[JonL]

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

JonL:



First - we need some evidence that "the rich" benefitted from the downturn in the economy. MOST of the "tax targeted rich" got PUMMELED in their private 401K and savings. Only the traders who positioned themselves out of Fanny/Freddy and the housing bubble increased their worth. But for these few, the last 5 years is probably close to a wash. We are ALL being economically deflated. Top to bottom.. Yes, there's a gap -- but it's becoming just about as meaningful as the gap between the Howells and everyone else on Gilligan's Island.

I know that the disparity in wealth in this country has increased dramatically over the past decade... for whatever reason. I also know that during that time the taxes paid by the wealthiest Americans has decreased dramatically. Perhaps a good start to increasing revenues (while also responsibly reducing spending) would be to restore the tax structure to where it has historically been during periods of protracted economic growth fueled by a vibrant middle class. BTW, I'm not suggesting that the downturn benefitted the wealthy, but it certainly didn't cause the same degree of hardship that it caused the middle class and below. I am suggesting that our tax policy has benefited the wealthy to the detriment of the rest of us.

I surely don't get your Gilligan's Island analogy.

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

Second -- We're seeing the results of criminally poor financial management at the Congressional level. That Geitners recent action is just the latest example of negligient fiduciary responsibility. For THAT -- the guilty have to pay. Just like demanding accountability on Wall Street, we need accountability and some "perp walks" from the govt. Not going to let them continue these criminal acts. Especially, the continuing lie that the SS/MC crisis is still years off. Stop the lying now -- and we can talk about fixing it. You stop the criminal acts, before you swing into repair mode.

It would be nice to reduce the hyperbole in DC and start discussing issues in a rational manner that isn't totally influenced by lobbying and pandering.

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

Thirdly, we have excused about 1/2 of America from contributing to this crisis by reducing their INCOME taxes to zero (or refunding a negative tax thru EITC). That puts a crimp into the repair effort. Now progressive income is OK I guess to a point. If we hadn't stolen from this bottom half thru excess payroll taxes for most of their lives, I'd have NO compunctions about asking them to contribute a token amount to the fix. Were none of THESE people for the wars that helped shove us into an untenable financial muck-up? Were none of these people for the housing policies that inflated the housing bubble? Were none of these people for all the Green crappola that's been over-hyped at GE? Were none of these people in favor of including drug benefits to MCare?

The reason so many lower income people pay little or no income tax is because far too many people have subsistence level incomes or below. I don't know what you mean about "stealing" from people with payroll taxes. We all get services from the gov't, and they need to be paid for. The fact that people (of whatever means) may have been "for" or "against" various policies in a general sense has no bearing on if those people as individuals or as a member of a particular class should pay or not pay for the policies. We are all in this together. If our elected (?) leaders take us into war, it is incumbent upon them to demand that we pay for it. If we do not want to pay for it, we need to get our leaders to change their policies. Our leaders lacked the courage, foresight, or principle to demand that we make sacrifices to achieve our objectives.

Furthermore, it's disingenuous to "blame" normal people for supporting various policies that were so convoluted and arcane in their implementation as to be totally unintelligible. Do think anyone who benefitted from housing policies was given an explanation about CDOs, mortgage backed securities, economic bubbles, bank failures, foreclosures, etc, while they were being told that homeownership was the American dream and that real estate was a "sure thing?" As to the drug benefits, there was TREMENDOUS opposition to the way it was implemented because it was confusing to the supposed beneficiaries and a windfall for the actual beneficiaries - the pharmaceutical companies and the insurance companies. I also believe that a majority of Americans would favor a sound "green" energy development policy if it was funded by eliminating oil company tax breaks, and I bet most would even support it if it included a modest gas tax of a couple of pennies per gallon.

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

Fourthly, the better method than targeting specific incomes with higher tax brackets, is to start closing the existing "tax expenditures" (as the left likes to call them) or loopholes. Do it as uniformly and universally as possible. Don't promote the class warfare rhetoric which truly isn't gonna fix the problem.. (See california e.g. where about 30,000 people in that state pay 60% of state income tax. So when THOSE people take a hit in a declining market -- the whole state goes into the red).

No argument that loopholes should be closed. However, this mantra of "class warfare" is a stupid red herring. Only the most radical of leftists are saying anything that approaches class warfare rhetoric. It's a nice way for those who are benefitting from the increasing income disparity to deflect criticism of the unfair policies that help them. It's as if a bully keeps poking his finger in your eye and when you punch back he gets you arrested for assault.

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

But I'm not in a mood to see the Treasury stealing from yet ANOTHER pile of OPiuM (other peoples money). Or punishing the lower class with a dollar devaluation and NOT calling that a tax.

How much taxation is legitimate before you call it "stealing?"