Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

The 'Me-First, Screw You Crowd' Are No Longer Hiding Their Antics

By David Sirota, Creators Syndicate. Posted August 10, 2009.


Finally, there's no pretense. The ugliest traits of this despicable movement are there for all to behold.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

I know I should be mortified by the lobbyist-organized mobs of angry Brooks Brothers mannequins who are now making headlines by shutting down congressional town hall meetings. I know I should be despondent during this, the Khaki Pants Offensive in the Great American Health Care and Tax War. And yet, I'm euphorically repeating one word over and over again with a big grin on my face.

Finally.

Finally, there's no pretense. Finally, the Me-First, Screw-Everyone-Else Crowd's ugliest traits are there for all to behold. 

The group's core gripe is summarized in a letter I received that denounces a proposed surtax on the wealthy and corporations to pay for universal health care:

"Until recently, my family was in the top 3 percent of wage earners," the affluent businessperson fumed in response to my July column on taxes. "We are in the group that pays close to 60 percent of this nation's taxes ... Think for a second how you would feel if you built a business and contributed more than your share to this country only to be treated like a pariah."

This sob story about the persecuted rich fuels today's "Tea Parties" -- and I'm sure you've heard some version of it in your community.

I'm also fairly certain that when many of you run into the Me-First, Screw-Everyone-Else Crowd, you don't feel like confronting the faux outrage. But on the off chance you do muster the masochistic impulse to engage, here's a guide to navigating the conversation:

What They Will Scream: We can't raise business taxes, because American businesses already pay excessively high taxes!

What You Should Say: Here's the smallest violin in the world playing for the businesses. The Government Accountability Office reports that most U.S. corporations pay zero federal income tax. Additionally, as even the Bush Treasury Department admitted, America's effective corporate tax rate is the third lowest in the industrialized world.

What They Will Scream: But the rich still "pay close to 60 percent of this nation's taxes!"

What You Should Say: Such statistics refer only to the federal income tax. When considering all of "this nation's taxes" including payroll, state and local levies, the top 5 percent pay just 38.5 percent of the taxes.

What They Will Scream: But 38.5 percent is disproportionately high! See? You've proved that the rich "contribute more than their share" of taxes!

What You Should Say: Actually, they are paying almost exactly "their share." According to the data, the wealthiest 5 percent of America pays 38.5 percent of the total taxes precisely because they make just about that share -- a whopping 36.5 percent! -- of total national income. Asking these folks to pay slightly more in taxes -- and still less than they did during the go-go 1990s -- is hardly extreme.

Stripped of facts, your conversation partner will soon turn to unscientific terrain, claiming it is immoral to "steal" and "redistribute" income via taxes. Of course, he will be specifically railing on "stealing" for stuff like health care, which he insists gets "redistributed" only to the undeserving and the "lazy" (a classic codeword for "minorities"). But he will also say it's OK that government sent trillions of dollars to Wall Streeters.

And that's when you should stop wasting your breath. 

What you've discovered is that the Me-First, Screw-Everyone-Else Crowd isn't interested in fairness, empiricism or morality. 

With 22,000 of their fellow countrymen dying annually for lack of health insurance and with Warren Buffett paying a lower effective tax rate than his secretary, the Me-First, Screw-Everyone-Else Crowd is merely using the argot of fairness, empiricism and morality to hide its real motive: selfish greed. 

No argument, however rational, is going to cure these narcissists of that grotesque disease. 


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: taxes, corporate greed, greed, lobbies, insurance lobbies

David Sirota is a best-selling author whose newest book, "The Uprising," was just released this month. He is a fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and a board member of the Progressive States Network -- both nonpartisan organizations. His blog is at www.credoaction.com/sirota.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
the fruits of their labors
Posted by: jcutler9 on Aug 10, 2009 1:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In a recent column, Cal Thomas decried the notion that taxes should be increased on the rich to help pay for health care. He was irate that anyone should want to "take away the fruits of their labors" of the rich. the fruits of whose labors?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» They are so fair Posted by: talkville
» RE: the fruits of their labors Posted by: wwarner44
But, but, .... but, ........
Posted by: talkville on Aug 10, 2009 1:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These are the titled ones! These are the ones who en-title the rest of us to bask in a privilege, or 'perk' or 'kudo' that may come our way by their endless benevolence, short-term or long-term!

The nerve! The nerve!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I need a reality check
Posted by: Marina in Paris on Aug 10, 2009 3:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hi,

I don't live in the US and read Alternet a lot. It makes me feel that "the people" will henceforth not let their representatives kill the universal health-care plan (isn't that one of the reasons Obama was elected?).

Then I hap upon one of those Fox news thingies where I see ranters ranting about writing to their representatives to tell them to kill the health plan or else! And I've been told that Fox news is the most widely viewed propaganda channel. So I wonder.

Anybody out there think that the health plan will not be killed? What's the reality of the situation?

Thanks for your input.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I need a reality check Posted by: talkville
» RE: I need a reality check Posted by: notabilia
» RE: I need a reality check Posted by: Marina in Paris
» Take into consideration two things Posted by: political-none
» Nailed it!!!!! Posted by: Hiroak
» RE: I need a reality check Posted by: timenotonmyside
» RE: I need a reality check Posted by: Ederlore
DrBob
Posted by: ProfBob on Aug 10, 2009 3:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In Book 4 (on values) of "And Gulliver Returns"
the popular free ebook series (http://andgulliverreturns.info) we can examine the basic assumptions of the self-centered people. But it also reports on the maximum tax rates that people will tolerate, which seems to be in the 48% range. A Norwegian billionaire recently removed his fortune from Norway to Switzerland to avoid the 1% tax on the money he had already earned and paid taxes on. He still lives in Norway and pays all his other taxes.
Book 6 comments on the drive for power. Let's face it self-centeredness and power are our most basic motivations. It takes a mature person who has been raised by loving parents to move to unselfish loving motivations with a strong societal ethical base.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: DrBob Posted by: Marina in Paris
» RE: You're lying to yourself Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
» RE: HEALTH CARE is what you WANT Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
There's a better solution
Posted by: political-none on Aug 10, 2009 3:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The whole thing about doing an ad-hoc tax on the top 3 percent is silly and short term, it's meant to create this kind of class war fervor and be ineffective.

A true solution is showing the privileged class who does all the work and who needs who, if people had the balls to go on strike and stop cowering to the wealth class, everything would change. Every worker can refuse to work, pay any bills, and continue to live as they do without paying anything, as long as they did it all together in an organized fashion. Then you could implement what ever you wanted.

The the working class cower at the thought of making the wealthy angry at them, refuse to organize, and can't even commit to meeting with others on a regular basis. As long as this is the case and the wealth class are not afraid to organize and do was they please, the working class deserve what they get. Honestly, they keep getting screwed over and having a bowl of crap shoved in their face as a reward, then they look around to see who's going to stand up and do something for them. If they can't take responsibility for their own situation let them keep dropping like flies until the system can't allow it anymore, because they refuse to take matters into their own hands.

Obama is a farce, and electing a smart sounding Bush is not the end of the working class taking control of their situation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: There's a better solution Posted by: Cybershaman
Liberal? Conservative? There are plenty of those "me first fuck you" scumbags on all sides.
Posted by: maxpayne on Aug 10, 2009 4:04 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't limit this to the fucking lobbyists. It's out here on Main Street. We're all a nation of selfish fucking assholes and GOD is PUNISHING America for it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thanks, David!
Posted by: DaBear on Aug 10, 2009 4:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The interesting thing for me is, in most "conversations" like the hypothetical one he superbly outlines, the whack jobs I have the thrill of speaking to often go apoplectic after the very first exchange where I offer up one single fact. Most of the unhinged cannot tolerate anything beyond the first or second level let alone get to the point where David recommends checking out of the engagement.

That's how bad things have gotten.

The commentary so far has been brilliant. Thanks to everyone up-thread for a decent conversation.

Of course the RWA trolls will soon swoop in once they wake up and grab their coffee. And then the commentary will go all to hell.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Actually not
Posted by: lisafrequency on Aug 10, 2009 4:44 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The modern day tea parties originated with the Ron Paul for President group who's goal is to abolish income tax for everyone,

The neo cons took it over and made it into something other than what was originally thought out.

Now Ron Paulers have pretty much lost interest in the tea parties because of the neo con interest.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» rights of "unborn people?" Posted by: luzmejor
Unless we change Constitution nothing will change
Posted by: Moonray on Aug 10, 2009 4:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The progressive movement should stop tilting at windmills (sometimes literally) and get serious about changing how America operates. The only way to do that is to change the Constitution to sharply reduce the power of lobbyists and streamline the government. We need a small, one-house legislature, iron-clad term limits of eights years or so, total bans on campaign donations or any other donations, brief election campaings using public broadcasting ONLY, specific rules on war-making and troop deployments and other reforms. And oh yes: We need to put single-payer health care, sensible gun controls and church/state separation in the Constitution.

Until this is done the bad guys will continue to win every time. They own the system and can screw us at their leisure.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Why is there lobbying? Posted by: je5752
» RE: Why is there lobbying? Posted by: Cybershaman
» YES. Posted by: divanne
Paul Krugman says it best............
Posted by: timenotonmyside on Aug 10, 2009 5:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rewarding Bad Actors

Americans are angry at Wall Street, and rightly so. First the financial industry plunged us into economic crisis, then it was bailed out at taxpayer expense. And now, with the economy still deeply depressed, the industry is paying itself gigantic bonuses. If you aren’t outraged, you haven’t been paying attention.

But crashing the economy and fleecing the taxpayer aren’t Wall Street’s only sins. Even before the crisis and the bailouts, many financial-industry high-fliers made fortunes through activities that were worthless if not destructive from a social point of view.

And they’re still at it. Consider two recent news stories.

One involves the rise of high-speed trading: some institutions, including Goldman Sachs, have been using superfast computers to get the jump on other investors, buying or selling stocks a tiny fraction of a second before anyone else can react. Profits from high-frequency trading are one reason Goldman is earning record profits and likely to pay record bonuses.

On a seemingly different front, Sunday’s Times reported on the case of Andrew J. Hall, who leads an arm of Citigroup that speculates on oil and other commodities. His operation has made a lot of money recently, and according to his contract Mr. Hall is owed $100 million.

What do these stories have in common?

The politically salient answer, for now at least, is that in both cases we’re looking at huge payouts by firms that were major recipients of federal aid. Citi has received around $45 billion from taxpayers; Goldman has repaid the $10 billion it received in direct aid, but it has benefited enormously both from federal guarantees and from bailouts of other financial institutions. What are taxpayers supposed to think when these welfare cases cut nine-figure paychecks?

What should be done? Last week the House passed a bill setting rules for pay packages at a wide range of financial institutions. That would be a step in the right direction. But it really should be accompanied by much broader regulation of financial practices — and, I would argue, by higher tax rates on supersized incomes.

Unfortunately, the House measure is opposed by the Obama administration, which still seems to operate on the principle that what’s good for Wall Street is good for America.

Neither the administration, nor our political system in general, is ready to face up to the fact that we’ve become a society in which the big bucks go to bad actors, a society that lavishly rewards those who make us poorer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A greed... Posted by: Cybershaman
Modern Republican Principles
Posted by: PJAW on Aug 10, 2009 5:35 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Principle Number One:, I've placed my interests first my entire life. It's time for others to place my interests first.

The average citizen should be paying no income tax at all, because they have no "income". Income is what happens when you have increased your wealth, not when you receive financial remuneration in exchange for your labor. Wages and other forms of compensation paid for one's productivity are simply an exchange and money is the note of promise that you will receive something of equal value at some future time. If you have not received something of greater value than you have provided, where is the "income"?

If someone in the "upper 3%" is providing something of such value to society that the exchange is marked by a large quantity of money, then technically he or she should not pay income tax either. However, if someone manages to gather a large quantity of money, through market manipulations, that is not an exchange, it is income and it should be taxed. In my opinion, it is actually white collar crime and should be prosecuted, but appropriate taxation avoids burdening the courts and spares us the expense of incarceration.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Income is revenue minus expenses Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
» RE: Modern Republican Principles Posted by: theblackgeorgecarlin
Ironic that the most vociferous anti-tax folks are strident Iraq war supporters
Posted by: xvictor on Aug 10, 2009 6:30 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OK, so don't pay your taxes and we'll end the war there and bring our troops back home.

Deal?

So much for the "support our troops" nonsense from the Reichwingers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ironic? How about key? Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: Huh? Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
Slap an MBA grad. right across the face
Posted by: weathered on Aug 10, 2009 6:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
break glass and vote w/your Wallet.

You think this will come to head on the streets?
No, this comeuppance will happen on the back 9 of the best clubs, in Greenwich/Great Neck/Aspen, Santa Fe... all the places they think are safe

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Corporations have not paid their fair share for quite some time
Posted by: shanaza on Aug 10, 2009 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look at this article from MSN regarding taxes paid by corporations during the 90's boom. We pretty much squandered our wealth during the past 30 years paying for the Department of Offense and not collecting taxes from the big guys. Many states and localities were forced into providing additional breaks.
moneycentral.msn.com/content/Taxes/P80242.asp (copy / paste)
Here's one from The Motley Fool (on Microsoft)
www.fool.com/portfolios/rulemaker/2000/rulemaker000217.htm (copy / paste)

Compare corporate / individual rates now to the early 70s and you will notice how low the current rates are.

The problem is: we are collecting less taxes and have been p!ss!ng it away on non-productive activities. Look at our infrastructure; look at our health care; look at our welfare. You may now be used to it, but ask the opinion of any visiting European - it may be an eye opener.

Our government / corporations have screwed us while we were sleeping. Are we going to let them continue to do so while we are awake?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

American Dream
Posted by: dimityrose on Aug 10, 2009 6:46 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The dream is to try live one more day and hope you stay healthy. I think that all the super CELEEBRITIES should love to pay for the cost of health care in their country. All the people making so much money off of entertainment and sports. Americans need to make these people responsible. Americans quit buying their brand clothes and music and going to games. Instead put that money into your health care. No more LaSenza or sports jerseys put that into health care. How about no more fast food, smoking or alcohol, put that into health care. There are alot of ways that Americans can look after themselves, but there seems to be this need to bring the masses to the trough without them doing it for themselves. RESPONSIBLITY, where does it begin? WITH ONESELF. It amazes me that nobody can afford health care, but in some form of a miracle can get designer clothes, smoke, get tickets to sports or donate to a mega church. How about taking away the no tax from the churches whom are definately making too much money or making the church provide heathcare for their congregation. After all are they not suppose to be looking after the sheep, not the other way around. There are many avenues including the undertaxed, but lets close some of the tax holes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: American Dream Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» Celebrities Aren't The Problem Posted by: Jim Shaw
The leaders should be shouting them down, not the people in the audience
Posted by: sliver on Aug 10, 2009 7:27 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Shouldn't the person with the microphone be armed with this information? People in the crowd shouldn't be burdened with having to prove the tax nuts wrong, the statistics and comparisons should be right up front, with the politicians and whatever henchmen run these meetings.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's bring back the Eisenhower days
Posted by: hurricane hugo on Aug 10, 2009 7:31 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
where people got taxed at a 91% rate for every dollar past 400k. Adjusted for inflation, of course.

#@!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

gimmie shelter
Posted by: gimmie shelter on Aug 10, 2009 8:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Are we forgetting the fact that most corporations get subsidized by the community that they are located in by local, State and Federal entities. It would in some cases probably be cheaper to lose the jobs than keep up the amount of corporate welfare some of them receive. Than to add insult to injury most of them try to employ illegals to maximize their profits.

The poor corporations are only making a few billion this year...how sad.

Lets tame these corporations and clear away their bullshit before we all get mauled.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: gimmie shelter Posted by: gimmie shelter
No more pussyfooting with pigs!
Posted by: bettyn on Aug 10, 2009 8:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's time for progressives to get TOUGH with these spoiled brats....and that is exactly what they are: SPOILED BRATS! No more Mr. Nice Guy! That includes YOU, Mr. President and Democratic members of Congress!!

Shut the pigs out! You have the votes to do so!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not a bright comment...
Posted by: rider3 on Aug 10, 2009 8:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I got into an email "discussion" with someone whom I never met. In this discussion, he/she stated that they can take care of themselves and don't need the government's assistance (the topic started as national healthcare). I had to say that it's all well and good, but what about the fire departments, police departments, schools, roads and infrastructure, trash removal, hospitals, social security, medicare, food stamps, etc. If anyone uses these things, they are being helped by the government. It's so ignorant for a person to think they they are getting by without any government help. Fact is, everyone uses these services, which are all governmentally funded and needed to live our lives. I wish they'd wake up and realize this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Not a bright comment... Posted by: JSquercia
» RE: Not a bright comment... Posted by: gimmie shelter
Of course, this is the characteristic most representative . . .
Posted by: Walks-in-Storms on Aug 10, 2009 9:07 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course, this is the characteristic most representative of classic capitalism. "Me First," is its national anthem.

The author is correct, but to pretend that his subject is the only place where "me first" is the rule is deceptive in the extreme. Look around you. Look, for instance, at a nation burying itself - and wherever it goes on the planet - in trash. "To hell with the people who live here, I don't want this in my car (or on my boat, etc.).

Look around you on the street or highway. "If I feel like driving 90 mph while I'm sipping a beer and text-messaging and talking on my cell phone, screw everybody who's also on the road."

"I want to use as much energy as I possibly can. A population amounting to four and a half percent of the world's, I use thirty-five percent of its energy - and dammit, I want more. I want as much as I want, no matter who has to sicken or die. F--- 'em."

And so on. I'd recite more, but I've already exceeded the typical U.S. Citizen attention span already. "I don't care what anybody else thinks, anyway."

And you wonder why we're in the shape we're in? REALLY? Could it be that you're part of the problem . . .?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And P.S. my last . . .
Posted by: Walks-in-Storms on Aug 10, 2009 9:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about "I want someone from my sex, my race, or my culture in that position, and I don't give a damn about how capable he (or she) is"?

Me - or mine - first, goddammit!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

waaaaaaa!
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford on Aug 10, 2009 9:42 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find it odd that conservatives (the blue-collar worker ones) seem to favor lower taxes for the rich. Why is that exactly? Do they still suffer under the delusion the reaganomics model presented, that the money from up above is going to "trickle down" into their own greedy mouths?

Um, hate to break it to you, but the rich built a water tight net and placed it under themselves, so that not one solitary drop "trickles down" down to your level. As if that wasn't bad enough, they also invented schemes to TAKE money from you, the working class.

When I see blue-collar conservatives arguing against taxing the rich, most of what I see is pure delusion: "blah blah blah, I'm going to be rich one day, and I don't want to have to pay such high taxes, etc." Wow. No. You won't. You really won't. You won't EVER be rich, because 1, you weren't born into the system, and 2, you're not smart enough to take advantage of the system.

The other problem with the blue-collar conservatives is their ridiculous tea parties (TEA: Taxed Enough Already). Really? You think that you're taxed enough already, when you enjoy one of the lowest tax rates in the industrialized world, and a just-as-low standard of living? Look at the UK. Look at Sweden. Look at France. Look at even Canada. Most all of Europe plus our neighbor to the north pays more in taxes than we do, and they all enjoy a MUCH higher quality standard of living than we do. Taxed enough already? No. You're not.

One last thing is that conservatives, rich or poor, seem to cling to the o so beloved 1950's. The era of unprecedented growth and expansion. When suburbs and subdivisions sprouted up. When mom worked at home and pop worked at the factory and little Jimmy and Jenny and JoJo Shabadoo were playing jump rope outside. When the tax rate on the highest income earners in this country was 90%. Oops, was that supposed to be in there? Yeah. See? Even your precious nostalgia-time Eisenhower saw that the rich should be taxed heavily for the benefit of the poorer classes. You wouldn't dare try to justify your answers now, knowing that the most beloved period by conservatives in the history of the country actually levied enormous taxes on the wealthy.

The only reason that the rich might be seen as having a "burden" to carry with higher taxes is that they don't spend/save money responsibly. When you have someone like Paris Hilton or Brittany Spears spending money right and left, despite earning enough over the course of their careers to live quite comfortably for ten lifetimes, then there is no excuse. If we tax the rich more, they'll learn. They'll learn that they don't need private jets. They don't need ten houses. They don't need mansions that have fifty rooms even though only three people live there. They'll realize that they need to cut back on extravagances for the greater good of their fellow man.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» P.S. Posted by: Rusty Shackleford
» RE: P.S. Posted by: MT512
» RE: waaaaaaa! Posted by: timenotonmyside
» RE: waaaaaaa! Posted by: xnwolfwoman
Here's The REAL numbers-the rich get off easy
Posted by: FoonTheElder on Aug 10, 2009 9:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.ctj.org/pdf/taxday2009.pdf
This is for total taxes, including income, sales, property, etc.

The top 1% pay total taxes at a 30.8% rate, which is a lower rate than the next 19%.

The bottom 99% pay 29.4% of their income in taxes, compared to the top 1% at 30.8%.

The middle 20%(40-60) and the fourth 20%(60-80), average income of $40,000 & $66,100, pay 27.0% and 30.0% respectively on their income.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What are we: subjects of tyrants? or self-sovereign citizens?
Posted by: knowbuddhaU on Aug 10, 2009 11:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Time our for comparative mythology.

"[A]ny experience that we have through our senses, whether of sound or of touch or of light, is a vibration. And a vibration has two aspects: one called ‘on;’ and the other called ‘off.’ . . . .And although . . . the positives and the negatives are different, they’re at the same time one. . . [D]ifferent things can be inseparable. That what is explicitly two can at the same time be implicitly one. If you forget that, very funny things happen. . . .

And this causes us to believe that we are separate beings, isolated, by the boundary of the epidermis from the rest of the world.

. . . [I]n the science of ecology, one learns that a human being is not an organism in an environment, but is an organism hyphen environment. . . . [Y]ou must be very careful indeed not to fall into old Newtonian assumptions about the billiard-ball nature of the universe.

The organism is not the puppet of the environment—being pushed around by it.
Nor, on the other hand, is the environment the puppet of the organism being pushed around by the organism. . . .
[Bold emphasis added.] Coincidence of Opposites

But that's exactly how Psychology sees us: mere voting machines on two legs, easily jacked.

The Pentagon’s Public Affairs Office has been one of the last redoubts of the Neoconservatives. Burrowed Bush era figures remain in key positions in the office, which had responsibility for implementation of some of the Rumsfeld Pentagon’s most controversial strategies in which the American public was targeted with practices previously associated with battlefield psy-ops. Pentagon propaganda

The power of myth is powering weapons-grade domestic propaganda.

In Dynasty II Egypt, 3500-2500 BCE, stagecraft was invented as the way out of the cycle of ritual regicide. Fast forward to the theft of elections. The Secret of the Two Partners is perfect for stealing elections great and small.

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: [The people] are revealed as moving with an apparent independence. They hold councils, they decide, they plan; they take over the work of arranging the world. Yet we know that behind the scenes the Unmoved Mover is at work, like a puppetmaster.

[...]

The props of the universal stage have to be adjusted, even beaten into shape. . . .[Hero with a Thousand Faces, 1968, pp.72-84.]

[This] was the rite by which the literal killing of the old king and transfer of power to the new had been transformed into an allegory. The king died not literally, but symbolically, in the earliest passion play of which we have record.

[...]

And this returns us to our point. . . . [I]t is perfectly clear that these pharaohs had taken maat unto themselves, away from the stars and their gods and priests, forgoing the holy ritual death and assuming the much lighter part of a ritual dance—...saving themselves for the mastery of a religiously rationalized and costumed, yet actually political, order governed by their own fiat. . . .

We are in the presence here of a line of grandiose, highly self-interested, prodigiously inflated egos. [The masks of god: oriental mythology, 1962, p.77. The Secret of the Two Partners]

Two words: C Street.

It's the lesson of the Grail legends: Myth-jacking people to hell and back, sticking them with the bill both ways, converts a Promised into a Waste Land.

Every step taken on their false orders in their false cosmos also is false.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Corporate Manipulation!!!
Posted by: marew on Aug 10, 2009 11:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What one never hears from big business is all the millions of dollars of tax write-offs the corporations get BEFORE they pay taxes. They actually pay one of the lowest tax rates in the world when this is figured in but, of course, we never hear that part of the story.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not all Taxes are Immoral but the Income Tax Is.
Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com on Aug 10, 2009 11:59 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The biggest problem I have with the income tax is that the government has stated that they are entitled to a cut of labor, money I earned from the sweat of my own brow.

That is the action of a slave master.

We are not free in this country, we are slaves.
The government decides what we are allowed to put into our own bodies.
The government decides how much of cut they can make off of our own labor.


If we had natural resource taxes on materials like gold, oil, copper, iron, aluminum, etc, I could not claim they were immoral. I might disagree with how they are being spent but the natural resources of this planet are humanity's collective natural inheritance. They rightfully belong to all of us and it is fair that together we would decide on how they should be taxed.

The income tax is immoral but for those who don't believe in "your body, your property, your choice" it is easy to attack people as being "me-first".


P.S. Those least likely to shock the hell out of others in the Milgram experiments (2/3 of people don't stop until the Doc running the experiment ends it) are those who want to be in control of their own lives and who can empathize with others. Libertarians are uniquely qualified to fit this bill, respecting individual liberty in others requires demanding it for oneself and vice versa.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Capitalism is not freedom Posted by: drcyflowers
» RE: Capitalism is not freedom Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
» RE: Oh, also... Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
The rich use more services
Posted by: suprmark on Aug 10, 2009 12:24 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I need a road in good condition to get to work, my boss needs his own road to be in good condition, and the roads of all of his employees.

While I need a justice system, a rich person has more to lose and so needs it more, and probably uses it more too. Same with the military - I have no wealth or land so can offer up no spoils of war, nor do I gain anything when it goes on the attack.

Welfare too can be seen as a service for the rich. It allows people who have fallen on hard times some time and space to get themselves back on their feet, which is cheaper for an employer than training a new employee. It means when there are no jobs, or no desire to work, those people won't turn to crime in order to survive, which is always a bigger problem the wealthier you are, and always causes problems if they are able to turn their lives around.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Today's rich live separately Posted by: drcyflowers
Righting a Wrong is not Wrong
Posted by: SpiritMatter on Aug 10, 2009 1:24 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The progressive tax system is not stealing from the rich to give to the poor, it is correcting the capitalist system of compensation where those with the most power, not those who contribute the most value, get the most money. Just because you have a patented cure for a deadly disease and people are willing to give all they have to save their lives does not mean you have earned or deserve what they would give you. The more someone reaps from society the more responsible he or she is for sowing back into society. Might does not make right or define ownership.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 2 Wrongs Don't Make a Right Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
Tax the rich out of existence
Posted by: drcyflowers on Aug 10, 2009 3:00 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We should tax the rich out of existence. Then they won't undermine our democracy anymore.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Tax the rich out of existence Posted by: gimmie shelter
» Hear! Hear! Posted by: Steven Wanzell
» RE: Hear! Hear! Posted by: gimmie shelter
thoughts
Posted by: tjg1984 on Aug 10, 2009 6:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is it possible to disagree with proposed healthcare plans giving the government more power without being a member of the "Me First, Screw You crowd?" I don't think it's fair to assume that everybody who thinks the government already has enough power is more greedy or selfish than those who do not.

Regarding opponents of your view being "unscientific," political discussions are not scientific. Even if you seek to do something objective and measurable with a policy, the desirability of the outcome and the moral/ethical acceptability of the proposed means of achieving it are subjective.

Also, I disagree with your implication that everybody who uses the word "lazy" in this debate is using it in a racist manner. You are essentially saying, "Everybody who uses the word 'lazy' while disagreeing with me is a racist." Where is your evidence?

I want to help those who suffer undeservedly, but after some of the things I've seen the federal government do, I don't necessarily trust it to do that. I'd rather decide for myself between competing charities that cannot force me at gunpoint to give to them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh, those poor overtaxed rich people
Posted by: Alenna on Aug 10, 2009 6:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Never mind that most of of them are rich because they inherited daddy's riches (like poor Paris Hilton), or swindled and stole from others (like Bernie Madeoff, Kenneth Lay and the whole Goldman Sachs crowd), or evaded taxes offshore (like executives of Halliburton and other companies), or bought most of their retail goods in China from people who work under slave labor conditions and pay their US employees peanuts (like the Walmart Walton Billionaires), or they bribe and lobby the politicians (like the Big Pharma executives with their Medicare Part D...or the AIG CEOs Bailout...or the Big Bank bailouts....) ad nauseum.
It's impossible to get rich these days without "knowing" someone or taking advantage of some situation. The days of the true entrepreneurial rich person, who gets rich by hard work has long past.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

third way
Posted by: hidflect1 on Aug 11, 2009 2:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We should embrace these events as welcome news. With the trend over the last 30 years inexorably moving towards serfdom under an esoteric-industry-occupied uber-class it was inevitable that someday there would need to be a great, bloody showdown. But I feel the elite have tipped their hand and moved too fast too early. This is one more nail in their coffin, not ours. The internet will be remembered as the great marshaling force of the take-back of society by the 99%.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I believe you're right. Posted by: Steven Wanzell
Here's something to try...
Posted by: diof09 on Aug 13, 2009 10:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Next time, they are going on with their "mimi" read ME! ME! belligerence, say: "It must really bug hell out of you that the Preamble of the Constitution starts with "We the People" and not "I for Myself"!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't ask for anything!
Posted by: Rasplanet on Sep 6, 2009 7:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't ask the untaxed church for anything. If you do, they usually send you to a govt. agency. I have seen this happen more than once. It's ironic that the very entity that we give money to, is very stingy when asked to give back. The money that is given to them(tax free) is invested in gold chalices and candelabras etc. I seldom see churches doing what they are supposed to be doing. They do give out food boxes supplied by people who don't like yams and rutabagas or rice.
Some people do spend extravagantly on entertainment and idol worship and are very wasteful. They will then run to a church or some other agency and beg their way out of a financial crisis. I live in the bible belt, where there's a church on every corner. The services once provided by church, are now handed off to someone else. I agree with the poster who said that responsibility begins with the individual.
A lot of people are clinging to their money. That's not a good thing to do during a recession.(regardless of what the $guru$ say)
I say spend as much as you can on things that are made in America and provides the most jobs for us peasants. Otherwise you may drive us into a different lifestyle. Who is going to bring food to the rich? Who is going to maintain utilities? If the working side of America ever gets organized and takes a siesta together,(or even a vacation)the rich people could starve. But there will always be traitors who will suck up.
If the churches were to get together and provide healthcare; wouldn't that be like socialism,with an evangelist running the show? I'm sure I would choose the US govt.(we the people)
When us working taxpayers stop thinking of the govt. as a foreign enemy and demand accountability,our problems will be pretty much solved. The damn politicians work for us, not the other way around. While we worry about the feds screwing us, we are taking the big shaft from our local govt.'s.(with no lube)I once went after the federal govt. with all the litigation savvy that I could muster. I had my case won, until the locals sneaked up from behind and stuck it to me good."While your arrow is pointing at the emperor, his soldiers will chop your head off".
More and more people these days should start petition drives and force politicians to do what is right.(but wait! too many crybabies)The people we have entrusted to protect us and who we pay(well too ,I might add)are taking bribes, in the name of campaign contributions(wow! that's a title to remember)Corporate lobbyists should be shown the door. Lobbying for corporate interests should be outlawed. It does not help the people in any positive way.
Lobbying was intended to help the everyday man to change laws that were beneficial and supported by the community. Lobbyists these days mostly get paid to help the big corporations to destroy our environment in the name of capitalism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement