quite nice for any lifetime, let alone annually. In 1970, income over $1.2 million (adjusted for inflation) had a tax rate of 70%.
To build this country, someone has to pay. The average American is already maxed out. So isn’t it time that those with the most start paying the most. Take the money from the non-productive traders and super-rich, and put it behind healthcare, roads, clean water, education, child care, elder care, etc.
Who Should Pay for RTC 2008.
Throughout this weekend I continually encountered a tremendous anger and fury among Americans who are 1) not over-leveraged, 2) already paying in total nearly 50% in taxes, 3) making very moderate incomes, 4) and already experiencing higher prices across the board, and 5) do not want to pay $7 bill. to bail out Wall Street.
Already the total war effort in Iraq and Afganistan is nearing $1.0 trillion. Doubling the national debt yet again for literally nothing to show for it. Most Americans disgust with the war is mostly with its waste: of young American lives and our hard earned taxes while American business interests realize unprecedented profits. All of this done without competitive bids, oversight, literally even losing bundles of cash. And all of this without accomplishing its purposed mission: making America safer. Safer from what?
Let’s accept that a type of Federal RTC is necessary to avoid a total banking collapse. Then the big step is for both Democrats and Republicans to come up with a fair system to pay for RTC 2008. Tax legislation should be attached to any authorization bill for the RTD and those taxes should target the sector of American citizens who have reaped the most from this credit bubble: the super wealthy. Wealthy is not a millionaire anymore in this country. When I talk of super wealthy, I mean the 0.1% of the population that own nearly 70% of US assets: bonds, equities, land, patents, art, private businesses, etc. Their net worth often tops $100 million with some exceeding $ billions. It is this extensive private net worth that should be taxed, as well as increase their income tax rates.
My propose is very simple. Any family/individual, tax paying entity (including private trusts and companies) with a worldwide net worth exceeding $5.0 million pay an annual 2% intangibles tax. Tax would be graduated up for higher brackets, so that persons and entities with net worth over $1.0 billion would pay up to 5%. The revenue from this excise tax would go to fund the RTC, pay its expenses and be in place until the RTC has accomplished its mission.
99% of Americans will never experience this tax, yet the Federal government could see an additional $1.14 billion a year in revenue (2% on 57 trillion: Capgemeni Report http://www.us.capgemini.com/worldwealthreport08/WWR08_facts.asp . The numbers are hard to verify among the super wealthy since so much wealth goes unreported. Many people will argue that it will be very difficult for the IRS to verify net worth statements. Compliance would be hard to prove. To avoid an audit, wealthy families and individuals could have the option of directly negotiating with the IRS their intangibles tax. The government could take a position to let families negotiate their tax level in lieu of detailed reporting, which is often done in Switzerland for very wealthy immigrants. Forbes and other publications give a clue who to target. Fortunately in the USA, the new rich are not shy about showing it.
Net worth is not just under an individual’s name. Much wealth is held in private trusts which should pay the intangibles tax as well. Many trusts are managed to provide 5% to 7% income, and many hedge funds charge 3% just to manage them. So the Federal intagibles tax of 2% is defintely affordable for this sector of society.
Income tax rates should incorporate new brackets, not just the top one now that is a merely $350,000. Federal tax brackets should go up to $10 million, $1.0 billion with higher and higher rates, perhaps up to 80%. Even after taxes 80% of 1.0 billion income is take home of $200,000 million – quite nice for any lifetime, let alone annually.
The premise of this tax proposal is to make those who have benefited the most from this credit bubble, cough up some of their gains. Income inequality is already large in the USA, but net worth disparity is off the records. Most Americans have less than $10,000 saved for retirement and we can’t ask the super wealthy to chip in to pay for this country’s huge bing.
Huge fortunes have been made on Wall Street and in Main street as well. From bio-tech companies that had no hopes for a patent, to fictious telcom networks and now tainted mortgage back securities, each one of these episodes saw huge money made for a few: investment bankers, insiders, and the lucky ones. Now it is their time to take their responsibility, especially with the Federal deficit.
Democrats have to be very careful that the Bush administration doesn’t burden the next president and Congress with a budget that is incapable of promoting any of the progressive needs in this country: infrastracture, alternative energy, healthcare, education. If the conservative won’t take it out of the defense budget, then there is no money to do anything. Especially in an economy where government infrastracture programs could provide employment and future productivity. To build this country, someone has to pay. The average American is already maxed out. So isn’t it time that those with the most, pay the most.
February 8th, 2009 at 9:31 amThat’s one of the most convoluted posts I have read in years.
You didn’t come up with that yourself did you? Geez I hope not. If you did then I hope your not in any position of power.
February 8th, 2009 at 10:29 amI disagree with giving massive amounts of money to people who are being investigated by the FBI like ACORN.
And you were doing so well there, too. However, there is no line item in either version of the stimulus bill that gives money to ACORN. Also, ACORN does good work and is innocent of whatever it is you’re trying to insinuate they’re guilty of.
.
professorj Says:
That is included in the figure. You see we already have a deficit. We spend more than we take in. Wait until you liberals are asked to pay all this back. How you may ask? Why the only way that this Government of ours gets money.
More taxes. Eventually we have to pay more taxes.
If the bill is successful in reparing the economy, then the tax rate of the repaired economy would amount to much more revenue in dollars than it would now.
“More taxes” can either mean a higher tax rate, and/or a larger total revenue on the same rate due to increased GDP. You are attempting to imply the former. You have failed.
I have failed. In your Liberal mind maybe. As far as Acorn is concerned your so closed minded when it comes to what is really happening out there. Your pitiful. I know you rely on URL’s for forming your opinions so here it is.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/01/27/republican-leaders-raise-concerns-acorn-stimulus-dollars/
I can find you a dozen more if this one doesn’t do it for you.
ACORN is a corrupt organization that is involved in massive counts of Voter Fraud and exists solely to further the Liberal Socialist Agenda. That’s why you Leftists defend it so vigorously. Surely they help some people every now and then but that’s just window dressing for their underlying purpose. Visit one of their community schools. Socialism 101.
You really make me laugh. Ha Ha Ha.
February 8th, 2009 at 10:45 amElBruce Says:
professorj Says:
As far as tax cuts creating jobs. I’ll make it simple to understand for you.
You see you get to keep more of your hard earned money to spend without having the Government as a middle man.
So ideally, we’d have 0% taxes and therefore $0 government, in a pure, natural state of… what’s that called? Oh yeah, anarchy. Anarchy would be the most effective economy. Except that doesn’t make any sense.
I don’t recall saying anything about 0 taxes. Your a putz for implying it.
February 8th, 2009 at 10:46 am#
Wang111 Says:
Bush had turned the surplus into a horrible deficit.
Bush is like an idiot.
Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993
“GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY” BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG
ONLINE ANTI-BUSH SCHOLASTIC RESEARCH: LISTING OF MAJOR ISSUES
http://andrewyu-jenwang.blogspot.com/ 2008/ 10/ bush-is-worst-president-in-american.html
News flash. Bush is at home in Texas drinking Ice tea.
Obie the Messiah is President now. You have the power now. Go for it. You have control of all three branches of Government.
OBTW Bin laden is still sitting in his lounge chair sipping Ice Tea, soldiers are still dying, and the cells at Gitmo are still full. Enjoy.
February 8th, 2009 at 10:53 amTo Professor
February 8th, 2009 at 11:15 amLove your blog, but the libs are too busy kissing Obamas butt to listen to you. They are like the kids following the Pied Piper, they are so unable to hold a decent conversation, they just love to criticize Bush but if you say something bad about Obama, they call you every name in the book.
Thanks for trying though.
Come on now folks, Dont you think we should see what is in this Bill?
February 8th, 2009 at 11:59 amIs it too far a stretch to suggest that those tax cuts, compounded by Bush’s war-for-profit in Iraq, might well be the very instruments that flattened our economy?
Maybe it is time for ALL of us to say it loudly; “Bush’s trillion dollar tax cut has nearly ruined our economy!”
About time someone recognized that Bush’s billionaire tax cuts simultaneously applied as he went to war five thousand miles away, were the egg, and this flailing, failing economy is the chicken it hatched.
February 8th, 2009 at 1:40 pm“As far as Acorn is concerned your so closed minded…”
So, your a Professor of grammar?
February 8th, 2009 at 1:48 pmAnd I see you have a sock puppet, too…
February 8th, 2009 at 1:52 pmHey, Prof, do you really think these monopolists you defend are honest capitalists? You are just a noisy pawn of the no-bid, book-cooking, CEO’s who consider you a bigger dupe than any of us “libs.”
I know it for a fact, I’ve heard from more than one horse’s mouth. The wingnuts consider you nothing more than one of their lemmings, but they consider us “Libs” as intelligent adversaries. You’re just a wannabe, a toadie dittohead, regurgitating whatever The Lump said on the radio this morning.
The intelligent folks in the majority here and on the other “leftie” blogs just shake their heads is sympathetic embarrassment, amazed that you continually defend the very creeps who consider you their ignorant pawns.
February 8th, 2009 at 1:58 pm“As far as Acorn is concerned your so closed minded…”
Professor or not-so-bright, 12-year old Valley Girl?
You decide.
February 8th, 2009 at 3:45 pmKeith Says:
“As far as Acorn is concerned your so closed minded…”
Professor or not-so-bright, 12-year old Valley Girl?
You decide.
Love your reply. How long did you work on that one?
February 8th, 2009 at 6:13 pmJEP Says:
Hey, Prof, do you really think these monopolists you defend are honest capitalists?
Just as honest as Geithner. Now there’s change you can believe in.
You are just a noisy pawn of the no-bid, book-cooking, CEO’s who consider you a bigger dupe than any of us “libs.”
How do you know I’m not one of them book-cooking CEO’s?
I know it for a fact, I’ve heard from more than one horse’s mouth. The wingnuts consider you nothing more than one of their lemmings, but they consider us “Libs” as intelligent adversaries. You’re just a wannabe, a toadie dittohead, regurgitating whatever The Lump said on the radio this morning.
I’m sure you really think that.
The intelligent folks in the majority here and on the other “leftie” blogs just shake their heads is sympathetic embarrassment, amazed that you continually defend the very creeps who consider you their ignorant pawns.
Why do you whine so much? Cry like little babies. Suck it up and be a man.
February 8th, 2009 at 6:21 pmjeanette deldin Says:
To Professor
Love your blog, but the libs are too busy kissing Obamas butt to listen to you. They are like the kids following the Pied Piper, they are so unable to hold a decent conversation, they just love to criticize Bush but if you say something bad about Obama, they call you every name in the book.
Thanks for trying though.
Thanks jeannette for the comment. You better watch out though, your on the verge of being called a Nazi Or a member of the KKK. LOL
Hey, did you know that the Democrats started the KKK? They also fought a civil war to protect their slavery culture and ideals.
February 8th, 2009 at 6:26 pmjeanette deldin Says:
To Professor
Love your blog, but the libs are too busy kissing Obamas butt to listen to you. They are like the kids following the Pied Piper, they are so unable to hold a decent conversation, they just love to criticize Bush but if you say something bad about Obama, they call you every name in the book.
Thanks for trying though.
I’m just tickling their little egos. Research for my next book. I’m even considering mentioning “Professorj” in it.
You see, in all the liberal web sites that I visit I read the same arguments against George Bush and the Republicans. The constan whining and crying is going on all over the internet despite their cries of “We won”.
Even Obie and Nancy Pelosi have used those words. They march in LockStep like good little Bundest.
Great material.
February 8th, 2009 at 6:39 pmI agree, to disagree with Neocon ideology, but maybe true Conservatism has never been ‘done right’?? The Neocons have consistently avoided prudently managing our national debt-in a sound, Hamiltonian way! So, they have never accomplished A REALISTIC ASSESSMENT OF DOMESTIC CONDITIONS! It’s about time that a stimulus package addressed OUR ISSUES, poverty, unemployment and financial incompetance!?
February 8th, 2009 at 6:40 pmEdgeOnIt Says:
I agree, to disagree with Neocon ideology, but maybe true Conservatism has never been ‘done right’?? The Neocons have consistently avoided prudently managing our national debt-in a sound, Hamiltonian way! So, they have never accomplished A REALISTIC ASSESSMENT OF DOMESTIC CONDITIONS! It’s about time that a stimulus package addressed OUR ISSUES, poverty, unemployment and financial incompetance!?
I’ve heard those words for the last 50 years. The Great Society. Eliminating poverty. Unemployment. There is nothing new here. If my memory serves me right, we had pretty low unemployment during the Bush years until the Democrats took power in 2006. We had high unemployment during the Carter and the Ford years. You Democrats hold no high ground in that respect.
Go for it but quit your whining. Geez you Liberals cry like little babies.
February 8th, 2009 at 6:51 pmTo: 5th estate. Some cold, hard facts are in order here; not just directed to you, but to most everyone here who dislikes the Republican party. I’m a Black American who is a Constitutional Conservative (not a Republican). First, read the following article: http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.DYK-Why%20MLK%20was%20a%20Republican
Second, about the Tax Cuts of Kennedy, Reagan and Bush: http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/323.html Please note here the amount of average tax reductions per person in Table 3.
There are 32% of Americans who pay no tax at all (which isn’t right), and the top 20% of wage earners pay over 82% of the taxes….. you know …. those “evil rich.” It’s not governments job to “take care of us” … we are each the captains of our own ship; steer it toward the rocks, or towards the open seas. Your choice. There is no “right” to a car; a house; a job or health care. In 2006, when the Dems took over, unemployment was at an all time low (better than 100% employment), the economy booming with a GDP about the highest it’s ever been, and as always, the tax cuts provided more income to the government coffers than ever before.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:49 pmObama is making the same mistakes FDR and Japan did, and we WILL be headed towards a depression if his economic plans are passed. Thanks for your time in reading this and doing some research on the links provided. Oh….. by the way….. pertaining to Fox news being biased: http://www.brutallyhonest.org/brutally_honest/2007/12/fox-news-is-mos.html
Rasmussen Poll: Only 37% Now Support Existing Stimulus Plan
February 4th, 2009
By JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
Print
Pollsters vary in their findings, and Rasmussen’s polls don’t always agree with Gallup’s — but this clearly shows a steep drop in support for the present incarnation of President Barack Obama’s economic stimulus plan:
Support for the economic recovery plan working its way through Congress has fallen again this week. For the first time, a plurality of voters nationwide oppose the $800-billion-plus plan.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 37% favor the legislation, 43% are opposed, and 20% are not sure.
Two weeks ago, 45% supported the plan. Last week, 42% supported it.
Opposition has grown from 34% two weeks ago to 39% last week and 43% today.
Sixty-four percent (64%) of Democrats still support the plan. That figure is down from 74% a week ago. Just 13% of Republicans and 27% of those not affiliated with either major party agree.
Seventy-two percent (72%) of Republicans oppose the plan along with 50% of unaffiliated voters and 16% of Democrats.
The two main shifts seem to be the continued mobilization of GOPers back to the party line as articulated by members of Congress and talk show hosts. Some will say it shows how easy it is to push a button and turn on the partisanship light. The other is the erosion in support from independent voters.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:53 pmJust as George Bush couldn’t be successful morphing from a Texas governor who was popular among people of both parties, Obama will need to retain his bipartisan appeal to succeed. It has also been evident in recent weeks that — so far, at least — Obama has not used the bully pulpit and all of the tools at his disposal to clamor (not ask) for the bill’s passage and/or to get Democrats to seriously fine tune it and peel off some of the Republican opposition.
Look for a VERY unhappy day at the stock market if this comes to a vote and fails to pass or is fillbustered and doesn’t come to a vote.
To: EdgeOnIt As to #109, above; Again, it’s not governments job to take care of “your” issues. The last time “Conservatism” was done right war the Reagan era. The “War against Poverty” has cost the American taxpayer over 7 TRILLION dollars over the last 35 years, with nothing to show for it but 7 Trillion dollars worth of poverty, a huge bureaucracy of Welfare, food stamps, etc (all un-Constitutional), and the destruction of the inner city and the Black family. Now Obama wants to make those programs even larger, and wants to expand the infanticide in America, and around the world. In just 35 years, over 40 MILLION American citizens have been killed/wasted.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:57 pmRepublicans = A Noun, A Verb and TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH!!!!
February 9th, 2009 at 12:58 pmThis gang of New Deal deniers is more concerned with avoiding Rash Limbo’s wrath than revitalizing Main Street. Feckless, fearful and fringe.
http://jackrabbitcafe.blogspot.com/2009/02/moscow-backs-roosevelt.html
February 9th, 2009 at 2:31 pmlapdogs Says:
Republicans = A Noun, A Verb and TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH!!!!
Reading the Liberal dictionary again, hey Dickie?
You have the indoctrination down pat. Like the humor but most of your stuff is just humor isn’t it?
Luv it. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha.
February 9th, 2009 at 2:31 pmJohnnyRussia Says:
This gang of New Deal deniers is more concerned with avoiding Rash Limbo’s wrath than revitalizing Main Street. Feckless, fearful and fringe
I’m with ya man. Up with communism.
Luv ya man.
Geeez.
February 9th, 2009 at 3:27 pmThis “economic destruction” plan is SPENDING; reductions in the tax rate stimulates economic growth by allowing everyone who gets one (about 65% of Americans) the ability to keep the money they earned. The majority of the money from the rate reductions went to families with 3 or more members. Reagan’s rate reductions gave us over 96 months of un-paralleled economic growth, and brought interest rates down from about 20% to the single digits.
Both the “New Deal” (more like a raw deal) and Johnson’s “Great society” programs cost taxpayers tons of cash with no positive economic results.
February 12th, 2009 at 8:10 pmThank you very much.
sohbet
February 14th, 2009 at 5:15 ambayan
chat
The article doesn’t make the strongest case. Mostly because
February 14th, 2009 at 12:37 pmthe 2001 tax bill spread the revenue cuts over a decade, until it expires in 2011.
The Recovery and Reinvestment Plan is concentrated over two years.
Of course, the tax cuts were also recklessly and irrationally combined with spending increases to send the deficit soaring.
Then RRP will take much longer than two years to come ionto effect. Even the “shovel-ready” work will take at least a year because of the bidding process. One has to make the assumption that BHO wants to save the economy. The FDR plan failed. It wasn’t the New Deal that brought America out of the great depression. WWII ended the new Deal, and THAT brought us out of the depression. What about the cost and debt contained in just one item of the RRP, namely, the end of the Welfare Reforms put into place by the previous administrations? Now, people won’t have to work to get welfare (or even attempt to find work), and there will be more (debt) money allocated to the states for every new welfare recipient that is signed up.
In 2011, when the tax cuts expire, that will be the largest tax increase in the history of America, second only to the Clinton tax increases on social security recipients.
The “tax cuts”of BHO’s campaign amount to roughly $13 per person per month. Gee……. I think I’ll go out and buy a car!!
February 16th, 2009 at 4:57 pmBy the way, Jay, tax cuts are not a Republican or strictly Conservative tool; they are an economic tool, and they work EVERY TIME THEY’VE BEEN USED….. from Queen Elizabeth the 1st, to John Kennedy to Reagan to Bush Jr. In 2006, America had the highest consumer confidence in history; the unemployment rate was the lowest in history (over 100% employment); the stock market was at an all-time high, and the tax cuts had more money flowing into the gov’t. coffers since Reagan. It’s what is called a “win/win” scenario.
February 16th, 2009 at 5:00 pm