Community | June 06, 2012 | 14 comments

WHY WE HAVE TO RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH AND END THE BUSH TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY (AND BILL CLINTON AGREES)

letsliveinpeace
I was on CNBC Tuesday when Bill Clinton gave an interview saying that, given the deadlock between Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill, it seemed likely the Bush tax cuts would be extended in 2013 along with all spending. When asked to comment, I said Clinton was probably correct.

But, of course, Republicans have twisted Clinton’s words into a pretzel. They say the former president came out in favor of extending the Bush tax cuts to the wealthy – in sharp contrast to President Obama’s position that they should not be.

It’s typical election-year politics, except for the fact that the Republican megaphone is larger this time around due to all the Super PAC and secret “social welfare” organization bribes, er, donations that are filling Republican coffers.

Here’s the truth. America has a huge budget deficit hanging over our heads. If the rich don’t pay their fair share, the rest of us have to pay higher taxes — or do without vital public services like Medicare, Medicaid, Pell grants, food stamps, child nutrition, federal aid to education, and more.

Republicans say we shouldn’t raise taxes on the rich when the economy is still in the dumps. This is a variation on their old discredited trickle-down economic theories. The fact is, the rich already spend as much as they’re going to spend. Raising their taxes a bit won’t deter them from buying, and therefore won’t hurt the economy.

In reality, Romney and the GOP are pushing an agenda that has nothing whatever to do with reducing the budget deficit. If they were serious about deficit reduction they wouldn’t demand tax cuts for the very wealthy.

We should have learned by now. The Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 were supposed to be temporary. Even so, they blew a huge hole in the budget deficit.

Millionaires received a tax cut that’s averaged $123,000 a year, while the median-wage worker’s tax cut has amounted to no more than a few hundreds dollars a year.

Bush promised the tax cuts would more than pay for themselves in terms of their alleged positive impact on the economy. The record shows they didn’t. Job growth after the Bush tax cuts was a fraction of the growth under Bill Clinton – even before the economy crashed in late 2008. And the median wage dropped, adjusted for inflation.

Let’s be clear. Romney and the Republicans are pushing a reverse-Robin Hood plan that takes from the middle class and the poor while rewarding the rich.

According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, Romney’s tax plan would boost the incomes of people earning more than $1 million a year by an average of $295,874 annually.

Meanwhile, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Romney’s plan would throw ten million low-income people off the benefits rolls for food stamps or cut benefits by thousands of dollars a year, or both. “These cuts would primarily affect very low-income families with children, seniors and people with disabilities,” the Center concludes.

The rich have to pay their fair share. Period.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozMpjCSUuWk&feature=player_embedded
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Politics,   Progressives United,   1 more
  2. tags:
    Same old every day
  3.     
    |

14 comments // WHY WE HAVE TO RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH AND END THE BUSH TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY (AND BILL CLINTON AGREES) // Video

  • Paratus
    • 0
      Paratus  
    • Tax rates across the board dripped when Bush changed the rates. In addition to lowering the income tax rate he also lowered the capital gains rate 5%- both good things. The tax rates for the "rich" dropped 4%. As things are now, 47% of the filers don't pay any FIT so it seems that only those who have bigger incomes pay income tax at the federal level.

    • 11 months ago
  • cztheday
    • +1
      cztheday  
    • Depends on how they define "rich," of course. The Alternative Minimum Tax was created to make certain that "rich" families paid their fair share of taxes. However, it has been so long since they changed the rates that 15% of households with total annual incomes over $75,000 must pay the tax. I will admit that $75,000 is nothing to sneeze at. But in a household where both spouses work, it is hardly "rich" - especially after tacking the AMT onto their regular income taxes.

    • 12 months ago
  • cztheday
    • +1
      cztheday  
    • cztheday:

      IMHO, it is the folks whose incomes exceed $500,000 per year who are making out like raped apes...and I have no problem at all with raising their federal income tax rates. If I recall correctly, the top tax bracket now is 39%. I don't like any system that takes more than half of anybody's income, but I could see a 45% rate that would raise a hell of a lot more revenue that, combined with judicious spending cuts, could help get us back to the surpluses at the end of Clinton's second term. Neither more taxes nor spending cuts, by themselves is really a feasible way to end deficit spending if you take a realistic look at the numbers. It HAS to be a combination of both.

    • 12 months ago
  • MSII
    • +4
      MSII  
    • Long past time these things were done! Time to go back to the old rates on the rich that we had back-in-the-day when the economy was actually sane before the right-wing-corporate-fascists and their pissed on, errr excuse me, their "trickle down" economics disaster. Back before the rise of their imperialist-militant-fascist holy-saint-reagan-the-mad!

    • 12 months ago
  • Paratus
  • artemis6
  • KB723
  • letsliveinpeace
  • KB723
  • cpad
  • letsliveinpeace
  • MSII
  • letsliveinpeace
  • wolfess
    • 0
      wolfess  
    • letsliveinpeace:

      I think I just had an epiphany ----- any possibility that Clinton employed a little reverse psychology there? To wit: he says it 'ain't gonna happen' and that gets Obama to FINALLY stare down the wrongwingers simply because Clinton thinks the tax cuts will wind up getting passed again.

      Pwr 2 the FED-UP peons! GUILLOTINE MEDIOCRITY in all its forms!

    • 12 months ago
more from Community:

top videos