Budget talks: This is getting nasty

For some reason, there are plenty of people who think we are overtaxed as a nation. I don't know how one could come to that conclusion.

 

I think it's because the tax code is so complicated. There are so many things that come with tax issues, from everything you buy to every child you have. Some of the tax issues add to your cost, a lot of it subtracts from your tax load. But it adds to up make the issues of taxes sort of a factor on just about everything you do, at least in a tiny way.

It's the omnipotent nature of taxes that makes it seem more of a financial burden. In reality, it's more of a mental and emotional burden on a lot of people.

 

Slash the mother in half and nobody would notice --- except the brass hats who like to play with fancy toys that blow things up.

 

Well, the hundreds of thousands of people who work in factories with DOD contracts might notice.


I want the defense budget cut as much as anybody but it's naive to think it can just be chainsawed with no ripple effects.

The MIC is the "beast" we should have been "starving" for about the last 20 years.

 

Get ready for a total combined marginal tax rate of nearly 70%

That should finally satisfy the "tax the rich" cheerleaders.

 

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure,” he said. “It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/04/obama-2006-vs-obama-january-2011-vs-obama-april-2011-on-the-debt-ceiling.html

 

Straight from the Faux Noise mouthpiece the WSJ. Totally credible.

 

So, if you're a CEO in Thief River Falls, MN; (great name, btw), Pierre, SD; or Muscle Shoals, AL, and you fly in a "corporate jet, are you still a bad guy?

 

This is a believer in the Laffer curve, so the grain of salt comes out pretty quick. He starts by saying "higher marginal rates do harm to the economy" and claims that is taught in Econ 101. Geesh, how high is "higher?" Right now we've been sitting at some of the lowest marginal tax rates in over a half century and what happened? The worst economic crash in 80 years and a catostrophic debt.

Look it up. Federal tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was at its lowest level in 61 years last year.

Sixty-one years.

The info can be found here if you want to look it up:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/

So this guy, very much with a dog in the hunt, wants us to think that we're about to get taxed out of our heads. Meanwhile, the evidence simply is not there to support it.

 

So in an environment where the worst-case scenario predicts a top rate of 52 percent, he comes up with a statistical measurement that purports to say a certain share of earnings would be paid at a rate of nearly 70 percent. Naw, there is no statistical gymnastics going on here, no giving those numbers a nice Shiatsu to bend them to your point.

Jesus, these guys are like Daddy Warbucks without the orphaned redhead to humanize them.

 

I don't begrudge a CEO having a corporate jet. I do think they should have to pay regular tax on them and shouldn't be getting an exemption that was designed to help the airline industry after 9-11. Hello, that was 10 years ago. I think the industry is past that now.

If cash-for-clunkers was allowed to renew for 10 years, would it offend you? It's basically the same thing, a tax credit to help a troubled sector. So if we keep the airplane break, do we also keep cash for clunkers? It certainly helped car sales. Without it, people won't buy cars, right?

 

The economy also was allegedly better in '06 (at least for the wealthy) than it is now. It would almost be like comparing 1926 to 1931, except in 1931, you had breadlines and Hoovervilles, unlike now.