Take From the Poor, Give to the Rich

The title, of course, is the McCain-Bush-Bush-Reagan-Greenspan Republicans always and forever tax policy. It has been an hugely successful policy - the past 28 years have seen an enormous transfer of wealth from the middle class and poor to the very rich. A perphaps unfortunate, but doubtless necessary, side effect has been an even larger transfer of wealth from the United States to Saudi Arabia, other oil exporters, and China.

I was reminded of this as I watched CNN while on the treadmill at the gym. A panel was comparing the Obama and McCain tax proposals. Oddly enough, many of the panelists stuck to the facts, noting that McCains tax proposals consisted of tiny tax cuts for poor and middle class plus big tax cuts for the rich and very big tax cuts for the very rich, while those proposed by Obama had much larger tax cuts for the poor and middle class, small tax increases for the upper-upper middle class, and substantial tax increases for the rich and super rich.

The ancient Republican hack on the panel complained bitterly that Obama's tax proposal was taking from the rich and giving to the poor, an imagery that would have been more credible if he or any other Republican had made the reverse observation when Reagan cut taxes for the rich while raising them for the working and middle classes.

These characterizations are of course dishonest, and designed to be emotionally loaded. In this golden age of crony capitalism the Republicans have consistently used the following strategy: cut nominal taxes by a pittance for most, cut taxes wholesale for the rich, and borrow the money to rule (or misrule). I call the tax cuts 'nominal' because of course the borrowed money will need to be repaid, one way or the other, though the rich and super rich will just take the fortunes they have accumulated in the meantime and move off shore, so they will likely escape any burdens. All that borrowing weakens the nation, of course, and strengthens its rivals and enemies - a price the Republicans have been too willing to pay.

Both McCain and Obama have proposed plans that will produce further deficits, probably inevitable in the current weak economy, but McCain's is both more expensive and less honest, since it produces huge deficits but pretends it doesn't by claiming to say trillions by cutting "earmarks" - a good idea, but hard to implement without public campaign financing, since the earmark system of semi-legalized bribery is the major basis of most current congressional campaign financing. The money involved is also about two orders of magnitude too small to balance McCain's budget.

Kevin Drum has a nice graph of the impact by income percentile.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Anti-Libertarian: re-post

The most pointed critique of social security and liberalism in general is the libertarian critique. The problem with libertarians, for a liberal, is that we have too much in common. We both believe in individual rights, tolerance of individual differences, and dislike government prescription of religion. The basic difference, it seems to me, is the different answers we give to Cain's (with thanks to the Captain - my original version had the corpse asking the question!) famous question: "Am I my brother's keeper?" That's not really my basic bitch against the libertarians though. My real complaint is the same as my complaint against most religion - its premise is a fraud. For those who can't stand to wait for the punchline, I believe that trying to implement libertarian principles leads to tyranny or social disintegration. Demonstrating that takes some historical (and pre-historical) context. For all but the last 15,000 or so of the 100,000 years the human spec
Read more

Uneasy Lies The Head

Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown ........... Shakespeare Henry IV, Part II. So it is with us and our slightly distant primate cousins , so it seems. A 9-year study of wild baboons in Kenya by Princeton University and the Institute of Primate Research may turn conventional assumptions of alphas males upside down. The study found that alpha males have high testosterone levels, which allows them to dominate other baboons, get access to more food, and attract better mates. This is expected. Surprisingly, though, the alpha males also have high levels of stress hormone glucocorticoid, which scientists measured from their feces samples. In fact, the stress of alpha baboons was on par with low-ranking baboons. The convention wisdom is that access to food and females provides life security and thus less stress for dominant males. Conversely, weak males who are constantly threatened by starvation and physical violence from stronger males are thought to be more stressed. The st
Read more

We Call it Soccer

The US played its best, and maybe only good game of World Cup, but lost thanks to brilliant goalkeeping by the Swedish keeper and the bizarre method soccer uses to settle ties when three US stars could not put the ball on frame from the 12 yard spot.  At the end it came down to a blocked shot that spun in by maybe a couple of centimeters. Well, that's football - too much like life.   Which brings me to a modest proposal.  Replace the thirty minute overtimes with as many 7-player 15 minute periods as needed to settle it.  Scoring should be much easier with fewer players.
Read more