COMMENTS: 74
How the Ultra-Rich Are Trying to Kill Health Reform
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Personal Health headlines via email.
Here's a truism: The wealthiest 1 percent have never had it so good.
According to government figures, 1-percenters' share of America's total income is the highest it's been since 1929, and their tax rates are the lowest they've faced in two decades. Through bonuses, many 1-percenters will profit from the $23 trillion in bailout largesse the Treasury Department now says could be headed to financial firms. And, most of them benefit from IRS decisions to reduce millionaire audits and collect zero taxes from the majority of major corporations.
But what really makes the ultra-wealthy so fortunate, what truly separates this moment from a run-of-the-mill Gilded Age, is the unprecedented protection the 1-percenters have bought for themselves on the most pressing issues.
To review: With 22,000 Americans dying each year because they lack health insurance, Congress is considering universal health care legislation financed by a surcharge on income above $280,000 -- that is, a levy almost exclusively on 1-percenters. This surtax would graze just 5 percent of small businesses and would recoup only part of the $700 billion the 1-percenters received from the Bush tax cuts. In fact, it is so miniscule, those making $1 million annually would pay just $9,000 more in taxes every year -- or nine-tenths of 1 percent of their 12-month haul.
Nonetheless, the 1-percenters have deployed an army to destroy the initiative before it makes progress.
The foot soldiers are the Land Rover Liberals. These Democratic lawmakers secure their lefty labels by wearing pink-ribbon lapel pins and supporting good causes like abortion rights. However, being affluent and/or from affluent districts, they routinely drive their luxury cars over middle-class economic interests. Hence, this week's letter from Boulder, Colorado's dot-com tycoon Rep. Jared Polis, D, and other Land Rover Liberals calling for the surtax's death.
Echoing that demand are the Corrupt Cowboys -- those like Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mt., who come from the heartland's culturally conservative and economically impoverished locales. These cavalrymen in both parties quietly build insurmountable campaign war chests as the biggest corporate fundraisers in Congress. At the same time, they publicly preen as jes' folks, make twangy references to "voters back home," and now promise to kill the health care surtax because they say that's what their communities want. Cash payoffs made, re-elections purchased, the absurd story somehow goes that because blue-collar constituents in Flyover America like guns and love Jesus, they must also reflexively adore politicians who defend 1-percenters' bounty.
That fantastical fairly tale, of course, couldn't exist without the Millionaire Media -- the elite journalists and opinionmongers who represent corporate media conglomerates and/or are themselves extremely wealthy. Ignoring all the data about inequality, they legitimize the assertions of the 1-percenters' first two battalions, while actually claiming America's fat cats are unfairly persecuted.
For example, Washington Post editors deride surtax proponents for allegedly believing "the rich alone can fund government." Likewise, Wall Street Journal correspondent Jonathan Weisman wonders why the surtax "soak(s) the rich" by unduly "lumping all of the problems of the finances of the United States on 1 percent of (its) households?" And most brazenly, NBC's Meredith Vieira asks President Obama why the surtax is intent on "punishing the rich?"
For his part, Obama has responded with characteristic coolness -- and a powerful counter-strike. "No, it's not punishing the rich," he said. "If I can afford to do a little bit more so that a whole bunch of families out there have a little more security, when I already have security, that's part of being a community."
If any volley can thwart this latest attack of the 1-percenters, it is that simple idea.
Stay up to date with the latest Personal Health headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mmckinl on Jul 25, 2009 12:43 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The top 1% received a 30% or better income tax cut, scores of tax loopholes and cuts on their capital gains, dividend and estate taxes that have saved them literally trillions of dollars.
The rest of us haven't been so lucky. Our taxes have increased because state and local government has had to increase taxes because of the unfunded mandates that Congress has passed to the states and local governments, usually in the form of regressive taxes, like sales taxes and use fees ... and less funding for education, because the top 1% send their children to private schools or live in very well to do areas that have fewer children and very expensive houses.
Well, health care funding to them is a foot in the door of all their privilege. They actually have reporters asking why they should be penalized for helping all Americans get decent health care ... PENALIZED ! ! !. To them their Reagan Tax Cuts aren't a public policy decision but a God Given Right for the fabulously well to do!
What we do know is that since the Reagan Tax Cuts the wealthy have gotten even wealthier, the biggest wealth gap since 1928, while the rest of America has gotten poorer and the government is mired in debt!
Make no mistake ... the wealthy under the guise of their think tanks, institutions and media are going to fight health care funding tooth and nail whatever the cost ...
Here is a Great Article on the wealthy, their institutions and tax rates ...
The Great Tax Con Job
" Novelist Larry Beinhart was the first to bring this to my attention. He looked over the history of tax cuts and economic bubbles, and found a clear relationship between the two. High top marginal tax rates (generally well above 60%) on rich people actually stabilize the economy, prevent economic bubbles from forming, prevent economic crashes, and lead to steady and sustained economic growth (and steady and sustained wage growth for working people).
On the other hand, when top marginal rates drop below 50 percent, the opposite happens. As Beinhart noted in a November 17, 2008 post on the Huffington Post, the massive Republican tax cuts of the 1920s (from 73% to 25%) led directly to the Roaring '20s stock market bubble, temporary boom, and then the crash and Republican Great Depression of 1929.
Rates on the very rich went back up into the 70-90% range from the 1930s to the 1980s. As a result, the economy grew steadily; for the first time in the history of our nation we went 50 years without a crash or major bank failure; and working people's wages increased enough to produce the strongest middle class this nation has ever seen.
Then came Reaganomics.
Reagan cut top marginal rates on millionaires and billionaires from 74% down to 38% and there was an immediate surge in the markets - followed by the worst crash since the Great Depression and the failure of virtually the entire nation's savings and loan banking system."
~~~~
The stakes couldn't be clearer or higher ... will trillions be creamed off the top of the economy to make the wealthy even wealthier or will they be taxed to stabilize the economy and fund programs that all Americans need, starting with health care.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Not Angry Enough Yet: Tax Loopholes for the Filthy Rich !
Posted by: mmckinl
» Sign this petition http://bit.ly/HR676
Posted by: www.democratz.org
» RE: Sign this petition http://bit.ly/HR676
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Perry Logan on Jul 25, 2009 2:48 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
True, except for the Clinton years.
Clinton raised taxes on the rich, leading to the longest sustained economic expansion in U.S. history, higher income at all levels, and a lower poverty rate. He was even paying off the deficit. People forget this.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Clinton did no such thing
Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Clinton did no such thing--You're a LIAR, leafsong1...
Posted by: jvaljon1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: drricklippin on Jul 25, 2009 3:38 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The greatest threat to the US is not terrorism. It is the erosion of our middle class in an era where anyone with a computer can easily ascertain the obscene assets of the rich.
The rich should know that if the people get angry enough there will be no place to hide For their own survival they should yield. But their greed gets in the way of rational thought.
Dr. Rick Lippin
Southampton,Pa
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: The Old Hippie on Jul 25, 2009 4:00 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you are confused, or you simply do not know what “the allowing” is all about...
Then maybe this link will help?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It’s The Allowing, Stupid.
Posted by: wbblack
» Great piece The Old Hippie!
Posted by: Quist
» Great essay!
Posted by: cdlepthien
Comments are closed-
Posted by: timenotonmyside on Jul 25, 2009 4:26 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Today, many of those Washington Establishment voices are precisely the same people who now insist we cannot "rush" a $1 trillion health care reform package through Congress. After pushing a $12 trillion no-strings-attached handout to Wall Street, they actually insist that they don't want to "rush" health care because of it's price tag.
And so, I'm wondering - has anyone bothered to ask those same bailout backers why they said we had to rush $12 trillion out to Wall Street, but we shouldn't "rush" health care reform for the 45 million Americans who don't have health insurance, and the 22,000 who die every year because of that reality?
I mean, even if you subscribe to the empirically absurd notion that debating health care for 64 years is a "rush," this is a pretty simple line of questioning: How was handing $12 trillion to Wall Street over the course of 10 days of legislative debate the right kind of thing to rush, but spending $1 trillion on universal health care after a 64-year debate the wrong kind of thing to "rush?"
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CTC123 on Jul 25, 2009 5:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Big Money Makers $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Collect money from the CONSUMERS (U & I)
U & I recieve trick'le.down economics.
U & I need to take ACTION!!!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Sign this petition http://bit.ly/HR676
Posted by: www.democratz.org
» RE: Sign this petition http://bit.ly/HR676
Posted by: jvaljon1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cberkland on Jul 25, 2009 5:18 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Productivity gains over the last 30 years are illusory
Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Productivity gains over the last 30 years are illusory
Posted by: cberkland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cheryljohns on Jul 25, 2009 5:52 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What few are getting...
Posted by: cberkland
» Not such a fantasy anymore
Posted by: cheryljohns
» RE: Not such a fantasy anymore
Posted by: cberkland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: tomfrazee on Jul 25, 2009 6:31 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» The author of the article doesn't even know who's insured now!
Posted by: johnwinthrop
Comments are closed-
Posted by: forestnfama on Jul 25, 2009 6:35 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Won't work here in America
Posted by: cheryljohns
» RE: The Republican elite stoled the American Dream.
Posted by: bettyn
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SeattlePackedSnowandCollidedCars on Jul 25, 2009 6:39 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: what happens if the wealthy just move away
Posted by: JSquercia
» RE: what happens if the welthy just move away
Posted by: cberkland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cheryljohns on Jul 25, 2009 6:45 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Parcival01 on Jul 25, 2009 6:59 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look at the words particularly of the Wall Street guy. It's the same: Oh, that po' po, 1 percent. Must they pay for everything? The poor victims.
What's sad is, if you look at related pages on places like YouTube, there are many who can't afford to eat who're suggesting--INSISTING--that health care reform as proposed is not much short of a commie plot.
Our stuggle: to get people--and I'm not talking about that 1 percent--to NOT vote against their own self interest. And that's not going to be easy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Not when they are stupid..A new book - Idiot America
Posted by: cheryljohns
» Maybe another COMMIE PLOT!
Posted by: Parcival01
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Chloe2005 on Jul 25, 2009 7:22 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The 1%'ers are the very ones
Posted by: wbblack
» RE: The 1%'ers have the true community
Posted by: jbpazz
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SPEAKTRUTH200 on Jul 25, 2009 7:36 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» We are NOT useless eaters - we are the slave pool for cheap labor
Posted by: cheryljohns
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cori on Jul 25, 2009 8:24 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is going to be a long, jobless recovery. Hours worked per week are at an all-time low. As noted above, part-time work is very high. Employers, when things actually start to turn around, and they will, will first give current employees more hours and then expand the hours of part-time workers. There will be few new jobs for a long time.
Because our population is growing, between 130-150,000 new jobs are required each month to keep unemployment from rising. Initial and continuing claims suggest we are currently losing at least 300,000 a month.
(As an aside, the media talks about initial unemployment claims falling. That is actually not true. Unemployment claims are in fact quite high and rising, but the seasonal adjustments make them look smaller. Normally, this would not be a big deal. But the summer seasonal adjustment assumes a normal automobile manufacturing market, with layoffs in July. The layoffs came much earlier this year, distorting seasonal adjustments.)
Higher and persistent unemployment, lower incomes and wages, higher savings rates, capacity utilization at 50-year lows and still falling, rising home foreclosures, a deleveraging financial system, etc. are not the stuff of "V-shaped" recoveries. Throw in that Moody's estimates that US banks will have to write off $400 billion in 2010, and it's a very weak recovery indeed that shapes up for next year.
It's the return of The Muddle Through Economy*, which is better than what we have had, to be sure. But that asterisk is there for a reason. Congress and the Obama administration are seemingly hell bent on a massive tax increase. If that happens, it will push a fragile recovery back into recession. It will look like the twin recessions of 1980-82.
It will be a difficult investing environment, to say the least. If buy-and-hold is not your favorite style, there are alternatives. Quick commercial: my friends at CMG have a platform of alternative managers that can be tailored to your specific needs. These are traders who have weathered the storms of this last decade. These are individually managed accounts, with daily liquidity. You really owe it to yourself to see the managers on their platform. The link to their form is http://www.cmgfunds.net/public/mauldin_questionnaire.asp.
I am encouraged by the fact that the radical health reforms look like they might not pass. The health-care system clearly needs a major overhaul. Let's hope that we get it right.
In a future letter, I am going to talk about taxes. I am concerned that we are going to raise taxes now to very high levels, and not leave any room for the tax increases we are going to desperately need in the middle of the next decade to pay for entitlement programs. That will mean a VAT tax and tax increases on the middle class. Again, not good for the economy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Are we expected to believe that this post isn't an advertisement
Posted by: leafsong1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thornwolf on Jul 25, 2009 8:44 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Interestingly, tax increases at the top actually work as supply-side stimulus for the larger economy. Ironic, isn't it?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thornwolf on Jul 25, 2009 8:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Oops, never mind
Posted by: thornwolf
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leafsong1 on Jul 25, 2009 9:47 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: at the Rich
Posted by: theblackgeorgecarlin
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Trainer12 on Jul 25, 2009 10:54 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: TJColatrella on Jul 25, 2009 11:46 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: nd Corporate "Personhood"
Posted by: theblackgeorgecarlin
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on Jul 25, 2009 12:17 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If we were not borrowing from other nations, genuine fiscal responsibility would be harder to ignore. That would mean reserving tax cuts for anyone making under 200k per year and making sure that the taxes collect were put to constructive purposes such as public transportation, education where it counts, and other domestic and constructive purposes rather than destructive purposes such as wars, spoonfeeding Wall $treet, tax cut and loophole giveaways to the wealthy/corporate elite, etc ... We need to both get our tax code structure seriously repaired AND get our spending priorities and distribution straightened out.
P.S.: I used to get frustrated when people would call me a "Republican" for bringing this part up but I found that if I laugh it out, it's harder to back down from that truth. Come to think of it, I really do miss genuine fiscal conservatism. When I think about it, a country's true happiness is no different than an individual's happiness. At some point, the more one spends beyond a certain limit, the more unhappy they get.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's not just the unfair taxation but the unfair spending that's to blame.
Posted by: Steppin Razor
» RE: It's not just the unfair taxation but the unfair spending that's to blame.
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield
» Tax cuts cause excess spending
Posted by: leafsong1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: wireup on Jul 25, 2009 3:36 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Agreed...but some of these 1%ers are war profiteers (a/k/a criminals).
Posted by: johnmont
Comments are closed-
Posted by: talkville on Jul 25, 2009 7:41 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Keep an eye on GM ("What's good for GM is good for America"). I feel relatively confident that in a few years it will re-emerge in it's true private form, having in the meantime replaced it's auto-manufacturing center-piece with its Consumer Finance and Real Estate arms moved onto center stage. And it will remain immensely lucrative for its major shareholders who at the moment are off whistling and dissimulating somewhere in their luxurious estates and vacation spots.
What Mussolini called Corporatism, albeit with a detectable Puritan style.
There's good, there's bad and there's ugly in all of this. But about 60 to 70% of the population will lose much more than it gained-- by "consent" of the governed.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: armorypk on Jul 25, 2009 8:54 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» So true.
Posted by: leafsong1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: quito on Jul 26, 2009 6:44 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ava1984 on Jul 26, 2009 1:58 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ava1984 on Jul 26, 2009 2:01 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Steve Adair on Jul 26, 2009 7:37 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mapsguy1955 on Jul 27, 2009 4:43 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» If only!!!
Posted by: thekidde
Comments are closed-
Posted by: swooshy on Jul 27, 2009 6:37 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let an army of investigative reporters, constituents, forensic accountants start crawling over these overpaid ceo's and politicians like red ants.
Is Mr. Hypocrite avoiding paying taxes banking in Cayman or Switzerland?? Why do many elected officials leave office with a lot more than they came in with?? Insurance conglomerate outsourcing personal information and work overseas?
How much tax do some of these companies actually PAY?
Set up funds to pay investigative reporters to to the job our regulators and big media won't.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LadyLiberty101 on Jul 28, 2009 2:07 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: itouch backup on Jul 29, 2009 7:52 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: zzdinko on Aug 4, 2009 4:18 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
RT
http://www.anon-web-tools.tk
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: fboisseau on Aug 5, 2009 11:10 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But having said that, please keep in mind the following when talking about how the rich are getting off easy. The percentage of total tax dollars paid by the rich has increase every year since 1987 (except for 1988). In 2007 the total amount of taxes paid by the top 1% exceeded the total taxes paid the bottom 95%. ( see here http://bit.ly/3uAeko )
Finally, I have a question for you. If I came and took 20% of what you earned by force and gave it to those that did not work, how would you feel? Because when the government takes my money and pays it out to welfare that is what they are doing. (Do not try to paint me a mean spirited, because I believe the system is worst for those on welfare. It destroys their families, self respect and self worth).
Every person in this country is entitled to what they earn from their labor, and the only two people that can judge the value of that labor is the person doing the work and the person paying for that work. Anyone else that tries controls that exchange is taking something away from one or both of them. And anyone that claims ownership of what another works for, is taking away what is rightfully the property of the worker.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: realitycheck6640 on Aug 5, 2009 11:30 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: boay on Aug 17, 2009 6:46 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: boay on Aug 17, 2009 7:48 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mmckinl on Jul 25, 2009 12:43 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The top 1% received a 30% or better income tax cut, scores of tax loopholes and cuts on their capital gains, dividend and estate taxes that have saved them literally trillions of dollars.
The rest of us haven't been so lucky. Our taxes have increased because state and local government has had to increase taxes because of the unfunded mandates that Congress has passed to the states and local governments, usually in the form of regressive taxes, like sales taxes and use fees ... and less funding for education, because the top 1% send their children to private schools or live in very well to do areas that have fewer children and very expensive houses.
Well, health care funding to them is a foot in the door of all their privilege. They actually have reporters asking why they should be penalized for helping all Americans get decent health care ... PENALIZED ! ! !. To them their Reagan Tax Cuts aren't a public policy decision but a God Given Right for the fabulously well to do!
What we do know is that since the Reagan Tax Cuts the wealthy have gotten even wealthier, the biggest wealth gap since 1928, while the rest of America has gotten poorer and the government is mired in debt!
Make no mistake ... the wealthy under the guise of their think tanks, institutions and media are going to fight health care funding tooth and nail whatever the cost ...
Here is a Great Article on the wealthy, their institutions and tax rates ...
The Great Tax Con Job
" Novelist Larry Beinhart was the first to bring this to my attention. He looked over the history of tax cuts and economic bubbles, and found a clear relationship between the two. High top marginal tax rates (generally well above 60%) on rich people actually stabilize the economy, prevent economic bubbles from forming, prevent economic crashes, and lead to steady and sustained economic growth (and steady and sustained wage growth for working people).
On the other hand, when top marginal rates drop below 50 percent, the opposite happens. As Beinhart noted in a November 17, 2008 post on the Huffington Post, the massive Republican tax cuts of the 1920s (from 73% to 25%) led directly to the Roaring '20s stock market bubble, temporary boom, and then the crash and Republican Great Depression of 1929.
Rates on the very rich went back up into the 70-90% range from the 1930s to the 1980s. As a result, the economy grew steadily; for the first time in the history of our nation we went 50 years without a crash or major bank failure; and working people's wages increased enough to produce the strongest middle class this nation has ever seen.
Then came Reaganomics.
Reagan cut top marginal rates on millionaires and billionaires from 74% down to 38% and there was an immediate surge in the markets - followed by the worst crash since the Great Depression and the failure of virtually the entire nation's savings and loan banking system."
~~~~
The stakes couldn't be clearer or higher ... will trillions be creamed off the top of the economy to make the wealthy even wealthier or will they be taxed to stabilize the economy and fund programs that all Americans need, starting with health care.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Not Angry Enough Yet: Tax Loopholes for the Filthy Rich !
Posted by: mmckinl
» Sign this petition http://bit.ly/HR676
Posted by: www.democratz.org
» RE: Sign this petition http://bit.ly/HR676
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Perry Logan on Jul 25, 2009 2:48 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
True, except for the Clinton years.
Clinton raised taxes on the rich, leading to the longest sustained economic expansion in U.S. history, higher income at all levels, and a lower poverty rate. He was even paying off the deficit. People forget this.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Clinton did no such thing
Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Clinton did no such thing--You're a LIAR, leafsong1...
Posted by: jvaljon1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: drricklippin on Jul 25, 2009 3:38 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The greatest threat to the US is not terrorism. It is the erosion of our middle class in an era where anyone with a computer can easily ascertain the obscene assets of the rich.
The rich should know that if the people get angry enough there will be no place to hide For their own survival they should yield. But their greed gets in the way of rational thought.
Dr. Rick Lippin
Southampton,Pa
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: The Old Hippie on Jul 25, 2009 4:00 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you are confused, or you simply do not know what “the allowing” is all about...
Then maybe this link will help?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It’s The Allowing, Stupid.
Posted by: wbblack
» Great piece The Old Hippie!
Posted by: Quist
» Great essay!
Posted by: cdlepthien
Comments are closed-
Posted by: timenotonmyside on Jul 25, 2009 4:26 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Today, many of those Washington Establishment voices are precisely the same people who now insist we cannot "rush" a $1 trillion health care reform package through Congress. After pushing a $12 trillion no-strings-attached handout to Wall Street, they actually insist that they don't want to "rush" health care because of it's price tag.
And so, I'm wondering - has anyone bothered to ask those same bailout backers why they said we had to rush $12 trillion out to Wall Street, but we shouldn't "rush" health care reform for the 45 million Americans who don't have health insurance, and the 22,000 who die every year because of that reality?
I mean, even if you subscribe to the empirically absurd notion that debating health care for 64 years is a "rush," this is a pretty simple line of questioning: How was handing $12 trillion to Wall Street over the course of 10 days of legislative debate the right kind of thing to rush, but spending $1 trillion on universal health care after a 64-year debate the wrong kind of thing to "rush?"
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CTC123 on Jul 25, 2009 5:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Big Money Makers $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Collect money from the CONSUMERS (U & I)
U & I recieve trick'le.down economics.
U & I need to take ACTION!!!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Sign this petition http://bit.ly/HR676
Posted by: www.democratz.org
» RE: Sign this petition http://bit.ly/HR676
Posted by: jvaljon1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cberkland on Jul 25, 2009 5:18 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Productivity gains over the last 30 years are illusory
Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Productivity gains over the last 30 years are illusory
Posted by: cberkland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cheryljohns on Jul 25, 2009 5:52 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What few are getting...
Posted by: cberkland
» Not such a fantasy anymore
Posted by: cheryljohns
» RE: Not such a fantasy anymore
Posted by: cberkland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: tomfrazee on Jul 25, 2009 6:31 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» The author of the article doesn't even know who's insured now!
Posted by: johnwinthrop
Comments are closed-
Posted by: forestnfama on Jul 25, 2009 6:35 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Won't work here in America
Posted by: cheryljohns
» RE: The Republican elite stoled the American Dream.
Posted by: bettyn
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SeattlePackedSnowandCollidedCars on Jul 25, 2009 6:39 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: what happens if the wealthy just move away
Posted by: JSquercia
» RE: what happens if the welthy just move away
Posted by: cberkland
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cheryljohns on Jul 25, 2009 6:45 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Parcival01 on Jul 25, 2009 6:59 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look at the words particularly of the Wall Street guy. It's the same: Oh, that po' po, 1 percent. Must they pay for everything? The poor victims.
What's sad is, if you look at related pages on places like YouTube, there are many who can't afford to eat who're suggesting--INSISTING--that health care reform as proposed is not much short of a commie plot.
Our stuggle: to get people--and I'm not talking about that 1 percent--to NOT vote against their own self interest. And that's not going to be easy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Not when they are stupid..A new book - Idiot America
Posted by: cheryljohns
» Maybe another COMMIE PLOT!
Posted by: Parcival01
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Chloe2005 on Jul 25, 2009 7:22 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The 1%'ers are the very ones
Posted by: wbblack
» RE: The 1%'ers have the true community
Posted by: jbpazz
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SPEAKTRUTH200 on Jul 25, 2009 7:36 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» We are NOT useless eaters - we are the slave pool for cheap labor
Posted by: cheryljohns
Comments are closed-
Posted by: cori on Jul 25, 2009 8:24 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is going to be a long, jobless recovery. Hours worked per week are at an all-time low. As noted above, part-time work is very high. Employers, when things actually start to turn around, and they will, will first give current employees more hours and then expand the hours of part-time workers. There will be few new jobs for a long time.
Because our population is growing, between 130-150,000 new jobs are required each month to keep unemployment from rising. Initial and continuing claims suggest we are currently losing at least 300,000 a month.
(As an aside, the media talks about initial unemployment claims falling. That is actually not true. Unemployment claims are in fact quite high and rising, but the seasonal adjustments make them look smaller. Normally, this would not be a big deal. But the summer seasonal adjustment assumes a normal automobile manufacturing market, with layoffs in July. The layoffs came much earlier this year, distorting seasonal adjustments.)
Higher and persistent unemployment, lower incomes and wages, higher savings rates, capacity utilization at 50-year lows and still falling, rising home foreclosures, a deleveraging financial system, etc. are not the stuff of "V-shaped" recoveries. Throw in that Moody's estimates that US banks will have to write off $400 billion in 2010, and it's a very weak recovery indeed that shapes up for next year.
It's the return of The Muddle Through Economy*, which is better than what we have had, to be sure. But that asterisk is there for a reason. Congress and the Obama administration are seemingly hell bent on a massive tax increase. If that happens, it will push a fragile recovery back into recession. It will look like the twin recessions of 1980-82.
It will be a difficult investing environment, to say the least. If buy-and-hold is not your favorite style, there are alternatives. Quick commercial: my friends at CMG have a platform of alternative managers that can be tailored to your specific needs. These are traders who have weathered the storms of this last decade. These are individually managed accounts, with daily liquidity. You really owe it to yourself to see the managers on their platform. The link to their form is http://www.cmgfunds.net/public/mauldin_questionnaire.asp.
I am encouraged by the fact that the radical health reforms look like they might not pass. The health-care system clearly needs a major overhaul. Let's hope that we get it right.
In a future letter, I am going to talk about taxes. I am concerned that we are going to raise taxes now to very high levels, and not leave any room for the tax increases we are going to desperately need in the middle of the next decade to pay for entitlement programs. That will mean a VAT tax and tax increases on the middle class. Again, not good for the economy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Are we expected to believe that this post isn't an advertisement
Posted by: leafsong1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thornwolf on Jul 25, 2009 8:44 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Interestingly, tax increases at the top actually work as supply-side stimulus for the larger economy. Ironic, isn't it?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thornwolf on Jul 25, 2009 8:47 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Oops, never mind
Posted by: thornwolf
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leafsong1 on Jul 25, 2009 9:47 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: at the Rich
Posted by: theblackgeorgecarlin
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Trainer12 on Jul 25, 2009 10:54 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: TJColatrella on Jul 25, 2009 11:46 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: nd Corporate "Personhood"
Posted by: theblackgeorgecarlin
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on Jul 25, 2009 12:17 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If we were not borrowing from other nations, genuine fiscal responsibility would be harder to ignore. That would mean reserving tax cuts for anyone making under 200k per year and making sure that the taxes collect were put to constructive purposes such as public transportation, education where it counts, and other domestic and constructive purposes rather than destructive purposes such as wars, spoonfeeding Wall $treet, tax cut and loophole giveaways to the wealthy/corporate elite, etc ... We need to both get our tax code structure seriously repaired AND get our spending priorities and distribution straightened out.
P.S.: I used to get frustrated when people would call me a "Republican" for bringing this part up but I found that if I laugh it out, it's harder to back down from that truth. Come to think of it, I really do miss genuine fiscal conservatism. When I think about it, a country's true happiness is no different than an individual's happiness. At some point, the more one spends beyond a certain limit, the more unhappy they get.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's not just the unfair taxation but the unfair spending that's to blame.
Posted by: Steppin Razor
» RE: It's not just the unfair taxation but the unfair spending that's to blame.
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield
» Tax cuts cause excess spending
Posted by: leafsong1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: wireup on Jul 25, 2009 3:36 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Agreed...but some of these 1%ers are war profiteers (a/k/a criminals).
Posted by: johnmont
Comments are closed-
Posted by: talkville on Jul 25, 2009 7:41 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Keep an eye on GM ("What's good for GM is good for America"). I feel relatively confident that in a few years it will re-emerge in it's true private form, having in the meantime replaced it's auto-manufacturing center-piece with its Consumer Finance and Real Estate arms moved onto center stage. And it will remain immensely lucrative for its major shareholders who at the moment are off whistling and dissimulating somewhere in their luxurious estates and vacation spots.
What Mussolini called Corporatism, albeit with a detectable Puritan style.
There's good, there's bad and there's ugly in all of this. But about 60 to 70% of the population will lose much more than it gained-- by "consent" of the governed.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: armorypk on Jul 25, 2009 8:54 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» So true.
Posted by: leafsong1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: quito on Jul 26, 2009 6:44 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ava1984 on Jul 26, 2009 1:58 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ava1984 on Jul 26, 2009 2:01 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Steve Adair on Jul 26, 2009 7:37 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mapsguy1955 on Jul 27, 2009 4:43 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» If only!!!
Posted by: thekidde
Comments are closed-
Posted by: swooshy on Jul 27, 2009 6:37 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let an army of investigative reporters, constituents, forensic accountants start crawling over these overpaid ceo's and politicians like red ants.
Is Mr. Hypocrite avoiding paying taxes banking in Cayman or Switzerland?? Why do many elected officials leave office with a lot more than they came in with?? Insurance conglomerate outsourcing personal information and work overseas?
How much tax do some of these companies actually PAY?
Set up funds to pay investigative reporters to to the job our regulators and big media won't.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LadyLiberty101 on Jul 28, 2009 2:07 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: itouch backup on Jul 29, 2009 7:52 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: zzdinko on Aug 4, 2009 4:18 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
RT
http://www.anon-web-tools.tk
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: fboisseau on Aug 5, 2009 11:10 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But having said that, please keep in mind the following when talking about how the rich are getting off easy. The percentage of total tax dollars paid by the rich has increase every year since 1987 (except for 1988). In 2007 the total amount of taxes paid by the top 1% exceeded the total taxes paid the bottom 95%. ( see here http://bit.ly/3uAeko )
Finally, I have a question for you. If I came and took 20% of what you earned by force and gave it to those that did not work, how would you feel? Because when the government takes my money and pays it out to welfare that is what they are doing. (Do not try to paint me a mean spirited, because I believe the system is worst for those on welfare. It destroys their families, self respect and self worth).
Every person in this country is entitled to what they earn from their labor, and the only two people that can judge the value of that labor is the person doing the work and the person paying for that work. Anyone else that tries controls that exchange is taking something away from one or both of them. And anyone that claims ownership of what another works for, is taking away what is rightfully the property of the worker.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: realitycheck6640 on Aug 5, 2009 11:30 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: boay on Aug 17, 2009 6:46 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: boay on Aug 17, 2009 7:48 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Could Your Cell Phone End Up Killing You?
The Overuse of Antibiotics in Livestock Feed Is Killing Us
One of the Most Common Chemicals Used in Modern Life Is Now Being Seen as a Health Threat




