REPUBLICAN CHARITY

Locked
Donald Isler
Posts: 3038
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 11:01 am
Contact:

REPUBLICAN CHARITY

Post by Donald Isler » Tue Dec 06, 2005 12:00 pm

The New York Times
Editorial
December 6th, 2995
Profiles in Pusillanimity

Q. When is a self-proclaimed moderate Republican lawmaker just another malleable vote?

A. When House G.O.P. leaders hold a budget-cutting showdown open after midnight for extended arm-twisting on the eve of their long holiday break.

Back home on that Thanksgiving break, spineless lawmakers were unlikely to share with their well-fed constituents the shameful result: for the lack of just two votes from the majority's vaunted "moderate" coalition, more than 200,000 poor Americans each face the loss of food stamps worth $140 a month in nourishment.

For weeks before the vote, coalition members won national praise and hometown headlines as they held their leaders at bay, vowing unity and demanding that the poor not be punished just as another tax-cut package for the affluent was being greased for passage. Then they buckled, after winning only cosmetic changes in what remains a truly draconian package to slash beyond food stamps to Medicaid, child care and other safety-net programs for the poor. A dozen supposedly moderate lawmakers turned tail as aptly named floor whips tested the rebels' steel. They feared embarrassing the G.O.P. in its shabby attempts to make the debt- and deficit-crazed Congress seem fiscally responsible. The vote was an appalling display of budget theatrics over responsible lawmaking. A number of the midnight retreaters apparently forgot that they had previously co-sponsored something called the Hunger-Free Communities Act of 2005.

More of this sham can be expected as Congress returns and the majority Republicans resume fighting among themselves while the Democrats hold fast against safety-net cuts. The moderates will stage new public "revolts," then fall in line to create more conservative victories in the final secret deal-making between the two houses.

It doesn't have to be this way.

Poverty has risen across the past four years to 37 million and counting, by the government's own measure, while the number of homeless children in public schools is at 600,000 and up. In 2004, some 38 million Americans - including nearly one in five children - lived in households that found it difficult to afford food, 6 million more than in 1999. These are the numbers that should be driving the nation's lawmakers, not the cynical desire to carry rebellion only to the brink of victory, followed by still another last-minute cave-in by the misnamed moderates.

Copyright 2005 The New York Times
Donald Isler

Alban Berg

Post by Alban Berg » Tue Dec 06, 2005 12:14 pm

I believe this is what Republicans call "compassionate conservatism."

Kevin R
Posts: 1672
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 1:15 am
Location: MO

Post by Kevin R » Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:05 am

Let me get my Kleenex :roll:
"Free trade, one of the greatest blessings which a government can confer on a people, is in almost every country unpopular."

-Thomas Macaulay

Classicus Maximus
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 2:28 pm

Post by Classicus Maximus » Thu Dec 08, 2005 7:49 am

Let me get my Kleenex
Now that is an astute statement - It answers everything.

How about this one:
Blessed are the poor in spirit - for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

or this one:
Blessed are the merciful - for they shall obtain mercy.

DavidRoss
Posts: 3384
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 7:05 am
Location: Northern California

Post by DavidRoss » Thu Dec 08, 2005 9:54 am

"Blessed are the middle-classes, for on their backs we shall lay the tax burden for feel-good programs causing more social ills than they solve, but which buy the votes necessary for us to continue lining our own pockets at public expense."
"Most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives." ~Leo Tolstoy

"It is the highest form of self-respect to admit our errors and mistakes and make amends for them. To make a mistake is only an error in judgment, but to adhere to it when it is discovered shows infirmity of character." ~Dale Turner

"Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either." ~Albert Einstein
"Truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it; but, in the end, there it is." ~Winston Churchill

Image

Classicus Maximus
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 2:28 pm

Post by Classicus Maximus » Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:07 pm

"Blessed are the middle-classes, for on their backs we shall lay the tax burden for feel-good programs causing more social ills than they solve, but which buy the votes necessary for us to continue lining our own pockets at public expense."
Let' see now -
Who controls the WHite House - Republicans.
Who controls the Senate - Republicans.
Who controls the House of Representatives - Republicans.
Who placed 7 of out of 9 judges in the Supreme Court - Republicans.
Who sat the majority of federal judges - Republicans.
Who controls the majority of state legislatures - Republicans.
Who has the majority of governorships - Republicans.

Who should we blame when the richest people in America pay a smaller percent of their income than lower middle class and working poor - Democrats.

Note: when calculating % of income be sure to include payroll taxes which somehow are always neglected. Recall that dividends are untaxed and capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than income.

pizza
Posts: 5094
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 4:03 am

Post by pizza » Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:12 pm

Who inherited 50 years of Democratic welfare programs that perpetuate the very problems poor Americans are experiencing?

The Republicans!

DavidRoss
Posts: 3384
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 7:05 am
Location: Northern California

Post by DavidRoss » Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:30 pm

Classicus Maximus wrote:Let' see now -
Who controls the WHite House - Republicans.
Who controls the Senate - Republicans.
Who controls the House of Representatives - Republicans.
Who placed 7 of out of 9 judges in the Supreme Court - Republicans.
Who sat the majority of federal judges - Republicans.
Who controls the majority of state legislatures - Republicans.
Who has the majority of governorships - Republicans.

Who should we blame when the richest people in America pay a smaller percent of their income than lower middle class and working poor - Democrats.

Note: when calculating % of income be sure to include payroll taxes which somehow are always neglected. Recall that dividends are untaxed and capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than income.
Gee, I wish my dividends were untaxed. And I sure wish capital gains were taxed even lower. There's no better spur to investment and job creation.

Personally, I'd like to see what I regard as a fair and simple tax structure--let's say a simple percentage of income, perhaps slightly "progressive," without a zillion loopholes intended to fund social engineering and to permit certain classes to legally avoid taxes. Of course, that will never happen, for there's a huge non-productive industry built on tax evasion--and the lawyers and accountants who profit from it comprise too powerful an interest group to permit reform.

BTW, your list showing Republicans in control of government is very instructive. Why do you think that--after decades of rule by the Democrats--in recent years the electorate has decided to change horses and give the Republicans a chance?
"Most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives." ~Leo Tolstoy

"It is the highest form of self-respect to admit our errors and mistakes and make amends for them. To make a mistake is only an error in judgment, but to adhere to it when it is discovered shows infirmity of character." ~Dale Turner

"Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either." ~Albert Einstein
"Truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it; but, in the end, there it is." ~Winston Churchill

Image

Alban Berg

Post by Alban Berg » Thu Dec 08, 2005 12:58 pm

DavidRoss wrote:Personally, I'd like to see what I regard as a fair and simple tax structure--let's say a simple percentage of income, perhaps slightly "progressive," without a zillion loopholes intended to fund social engineering and to permit certain classes to legally avoid taxes.
And where do you stand on the alternative minimum tax, intended originally to prevent high-income earners from legally avoiding taxes, but now more and more a burden on the middle class because it's not indexed for inflation?

DavidRoss
Posts: 3384
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 7:05 am
Location: Northern California

Post by DavidRoss » Thu Dec 08, 2005 1:02 pm

Alban Berg wrote:
DavidRoss wrote:Personally, I'd like to see what I regard as a fair and simple tax structure--let's say a simple percentage of income, perhaps slightly "progressive," without a zillion loopholes intended to fund social engineering and to permit certain classes to legally avoid taxes.
And where do you stand on the alternative minimum tax, intended originally to prevent high-income earners from legally avoiding taxes, but now more and more a burden on the middle class because it's not indexed for inflation?
It's simply evil. Of course with a progressive tax system inflation has always been a covert means of effectively raising taxes.
"Most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives." ~Leo Tolstoy

"It is the highest form of self-respect to admit our errors and mistakes and make amends for them. To make a mistake is only an error in judgment, but to adhere to it when it is discovered shows infirmity of character." ~Dale Turner

"Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either." ~Albert Einstein
"Truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it; but, in the end, there it is." ~Winston Churchill

Image

Classicus Maximus
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 2:28 pm

Post by Classicus Maximus » Thu Dec 08, 2005 5:24 pm

Gee, I wish my dividends were untaxed. And I sure wish capital gains were taxed even lower.
David
Dividend exemption extension just passed the House
and yes long term capital gains (I am pretty sure that long term is still 1 year) are taxed at a lower rate.
=================================
http://nytimes.com/2005/12/08/politics/ ... r=homepage

WASHINGTON, Dec. 8 - The House of Representatives today passed the last and biggest piece of a total of $95 billion in tax cuts, a move that reflects both the ambition of House Republicans leaders and their willingness to let the budget deficit widen in years to come.

The bill passed by a vote of 234 to 197. It extends a long list of tax cuts at a cost of $56 billion over five years. The biggest provision would extend President Bush's 2001 tax cut for stock dividends and capital gains for two years at a cost of $20 billion.

The Republican majority easily defeated an alternative plan proposed by Democrats, who argued that the tax cut for stock dividends would overwhelmingly favor the very richest families
====================================
a move that reflects both the ambition of House Republicans leaders and their willingness to let the budget deficit widen in years to come.
Remember when conservatives would be aghast at this.
Cheney said that deficits don't matter.
I wonder if China and Japan have a say in this.

:? :? :? :? :? :? :? :?

Corlyss_D
Site Administrator
Posts: 27663
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:25 am
Location: The Great State of Utah
Contact:

Post by Corlyss_D » Thu Dec 08, 2005 10:24 pm

Classicus Maximus wrote:Who should we blame when the richest people in America pay a smaller percent of their income than lower middle class and working poor - Democrats.
You forget who devised the brilliant feel-good programs and when: they (SS, Medicare, Medicaid) were devised by Democrats who controled all instruments of Government federal and state for most of the period 1936-1994.

Since it's an NYT editorial, it hardly merits attention as their fact checking is notoriously bad and their political leanings are simply notorious.
Corlyss
Contessa d'EM, a carbon-based life form

DavidRoss
Posts: 3384
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 7:05 am
Location: Northern California

Post by DavidRoss » Thu Dec 08, 2005 11:28 pm

Classicus Maximus wrote:
Gee, I wish my dividends were untaxed. And I sure wish capital gains were taxed even lower.
David
Dividend exemption extension just passed the House
and yes long term capital gains (I am pretty sure that long term is still 1 year) are taxed at a lower rate.
=================================
http://nytimes.com/2005/12/08/politics/ ... r=homepage

WASHINGTON, Dec. 8 - The House of Representatives today passed the last and biggest piece of a total of $95 billion in tax cuts, a move that reflects both the ambition of House Republicans leaders and their willingness to let the budget deficit widen in years to come.

The bill passed by a vote of 234 to 197. It extends a long list of tax cuts at a cost of $56 billion over five years. The biggest provision would extend President Bush's 2001 tax cut for stock dividends and capital gains for two years at a cost of $20 billion.

The Republican majority easily defeated an alternative plan proposed by Democrats, who argued that the tax cut for stock dividends would overwhelmingly favor the very richest families....
Duh, ordinary dividends are not tax exempt, CM. You are right that capital gains on assets held more than one year are taxed at 15%, which is lower than the rate on ordinary income. But what I said was that they should be taxed even lower (than they are now, not just lower than ordinary income).

As for those stupid pronouncements in the Times about tax cuts "costing $20 billion"--in the first place, it doesn't cost anything. What they mean is that they project that the IRS will fall $20 billion short of what it hoped to steal from the taxpayers. In the second place, judicious tax cuts actually increase tax revenues by enabling taxpayers to put more of their own money to work earning still more money and creating still more jobs, so that though the rate is lower, the pool is larger. A smaller portion of a larger pie can be bigger than a bigger portion of a small pie. Despite lower tax rates, total tax revenues have actually been increasing over the past few years.

Your NY Times excerpt is a splendid example of willful distortion of the facts. For shame.
"Most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives." ~Leo Tolstoy

"It is the highest form of self-respect to admit our errors and mistakes and make amends for them. To make a mistake is only an error in judgment, but to adhere to it when it is discovered shows infirmity of character." ~Dale Turner

"Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either." ~Albert Einstein
"Truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it; but, in the end, there it is." ~Winston Churchill

Image

Corlyss_D
Site Administrator
Posts: 27663
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:25 am
Location: The Great State of Utah
Contact:

Post by Corlyss_D » Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:08 am

DavidRoss wrote:Your NY Times excerpt is a splendid example of willful distortion of the facts. For shame.
Maybe he thinks repeating the delapidated and long since discredited mantras of the left makes them true. The NYT Editorial writers certainly do. Maybe we should tell him, "Max, put down the kool aid and step away from the pitcher . . . " :wink:
Corlyss
Contessa d'EM, a carbon-based life form

Kevin R
Posts: 1672
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 1:15 am
Location: MO

Post by Kevin R » Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:29 am

Classicus Maximus wrote:
Let me get my Kleenex
Now that is an astute statement - It answers everything.

How about this one:
Blessed are the poor in spirit - for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

or this one:
Blessed are the merciful - for they shall obtain mercy.
CM,

You missed the point. Here you had a situation of minor cuts that some (including the editorial) turned into a cruel and heartless act.

The NYT (as usual) doesn't understand the problem. The problem (since LBJ and the Great Society) is that all of the $ spent to lessen such problems has simply created a culture of poverty, where dependency becomes a way of life. In 1973 (just as many of the Johnson programs were being initiated) the poverty rate (the rate itself is seriously flawed, but that is another story) stood at 11.1%. In 1999 the rate stood at 11.3%. All of the money spent on welfare programs (well over $8 trillion) and poverty has basically remained the same! And yet the NYT laments a minuscule cut? Poverty simply can't be ended by giving out money. And since long term poverty rates are minor (1% to 2%), Congress should be looking to cut some of these well meaning but ineffective programs.

And why is it that the NYT ignores the social causes of poverty in the US?
"Free trade, one of the greatest blessings which a government can confer on a people, is in almost every country unpopular."

-Thomas Macaulay

Kevin R
Posts: 1672
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 1:15 am
Location: MO

Post by Kevin R » Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:41 am

Classicus Maximus wrote:Who should we blame when the richest people in America pay a smaller percent of their income than lower middle class and working poor - Democrats.

Note: when calculating % of income be sure to include payroll taxes which somehow are always neglected. Recall that dividends are untaxed and capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than income.
CM,

I'm afraid you are wrong on that point.

Now if you look just at income taxes the picture is rather striking, where the top 1% of taxpayers (as of 2003) paid just over 34% of taxes.

But if you include Social Security taxes you see that the "rich" still pay more than the middle class and lower class. In 1999, the top 10% paid over half (52.2%) of payroll and income taxes.
"Free trade, one of the greatest blessings which a government can confer on a people, is in almost every country unpopular."

-Thomas Macaulay

DavidRoss
Posts: 3384
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 7:05 am
Location: Northern California

Post by DavidRoss » Fri Dec 09, 2005 8:51 am

Kevin R wrote:The NYT (as usual) doesn't understand the problem. The problem (since LBJ and the Great Society) is that all of the $ spent to lessen such problems has simply created a culture of poverty, where dependency becomes a way of life.

And why is it that the NYT ignores the social causes of poverty in the US?
It is ancient wisdom that if you want to feed a hungry man for a day, you give him a fish...but if you want to feed him for life, you teach him how to fish. The failures of the Great Society are so glaringly obvious that it's hard to believe that the NYT and other leaders of the Liberal Elite cannot recognize them. Surely they're not that stupid? Consequently, I suspect that they are viciously cynical, knowingly propounding policies that breed poverty and dependency, in order to continue lining their own pockets at public expense.

If the American system is so heartless, racist, and cruel, then why is it that millions of immigrants with little or no English, dark skin, no money or class advantages, and little or no education, continue to arrive on our shores and thrive on the opportunities available here? If structural poverty is a fact, then how do the overwhelming majority succeed in getting jobs, educations, homes, and raising their children with the blessings of our way of life to grow healthy and strong and go to college and even have professional careers? Could it be that such success stories, which are so commonplace as to be banal, just don't help sell big city newspapers?
"Most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives." ~Leo Tolstoy

"It is the highest form of self-respect to admit our errors and mistakes and make amends for them. To make a mistake is only an error in judgment, but to adhere to it when it is discovered shows infirmity of character." ~Dale Turner

"Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either." ~Albert Einstein
"Truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it; but, in the end, there it is." ~Winston Churchill

Image

Ted

Post by Ted » Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:05 am

If the American system is so heartless, racist, and cruel, then why is it that millions of immigrants with little or no English, dark skin, no money or class advantages, and little or no education, continue to arrive on our shores and thrive on the opportunities available here?
You can’t be serious David
Running water and Ice are “Streets Paved With Gold” to many of the 3rd world immigrants who flock here.
I’m against entitlements and all the rest of the bleeding heart liberal social offerings, in fact were it up to me, everyone immigrating to this country would have to speak English and have a job waiting.
People come here despite American Heartlessness, Racism and Cruelty

DavidRoss
Posts: 3384
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 7:05 am
Location: Northern California

Post by DavidRoss » Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:04 am

Ted wrote:
If the American system is so heartless, racist, and cruel, then why is it that millions of immigrants with little or no English, dark skin, no money or class advantages, and little or no education, continue to arrive on our shores and thrive on the opportunities available here?
You can’t be serious David
Running water and Ice are “Streets Paved With Gold” to many of the 3rd world immigrants who flock here.
I’m against entitlements and all the rest of the bleeding heart liberal social offerings, in fact were it up to me, everyone immigrating to this country would have to speak English and have a job waiting.
People come here despite American Heartlessness, Racism and Cruelty
Yes, Ted. I am very serious. I see it every day. For years I have worked with such immigrants. At present I work with over 100 immigrants doing exactly as I described, mostly from Mexico and the former Soviet bloc countries.
"Most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives." ~Leo Tolstoy

"It is the highest form of self-respect to admit our errors and mistakes and make amends for them. To make a mistake is only an error in judgment, but to adhere to it when it is discovered shows infirmity of character." ~Dale Turner

"Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either." ~Albert Einstein
"Truth is incontrovertible; malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it; but, in the end, there it is." ~Winston Churchill

Image

operafan
Posts: 527
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 10:18 am
Location: San francisco

Post by operafan » Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:58 am

A few tax facts, which consider not only fed, but state and local taxes. Now if they could just throw in death taxes, sin taxes, and reverse taxes (fines) things might be clearer. The good graphs in this article do not transfer so I recommend reading it for your self. The numbers for the working poor are dismal but not unexpected. The numbers for fraud in Medicare l(costs more than Medicare itself) are amazing.

http://www.askquestions.org/articles/taxes/
Quote

Warren Buffett has famously said, “if there is a class war in America, my side is winning.” In his annual letter to shareholders this year, the billionaire investment guru urged corporations to pony up on taxes, saying, "We hope our [Berkshire Hathaway corporate income] taxes continue to rise in the future—it will mean we are prospering—but we also hope that the rest of corporate America antes up along with us.”

Another voice from the billionaire class, Bill Gates Senior, reminds us that public investments in our courts, schools, transit systems, public utilities, and research programs have pushed the United States to the top of the world’s economy. No other investment scheme in the history of the world has been so successful, says Gates. “As taxpayers, we should take pride in the fact that the US government is the world’s largest venture capitalist.” "
'She wants to go with him, but her mama don't allow none of that.'

Elementary school child at an opera outreach performance of "Là ci darem la mano!" Don Giovanni - Mozart.

Donald Isler
Posts: 3038
Joined: Tue May 20, 2003 11:01 am
Contact:

Post by Donald Isler » Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:21 am

Somehow I'm not able to make myself cry for the sufferings of the wealthy when they pay their taxes. According to everything I've read, during the last several years, when Republicans controlled the Congress and the Presidency, the gap between rich and poor has grown. Tax cuts, and cuts in food stamps and other programs for the poor have mostly helped the already haves. And as someone once said, it's socialism for the rich, and capitalism for the poor.

Also, speaking of Warren Buffett, a remarkable man, I recall reading a year or so ago that he was against the current tax situation because he had discovered that his secretary would pay a higher percentage of his income than he himself. And unlike the people who run our country today this man has a conscience.
Donald Isler

BWV 1080
Posts: 4451
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 10:05 pm

Post by BWV 1080 » Fri Dec 09, 2005 1:42 pm

Corporate income tax needs to be abolished - it taxes productivity and discourages investment and job creation. If wealth is not taxed at the corporate level it will simply be passed through in the form of dividends, capital spending, payroll, etc & taxed at the individual level where it will be subject to the progressive tax system
Written By: Richard W. Rahn
Published In: Budget & Tax News
Publication Date: January 1, 2005
Publisher: The Heartland Institute

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On November 18, in a speech given at the Finance Ministry in Vienna, Austria, the very highly regarded European economist and first woman president of the Mont Pelerin Society, Professor Victoria Curzon Price, called for eliminating the corporate income tax.

There, in the center of socialist Europe, was not only the call to get rid of this destructive tax, but almost everyone in an audience of economists, various government finance officials, and public policy experts appeared to agree with her.

The idea and practice of the corporate income tax has been dying slowly for the last two decades. The corporate income tax is a highly destructive tax that greatly distorts proper economic decision-making, taxes the same income more than once, is endlessly complex, and provides a declining share of tax revenue in most countries. For instance, in the United States, corporate income tax revenues fell from 4.2 percent of gross domestic product in 1967 to only 1.2 percent of GDP in 2003, though there was minimal change in the tax rate.

Good economists have long known the corporate income tax causes more problems than it solves. Many countries, seeking higher economic growth and employment, have sharply cut their tax rates. Ireland cut its corporate tax rate from 43 percent to only 12.5 percent, attracting investment from around the world and, in turn, becoming not only one of the fastest-growing but one of the wealthiest economies in Europe.

The new market economies of Eastern Europe--seeking high growth and rapid job creation--have also been cutting their corporate tax rates. Slovakia, Lithuania, and Poland have a 19 percent corporate rate; Hungary 16 percent; Slovenia and Latvia 15 percent; and Bulgaria just announced it will move to a 15 percent rate next year. Montenegro, not to be outdone, announced it will go to a 9 percent rate. Estonia has become the champion by going to a zero rate on reinvested profits.

As a result of this competition, even France (34 percent) and Germany (38 percent) have been forced into modest corporate tax reductions, giving them lower rates than corporations face in the United States. American companies now have an average 40 percent rate (including state corporate taxes), and only very poorly performing Japan with its 42 percent rate is higher.

Looking at these numbers, it is easy to understand why corporations doing business around the world elect not to have the United States as their legal home, because it makes them noncompetitive. When running for president, Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) proposed punishing companies for leaving the United States. The correct solution is for the U.S. to abolish the corporate income tax, thereby making it the most desired location on the planet for many companies to incorporate.

Those who oppose eliminating the corporate tax will say we cannot afford the revenue loss. They say such things because they do not think beyond the first order. Think about it for a minute. If you eliminate the corporate tax, corporate profits will increase, causing corporations to hire more workers and/or raise wages and invest more in new and better equipment, and/or increase their dividend payouts. All this will cause the price of corporate stock to rise and the government to receive more in capital gains tax revenues. The government will also receive more tax revenue from the increase in dividends paid and workers hired. If we look at the experience of other countries who have greatly reduced corporate tax rates, like Ireland, it is clear the additional growth in jobs and profits ended up providing the government more, not less, tax revenue.

The U.S. Treasury and Congress's Joint Tax Committee use very simple-minded static revenue models when estimating proposed tax changes. That is why they almost always get it wrong. I have no doubt a properly constructed dynamic model or, better yet, an actual experiment of eliminating the corporate tax, will prove we are better off without it.

The corporate tax is enormously complex and hence extremely expensive to administer; tends to drive companies to set up operations outside the United States; discourages foreign investment in the U.S., thereby driving down the dollar's value; taxes capital income more than once, thus reducing the U.S. saving rate, which also drives down the dollar's value; and makes us less competitive. The corporate rate is also unfair to businesses that need a corporate form as opposed to a single proprietorship, partnership, limited liability company, and real estate investment trust (REIT), which are not burdened with the extra level of taxation.

The president has pledged fundamental tax reform. A first step ought to be eliminating the corporate income tax, because it will greatly simplify the tax code and its enforcement, make U.S. companies more competitive, strengthen the dollar, create many new jobs, and increase economic opportunity. There are still some, but fortunately a diminishing number of mentally lightweight leftists, who believe you somehow can tax a corporation without taxing the workers, customers, suppliers, and stockholders (who in many cases are invested in pension funds) of the corporation. When they make the cry, as they surely will, that eliminating the corporate income tax benefits the rich and rewards the greedy, they should be challenged with facts and logic.

Advocates of sound economic policy have too many times allowed themselves to be bullied by loudmouths who claim compassion, yet cause misery. Tax reform is too important to allow ignorance to prevail.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard W. Rahn is a senior fellow of the Discovery Institute and an adjunct scholar of the Cato Institute. This essay was first printed on December 1, 2004 by the Washington Times and is reprinted with permission.

operafan
Posts: 527
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 10:18 am
Location: San francisco

Post by operafan » Fri Dec 09, 2005 8:18 pm

BWV 1080 wrote:Corporate income tax needs to be abolished - it taxes productivity and discourages investment and job creation. If wealth is not taxed at the corporate level it will simply be passed through in the form of dividends, capital spending, payroll, etc & taxed at the individual level where it will be subject to the progressive tax system
No corporate taxes??? This idea is very hard to believe. Normally I believe your thoughts on economics are sound (though I may disagree with them) but this one seems made out of fairy dust. Yes, there is a school of thought that believes in this. Yes, corporate taxes have been diminishing. But the capital does not go back into creating more jobs in the U.S., it goes into overseas investment, and sweatshop jobs overseas. Small cities all over the nation are competing for jobs, preferably in the light industry or software type, the light polluting type of industry. If corporations do not pay taxes, cities can not afford to pay the sanitation, the sewage, the utilities and the rest.

The US needs to have corporate taxes if only so that businesses can be given incentives for behaving well. (What a horrid, motherly comment, but hold on while I make my case). Research has been pretty much economically killed off at the state university level by lack of federal funding. Corporations need incentives to do research. Offer them tax relief for research. Corporations need incentives not to pollute. Offer them tax incentives for cleanlyness (IMO it is easier to prevent a mess than it is to clean it up).

The current deal where big box businesses pay less than their workers need, corporate taxes pay the Medicade, the hospital bills, and the rest of the welfare that is currently encouraged. Cities make those deals because they think that marginal employment is better than welfare and homelessness. The gap between marginal employment and real costs is paid by a mixture of corporate and personal taxes (in California at least). Profits from those big box businesses are going someware in Kansas, not back to the community. Think there will ever be a progressive personal tax that will bring the profits back adequately to say, California? Both Democrats and Republicans have been remarkably resistant to this. (Plus think what it would do the states - the feds never give anything back to California without purse strings added and vast percentages of pork subtracted.) Check the last page of this http://www.retrovsmetro.org/book/chapter_2.html?c=2&p=2 for the graph of which states are taxed more at a federal level vs which states are receiving more money from the feds, and you can see there is a lot of work to be done. If economists want to phase out corporate taxes, they are going to have to phase in very progressive personal taxes in a strong way - not much political will for that. Belt tightening - Americans aren't too good at that either - plus, who wants to go without the standard bennies of living in America?
'She wants to go with him, but her mama don't allow none of that.'

Elementary school child at an opera outreach performance of "Là ci darem la mano!" Don Giovanni - Mozart.

Corlyss_D
Site Administrator
Posts: 27663
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:25 am
Location: The Great State of Utah
Contact:

Post by Corlyss_D » Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:40 pm

Ted wrote:People come here despite American Heartlessness, Racism and Cruelty
On the whole, it's not nearly as important to them as the economic opportunity and the upward mobility that this country represents.
Corlyss
Contessa d'EM, a carbon-based life form

Corlyss_D
Site Administrator
Posts: 27663
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:25 am
Location: The Great State of Utah
Contact:

Post by Corlyss_D » Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:46 pm

Donald Isler wrote: Republicans controlled the Congress and the Presidency, the gap between rich and poor has grown.
That's because more middle class people are moving in the the upper strata, more poor are moving into the middle class, and the gap between the "permanent underclass" as Charles Wilson terms it, is indeed growing. If the government programs were geared to equipping the permanent underclass the character skills to become producers and contributers, there wouldn't be so many of them. Unfortunately, the government programs are geared to keeping them dependent by giving them money or support or job training, which isn't their problem. They can't take advantage of the job training because they don't know how to function as responsible adults, no matter what they are taught.
Corlyss
Contessa d'EM, a carbon-based life form

Kevin R
Posts: 1672
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 1:15 am
Location: MO

Post by Kevin R » Sat Dec 10, 2005 4:00 am

DavidRoss wrote:
Kevin R wrote:The NYT (as usual) doesn't understand the problem. The problem (since LBJ and the Great Society) is that all of the $ spent to lessen such problems has simply created a culture of poverty, where dependency becomes a way of life.

And why is it that the NYT ignores the social causes of poverty in the US?
It is ancient wisdom that if you want to feed a hungry man for a day, you give him a fish...but if you want to feed him for life, you teach him how to fish. The failures of the Great Society are so glaringly obvious that it's hard to believe that the NYT and other leaders of the Liberal Elite cannot recognize them. Surely they're not that stupid? Consequently, I suspect that they are viciously cynical, knowingly propounding policies that breed poverty and dependency, in order to continue lining their own pockets at public expense.

If the American system is so heartless, racist, and cruel, then why is it that millions of immigrants with little or no English, dark skin, no money or class advantages, and little or no education, continue to arrive on our shores and thrive on the opportunities available here? If structural poverty is a fact, then how do the overwhelming majority succeed in getting jobs, educations, homes, and raising their children with the blessings of our way of life to grow healthy and strong and go to college and even have professional careers? Could it be that such success stories, which are so commonplace as to be banal, just don't help sell big city newspapers?
This issue (Liberal Elite) reminds me of the mindset described in Thomas Sowell's book "The Vision of the Anointed."
"Free trade, one of the greatest blessings which a government can confer on a people, is in almost every country unpopular."

-Thomas Macaulay

Kevin R
Posts: 1672
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 1:15 am
Location: MO

Post by Kevin R » Sat Dec 10, 2005 4:08 am

operafan wrote:A few tax facts, which consider not only fed, but state and local taxes. Now if they could just throw in death taxes, sin taxes, and reverse taxes (fines) things might be clearer. The good graphs in this article do not transfer so I recommend reading it for your self. The numbers for the working poor are dismal but not unexpected. The numbers for fraud in Medicare l(costs more than Medicare itself) are amazing.

http://www.askquestions.org/articles/taxes/
Quote

Warren Buffett has famously said, “if there is a class war in America, my side is winning.” In his annual letter to shareholders this year, the billionaire investment guru urged corporations to pony up on taxes, saying, "We hope our [Berkshire Hathaway corporate income] taxes continue to rise in the future—it will mean we are prospering—but we also hope that the rest of corporate America antes up along with us.”

Another voice from the billionaire class, Bill Gates Senior, reminds us that public investments in our courts, schools, transit systems, public utilities, and research programs have pushed the United States to the top of the world’s economy. No other investment scheme in the history of the world has been so successful, says Gates. “As taxpayers, we should take pride in the fact that the US government is the world’s largest venture capitalist.” "
There are some serious problems with the findings presented (Krugman was a source!?), for a useful corrective to some of the issues brought up see the following:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/cda04-13.cfm

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-353es.html

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-302es.html

http://www.optimist123.com/optimist/200 ... e_bla.html

http://www.ipi.org/ipi%5CIPIPublication ... 4E007DA75F

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/52dd ... 329d75.pdf

http://taxesandgrowth.ncpa.org/hot_issue/share/

http://woodrow.mpls.frb.fed.us/research/wp/wp618.pdf

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/cda04-12.cfm

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg1791.cfm

http://www.house.gov/jec/publications/1 ... 109-20.pdf

ftp://ftp.iret.org/pub/ADVS-179.PDF
"Free trade, one of the greatest blessings which a government can confer on a people, is in almost every country unpopular."

-Thomas Macaulay

Kevin R
Posts: 1672
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 1:15 am
Location: MO

Post by Kevin R » Sat Dec 10, 2005 4:13 am

Donald Isler wrote:Somehow I'm not able to make myself cry for the sufferings of the wealthy when they pay their taxes. According to everything I've read, during the last several years, when Republicans controlled the Congress and the Presidency, the gap between rich and poor has grown. Tax cuts, and cuts in food stamps and other programs for the poor have mostly helped the already haves. And as someone once said, it's socialism for the rich, and capitalism for the poor.

Also, speaking of Warren Buffett, a remarkable man, I recall reading a year or so ago that he was against the current tax situation because he had discovered that his secretary would pay a higher percentage of his income than he himself. And unlike the people who run our country today this man has a conscience.
No one is asking you to cry for the wealthy. They have it very good. But the old class warfare mantra is complete garbage. Social stratification is a fact in every nation, but it is far more serious in non-capitalist countries (yet we don't hear about that). And the idea that the "rich" get wealthier each year masks the fact that the "rich" change from one year to the next. Social mobility is striking and disproves the leftist nonsense that there is an entrenched plutocracy in the US.
"Free trade, one of the greatest blessings which a government can confer on a people, is in almost every country unpopular."

-Thomas Macaulay

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests