Atlanta, Washington singing from same hymnal on tax reform

When politicians in Washington and Atlanta talk up the same idea, they’re usually onto something or up to something. In the case of the suddenly fashionable idea of making taxes broader, flatter, simpler and lower, taxpayers can be more relieved than suspicious.

The “Fiscal Solutions Tour” rolled into Atlanta last week. Its barnstorming economists and politicos want to solve the federal debt problem by cutting spending and reforming entitlements and taxes.

They described a tax code for individuals and business alike with fewer, if any, deductions and credits. The changes would be offset in part by lowering tax rates, though revenues on the whole would likely rise. (The group also favors a consumption tax to supplement existing levies; another bipartisan debt commission, as well as yours truly, believes the budget can be balanced without a new national sales tax.)

Listening to them, I was reminded of similar reforms for Georgia a special panel proposed earlier this year.

Unlike on the federal level, the state’s proposed changes are designed to keep revenues flat. Of course, unlike Washington, the state balances its budget each year and hasn’t racked up trillions in debt.

The idea of broadening the tax base, closing loopholes and setting marginal rates as low and flat as possible isn’t new. Economists have long said such a tax code would cost less to enforce and follow, reduce distortions in the market, and punish success to a lesser degree.

What is new is that politicians on both sides of the aisle are warming up to the concept, albeit still slowly in some cases.

In Georgia, after proponents addressed initial fears that their plan would lead to a massive tax increase, a tax-reform bill (HB 385) is before the Legislature. With Republicans in control, these conservative ideas ought to prevail — if legislators can resist special interests favoring the status quo.

Things haven’t progressed as far in Washington, where Georgia’s Saxby Chambliss is among a bipartisan handful of senators pushing reforms.

“Fiscal Solutions” member Alice Rivlin, a former White House and congressional budget chief, said the right is more accepting of the idea.

“The shift that I’ve seen recently,” she told me, “is among Republicans who have come to realize…that there are a lot of subsidies in the tax code. And they used to resist that idea, and [said] anything that lowered your taxes was good.

“But I think a lot of Republicans have come to realize, we subsidize a lot of activities. And we do some of it with direct spending, and we do a lot of it in the tax code. And doing it in the tax code isn’t better.”

Not all tax cuts are created equal, of course, and government shouldn’t pick winners through tax or spending policy. Better to let individuals and businesses make decisions on the economic merits, rather than inviting them to choose based on tax treatment.

Rivlin continued: “And then there’s the liberals. I’ve found that the knee-jerk reaction of most liberals is negative, because they think, ‘Lower rates for rich people? That’s terrible!’

“But you have to look at the whole incidence [of taxation]. Because, actually, most of the benefits of the deductions and exclusions and so forth goes to upper-income people. So, they aren’t getting off the hook.”

The bulk of the work, in Washington as in Atlanta, remains on the spending side of the ledger. But if politicians back off these sensible tax reforms, start getting suspicious.

– By Kyle Wingfield

Find me on Facebook or follow me on Twitter

Or tweet this blog post:

149 comments Add your comment

Linda

March 4th, 2011
7:31 pm

Since I’m first, I’m asking everyone to be civil. Stick to your points. Refrain from insults. Let’s try it! If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say it.

Michael H. Smith

March 4th, 2011
7:34 pm

You are not going to allow me to say what I tried to post?

Why not?

Michael H. Smith

March 4th, 2011
7:38 pm

Let all these politicians first make their spending flatter, simpler and alot lower. Then I might believe they will actually do what they are now saying, rather than going to raise taxes in the process.

Hillbilly Deluxe

March 4th, 2011
8:17 pm

I’d like to see a tax code with no credits, no deductions and all types of income are taxed at the same rate. You make “X” amount of dollars, you pay “Y” % of “X” in taxes. It’s a pipe dream that I don’t expect to ever see.

Any change in the tax code should be revenue neutral and not a hidden tax increase.

Linda

March 4th, 2011
8:39 pm

So far, so good!

Jason

March 4th, 2011
9:51 pm

” Of course, unlike Washington, the state balances its budget each year and hasn’t racked up trillions in debt.”

What do you call bonds? Georgia doesn’t have trillions owed but it’s still quite a bit. I don’t know how anyone can say it’s not debt. How many years of gas tax revenue and Federal highway money is it going to take to pay off the bonds already issued by GDOT? Twenty? Thirty? How is that not debt?

Jason

March 4th, 2011
9:53 pm

@Hillbilly, any change to the tax code is going to be a tax increase for somebody. It might be revenue neutral for the state but it certainly won’t be payment neutral for individuals. There will be winners (some big time winners) and losers (probably not any huge losers but more of them). Expect a select few to make out like bandits and the rest to pay to cover the change.

Jane

March 4th, 2011
10:04 pm

An interesting idea but I withhold judgment until I see the specifics. Which deductions and credits will be done away with–the home mortgage deduction, that has helped millions of middle class families achieve the dream of home ownership and have more money in their pockets? The provision that allows employees to save money for retirement in pre-tax dollars–something that will become even more important as pensions become a quaint anachronism and politicians seem intent on slashing social security? Is it the provision that provides tax relief to save for college, another factor that will be especially important in Georgia as money for HOPE dwindles. While the rich do benefit from deductions and loopholes, the primary beneficiaries for many current deductions are the middle class. If Congress tries to take away those benefits, they’re going to have a very hard sell.

get out much?

March 4th, 2011
11:25 pm

whenever I hear the phrase “tax reform” I ask a simple question: “Who pays more and who pays less”.

Linda

March 5th, 2011
6:18 am

Stick it in your ear.

Michael H. Smith

March 5th, 2011
6:26 am

Why does someone have to pay more, g.o.m.? Is it cast in concrete somewhere that government has to spend more and grow more? Actually, spend more and grow more beyond the ability of economic expansion to accommodate government spending in terms of revenue? If so, then that is a zero-sum-game, where wealth is only being transferred and not created. Blame the evil rich all we want but the evilest of all the rich is our own evil government.

On deductions and credits, it is time to have a come to Jesus moment, Jane. Home mortgage deductions are subsidies, plain and simple. The biggest reward from this subsidy goes to bankers, developers and realtors, with we the house buyers getting a few table scraps called mortgage deductions. Government should never have got into the housing business. In fact, government needs to get out and stay out of business altogether to resume its’ given role of governing. It is becoming harder for me to justify governance by using the “carrot and stick” philosophy: Where government is creating a market for something by creating a false demand that the public either cannot afford or does not want, which usually creates a “bubble” that eventually burst and collapses as we have all recently witnessed; et al Wall Street, Banks, Freddie and Fannie Ma etc. This fiscal mess will take many years to clean up economically. Any guess as to who will pay the cost for the clean-up? grr!

On your second point Jane, and I do applaud you for bringing this to fore, because it is the rightful basis for how government should have provided a major portion of what is often referred to as the “Safety Net”, by allowing individuals to escape the onus of taxation. Some may think that I’m against things like Social Security, Medicare and other social programs, which is false. What I’m against is the government’s role in these social programs that were chiefly the idea of Teddy Roosevelt not his cousin Franklin. I’m actually in total agreement with the concept of the “Safety Net” TR desired by way of fair play and the square deal, later to become the new deal. However, the control and ownership of this deal should have been individualized under government oversight not the other-way-round as we have it today.

Government should not be the provider of anything other than governance, wherein government should serve as the enabler and facilitator of the means whereby we provide for ourselves the wealth and “safety net” we all commonly need.

No matter what Congress tries it will have a hard sell but it is time for Congress to be honest with the American people and make the choices that very few of us will like. As was recently said, either they make the decisions now or the decisions will be made for them.

Ron Paul/Herman Cain 2012

March 5th, 2011
7:36 am

Simplify everything with the FAIRTAX !!

END the income tax, audit and abolish the Federal Reserve, and watch the biggest economic boom this country has ever seen.

Still Waiting For the Trickle Down

March 5th, 2011
7:40 am

MHS

Perhaps government should never have gotten into the housing business, but the deduction certainly helps blunt the blows of the banking industry, which never should have gotten into the amortization business. Paying twice or three times the value of the home over the term of the loan is highway robbery.

Toby

March 5th, 2011
7:41 am

Nothing good will come of this, you can take that to the bank. When one class makes all the rules you know who they will favor.

Still Waiting For the Trickle Down

March 5th, 2011
7:48 am

What are the down sides of the Fair Tax? I’m no economist, but I’m also dubious about something so heavily touted by the millionaire class. Makes me think the benefits must be tremendous for the likes of Neal Boortz.

jconservative

March 5th, 2011
8:31 am

Our critical problem is not taxes. Our critical problem is spending.

So let’s tackle spending first, then taxes.

I propose we review the role of the US in the world. Defense is 23% of our annual spending. And it is going up. To date we really do not know what we will get for our $1 trillion investment in Iraq. By the time we get out of Afghanistan we will be light another $1 trillion and to date we have no idea what we will get out of it.

I am fairly sure we could use the $2 trillion in cash.

Remember Cheney saying that one reason he liked toppling Saddam was he liked the idea of oil at $20 a barrel?

So lets review the US role in the world before tackling tax reforms. We may end up changing nothing on our role in the world, just keeping on keeping on. But we have not had such a review in 70 years.
It is past time to do so.

And I have not even mentioned domestic spending.

Please, let’s handle our spending problem before we tackle taxes.

Michael H. Smith

March 5th, 2011
8:54 am

Still Waiting For the Trickle Down ~

Deductions probably didn’t blunt the blows of the banking industry or from it. Deductions in reality more than likely only camouflaged the hammer that has been used to have beaten us upon that all too inviting government supplied anvil, which regrettably has shaped the housing market and all the profiting parties thereof, as we miserably know it and them today. Eventually we the consumers pay the majority of the tab when the real bills comes due (all compounded of course), in one way, shape, form or another for all the blue smoke and mirrors, hokus-pokus shell games and voodoo economics that were used.

Michael H. Smith

March 5th, 2011
8:57 am

Our critical problem is not taxes. Our critical problem is spending.

At times I believe you and I are the only two people in this country that actual get it.

JB

March 5th, 2011
9:08 am

As heard in IROBOT — “now that is the was right question to ask” — I am encouraged to see it recognized here and yes it is relevant and of common interest across both sides of the aisle and for those in the middle, if the subsidies to those benefiting and used as a competitive advantage are seen for what they are.

“But I think a lot of Republicans have come to realize, we subsidize a lot of activities. And we do some of it with direct spending, and we do a lot of it in the tax code. And doing it in the tax code isn’t better.”

Not all tax cuts are created equal, of course, and government shouldn’t pick winners through tax or spending policy. Better to let individuals and businesses make decisions on the economic merits, rather than inviting them to choose based on tax treatment.

Michael H. Smith

March 5th, 2011
9:14 am

Remember Cheney saying that one reason he liked toppling Saddam was he liked the idea of oil at $20 a barrel?

Yes, I do. If we used our own natural resources we could topple all the despots like Saddam and stop subsidizing our oil rich enemies while paying for a military capable of policing the world in the image as we (or as our politicians and corporations) would like it to be. Until the body politic is set aside to allow the corpus principle to serve this rightful purpose in efficacy nothing will change; and we shall not see energy independence, let alone a sound relational strategic national and global energy policy.

ml

March 5th, 2011
9:24 am

the rax system should simplifiedand the same for everyone. that stupid ‘fare’ tax isn’t. are tax code should be simple that an 8th could completely understand it all. and we should all dispell the myth that taxes are bad. that’s too broad a brush stroke. we need taxes, we need the things that we have that help us. by being brainwashed on another thing by politicians is ruining the budgets everywhere. and when they lower taxes just to get people to elect them you know what happens. roadblocks, speed tickets, petty little tickets, etc. all increase. folks, they are going to get their money somehow. can’t we just pay the protection money up front? instead of some surprise and inflated money grab from cops or property or ad valorem later. don’t want high taxes, but tearing down America because we don’t feel like paying to keep it up is not the answer.

two things off subject-

the young basketball player that died this weekend highlights the failure of the people of this country to realize how important and necessary health care for all of us is. if he could have affordedt, if he had access to it, his condition could’ve detected and he coujld be alive today. to understand the benefits of all Americans having healthcare is not liberal and it’s not the devil’s socialism. when a country’s people are healthier, they are more able to defend their country, in so many ways. that kid could’ve lived. and deserved to.

why are republicans worrying about a gay marriage ban? why? if we made God our president it wouldn’t even be on his list of things to do for America. and if it were, it wouldn’t be in the top 10,000 things he would need to do first. our country is in serious trouble and republicans and their enablers are worried about gay marriage. it’s mind blowing to watch people allowing this happen. and totally unpatriotic. if your car has a flat tire and the cigarette lighter isn;t working, which one would you fix first? well i would fix the flat tire, but not republicans, they would go on and on about that cigarette lighter and may not even ever get around to getting it fixed. the whole time things are going bad because that care can’t go anywhere because of the tire. can’t go to work, can’t take a sick parent to medical care, can’t pick up the kids, etc. but let’s worry about that damn cigarette lighter. that’s what worrying about gay marriage is like in these times. it’s all grandstanding, all a waste of money we don’t have and all more of the distractions used to keep us not focused on the crapm that they are doing that is hurting us all. it’s time to get real and stop playing games that are ruining America and hurting everyone.

Doug E

March 5th, 2011
9:24 am

The problem is us. We want what we want and have no qualms about the government seizing somebody else’s money to provide it. The legislators dare not cut spending that we demand. Every line in evey budget has a constituency(sp). The problem will not be solved until we bring our expectations back down to earth.

Screwy Louie

March 5th, 2011
9:27 am

Linda the First- SHUT UP and make the coffee. Just kidding but it was a juicy setup.

I hope everyone plays nice and has a wonderful day. Now get out there and give your legislators an earful on why they need to lower taxes and reduce spending.

Corey

March 5th, 2011
9:53 am

Our law makers promise us that state income taxes will go down over time if these new taxes are enacted. There is a psychological affect that they are not taking into account. People are use to having a certain amount of their pay withheld for state taxes and don’t miss that because they never have that money in thier hands. On the other hand, when people have to start shelling out more at the checkout for everyday purchases for goods and services they will shop less thus, even less revenue for the state and less business for small businesses, creeping unemployment and an anemic economy.

John Galt

March 5th, 2011
10:17 am

First and foremost we need to eliminate the wealth tax known as property taxes. Regardless of income, you must paid based on what is the “perceived” value of what is probably your largest asset. Even if you down own 100% of it, you pay a tax on it as if you did.

Property taxes are also unbalanced taxation. You are a single parent with a home, and your relative property taxes are twice that of a home with two adults. Yet you could argue that the two adults put more of a burden on the community than one adult. There is nothing fair about this scenario.

Second, we need some truth in taxation. Too many taxes are hidden, and none of us really know with any certainty what we are truly paying. This enables the politicians to keep pulling the wool over our eyes. Knowing the politicians it is now synthetic wool.

And we should indeed eliminate not some, but all deductions. We all have the same vested interest and we will all be involved in how our money is spent. If you pay little or no taxes, you do not even have to bother with what is happening.

retiredds

March 5th, 2011
10:28 am

The beauty of the deficit problem is that the politicians have to come up with solutions that are sound and far reaching. The can has been kicked since the Reagan administration and has been completely crushed. So we’ll see if the current crop of Republicans and Democrats can actually come up with a long range plan absent their respective ideologies the will begin to reduce the accumulated deficit of $14+ trillion that both parties have had a significant contribution, no matter their slogans and spins. I won’t hold my breath, but there is no place to go but up (but in this case up is down with regard to deficits and budget shenanigans, the latter made to fool most of the people most of the time).

iReport, Liberals Whine

March 5th, 2011
10:38 am

Anyone seen the liberal main stream media and liberal Dimocrats whine about gas prices yet like they were in 2008 when Bush was president? {cricket chirp…cricket chirp..cricket chirp}. And didn’t King Obama state on the campaign trail that if he were president gas prices would never again see $4/gallon? How come the liberal media isn’t calling his failed promises back to the news? Oh wait, they voted for him of course. Meanwhile our wonderful Governor backs keeping the GA400 toll alive and well. Reagan was right in countless ways (and wrong in some others), but he was never more right when he stated “there is nothing so permanent as a temporary government program.”

Now let’s see what taxes are going up under the wonderful presidency of His Majesty, King Obama (all bow to His Greatness):

“The top income tax rate will rise from 35 to 39.6% (this is also the rate at which two-thirds of small business profits are taxed). The lowest rate will rise from 10 to 15%. All the rates in between will also rise. The “marriage penalty” (narrower tax brackets for married couples) will return from the first dollar of income. The child tax credit will be cut in half from $1000 to $500 per child. In 2010 there was no death tax. For those dying this year and every year after, there is a 55% top death tax rate on estates over $1 million. A person leaving behind two homes and a retirement account could easily pass along a death tax bill to their loved ones. Small businesses can normally expense (rather than slowly-deduct, or “depreciate”) equipment purchases up to $250,000. This will be cut all the way down to $25,000. The capital gains tax will rise from 15% this year to 20 percent in 2011. Likewise the dividends tax rises from 15% to 39.6%. These rates will rise another 3.8% in 2013.”

Meanwhile on to other news……..

“Lockheed said its wage package calls for increases of 3 percent, 3 percent and 2.5 percent each of the three years, totaling 8.5 percent. It also said it offered a $2,500 ratification bonus and an annual cost of living adjustment.”

That sounds pretty fair to me. The machinist union there however is still pondering a strike after midnight this Sunday. You just have to love unions. By the way, how come the liberal main stream media isn’t telling us that both Missouri and Colorado do not have collective bargaining for public service employees? Could it be because both governators are Democrats? They sure as hell are feeding the frenzy in Wisconsin. A frenzy that goes violent with union goons beating people up. And that’s the same liberal media of course that told us that the Tea Party was violent.

That fat hypocritical greasy neo-communist liberal pig, Michael Moore, got on some show “The Blaze” and said that the wealthy’s money is a NATIONAL RESOURCE and not private property. In other words, everyone who is “rich” should have it confiscated by the federal government and I suppose handed out to crack addicts and the homeless and those who sit at home on their fatasses watching Oprah on their 50″ plasmas while living on welfare. No word yet on if The Pig will open up and donate his millions. Learjet Liberals…you just have to love to hate them. No wonder nobody wanted the Irish a century ago.

we like taxes

March 5th, 2011
10:43 am

we are the Republican party and we like taxes. we tell you we don’t but we love them and money more than America. but don’t question us. don’t you dare. because we love children and families. we love Jesus and even though Jesus doesn’t think so, we are his favorites. we’ll tear down America just of rmoney, but we’re patriots and you cn’t question that, because we know how to invalidate others and we are the best at it. don’t question us even as we say things like: “I think all of us recognize the need for toll roads,” Sen. John Albers, R-Roswell. because we all know that tolls aren’t taxes, no sir, just think of it as a tithe, yeah that’s it. everytime you go thru a toll booth and give them money it goes straight to God. that’s right. everybody knows that. and if you question us, we’ll call you names in front of others. our patron saint the almighty Reagan raised taxes 6 of the 8 years he was in office for all the people of this country that serve and have sons who serve in the military but thank goodness he was wise enough not to lower the taxes for all those that have more money than they will be able to spend in 3 or 4 lifetimes. but that was different. because we may not need those that die in some foreign hellhole, they weren’t rich, they didn’t work hard enough or try hard enough, who needss them. but we all know that God loves rich people. because if we take care of rich people, they’ll take care us. how charitable they are. why they are so kind and generous and always thinking of the children that sometimes the peasants have to shovel all that trickle down money out of their driveways first just to be able to get the car out. so remember, we like taxes, oops, excuse me, I mean tithe. it all those darn liberals, yeah, that’s right liberals that ask for money for bad reasons. stupid stuff like sick people and the elderly. without us and our rich friends the liberals with their yellow fanged teeth and demonic red eyes will sneak into your house and eat your whole family at night. now you don’t want that do you? we in the Republican party we are looking out for you. so don’t question us or doubt us we’re looking for that. we’re looking for those heretics. that’s why everytime you hear of a married Republican having sex with another man while they are voting against gay rights and talking about the sacred bond of marriage, it’s because we are testing your faith. drawing out the evil wicked liberals that may question us so that they shall punished for their insubordination. give us your money and we will give it to the rich people then they will give it back to you ten fold. what a deal, huh? only a sinner wouldn’t go for a good deal like that. so don’t question us, we are looking for you and we never do bad. we go to church. see. anybody tht goes to church is a good person. everybody knows that. no one would ever go to church just to cover or legitimize their bad behavior. why that would be wrong. and wrong is bad and we’re never bad. and we’ll only do things that help the United States. you do love the United States don’t you. well ok then.

Truth

March 5th, 2011
10:43 am

The last time gas was $4+/gallon the economy was rolling and people were making $. This time the economy is in the tank and the majority of people are not doing well financially.
Obama IS Jimmy Carter!

Union Goon

March 5th, 2011
10:48 am

The entire nation attempting to do with less except the greedy union parasites!

Now to the union slugs at Lockheed. To show what greedy, parasitic morons you are, is it smart to go on strike during a depression? I hope you do and hope the company fires you parasites so those happy to work for already overpriced wages can get your job!!!!

Lockheed Martin union could strike SundayBy David Markiewicz

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

5:45 p.m. Friday, March 4, 2011

Machinists union workers at Lockheed Martin’s Marietta plant vote Sunday on whether to go on strike.

About 3,800 employees represented by Local 709 of the International Association of Machinists have been asked by union leaders to reject what the company termed its “last, best and final economic proposal” for a new three-year contract.

The current contract expires at 12:01 a.m. Monday. Members are to take a strike vote Sunday between noon and 8 p.m., with results expected by 10 p.m. If they opt to walk out, they will staff picket lines after midnight.

The union said the company is offering wage hikes lower than those in past contracts and that the proposed pension plan “punishes” new and rehired workers by eliminating the defined benefit that would give them a fixed monthly payment in retirement.

“That is the key issue,” said Denise Rakestraw, president of Local 709. She also said fewer health care coverage options will be offered.

Lockheed said its wage package calls for increases of 3 percent, 3 percent and 2.5 percent each of the three years, totaling 8.5 percent. It also said it offered a $2,500 ratification bonus and an annual cost of living adjustment.

“We are very confident that the package we have offered is industry leading,” said Erica Crosling, a company spokeswoman. “You’re not going to find those benefits in a lot of other places.”

Lockheed called the retirement changes for new workers, “an important step … to remain competitive in our industry.”

Crosling said non-union personnel would take on additional duties if a strike occurs.

Workers in Marietta struck over contracts in 2002 and 2005, but voted overwhelmingly to ratify a three-year deal in March 2008, ending a strike threat that year.

Local 709 represents factory, technical and office workers including mechanics, electronics technicians and assemblers. The Marietta facility has just under 8,000 total employees. The facility has five production lines, with the C-130J transport and the F-22 fighter as its main products.

Find this article at:
http://www.ajc.com/business/lockheed-martin-union-could-861070.html

interested observer

March 5th, 2011
10:56 am

I don’t trust the GOP in Washington or Atlanta to devise a tax code that treats people fairly. That said, the Democrats sure haven’t done anything, so it is cautiously encouraging to see more serious discussions of how to raise revenue and cut spending.

Most deductions and tax credits were created to the benefit of special interests, and it is entirely appropriate to eliminate some of those – not exactly a tax hike, but achieves the same thing. As hard as it will be to close loopholes against the will and power of those who use them, it will be even more challenging to sustain them against the intense lobbying that will occur to reverse them from the moment they’re enacted. Much of the complexity of the current tax code can be traced to special provisions implemented for this or that group. That dynamic will not change, regardless of what system of taxation is implemented.

carlosgvv

March 5th, 2011
11:03 am

The idea is to lower taxes on Big Business and raise them on the middle and lower class. They can use smoke and mirrors to disguise this, but many voters will know better.

Edward

March 5th, 2011
11:06 am

How about the Federal gov’t making sure every state doesn’t receive any more Federal funding than they generate in revenue. Oh, wait, that would mean Georgia and almost all of the red states would get massive cuts in Federal dollars because they depend on those “librul” blue states to subsidize them. Maybe the “librul” blue states should demand their money not going to fund all those red states that love to suck up the gov’t welfare.

“Conservatives” really hate welfare and “socialism”, except when they’re receiving the benefits.

Will

March 5th, 2011
11:12 am

Why are all the republican newspaper writers and radio entertainers so grumpy about another month of declining unemployment numbers? Not one that I have heard or read can say anything better than, “yeah, that’s okay but…..”.

Do you think republican newspaper writers and republican radio entertainers are so grumpy because they know that if unemployment continues to decline, the President’s re-election will be virtually assured?

Fred

March 5th, 2011
11:25 am

Linda,

You seem nice…and misled. In pity, I’ll offer you some of my grub deconstruction gruel laid over a boiled pine needle noodle bed, once the food riots start and the fiat currency has been found out for the fraud it is.

Also, TAXATION IS THEFT!!!!!

Tax the Poor

March 5th, 2011
11:42 am

Republicans never met a regressive consumption or sales tax they didn’t like.

25% percent of private income goes to the top 1%. Still. Cut taxes for the rich. Raise taxes for the poor and/or the middle class via sales or value added taxes. That’s the Paul Ryan way. That’s the Kyle Wingfield way. That’s the Republican way.

jack

March 5th, 2011
12:15 pm

All the tax reformers cite the tax reform as REVENUE NEUTRAL, what they don’t say is that Revenue Neutral means t the state level not the taxpyer neutral. It merely shifts the tax burden from the haves to the have-nots/////

We need to send those jokers back to the drawing board.. that is my opinion and I am stuc with it……..

@@

March 5th, 2011
12:23 pm

The idea of broadening the tax base, closing loopholes and setting marginal rates as low and flat as possible isn’t new. Economists have long said such a tax code would cost less to enforce and follow, reduce distortions in the market, and punish success to a lesser degree.

Excellent! It’s always been the logical solution and now’s the time to implement it.

Most appealing to me, because it eliminates the class warfare…something Democrats have always used as their weapon. Justification for building up their cache or stash, if you will.

How many people see their tax refund as a savings account? Heck…a young couple I know is waiting for their refund so they can buy custom-made blinds to go over their kitchen window. How pathetic is that? Probably living above their means, much like our government.

The Original Get Real

March 5th, 2011
1:07 pm

iReport, Liberals Whine

Wow…entertaining read, a bit over the top but all in all I tend to agree with most of your points…

retiredds

March 5th, 2011
1:09 pm

Just for your information, those of you discussing gas prices. It has to do with market forces. The US has no control over the price of gas. It has nothing to do with who is president. It has everything to do with the fact that as the “great decider” GWB said in one of his State of the Union addresses, “we are addicted to oil”. Get off that addiction and then you will not be at the mercy of the global market for oil. There is an answer and it’s not drill baby drill but move as quickly as you can to alternatives. But as long as the US remains oil dependent you will have to pay the piper. And if the global price of a barrel of oil rises, as it will, you pay more.

The Original Get Real

March 5th, 2011
1:13 pm

we like taxes

Sounds like somebody is having a real bad day….

I heared he was an Ayrab

March 5th, 2011
1:13 pm

Anything that will fix the fact the GE, Bank of America, Exxon Mobil paid ZERO federal corporate taxes in 2009 despite the humongous profits they made? I will wait to see and hear what if anything these politricians do about that

The Original Get Real

March 5th, 2011
1:18 pm

retiredds @ 1:09 pm

“Just for your information, those of you discussing gas prices. It has to do with market forces.”

Understood…but it is interesting that Bush was lambasted and Obama gets a pass, must be that fair and balanced main stream media

The Original Get Real

March 5th, 2011
1:23 pm

Edward

Newsflash Slick….all or most of the blue states are bankrupt..

Linda

March 5th, 2011
1:29 pm

Kyle, Someone used my name to comment @ 6:18 AM in a negative way!

CONSERVITARDS

March 5th, 2011
1:35 pm

TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS DOESN’T WORK. IT NEVER HAS AND IT NEVER WILL.

DawgDad

March 5th, 2011
1:47 pm

No, seeing is believing. I have NO DOUBT what they’re after is the lost tax revenue from my home mortgage deduction and 401K pre-tax contributions. No doubt whatsoever. They’re tapped out on borrowing, printing money, and confiscating from taxpayers under the current structure, they have to find money somewhere or the Blue States will all collapse.

Yet, I have to pay a high-priced accountant to do my taxes and subsidize the bureaucratic nightmare of the IRS via taxes. It’s nuts. The current system is horrible, but how do you end all the tax code subsidies and loopholes without creating massive disruption of society and the economy? Show me the plan.Seeing is believing.

These are politicians, they generally exist to serve their own selfish interests, not mine, as we’ve recently witnessed with TARP, bailouts, Obamacare, etc. The current leadership in Washington is not about to do the right thing for the citizens of this country; even if the Heavens part and a good bill passes the House it’s DOA in the Senate or on the President’s desk. There’s no real Hope for Change until 2012 at the earliest.

Linda

March 5th, 2011
1:48 pm

CONSERVITARDS@1:35, Pres. Kennedy said in ‘63 to the Economics Club of NY, “…the paradoxical truth is that tax rates are too high & revenues are too low, & the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to lower taxes now.”
You would need to pass Econ 101 to understand.

retiredds

March 5th, 2011
2:04 pm

The Origianl Get Real, who gives a d..m. It is in everyone’s best interest in this country to decouple as much as possible from oil. I know it can’t be done entirely, but as much as possible. And if you, me and others keep focusing on the trivial matter of who gets lambasted or who gets a pass, NOTHING gets done. So get on your Congressman’s and Senator’s backs and tell them we want solutions not ideological “mumbo jumbo”. Who yells the loudest, who has the best slogan, who is the best spinmeister, does nothing but distract from the task which is to become less dependent upon oil.

Kingfish

March 5th, 2011
2:14 pm

How is all this related to the “birther” question?