ThinkProgress Logo

Economy

Paul Ryan Calls For Increasing Taxes On Middle Class But Dismisses Millionaires Tax As ‘Class Warfare’

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) resumed his attacks on President Obama’s economic policy Sunday morning, suggesting that the President’s plan to tax millionaires’ profits from capital gains in order to fund job creation efforts constitutes “class warfare”:

RYAN: It adds further instability to our system — more uncertainty — and it punishes job creation and those people who create jobs. Class warfare, Chris, may make for really good politics but it makes for rotten economics. We don’t need to divide people and prey on people’s fear and envy and anxiety. We need to remove the barriers so entrepreneurs can hire people. These tax increases don’t work. [...]

This is a double tax… If we tax investment and tax more you will get less of it. It looks like to me not a very good sign. It looks like the President wants to move down the class warfare path. Class warfare will simply divide this country more, will attack job creators,  divide people, and it doesn’t grow the economy.

Watch it:

Ironically, Ryan was simultaneously calling for an end to the current temporary tax cuts, which would raise taxes by 50 percent on those making less than $106,000. While launching accusations of “class warfare,” Ryan is the one who would prefer that people with less money pay more, while those with more money keep more.

As Warren Buffett pointed out last month, the mega-rich pay “practically nothing” in payroll taxes and instead pay far lower tax rates on passive investment income. Congress has “coddled” billionaires, Buffett argued, rather than calling on them for serious “shared sacrifice.”

Ryan is clearly attempting to paint the President as being responsible for the growing divide between the middle class and richest Americans. In reality, it’s House Republicans who are rejecting all of Obama’s plans to create and protect jobs for all Americans. If millionaires’ capital gains were the key to creating jobs, the jobs would exist by now.

Yglesias

Reinventing The HMO

The Stewart Community Choice health care plan concept, being launched in Massachusetts, seems like an obvious future step for a financially constrained world. They’ll be essentially offering people lower insurance premiums if they accept less choice of where they accept treatment. It makes sense as a matter of business, but as Sarah Kliff writes we’ve arguably seen this movie before:

Health insurance companies have made wagers similar to Steward’s in the past – and lost. Most notably was the rise of Health Maintenance Organizations, or HMOs, in the 1990s. The plans offered a similar trade off between choice and cost. And while they flourished for a few years, consumer backlash against limited options has led to HMO enrollment declining steadily for over a decade now.

This whole episode in American life is, in my view, under-discussed. After all, the HMOs were supposed to reduce cost. And the HMOs worked. But people have spent the past ten years voting with their feet away from this option. You often hear arguments about health care costs invoke the fact that the health care sector benefits from lots of explicit and implicit subsidies, which is true. But those subsidies weren’t suddenly created at the moment the worm turned on the HMO issue. People seem to quite authentically prefer, in the circumstances of 21st century America, to spend a large share of their marginal dollar on health care services.

Climate Progress

Update on Climate Scientists Defense Fund

The response was overwhelming to “Climate Scientists Defense Fund – Please Help.” As you may recall, Prof. Scott A. Mandia, explained why he and Prof. John Abraham launched the fund:

Clihttp://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/global_warming/images/defense_fund_logo.gifmate researchers are in need of immediate legal assistance to prevent their private correspondence from being exposed to Chris Horner and the American Tradition Institute who are using Freedom of Information (FOI) to harass researchers.   (For context please see: http://wapo.st/pQg0JC and http://wapo.st/oiua7V.)

The goal was to raise $10,000 in 48 hours.

Here is the update Mandia sent me this week:

Read more

Yglesias

Tax Loopholes Mostly Benefit Affluent Households

Lori Montgomery observes that while recent discussion of loopholes and deductions in the tax code has primarily focused on somewhat obscure corporate tax provisions, the real money is big breaks for households, especially the upper middle class households who pay relatively high rates.

This doesn’t, I think, seriously undermine the view that closing loopholes and simplifying the tax structure would be a good idea. All this is really telling us is that the individual income tax amounts to a lot more money overall than the corporate income tax. Consequently, tax breaks for households are a bigger deal than tax breaks for corporations. By the exact same token, if loophole-closing made it possible to reduce tax rates without causing massive revenue loss the primary beneficiaries of such a move would be upper middle class and wealthy households. Given the current structure of American society, this is where the money is and any major change necessarily impacts these interests.

Economy

Why There Are Protests On Wall Street: Their Actions Impoverished More Than 60 Million People

Today, over a thousand demonstrators began protests as a part of a campaign they are calling “Occupy Wall Street.” The protesters intend to engage in long-term civil disobedience to draw attention to Wall Street’s misdeeds and call for structural economic reforms. CNN Money covered the start of the campaign. Watch it:

As demonstrators converged on Wall Street — with police blocking them from reaching the New York Stock Exchange — much of the news media paid little attention to the protests. Meanwhile, much of the conservative punditry has taken to mocking the demonstrations, with conservative Twitter users lambasting the “hippies” in New York City. CNN contributor and RedState blogger Erick Erickson labeled the protesters as “profoundly dumb.”

Certainly, debates about the tactics and strategy behind an anti-Wall Street campaign are warranted. But in a country where much of the populist energy has been absorbed by a movement that compared expanding access to private insurance to “death panels,” it’s worth reviewing why Americans and others should be protesting against Wall Street.

While many of the conservative defenders of Wall Street may be quick to portray protests against the American financial establishment as driven by envy of its wealth or far-left ideologies, the truth is that people have a very simple reason to be angry — because Wall Street’s actions made tens of millions of people dramatically poorer through no fault of their own. In 2010, the International Monetary Fund and World Bank conducted studies of the effects of the global recession — caused largely by Wall Street financial instruments that were poorly regulated by government policies — and found that the recession threw 64 million people into extreme poverty:

The International Monetary Fund estimates that the global economy contracted by 0.6 per cent in 2009 and the implications of this have been severe for many. Economic growth in developing countries was only 1.7 per cent in 2009 compared with 8.1 per cent in 2007. However, if China and India are excluded, the economies of developing countries actually contracted by 1.8 per cent. The World Bank has estimated that an additional 64 million people will be living in extreme poverty on less than US$1.25 a day by the end of 2010 as a result of the global recession.

And nearly three years after the start of the global economic crisis — where taxpayers in multiple countries were called upon to save the financial industry — most of the banking elite’s top executives remain virtually untouched. There have been almost no high-profile convictions for fraud and related financial crimes, banking profits continue to soar, and unemployment not just in the U.S. but globally remains very high.

Given these facts, the question is not why more than a thousand people demonstrated on Wall Street yesterday. The question is, why aren’t even more people in the streets of the financial district in New York City?

Update

New research finds another apparent cost of Wall Street’s recession: a nationwide spike in child abuse.

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up