2012 Tuesday: Out of many, one tax reform plan will emerge — and set the stage vs. Obama
To those who worry that the rough-and-tumble Republican primary will produce a nominee who’s damaged goods by the time he* faces President Obama, allow me to point to the plethora of tax-reform plans coming from the candidates.
Concurrent with the daily superficial dramas that come with a presidential campaign is a real, substantive, intellectual debate about how to repair a fundamental — and fundamentally broken — function of government: the way it funds all its other functions. And it all but ensures that the eventual nominee will come equipped with a thoroughly vetted, central policy proposal that will compare very well with Obama’s embrace of the current tax code with just a few “tax the rich” tweaks.
Consider the range of proposals:
- Newt Gingrich was first on the board, back in May, with a plan that ends the capital gains and death taxes, lowers the corporate rate to 12.5 percent (the same as Ireland) while allowing full expensing of new equipment, and “moves toward an optional flat tax of 15 percent” for individuals.
- Jon Huntsman took up the banner of the Bowles-Simpson commission’s recommendation: eliminating deductions and credits, along with the Alternative Minimum Tax and the double taxation of capital gains and dividends, in exchange for three rates: 8 percent, 14 percent and 23 percent. It’s not a flat tax, but it’s a reform that flattens rates, offers broad-based pro-growth incentives rather than a maze of rent-seeking opportunities, and simplifies tax calculations. It also reforms corporate taxes and lowers the rate to 25 percent.
- Herman Cain made the biggest splash — and sparked much of the present debate — with his 9-9-9 plan: a 9 percent tax on individuals and corporations, plus a 9 percent sales tax. All other taxes would be eliminated. Cain has been revising the plan during the past several days to damp criticisms of it, and we might not have seen the final version yet.
- Rick Perry today revealed his tax plan: an optional (like Gingrich’s) flat tax of 20 percent that increases the standard deduction and maintains exemptions for mortgage interest, charitable donations and state and local taxes for those earning less than $500,000 a year. Perry would also eliminate the death tax and lower the corporate tax rate to 20 percent — with a super-low, temporary 5.25 percent rate for repatriated income from overseas.
- Of all the contenders, Mitt Romney has sketched out the fuzziest tax plan. He would keep individual rates at the Bush-era rates for now, with a promise to lower them to unspecified levels in the “long run,” and eliminate the taxes on capital gains and dividends — but only for those who earn less than $200,000 a year. He would lower the corporate rate to 25 percent. Like most of the other candidates, he would switch to a “territorial” tax system for companies.
- Well, Romney’s plan may be the fuzziest except for Ron Paul’s, which calls for getting income taxes down to zero percent eventually but doesn’t explain how to get there.
While there are some broad areas of agreement among these plans — flatter, simpler and broader are carrying the day in this primary — there’s a great deal of debate among them as to how to achieve those broad aims. Should such a basic reform as tax reform provide options for people to continue as they are now or change, as Gingrich and Perry argue? Should consumption be taxed by the federal government — either directly, as with Cain’s plan, or indirectly, as with the plans that keep the income tax but eliminate taxes on investments and savings? How much progressivity in the code is enough — or too much? Should Republicans play along with Obama’s game by treating higher earners differently when it comes to exemptions (Perry) or investment income (Romney)?
GOP primary voters have a chance to hash out these questions for themselves as they evaluate the candidates. And the analyses of these plans by independent and even left-leaning think tanks, as long as they’re intellectually honest, give the candidates a chance to weather criticism and make changes (a la Cain’s recent tinkering) before one of them wins the nomination and faces Obama.
And it must be said that any of these plans will contrast quite brightly with Obama’s plan to keep most of the current tax code, with higher rates — and fewer/no exemptions! — for higher earners. It is the difference between keeping a broken system mostly intact and starting mostly, or in some cases totally, over. It is the difference between using the tax code to reward/punish one’s allies/enemies, and simplifying it so that it doesn’t stand in the way of growth and investment that don’t develop the way government planners think, or hope, they will.
* – Yes, I am discounting the possibility that Michele Bachmann wins the nomination. And, while we’re talking candidates with zero chance of winning, Rick Santorum. And Gary Johnson. And any other candidates who have never gotten a mention on this blog.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
168 comments Add your comment
Jefferson
October 25th, 2011
12:20 pm
Cain has ZERO chances, while you are at it.
ragnar danneskjold
October 25th, 2011
12:25 pm
There are many paths toward paradise; seemingly the only way to avoid it is a “stimulus.”
hsn
October 25th, 2011
12:26 pm
Your pathetic Con candidates have released “tax” plans that can’t withstand practicality, so your only hope now is some phantom “hybrid” tax plan that will bail out whichever Conman wins your nomination?
This election will not even be close, and to top it off, I really hope the American people boot out the likes of Boehner, McConnell, Cantor, Ryan, and their moronic ilk, who were willing to see our country’s credit rating go down the tubes in hopes of political gains.
And…now, Jim Perry is re-awakening the dead birther issue. When Americans are getting out of Jurasic Park, he is about to check in. This guy is a clown in capital letters.
Obamamatic for the people — 2012!
ragnar danneskjold
October 25th, 2011
12:26 pm
Off-topic, Rush just announced that Herman Cain will be advertising on the Rush Limbaugh show. Mark of private-industry genius.
ragnar danneskjold
October 25th, 2011
12:29 pm
Dear hsn, good afternoon, “And…now, Jim Perry is re-awakening the dead birther issue.” Think Jim Perry will be pitching the second game in the double-header. In contrast, Rick was a victim of a crazed birther at Parade Magazine, funny analysis @ online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204777904576649993085008396.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion
Iva
October 25th, 2011
12:31 pm
Ron Paul’s Restore America’s Plan cuts 1 trillion from the budget and raises no taxes. Go to RonPaul2012 to find the details. No other candidate is cutting spending, only raising taxes to feed the Federal government beast. He will conduct an audit of the Fed. Don’t let pundits decide the election. Do your own research.
LH
October 25th, 2011
12:32 pm
Oh, come on. Ron Paul philosophically wants income tax at 0 because he considers it slavery. Did you know that historical ‘indentured servants’ only had to pay 20% of their income to their master?
However, Ron Paul has a very detailed plan to balance the budget in 3 years, cut one trillion in his first year, while preserving social security and senior entitlements (which he considers to be an issue of contract) and student loans until that system can be fixed. It is the Restore America Now plan and it is on his website.
Jimmy62
October 25th, 2011
12:50 pm
hsn: Because the current tax system, which wastes 1/3 of every tax dollar just on the cost of collecting it, is working so well that a bunch of ignorant people are protesting about it all over the country!
saywhat?
October 25th, 2011
12:59 pm
When will Republicans learn that just because you call it “reform” does not mean its better. Based on historical precedent, in all cases above, until I see independent proof otherwise, I will assume these so called reforms will do variations of the same thing- raise taxes on the poor and middle class, while lowering taxes on the rich and the investment class. They will also lower the overall tax revenue and increase deficits.
Yet somehow, the fact that ten years of this crap did absolutely nothing to fuel the economy or create jobs is completely overlooked.Once again the right is more interested in pursuing ideology than what is best for the country.
DW
October 25th, 2011
1:12 pm
@SAYWHAT
My thoughts exactly
DW
October 25th, 2011
1:13 pm
Simpler tax code – GREAT!
Screwing over the poor and middle class to get it – NOT SO GREAT
CJ
October 25th, 2011
1:13 pm
“It is the difference between using the tax code to reward/punish one’s allies/enemies, and simplifying it so that it doesn’t stand in the way of growth and investment that don’t develop the way government planners think, or hope, they will.”
It’s true that the current tax code is used to reward/punish one’s allies/enemies. For example, look at Republicans’ defense of subsidies for oil and nuclear while opposing similar subsidies for clean energy. Unfortunately, replacing one tax structure with another would do nothing to eliminate the influence of big money in Washington. Politicians will still find ways, inside and outside of any tax code to reward/punish one’s allies/enemies. The notion that this potential would disappear under any of these tax proposals is–with respect to Kyle–naive.
All of the candidate’s tax proposals are just variations of what the Ryan budget plan would accomplish:
1. Cut taxes on the wealthy by eliminating taxes on their primary sources of income, inheritances and investments.
2. Raise taxes on the poor and middle class with regressive forms of taxation.
3. Decimate the safety net for the poor and middle class, including but not limited to, Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security (see Jay Bookman’s current column about Rick Perry’s flat tax proposal).
4. Decimate our physical and economic infrastructure, including roads, bridges, ports, damns, levies,…
5. Decimate our ability to mount a strong national defense, all while…
6. Exploding the deficits.
On the other hand, with the elimination of taxes on inheritances and investments plus lower top tax rates on earned income, the wealthiest among us would do quite well. That is, after all, what really matters.
Jefferson
October 25th, 2011
1:29 pm
When will one of your parrots start offering coupons ?
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
1:34 pm
Can’t wait to see the left go insane when Obama loses next year.
Junior Samples
October 25th, 2011
1:34 pm
You might be thinking of someone else’s blog.
Might I suggest,
http://blogs.ajc.com/atlanta-bargain-hunter
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
1:35 pm
“When will one of your parrots start offering coupons ?”
Why do left wingers always want things for free?
Steve
October 25th, 2011
1:35 pm
Perry outlined his re-hashed “flat tax” plan in the Wall Street Journal, and here are some of its key elements:
An optional flat tax of 20 percent. (This would be a tax cut for anyone with more than about $70,000 in ordinary income.)
Reducing the corporate tax rate to 20 percent. (This fails to address the key problem with corporate the corporate tax code which is that loopholes mean different companies pay different effective tax rates thanks to their lobbying prowess.)
Completely eliminate taxes on long-term capital gains. (This is nothing more than a giveaway to wealthy investors and reduces their incentive to innovate and find productive investments.)
Cap federal spending at 18 percent of GDP. The last time federal spending was below 18 percent of GDP, the year was 1966. Under Reagan, it never fell below 21.3 percent.
Allow younger workers to opt-out of Social Security. (Virtually guaranteeing the system’s swift collapse by starving it of revenue.)
This is a cornucopia of crazy, but, unlike Herman Cain, Perry wasn’t bright enough to get his flat tax into single digits. (There’s a reason marketers price products at $9.99 instead of $10.)
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
1:35 pm
“Screwing over the poor and middle class to get it”
Make better life choices.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
1:36 pm
Steve is parroting Jay Bookman.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
1:38 pm
So what’s Obama gonna do to get unemployment lowered? I keep reading “Perry is an idiot” blah blah blah yet NO ONE on the left can offer a solution.
Demonizing opponents is all the left has.
emo
October 25th, 2011
1:50 pm
‘Can’t wait to see the left go insane when Obama loses next year.’
And you have the nerve to say the left demonizes? Without insults, you could never respond to well-reasoned arguments at all.
DW
October 25th, 2011
1:51 pm
@BILLY
“Make better life choices.”
Soooo.. EVERYONE should be rich and successful? Nice fantasy world you live in there d-bag.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
1:53 pm
“EVERYONE should be rich and successful? Nice fantasy world you live in there d-bag.”
Cue the name calling.
#occupy my desk...
October 25th, 2011
1:56 pm
I am happy to have my taxes raised as long as there are checkboxes so I can indicate where the money goes – sound fair?
Obozonomics
October 25th, 2011
1:59 pm
What a bunch of loser liberals here, the party of NO. No to anything the GOP says or does. What is it; do you liberals like our tax code? If so you are dumber than you sound, by the way what is the DNC plan, oh that is correct, no plan, just raise taxes. But then again I have never met a liberal that knows how to balance a checkbook, but boy can they spend… YOUR money…
Junior Samples
October 25th, 2011
2:01 pm
“Demonizing opponents is all the left has” ???
Let’s see…
Birth Certificate
Death Panels
Socialist
Muslim
Bill Ayers
The NRA (he’ll take our guns…)
Dosen’t salute the flag
Nice try Billy.
#occupy my desk...
October 25th, 2011
2:02 pm
You know what would cause a rapid turn around of our economy? Obama not being reelected. I know everyone will start screaming and banging their foreheads ala Rain Man but lemme splain. Consumer and investor confidence has never been lower yet businesses have more cash on hand than ever. Individuals are not spending and business is not investing/expanding right now. We can argue the specific causes but the bottom line is that there is serious mistrust of this administration from the business sector, which is where everything else gets set in motion. I honestly don’t think that most business owners think the POTUS has their best interest in mind and it is hard for me to disagree with that. What is it going to cost me to hire people this time next year? What are my taxes and regulations going to look like? It is hard to gamble right now when you don’t have any confidence in the system.
Hillbilly D
October 25th, 2011
2:03 pm
DW @ 1:13 pretty well sums up my view.
While all of us need to be responsible and make good choices, and suffer the consequences when we don’t, not everything in life comes down to a choice. I didn’t choose to be born in the United States, I didn’t choose to be born into a good family, nor did I choose any of the talents that I have. That all came from a higher power.
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
2:08 pm
It is ok, any of them will work.
Obozonomics
October 25th, 2011
2:17 pm
Junior Samples;
Wow you libs are really lost;
Birth Certificate, Obozo could have just produced the paperwork like EVERY candidate has since day one, why did he cause that issue? By the way if Obozo is so smart why did he have his school records sealed? Hmmmm
Death Panels, did you read the bill, obviously not, they are in there under “counseling to stop current treatments”
Socialist, he is a socialist haven’t you read what he studied and what clubs he joined, I guess not…
Muslim, He was raised Muslim till the age of 9, please learn to read.
Bill Ayers, this is an outright communist who made bombs to blow up government buildings, the only reason he is not in prison was a technical detail, and losers like you
The NRA, he IS for gun control, but I bet you forgot to read that also.
Doesn’t salute the flag, this is the best, you don’t even have to read, but are you blind, all you had to do was look at a picture, I guess you failed that also.
Nice try Junior Samples.
George Soros
October 25th, 2011
2:20 pm
Thank you hsn…..today you are my most useful idiot
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
2:33 pm
“Nice try Billy.”
You want a fainting couch, cupcake?
carlosgvv
October 25th, 2011
2:35 pm
There are only two things you can be certain of here:
1. Every Republican candidate’s tax plan will favor the rich at the expense of the middle class and poor.
2. Loyal Republican voters, most of them middle class, won’t care and will gladly allow themselves to be thrown under the bus rather than vote Democratic.
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
2:38 pm
Carlos….please tell me how the 9-9-9 favors the rich. Please tell me how the flat tax favors the rich? They are all flat tax rates. Equal equal equal.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
2:42 pm
carlosgvv
Stop lying.
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
2:44 pm
Billy Bane….he doesnt know how.
JF McNamara
October 25th, 2011
3:01 pm
UGA 1999,
It favors the rich versus our current tax structure. Rich will receive a tax break whereas the poor and middle class will see and increase. That’s how if favors them. It favors them versus the business as usual case.
DW
October 25th, 2011
3:01 pm
“please tell me how the 9-9-9 favors the rich. Please tell me how the flat tax favors the rich? ”
Really? You cant figure that one out? Even retarded Herman Cain figured it out and “revised” his plan. Your supposedly a UGA grad? Damn..
Junior Samples
October 25th, 2011
3:05 pm
OB, where can I pick up a copy of Conspiracy Theorists’ Quarterly so I can catch up on what you’re reading?
The post was pointing out the right certainly does it’s share of demonizing as well.
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
3:06 pm
Instead of forming tax gimmicks, why not instead focus their energy on getting substantive jobs here on American soil? If you increase employment, some of the other financial things will begin to work themselves out and make it much easier to tackle our other problems.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
3:06 pm
“You cant figure that one out? Even retarded Herman Cain figured it out and “revised” his plan. Your supposedly a UGA grad?”
DW needs a diaper change.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
3:07 pm
“Instead of forming tax gimmicks, why not instead focus their energy on getting substantive jobs here on American soil?”
Ask the unions and lawyers that question.
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:08 pm
JF….that was the dumbest response I think I have ever seen on here. If i am taxed at 9% and you are taxed at 9% and Bill Gates is taxed at 9%…..how is that unfair>
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:08 pm
DW….you failed to put any thought or a point in your last post. God you guys are fools!
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
3:12 pm
Ask the unions and lawyers that question.
I don’t recall any unions or lawyers running for the Republican nomination for president.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
3:13 pm
“I don’t recall any unions or lawyers running for the Republican nomination for president.”
No, but they ran businesses out of business and out of country.
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
3:16 pm
No, but they ran businesses out of business and out of country.
Nah, I think NAFTA and other free trade agreements did far more damage than any union or lawyer could ever do. Anytime politicians get their hands into something, they end up screwing things up. It doesn’t matter party or affiliation, they all screw things up.
DW
October 25th, 2011
3:16 pm
Yeah billy … it had NOTHING to do with the fact that people in China will work for 12 cents an hour. Nope.. it was all the unions fault. If it werent for them, maybe YOU could be working for 12 cents an hour here
DW
October 25th, 2011
3:18 pm
Oh I get it, you must have been BORN in 1999 UGA.. you seem to have the mental capacity of a 12yo
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:21 pm
DW….OMG….are you serious. Unions are responsible for continuing to fight for higher monthly wages for American workers to the failure of the company. OR they simply send the jobs over seas where there ARE NO unions!!
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:22 pm
DW…..hahaha you have yet to post one legitimate point. All you do is personal attacks. If you were educated you would realize that once someone goes to personal attacks the debate is over and the other person wins! THANKS
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:23 pm
Southern….and who is responsible for NAFTA???
emo
October 25th, 2011
3:23 pm
Based on the veiled profanity, name calling and low level of insults here, this is why I can’t discuss this stuff with my right wing friends; they just don’t get reason.
I had a boss who used to say, “You don’t wrestle with pigs; you just get dirty and the pig enjoys it”.
That’s why it’s a waste of time trying to reason with you all, you just don’t and never will get it.
Go ahead, call me names, I’m out of here.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
3:23 pm
DW is desperate.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
3:24 pm
“Based on the veiled profanity, name calling and low level of insults here”
You must be referring to DW.
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:24 pm
emo….go back and read the posts and then honestly tell us who is not reasoning with common sense. You are just so biased that your ignorance refuses to allow you to see the truth.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
3:24 pm
“Go ahead, call me names, I’m out of here.”
No one has called you a name.
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:29 pm
Billy…I know right! haha
It is like a 4 year old kid getting mad at losing a game of kickball and then saying “I am going to take my ball and go home”!! hahaha hilarious.
Where does the left find these people?
DW
October 25th, 2011
3:30 pm
“DW needs a diaper change.”
Really Billy? Really?
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:31 pm
DW….dude you act like you are 2 years old. BTW….I dont see a name being called anywhere in that post.
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
3:32 pm
and who is responsible for NAFTA???
According to records, there are 61 Senators and/or former Senators, 234 Reps and/or former Reps, and President Clinton all to blame. I’d also add any and all business interests who lobbied in favor of that agreement.
House vote
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1993/roll575.xml
Senate vote
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=103&session=1&vote=00395
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:33 pm
Southern….that is all CLINTONS baby.
Common Sense isn't very Common
October 25th, 2011
3:34 pm
If I remember correctly it was Bush 1 that started putting NAFTA together even though Bill Clinton signed it.
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
3:35 pm
and who is responsible for NAFTA???
According to records, there are 61 Senators and/or former Senators, 234 Reps and/or former Reps, and President Clinton all to blame. I’d also add any and all business interests who lobbied in favor of that agreement.
House vote results
Senate vote results
From what I see, it looks like one of those bipartisaned deals. There’s plenty of blame to go around.
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:35 pm
Common….nope dude wrong again. NAFTA was started and signed by Clinton.
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
3:36 pm
UGA
Clinton signed it, but he did not pass it through both houses of Congress. Congress plays a big part in trade agreements since they can not be enacted by Executive Order.
Common Sense isn't very Common
October 25th, 2011
3:38 pm
Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1986 among the three nations, the leaders met in San Antonio, Texas, on December 17, 1992, to sign NAFTA. U.S. President George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas, each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed it. The agreement then needed to be ratified by each nation’s legislative or parliamentary branch.
Before the negotiations were finalized, Bill Clinton came into office in the U.S. and Kim Campbell in Canada, and before the agreement became law, Jean Chrétien had taken office in Canada.
from wikipedia
Sorry dude wrong again
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:39 pm
Common…..Dude you are a liar. You changed what that said. CLINTON signed NAFTA. Typical Democrat lying to try to prove a point. it is ok we are used to it from you.
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
3:41 pm
http://timelinesdb.com/listevents.php?subjid=963&title=NAFTA
NAFTA timeline…
If you notice, there were 14 months of negotiations before NAFTA was announced on August 12, 1992. William Jefferson Clinton took the oath of office on January 20, 1993. That would mean that Clinton worked on NAFTA as the Governor of Arkansas if it were solely his blame. Bush I signed off on the agreement before he left office.
As I said earlier, it was one of those bipartisaned deals. Plenty of blame to go around.
a dad
October 25th, 2011
3:41 pm
OK, y’all help me out here. I thought one of the fundamental “goals” of Obama, Occupy people, etc., was to get everyone to pay their “fair” share. So, what is so wrong about having “everyone” pay the same percentage of their income, with a cut off point so individuals and families making less than “X” per year get a full refund at the end of the year. How is making someone pay more than anyone else “fair?”
Our tax code sux! All the loopholes, etc. I personally like a flat tax which is deducted from one’s paycheck (assuming, of course, the individual has a job) coupled with a natonal sales tax. A national sales tax give every individual direct control over the amount of taxes they pay. Don’t want to pay sales tax, don’t buy a lot of stuff. If you’re one of those “evil rich,” you’ll pay more buying your BMW 750 than poor old joe will buying a Honda Civic. You want the wealthy paying more in taxes, there’s your example. You earn more, you buy more. Simple economics. I like aspects of Perry’s plan in keeping the mortage deduction (the middle classes biggest deduction), and yes, dividends and such are multi-taxed (and anyone can buy stocks, penny stocks, etc. Stop whining, read some, and invest for your future). Corporations flat tax, with deductions for equipment and such since new equipment means greater production which just might lead to new jobs.
OK, can’t wait to read all the informed retorts.
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:42 pm
It was signed in 1993 (Clinton) and took affect in 1994 (Clinton).
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:43 pm
a dad….haha they only want “fair” if it benefits the lower class. Nothing fair about it.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
3:45 pm
“Really Billy? Really?”
Yes.
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
3:45 pm
http://www.yesmagazine.org/new-economy/images/nafta-signing-ceremony-federal-photo/view
Photo of NAFTA signing ceremony….
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:46 pm
Southern….again ANOTHER LIE!!
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.globaljusticecenter.org/images/presidentclinton.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.globaljusticecenter.org/articles/sofar_fromgod.html&h=239&w=388&sz=19&tbnid=Rv_d2G93L1faBM:&tbnh=73&tbnw=118&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dnafta%2Bsigning%2Bpicture%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=nafta+signing+picture&docid=GfRUa82MRObF9M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ChKnToHNI8qbtwfezJn4Dw&ved=0CCgQ9QEwAw&dur=3516
Common Sense isn't very Common
October 25th, 2011
3:47 pm
UGA 1999 – Maybe you weren’t old enough to remember it, and someone had to read it too you. Maybe that’s why I can read and comprehend. You not so much.
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:47 pm
FOOL!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bill_Clinton_signing_Nafta.gif
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:49 pm
Common…..ha I remember it well. You really need a history class. Did you have a hard time with grammar school? Look on Google or just look at the dates of NAFTA and then look who the president was.
How in the world do you guys get through life being so ignorant. You wonder why there is a lower class in this country? Look in the mirror.
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
3:49 pm
UGA
You do know the difference between signing a trade agreement versus your country’s government ratifying it, right? Bush I signed the initial agreement. Clinton signed the ratification of the treaty, which made it law of the land. Just because it doesn’t fit your “idea” of the truth does not automatically make it a lie. Read and research things a bit before you make your final choice. Part of my job is in the area of customs, so I’ve had to do my fair share of reading on trade agreements and such.
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:50 pm
Southern….once again you are wrong. No matter how many times you say a Lie it is still going to bve a lie.
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:51 pm
Southern….OMG you work in customs??
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
3:54 pm
UGA
We are both right, but you fail to see that.
When a trade agreement is reached, there is a signing of that agreement. After that agreement is signed, it is up to the law making bodies of each country to ratify that treaty before it can become law. All of those things typically happen under one administration. However, because of elections, NAFTA was signed by one administration in the three countries, and the ratifications were signed by different leaders in Canada and the US. I can’t remember if Mexico had elections at that time.
As I said earlier, go back and research things a bit. Don’t just take the first thing you see as the truth, or you’ll never find out the real truth about things.
And, yes, I work in customs. Problem with that???
BULLSEYE
October 25th, 2011
3:54 pm
uga IS ONE DUMB SUMBITCH
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
3:58 pm
UGA
An even more recent one to look at is the US/Colombia Free Trade Act. The original agreement was signed on November 22, 2006, but is just now being signed into law. Bush II signed the initial agreement, and Obama is just now signing the ratification into law.
UGA 1999
October 25th, 2011
3:58 pm
Bullseye…thanks for helping prove my point about the left.
BULLSEYE
October 25th, 2011
4:01 pm
And you proved mine.
Common Sense isn't very Common
October 25th, 2011
4:06 pm
I don’t wonder why many people follow the smoke blowers.
Since they don’t believe any news media except faux news.
Since before Reagan NO president has but main stream America ahead of getting elected(re-elected) or pandering to the donaters to those elections.
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
4:10 pm
NoCom
In my opinion, they all blow smoke.
Common Sense isn't very Common
October 25th, 2011
4:12 pm
But where do they blow it. In their eyes so they can’t read? or in their preferred places
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
October 25th, 2011
4:13 pm
Can’t wait to see the plan Obozo will offer in response. You can be sure it won’t include anything that would require his base (parasite losers) to pay their fair share towards their country’s governance.
Common Sense isn't very Common
October 25th, 2011
4:13 pm
SoCo by they way how are the Hindi language classes coming LOL
carlosgvv
October 25th, 2011
4:14 pm
UGA 1999 and Billy Bane
Wrong yesterday, wrong today, wrong tommorow. At least you’re consistent.
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
4:14 pm
I think it’s a mixed bag depending on the person who’s getting smoked out. There’s quite a few people who either can’t see or choose not to see the true nature of things going on and tend to believe the mumbo jumbo peddlers when they speak.
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
4:16 pm
NoCom
The Hindi is slacking, but my Korean is getting much better, thanks to Kia and Hyundai. Since the Infosys lawsuit, I have seen fewer and fewer L1’s and H1B’s coming through. I’m guessing they’re all sitting on pins and needles to see what happens.
Common Sense isn't very Common
October 25th, 2011
4:28 pm
SoCo – well I don’t know their point of entry, but here in Cleveland Hindi is fast becoming the second language (TaTa has a large group here) thanks to the Ohio state government
Know your history
October 25th, 2011
4:32 pm
#occupy my desk…
October 25th, 2011
2:02 pm
You know what would cause a rapid turn around of our economy? Obama not being reelected. I know everyone will start screaming and banging their foreheads ala Rain Man but lemme splain. Consumer and investor confidence has never been lower yet businesses have more cash on hand than ever. Individuals are not spending and business is not investing/expanding right now. We can argue the specific causes but the bottom line is that there is serious mistrust of this administration from the business sector, which is where everything else gets set in motion. I honestly don’t think that most business owners think the POTUS has their best interest in mind and it is hard for me to disagree with that. What is it going to cost me to hire people this time next year? What are my taxes and regulations going to look like? It is hard to gamble right now when you don’t have any confidence in the system.
Not quite accurate. For the last two years, business leaders have known that the government would be unable to affect major changes in social and fiscal policy due to the election of the Republican majority in the house. There have been several years of unchanging policy, due to the sharing of power between the parties. Your argument that the administration is responsible is unfounded. What you are correct in pointing out is that individuals are not spending. There is no demand, therefore businesses are reluctant to spend and hire.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
4:33 pm
“Wrong yesterday, wrong today, wrong tommorow. At least you’re consistent.”
How so, cupcake?
DW
October 25th, 2011
4:36 pm
@CARLOS
+1 .. quite the pair of ignorant losers
Southern Comfort
October 25th, 2011
4:37 pm
NoCom
I think JFK is the major point of entry. There’s direct service to Mumbai there via Delta. When Delta ran the ATL-Mumbai route, it was a daily thing to see dozens upon dozens of them a day. Tata has a major office in Cincinnati too. I’ve run across a few of them headed there from time to time.
carlosgvv
October 25th, 2011
4:43 pm
Billy Bane – 4:33
By being here in the first place. You are obviously a kid who does not belong on an adult site. Does your mother know you’re here? Did you lie to her and tell her you were doing research? You need to leave here, do your homework, and then eat supper. There’s a good boy.
JDW
October 25th, 2011
4:45 pm
@UGA1999…”If i am taxed at 9% and you are taxed at 9% and Bill Gates is taxed at 9%…..how is that unfair>”
I see the problem here…
unfair–marked by injustice, partiality, or deception
I goes back to when your were a kid, your parents should have taught you the concepts of sharing and fairness. For example
““The rich should contribute to the public expense not only in proportion to their revenue,but something more than in that proportion.” Adam Smith
You do believe in Smith’s philosophies don’t you?
TruthBe
October 25th, 2011
4:49 pm
hsn, You need to stop drinking the obamajuice now. Obama is a liar and his failed socialist progressive policies are destroying America. The overall spending of the dishonest democrats in the senate and congress needs to be stopped aswell.
ANYBODY BUT OBAMA in 2012!!!! Get this commie and his ugly wide-ass over spending wife Michele out of the Whitehouse.
HR Pufnstuf
October 25th, 2011
4:50 pm
Jon Huntsman for president, along with a democratic house and senate. Now we will get something done!
I Report (-: You Whine )-: Thee Magnificent!!! mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
October 25th, 2011
4:51 pm
Cain has ZERO chances, while you are at it.
1st comment^^ of the blog.
Businessman Herman Cain is now atop the field of Republican White House hopefuls, squeaking past former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in the latest CBS News/New York Times poll.
Cain garnered 25 percent support of Republican primary voters in the poll released on Tuesday, compared to Romney’s 21 percent.
We The People obviously believe otherwise.
Can you say President Cain?
Swede Atlanta
October 25th, 2011
5:05 pm
It is nice to talk about “starting over” on the tax system. Problem is there are too many vested interests that will fight to retain the status quo because they are afraid of what might happen if Pandora’s box is opened.
Any “flat tax” is by its very nature regressive. Someone making 40K per year @ 20% ends up with $32K left after taxes but someone making $400K per year ends up with $320K. It is much more difficult for someone to support a family on $32K than it is on $320K.
Sales taxes are especially regressive (such one plank of Cain’s 9-9-9 plan) because those at the lower end of the income scale spend all or nearly all of their income purchasing things. The more wealthy you are the more likely it is you will save and possibly invest some of your income. It is true everyone is subject to the same sales or consumption tax for every dollar of income spent but it applies to essentially all of the income for the lowest wage earners.
I would love to see a simpler progressive tax system that retains some of the best intentioned tax deductions such as home mortgage interest with a cap, charitable deduction with a cap, deductions for medical expenses above a threshold, deductions for educational expenses, etc.
The problem is where do you draw the line. While I am generally against corporate welfare, I support credits for people that work to make their homes more energy efficient and support tax policy that helps development of renewable forms of energy. But again, where do you draw the line? You can usually find some kernel of good in many of the deductions and credits in the current tax code, some being inherently better than others.
So the debate is good but I don’t think any of the plans has a chance of becoming law.
DW
October 25th, 2011
5:07 pm
well put Swede
Jefferson
October 25th, 2011
5:18 pm
People in GA will have no impact on the election.
Common Sense isn't very Common
October 25th, 2011
5:19 pm
Swede – Gee a common sense approach? What are you trying to do? Give us bloggers a bad name
TRUTH
October 25th, 2011
5:27 pm
I know I’m real late here, but Kyle, really, Kyle?
Bursting out in song…”Somedaaaaaayyyy, over the rainbow…..skies are blue..(strike that..) reeeeedddd….
Sure Kyle, even children are allowed to dream…
OBAMA 2012
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
October 25th, 2011
5:33 pm
It’s “somewhere over the rainbow”, not “someday”, Einstein.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
October 25th, 2011
5:36 pm
People in GA will have no impact on the election.
—————————–
Other than delivering 16 of the 270 electoral votes needed to win.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
October 25th, 2011
5:37 pm
Or did you mean to say DEMOCRATS in GA will have no impact on the election?
Swede Atlanta
October 25th, 2011
5:38 pm
Truth….you may have gotten the “someday” wrong but the “red” is probably correct if the Republicans take control of Washington. The skies over America will be red and brown and gray and black as they dismantle the EPA and give polluters free reign. Rivers will again become flammable, our coastlines will be covered with oil. What a terrific place to live and die young.
Swede Atlanta
October 25th, 2011
5:41 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout…
I want to be sure Georgia has an impact. So on primary day I am going to vote for the nuttiest GOP candidate on the ballot (I might need to do a lottery since combined they have the IQ of a box of rocks). So hopefully Georgia’s delegates to the Republic get together in Tampa will ensure the nuttiest one gets the nomination.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
October 25th, 2011
5:41 pm
“Someone making 40K per year @ 20% ends up paying just $8000 in taxes but someone making $400K per year ends up paying $80,000. It is much more difficult for someone to support a family on $32K than it is on $320K.
—————————–
It’s also more difficult to earn a position paying $400K a year than $40K. Anybody can get $40K. Make the sacrifices and exhibit the discipline needed to make $400K, and quit whining.
Dave
October 25th, 2011
5:44 pm
I suggest an AJC death match between you and Mr. Bookman. I’ve got to say his piece today on Gov. Perry’s plan makes a whole lot more sense. You lay out a bunch of nonsensical, non-starting plans and then give President Obama a slam for promoting some sort of status quo, with more money from the top tier of incomes (the base plan of course that of the Bush tax status from a decade ago). Do you really think the nonsense will resolve itself? Please explain the economics of any or all of the “plans” and the fatal flaw of Obama’s proposal. Thank you.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
5:46 pm
“By being here in the first place. ”
Thanks for proving yourself a fool, carlos.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
5:47 pm
Since all the left wingers are against anything the GOP has to offer they must be for high unemployment.
Good job leftys
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
5:49 pm
“Rivers will again become flammable, our coastlines will be covered with oil.”
HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
October 25th, 2011
5:50 pm
The “fatal flaw” of Obozo’s “plan” is that it is not a plan. It is a campaign slogan meant to sexually excite his parasite loser base, who are so pathetic that they live for nothimg more than to see their clown prince “stick it” to their more successful countrymen.
TruthBe
October 25th, 2011
5:54 pm
Obama has been one of the the most corrupt and dishonest presidents in our history. Obama hates the people who earned their money but travels all over the US begging for re-election campaign donations from them instead of doing his job.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
5:56 pm
“I suggest an AJC death match between you and Mr. Bookman.”
There’s be what, 12 viewers? Not much of a show.
Billy Bane
October 25th, 2011
5:56 pm
Dave
When’s Obama gonna fix the economy?
Dave
October 25th, 2011
6:05 pm
Billy, I doubt he is going to fix much of anything given his flaws and the absolute unwillingness of Republicans (and the far left on the Dems’ side) to do anything but pander to their base and refuse to discuss any sort of resolution to any of our large problems. That said, blame is to be laid on both sides in our run up to next year’s political circus.
Dave
October 25th, 2011
6:14 pm
Barry, I’m a fairly successful countryman. I’m not at all thrilled by what government costs nor what it does/doesn’t do. I’ve read your comments now and again recently. What do you gain by using terms like Obozo? I don’t have a problem with you disagreeing with me or the President; but, name calling completely turns me off.
Kyle Wingfield
October 25th, 2011
6:30 pm
Dave @ 5:44: Sure, I could make up any combination of numbers that prove any family making any given amount of money would pay any other given amount of taxes. What numbers are you looking for? Not that any such hypothetical would have any value beyond the rhetorical.
I have my doubts about Perry’s plan — I’d prefer eliminating all deductions and lowering the rate, and while I understand the argument for making it voluntary, well, there’s not much voluntary about the tax code today. But we still have a couple of months before the primaries begin, so I’m content to wait for some broad-based analyses based on actual past-year tax filings to come in (as we’ve seen with Cain’s plan and, via the reviews of Bowles-Simpson, Huntsman’s).
But that was pretty much my point: There are lots of ideas coming from these candidates, and those ideas are going to get more and more scrutiny over the next few months. That’s a good thing. Philosophically, from my point, they are all pointing generally in the right direction, even if I would quibble with some of the details. Similarly, imo, the president’s proposals, such as they are, point in the wrong direction by not improving incentives to invest, by not favoring real simplification (reducing exemptions and deductions, but only for some people — a mistake that Romney and Perry also make), and by trying to make the industrialized world’s most progressive tax code (per the OECD) even more progressive.
Common Sense isn't very Common
October 25th, 2011
6:36 pm
Kyle – you are leaving out the part about how lowering all the tax rates will have the jobs flowing in no time. Just like the last 10 years.
Dave
October 25th, 2011
7:09 pm
Kyle, thanks for the response. I’d actually like to hear a lot more about tax reform, I just don’t think much of what I’ve heard, on either side of the aisle, makes much sense. Not that it would last a week under media harassment, I’d love to hear a plan that didn’t tax those, evil, corporations that recently became “people.” They don’t pay taxes, they remit taxes that they collect from us flesh and blood people, masking what we pay. I’d love to hear a tax plan that was policy neutral, nothing for any interest group, be the group farmers, oil companies, Wall Street, pick your other groups. I’d love to hear a tax plan that recognized the reality that there are real live poor people among us that we have to support or let die. In short, I’d love to hear a candidate talk reality; and then, I’d love to see a pig fly.
Dave
October 25th, 2011
7:12 pm
Shoot, I should have ended with seeing a turkey fly – I love that episode of WKRP. “As God is my witness I thought [politicians tell us the truth.]“
ATF
October 25th, 2011
7:13 pm
Simplify the tax code. But, another way to do that is to say all income is equal. If a person gets it, it is income. Doesn’t matter if it is wages, dividends, capital gains, or the lottery. Money in = taxable.
Or tax spending. But tax it all. You buy a share of stock – taxable. You put money in a savings account – taxable. The only way it is not taxed is if you stuff it in a mattress, or buy food, water and sewer services for your home, electricity for your home, gas for your stove or home heating system, health care. What else that is necessary to life? Even a mortgage could be deductible for some amount that is based on the median income.
Don’t give me stuff about cutting taxes on the wealthy creates jobs. If cutting taxes creates jobs, where are they? The Bush tax cuts are still in effect, so where are the jobs? We have been cutting corporate taxes for a long time, and jobs just kept flowing overseas. I have had enough of that lie. What we got out of all those tax cuts is the greatest concentration of wealth since the Great Depression – in income, net worth, and financial assets. Only Switzerland, among industrialized nations, has a greater wealth concentration than the U.S.
Common Sense isn't very Common
October 25th, 2011
7:20 pm
ATF is a rabble rouser LOL, good for you
Dave
October 25th, 2011
7:23 pm
ATF, I think I agee with what you say other than the corporate tax cuts. I think taxing corporations just hides what we all pay. Sure, not taxing them increases what we pay in income or sales/use taxes; but, it will reduce what we pay for stuff. And, it will cause corporations to act in an economically rational, rather than tax avoidance, manner. That last sentence wasn’t wonderful; but, I’m tired.
Jm
October 25th, 2011
7:25 pm
Kyle 6:30
I hear you. But tax cuts without spending cuts are just deferred taxes
We need to see SPENDING plans to cut spending, how, how much, and why
West Indian Charlie
October 25th, 2011
7:35 pm
A remarkable sense of pessimism and skepticism was apparent in question after question in the survey, which found that Congressional approval has reached a new low at 9 percent. The disapproval toward Congress has risen 22 percentage points since the beginning of the year when Republicans took control of the House.
Why the pessimism? The Republicans promise jobs,jobs,jobs if elected in 2010 did’nt they. When are you people going to wake up and realize that both political parties are bought and paid for by the special interest group, lobbyist and the plutocrats.
Ninja
October 25th, 2011
7:59 pm
Even Adam Smith agreed with progressive tax rates. You’re now officially tories, hope you’re proud.
TRUTH
October 25th, 2011
8:00 pm
Thanks for the corrections (wondering why I never got an A in HS drama….). But, yes, I see Acid Rain in our future…
Republican/GOP/Tea Party Tax Plan = Tax cuts for the rich, Cutting off the American Worker who is out of work, Firing Teachers, First Responders, Eliminating the Dept of Ed, EPA, Post Office, Eliminating HealthCare for all (by pricing 99% out of the market), Unions, OSHA, LGBT marriages/unions, Voter Supression, Corporate Support, Financial DeRegulation, Cutting off Veteran’s benefits, Planned Parenthood, Woman’s Right to Choose, shall I continue?
I apologize now for any mispellings, inproper English, or anything else you Righties would like to point out. The fact remains, this is just a mere sampling of what’s in store if ANY ReTHUGlican wins the White House. Or should I say, Koch Brother Candidate, sponsored by Koch Industries… Cain is there boy…
Fast and Furious Spending
October 25th, 2011
8:13 pm
….recognized the reality that there are real live poor people among us that we have to support or let die. In short, I’d love to hear a candidate talk reality; and then, I’d love to see a pig fly.
I think you are flying pigs yourself, Dave with that comment, “people among us that we have to support or let die.” This is a materialist view of humanity not compatible with American history. What it sounds like is Marxism. Since you are trying to have your cake and eat it too, I suggest you not involve yourself in these discussions.
No one in Republican circles is suggesting that cuts to government will cause poor people to die. Poor people in this country right now have a greater problem not with hunger, but with obesity. With a leftist President we have more poor people on food stamps than at any time in history, and we have the longest sustained high unemployment since Jimmy Carter and the Great Depression.
The ones who are suggesting that republican cuts to spending will cause all kinds of socieital inhumanity and social collapse are Barack Obama himself, and the leftist Washington media machine. It is not compatible with American history because somehow, for the first 184 years of the republic, we grew, thrived, prospered and saved the world from two world wars all without an over-bearing nanny state.
I would further suggest that the form of government suggested by Obama and his policies have a degenerative effect on the achievement of success by American citizens.
Fast and Furious Spending
October 25th, 2011
8:17 pm
I think all of this wonky policy discussion is fine, but it would be nice if we had the advantage of a slavish national media in our hip pocket already talking about the thrill they get up their legs with Herman Cain speaks.
Don’t remember Obama being specific about ANYTHING except healthcare (his greatest disaster), closing Gitmo, ending all wars, cooling the planet and killing the coal industry. I guess obama skated by without much detailed discussion on taxes at all–that is, except for ending the Bush-era levels.
Swede Atlanta
October 25th, 2011
8:18 pm
We will never move away from a progressive tax system. It is the fair and proportional way to structure a system.
As Elizabeth Warren has pointed out, NO ONE does it on their own. Products are transported to market on roads and bridges paid for by all of us. Employers in this country employ workers that were educated for the most part by all of us in public schools. They have the advantages of our business law (i.e. liability protection) and our consumer-driven market economy.
That doesn’t mean those with terrific ideas such as Steve Jobs or that work very hard shouldn’t see the fruits of their labors but it is morally reprehensible to think they deserve to make multiples of times more than their average worker. Jesus tells you so in the Bible.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
October 25th, 2011
8:22 pm
“it is morally reprehensible to think they deserve to make multiples of times more than their average worker”
———————
Perhaps in your estimation, but please don’t try to force your beliefs on others. Thanks.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
October 25th, 2011
8:31 pm
In case you missed it, which is likely, since it doesn’t fit the CNN/MSNBC/ABC/CBS/NBC/AJC template:
——————–
News To Obama: The OECD Says the United States Has the Most Progressive Tax System
Ob[ozo] has been very successful in bolstering the conventional wisdom that the U.S. tax system does not place a significant enough burden on wealthier households and places too much of a burden on the “middle class.”
But a new study on inequality by researchers at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Paris reveals that when it comes to household taxes (income taxes and employee social security contributions) the U.S. “has the most progressive tax system and collects the largest share of taxes from the richest 10% of the population.” The U.S. tax system is far more progressive—meaning pro-poor—than similar systems in countries most Americans identify with high taxes, such as France and Sweden.
———————
Obozo: Liar.
Dave
October 25th, 2011
8:52 pm
“I suggest you not involve yourself in these discussions.
“No one in Republican circles is suggesting that cuts to government will cause poor people to die.”
Fast, I don’t often comment, usually because of attitudes like yours. I’m sure those in Republican circles don’t suggest or admit that people, deserving of life, will die with proposed cuts in spending unaccompanied by some tax increases. Marxist? I’d do one of those laugh out loud things if I knew how to do it. Talk some sense, no that’s too harsh. It’s all Dems, the GOP has no fault whatsoever in our current state? Have a conversation rather than trying to convince those that disagree with you that they should not engage; though, for the most part your view works here, little discussion, much invective.
Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil
October 25th, 2011
8:59 pm
If you throw out enough sh*t something is bound to stick. So far all I smell is boo boo!
@@
October 25th, 2011
9:15 pm
Serious tax reform?
Build it and they will come.
As it is now, we’re standing on a crumbling foundation.
ragnar danneskjold
October 25th, 2011
9:30 pm
Apologies, Kyle, meant to compliment the headline – clever use of e pluribus unum. Not enough stylish writers around today, thus my urge to encourage.
JDW
October 25th, 2011
9:38 pm
@Barry…”Perhaps in your estimation, but please don’t try to force your beliefs on others. Thanks.”
Something you would never do
@@
October 25th, 2011
9:43 pm
I’m more of an unus pro omnibus, omnes pro uno kinda gal.
A female swashbuckler…or swishbuckler. Whichever.
JDW
October 25th, 2011
10:03 pm
@Barry…”News To Obama: The OECD Says the United States Has the Most Progressive Tax System”
You probably missed the part of that report where it also points out that we trail only Mexico and Turkey in terms of income disparity and that it what drives “progressive” income tax rating as much as anything.
We also trail only Mexico in the number of people living in poverty and working fulltime.
What all that means is that the rich in this country have such a large share of total income visa a vie the poor that it skews the numbers. Or put another way, our poor are so poor, they don’t make enough to pay taxes.
For example:
“For example, the poorest 10% in Sweden have incomes 1.5 times the level of the poorest 10% in the United States even though average incomes are higher there.”
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
October 25th, 2011
10:08 pm
Can’t blame our highly progressive tax system for the slothfulness of a few.
JDW
October 25th, 2011
10:19 pm
@Barry…”Can’t blame our highly progressive tax system for the slothfulness of a few.”
Funny you should mention that…according to the report we also lead the world in lack of “income mobility”. In other words the income of the parents directly correlates with the income of the their children here more so than anywhere else in the world. If you are born rich you stay that way if you are born poor you stay that way. Seems we have done a better job of institutionalizing poor than any other developed country.
But as I am sure you would agree, it must be their own fault…all they need to do is pick themselves up by their bootstraps and get a job (hopefully not one of the many we have that lets them work fulltime while still staying poor).
Sounds a lot like the modern equivalent of “Let them eat cake”…Now how did that story end?
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/48/56/41494435.pdf
Dave
October 25th, 2011
10:23 pm
“Now how did that story end?”
Barry and his friends will change it with guns?
JDW
October 25th, 2011
10:25 pm
@Dave…LOL
Actually I was thinking they better be glad the OWS crowd doesn’t shop in the same store…yet.
Dave
October 25th, 2011
10:30 pm
OWS are kids, unreconstructed old folks and the like, so far. What the Right (and I should define that) doesn’t understand is that the poor and oppressed can change – what we herald in “Arab Spring” took awhile, we are early in that curve.
Bullet County
October 25th, 2011
10:34 pm
Kyle,
Herman Cain’s latest ad captures the essence of the so-called republican/conservative way and your false illusion that a tax plan will emerge from these clowns “you’re just blowing smoke”.
Jm
October 25th, 2011
10:35 pm
Obama is breaking the law by forgiving the student loans before 2014
Today’s Rebellion News – October 26th 2011 | Rebellion News
October 25th, 2011
10:45 pm
[...] 2012 Tuesday: Out of many, one tax reform plan will emerge — and set the stage vs. Obama [...]
getalife
October 25th, 2011
10:52 pm
The alternative to our President is another collapse and a default .
If you watched the gop actions since the collapse you would see it plain as day.
That is the truth.
Dusty
October 25th, 2011
10:52 pm
WHAT? Those people making an ARAB Spring were making a revolution against dictators. Then some of you want to act like these silly “occupiers” in the USA are headed the same way. Do you not see the difference?
People who do not appreciate the freedom given in the USA and want to change it insult the founders and fighters of our country. There’s a big difference in being poor and being terrorized.
Being poor comes from many sources, some self made and some not. Living under the terrorism of dictators comes from one source.
The next person here disgruntled over his personal economics may seek help. But distroying the foundations of our government is not the way to do it. Destroying the accomplishments of the legally rich is no answer either. Putting your heart and soul into your own abilities will help. It may bring about the surprise that you are responsible for yourself. Nobody else is.
Stop knocking our country. It is your only hope for a sane future.
JDW
October 25th, 2011
11:05 pm
@Dusty…”WHAT? Those people making an ARAB Spring were making a revolution against dictators. Then some of you want to act like these silly “occupiers” in the USA are headed the same way. Do you not see the difference?”
The fact that they were dictator’s is not really relevant, the real issue was economic opportunity. You didn’t notice any uprisings in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia or UAE did you? Dictators all but they keep the standard of living high for the masses.
“Stop knocking our country. It is your only hope for a sane future.”
You are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off base, far from knocking I am pointing out things we must do to survive long-term. We will not survive as a country long-term if we continue to lead the developed world in generational poor, working poor and income inequality…can’t you grasp that simple fact? Those factors have played out in revolutions through out history and unless we as a country address those issues we run the grave risk of repeating history.
Dusty
October 25th, 2011
11:25 pm
JDW
There will always be “the poor”. When you start saying we ned to STOP having “the generational poor, working poor and income inequality” you sound like a pure communist. That was exactly their goal in Russia and elsewhere.
In our country, we have the right to be equal as citizens, not as moneymakers. That privilege is left to the ones able to produce it and most do at various levels. That is why so many multitudes try to get here.
We are also predominantly a Christian country. We, as individuals reach out to the poor, the sick and the sad. In fact, as a Christian country we reach around the world to help those in need and in catastrophes. That is how our country works. But the country works from the heart of its citizens, not by government decree.
Have you entirely lost the spirit of independence? Of freedom? Of self reliance? Of appreciation for the greatness we still have in America? If so, then you are one of the poor who has lost the spirit of freedom. I don’t care to lose spirit with you. I love this place.
Road Scholar
October 26th, 2011
6:31 am
Whoa ! Whoa! Whoa! Where is the bipartisanship that repubs have been complaining about the lack of under President Obama? Besides, I wouldn’t let these people handle washing my car.
Shouldn’t we be determining which programs we want, and then adjust the tax code to PAY for them? Or are we just wanting to underfund our government so it is doomed to fail?
Yep
October 26th, 2011
9:02 am
The problem as I see it now with our tax code is that it is being used to confiscate and redistribute wealth to those unwilling to provide for themselves or their families. EVERYONE can see the inequity in that. If we were to simply make our entitlement programs more strictly governed and eliminate the waste, I would be alright with our current tax system. But allowing someone to use taxes as a way to steal or “spread the wealth” stick in my crawl as I suppose it does with most tax payers. Stop the free ride to illegals, shirkers and gamers! We then can all get along regarding taxes. Return the power to the citizens of this country.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
October 26th, 2011
9:26 am
Funny thing about that comparison to the Arab Spring…they were able to muster more than a few dozen folks to their protests, unlike the OWS losers.
Swede Atlanta
October 26th, 2011
9:43 am
Yep….
I agree. Let’s cut out the corporate welfare..no more subsidies to big Agra, oil and gas developers, etc. They already make billions of dollars in profits. They don’t need to be on the public dole.
No problem with ensuring that those taking advantage of our social safety net programs actually need them. But in this economy at this time the reality is there are many people that are just barely making it on any combination of unemployment benefits, welfare, food stamps, etc. We have seen a huge rise in the poverty rate in one of the wealthiest countries on earth. So while I am all for limiting these programs to those in need…if you are sitting with a good paying job right now and calling all those without employment lazy, you are totally uninformed and most likely don’t care.
a reader
October 26th, 2011
10:08 am
unless the repubs can come up with a new social hot button the writing’s on the wall.
The Austrian Brotherhood
October 26th, 2011
10:31 am
Ron Paul put his plan out to cut a trillion dollars in YEAR 1 but you don’t mention it. He’s talked of the need to transition and he’s intellectually honest.
But you’re exposed now. Go vote for Romney or Perry or Cain or Obama ya good for nothing GOP statist. Vote to loot your daughter’s future. Way to go. Make her proud. You can regale her with your vote for ruination.
Play time is over. It’s Hero Time.
Ron Paul 2012!!!
DawgDad
October 26th, 2011
11:02 am
A quick scan of the posts herein really highlights the depths of the political cold war in this country between the left and the right. The level of class vitriol and the live example of the Occupy crowds pretty well sums up what the left is all about – imposing a far harsher leftist/socialist tyranny. What they fail to consider is the breadth of consequence of their morally bankrupt ideology, which in the end is ruinous. We already have a fair taste of leftist socialist tyranny in this country, and as they are quick to point out the benefits are accruing to an ever-shrinking elite and politically connected class. The Occupy bunch is campaigning against the product of their own ideology, and they don’t get it. Why pick on the bankers and businesses who are bankrolling your political movement, while they wine and dine your “Hope and Change” leftist President and Party leaders? Why corner your own liberal/leftist mayors into confrontations and use of force, or otherwise expose their weakness and hypocrisy? Purely mindless.
There was considerable debate in the 80 election cycle on supply side economics and what would become Reagan tax policy. That debate was similarly ridiculed by the left, but the policy fueled the technology boom in the 80’s and 90’s. The current debate within the GOP is demonstrative of what America is all about, the process appears to be serving its purpose. Right-minded leaders with a solid plan and political mandate CAN lead us out of the malaise, as they have in the past. It’s time to marginalize the left politically and get America back to work at being America, not some bankrupt outpost beholden to foreign benevolence.
UGA 1999
October 26th, 2011
1:05 pm
Getalife….this president IS a collapse and a default!!