Tax the rich for health care!

FINALLY! I would say tax those families that make over a million a year would probably be enough. Ramp the tax rate up for capital gains to 90 percent to pay for health care! As one of the infamous "public enemies" said when asked why he robs banks "that's where the money is." Well that's where the money is -- with the super-wealthy and corporate elite. Let them for once pay their "fair share" for something that the super-majority needs. -- terrie


House Democrats Plan to Tax the Wealthy for Health Reform

To pay for a sweeping overhaul of the health care system,
House Democrats will propose a surtax on individuals earning
$280,000 and up and couples earning more than $350,000, the
chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee said on
Friday.

In all, the proposal is projected to generate roughly $550
billion over 10 years, which would cover about half of the
estimated cost of the $1-trillion-plus health care
legislation.

But it remains unclear if the Senate would approve such an
across-the-board income tax on the wealthy.

Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/?emc=na

News flash: most Americans WANT to redistribute the wealth

A new Gallup poll released yesterday finds that "a majority of Americans (58%) say money and wealth should be more evenly distributed among a larger percentage of the people."

And just under half (46%) "go so far as to say that the government should redistribute wealth by 'heavy taxes on the rich.'"

Gallup says it has been asking the public for over 20 years whether they think the distribution of money and wealth in this country is "fair," or whether money and wealth should be "more evenly distributed among a larger percentage of the people," and "across the nine times the question has been asked, a majority of Americans have agreed with the thought that money and wealth should be more evenly distributed."

In each of the four times Gallup has asked "Do you think our government should or should not redistribute wealth by heavy taxes on the rich?" in recent years, "between 45% and 51% of Americans have gone so far as to agree with the fairly harsh-sounding policy of 'redistribut[ing] wealth by heavy taxes on the rich.'"

That's the real American spirit, dontcha think?

McCain must think Adam Smith is socialistic!

reviewing the patriotic pedigree of a progressive income tax. -Cord

Overtaxed
//////////
by Steve Coll
The New Yorker
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2008/10/27/081027taco_talk_coll
October 27, 2008 edition
The rise and fall of Joe the Plumber as a symbol of the American self-made man’s resistance to progressive taxation began on October 12th, outside Toledo, Ohio.

Six Whoppers from the Debate

Six Whoppers from the Debate

From Campaign for American's Future

Last night, John McCain repeated conservative arguments that are completely divorced from the facts. We need to take every possible opportunity to counter these right-wing whoppers. Here’s a short summary:

Whopper: “Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac caused the subprime lending situation that caused the housing market in America to collapse.”

Fact: The unregulated shadow banking system caused our financial crisis. The Federal National Mortgage Association, known as Fannie Mae, and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, known as Freddie Mac, backed relatively few subprime mortgages until the Bush Administration changed the rules in 2004, encouraging those companies to buy subprime loans late in the game. [Washington Post] Instead, it was unregulated banking companies that created the situation—years before Fannie and Freddie got involved—by encouraging mortgage companies to lend to individuals who could not afford the payments. [Dean Baker, McClatchy Newspapers]

Whopper: “Businesses in America today are paying the second highest tax rate of anywhere in the world.”

Fact: Compared to other industrialized countries, actual U.S. corporate taxes are low. According to a 2008 study by the World Bank and PricewaterhouseCoopers, the United States’ total corporate tax burden ranks 76th of over 100 countries. [World Bank] Almost all of our major trading partners and competitors—including Canada, Mexico, China, Russia, India, Japan, Germany, and France—collect more businesses taxes than we do. Our tax rate is relatively high, but the code is so riddled with loopholes that two-thirds of American corporations and foreign corporations doing business in the United States pay absolutely no federal income taxes—despite taking in $2.5 trillion in sales. [Government Accountability Office]

Whopper: “We can eliminate our dependence on foreign oil by building 45 new nuclear power plants, right away.”

Fact: Nuclear power won’t make the U.S. energy independent. At the fastest possible pace of construction, it would still take almost 40 years to build 45 new nuclear power plants. During the same period, at least that many nuclear plants will have to be retired as they become too old to operate safely. [Keystone Center] In fact, the only practical avenue to energy independence is increasing the percentage of power generated from renewable energy sources, raising fuel efficiency standards, and enacting the Apollo Alliance plan to invest in conservation, energy efficiency and clean power—and create more than 3 million new jobs. The largest short-term savings on energy will come from conservation—retrofitting buildings to be more efficient, raising fuel and appliance efficiency standards, and changing personal habits.

Whopper: “We can offshore drill now. We will reduce the cost of a barrel of oil because we show the world that we have a supply of our own.”

Fact: Offshore drilling would take 10 years to bring new oil to market, 20 years to reach peak capacity, and even then it wouldn’t lower gasoline prices. It takes years—to set up operations, dig test wells, and build a functioning oil rig—for a new well to provide oil for the market. On top of that, all of the oil-drilling ships in the world are booked for the next five years. [New York Times] So it would take 10 years before any oil is pumped out of new offshore wells, and about 20 years for those wells to reach peak capacity. Bush’s own Department of Energy reports that with new offshore drilling “any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.” [U.S. Department of Energy]

Whopper: “ACORN...is now on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy.”

Fact: ACORN, a 38-year-old grassroots community organization, is being smeared by the right wing. ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, was founded in 1970 and is the nation’s largest grassroots organization of low- and moderate-income people, with over 400,000 member families. ACORN has done something praiseworthy: it has encouraged over 1.3 million Americans to join the democratic process by registering to vote. A few people gave ACORN registration forms with false names, and ACORN was required by law to turn those in to elections officials. But not one instance of voter fraud associated with ACORN has been proven. The Center for American Progress wrote an excellent paper debunking the claims against ACORN. [Center for American Progress]

Whopper: “The Washington, D.C. school voucher system [is a model for success—the number of vouchers offered] “I think it’s a thousand and some, and some 9,000 parents asked to be eligible for that.”

Fact: The Washington D.C. school voucher system illustrates perfectly why vouchers don’t work. Two studies from the Bush Administration’s own Department of Education found that the voucher program in Washington D.C. has had no impact on students’ academic achievement. [Department of Education 2007, 2008] And when the vouchers were first offered, so few public-school parents applied for them that the D.C. school system had to give them away to children who were already attending private schools. [Washington Post] With 90 percent of America’s students attending public schools, we need a reform agenda that provides them with great schools—not a plan to siphon off scarce public funds to give private school vouchers to a few.

$700 billion Wall Street bailout!?!

Remember the trickle down theory of economics? I think this started under the Reagan administration with the idea that giving all kinds of breaks to the guys at the top would some how trickle down to benefit the rest of us. As if a trickle was what we needed! I always said I was in favor of the trickle up theory. Give us all the money and just see how the economy would benefit!

You know how it is, when you read about someone who won it big on the lottery what do they say they are going to do with it? Pay off their debts, put aside money for their kids’ college education, buy a new car and a big new TV, take a nice vacation, maybe even start up a small business. Sounds to me like all that would benefit the economy.

So I would suggest that Bush instead of giving $700 billion in bailouts at the top—by the way, that’s $700,000,000,000.00, quite a lot of zeros isn’t it? —don’t hand that out to the guys at the top whose greed or stupidity caused this mess to begin with. No, give it out to us and we will pay off some of our debt, save some of it and spend some of it—the holidays are coming. And let the benefits trickle up for a change.

By the way, the population of the U.S. these days is over 300 million (that’s 300,000,000) plus about 4 million for Puerto Rico (that’s 4,000,000). So the $700 billion bailout averages to about $2300 from (instead of for) every one of us. This week.

Why the ultra-right is mobilizing against Obama

If you want to know why the ratcheted-up, anything-goes onslaught against Obama's presidential campaign, you need only look at this chart put together by the Washington Post, based on an analyis by the Tax Policy Center:

(source: Washington Post)

It graphically shows that

Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy.

and

For the approximately 147,000 families that make up the top 0.1 percent of the income scale, the difference between the two plans is stark. While McCain offers a $269,364 tax cut, Obama would raise their taxes, on average, by $701,885 - a difference of nearly $1 million.

The chart says it all. This election is not about "experience," "abortion," "national security," saluting the flag or lipstick. It is about a section of the tiny group of the richest people in our country, deathly afraid that finally they may be forced to pay the bill owed to the American people - to America's working families who have made their riches possible.

So this tiny group of very rich and powerful are priming up an all-out dirty campaign.

The outcome, I think, will rest on the grassroots mobilization by ordinary working class Americans fired up in the last few weeks of this campaign.

Solution to Budget Crisis Lies in Taxes Not Cuts

Governor William Patterson has called for a special session of the State Legislature to address the State's growing fiscal crisis . Unfortunately, his solution is to make one of the worst budgets ever even worse for working people by cutting deeper.

Patterson has proposed 7% across the board cuts in all programs (there goes the "restored" education budget.) and a state-wide hiring freeze. Sadly, he has simultaneously downplayed taxing the rich.

According to the New York Sun, Nobel Prize-winning economist and Patterson economic advisor Joseph Stiglitz, recommended different solution to the gov:

"New York, like most states, is now facing an unenviable choice: either taxes have to be raised, or expenditures cut," Mr. Stiglitz wrote. "When faced with such an unpleasant choice, economic theory and evidence gives a clear and unambiguous answer: it is economically preferable to raise taxes on those with high incomes than to cut state expenditures,"

wrote Stiglitz.

Back during the budget debate, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver championed a 1% tax surcharge on millionaires which would have filled much of the budget gap. Recently departed Senate Leader Joe Bruno wouldn't let the measure come out of committee. The budget compromise included no new taxes on the mega wealthy or big corporations.

A while back the New York Times reported that many millionaires have no problem paying their fair share, especially during a recession:

“I’m happy to do it,” said Arlyn Gardner, who did not hesitate to declare herself wholly in favor of a plan to raise income taxes on New Yorkers who earn more than $1 million a year. (That would include Ms. Gardner, a prominent philanthropist who splits her time between two homes, one on Fifth Avenue and one in Rye, N.Y.)

“I read about it, and I thought, ‘A lot of people won’t agree with this.’ But I say, ‘Why not?’ We pay taxes to help those who need it.”

Donald Trump is one who does not agree with the idea. “Foolish,” as he put it in a recent telephone interview. “I think it’s a great idea — if you are looking to force rich people to move to states like Florida,” said Mr. Trump, dismissing the notion that the wealthy should be expected to shoulder the burden when times get tough.

“In times of financial distress, the rich get hurt also,” Mr. Trump added.

Poor Donald. The rich cry too, apparently.

Fact is, the debate about how to address the State's fiscal crisis and the general economic crisis in the country has been topsy-turvy. Thirty years of market extremist ideology and right wing rule has made "tax" a dirty word and narrowed the range of solutions in Washington, Albany and City Hall.

As Stiglitz points out, cutting social services is much worse for the economy than raising taxes. Government layoffs, and reductions in benefits and services that lead to less cash in the pockets of low-income and other working people all adds up to slowing the economy.

The argument that increasing taxes on the rich and the big corporations will slow the economy just don't hold up. Taxes on the rich are low. profits are up and wealth is increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few. A limited tax will not drive the jet-set from their Park Avenue suites to their Summer homes on the Cape.

Remember, the way we got out of the Great Depression wasn't by trimming our way out of the crisis. The government spent its way out of the crisis. Putting people to work on government public works and public services jobs means cash in pockets of people that actually spend it. This is the way to get the economy going. It was rampant unproductive and highly speculative investment in energy, housing and financial markets which caused this crisis. The "market" on its own, won't get us out.

The main measure of the budget's success should be its impact on the working people of our state.

Let's put pressure on our State Legislators to put the millionaire's tax back on the table and to say no to any additional cuts. Then come November, let's ensure that a new President and a new Congress are motivated to put millions of Americans back to work rebuilding this country for the Green Millenium.