Reality-Based Politics

[cybercoma]

It's a pretty easy sell when your idea is to pillage 1 percent of the populations wallet while 99 percent of the electorate Get a tax cut. That sell was made in 1917 Russia, Cuba, venezula, etc.

Lynch mob politics instead of dealing with reality.

Pillage. What hyperbole.

[blueblood]

Pillage. What hyperbole.

It's the start of a slippery slope.

If taxes go up, everyone should foot the bill, it wasn't just the rich that are to blame for this mess. If a person has such an entitlement attitude that they must have a 400,000 house on 30,000 salary, they have blood on their hands as well.

[blueblood]

You're right. Slightly raising the income taxes of the very rich is exactly the same as 1917 Russia.

You're right. Slightly raising the income taxes of the very rich is exactly the same as lynching them.

The communists went after the "rich" people as well with the same kind of rhetoric, look where it got them

Its that dangerous lynch mob mentality that has caused problems for those countries with those people. Ask the people who sail to Florida from Cuba on a raft made out of a door, or the many wealthy emigrants of venezuela. More oil than Alberta and embroiled in poverty, outstanding.

[Michael Hardner]

It's a pretty easy sell when your idea is to pillage 1 percent of the populations wallet while 99 percent of the electorate Get a tax cut. That sell was made in 1917 Russia, Cuba, venezula, etc.

Lynch mob politics instead of dealing with reality.

It is kind of telling that proposals to reset tax rates to late 20th century rates is equated to Communism. I think the term Reality Politics will do quite well if this is the response.

[Bonam]

I for one don't think there's any kind of moral difference between the tax rates of 2000 vs the tax rates of 2012 in the US. Changing those tax brackets by a few % does not constitute any substantial move on the spectrum between capitalism and communism. The exact rates of the tax brackets should be based on pragmatic considerations.

However, personally, I would propose that if additional revenues need to be raised that one should first look at simplifying the tax code to reduce loopholes and deductions prior to modifying rates. Reducing loopholes and deductions would simplify the complexity of the tax system and allow small businesses who cannot afford legions of lawyers and accountants to better compete with large businesses that are adept at navigating the hellishly complex tax system that presently exists. And it would also make it so people earning very high incomes would no longer be able to shelter their earnings from taxation using the complexities of the tax system, and would pay higher marginal rates than lower income earners as per the intent of the income tax system.

Loopholes and deductions in the US tax code constitute over $1 trillion in potential annual revenue that is not collected, and eliminating/capping some of them could close a big part of the deficit (eliminating all of them completely would actually put the budget in surplus), without raising any actual tax rates.

Edited December 1, 2012 by Bonam

[sharkman]

Yeah, well what Obama wants is the old Clinton rates without Clinton's reduced spending levels.

[bush_cheney2004]

President Obama doesn't want all of the Clinton rates, just the highest marginal rate to sock it to the "rich". In a strange twist, Obama and the Democrats are fighting to preserve "Bush era" tax cuts.

[blueblood]

It is kind of telling that proposals to reset tax rates to late 20th century rates is equated to Communism. I think the term Reality Politics will do quite well if this is the response.

It's the rhetoric that's he big issue. The democrats have successfully used the rhetoric that the rich must pay more and are using lynch mob style tactics of a similar but lesser degree used in 1917 Russia, venezuela, et. Al. the rhetoric used also fits the term reality politics.

If your going to reset tax rates, reset them all. I think just the loopholes should be closed and spending cut as per bon ams suggestion.

The reality is the entitlement attitude is toxic.

[bush_cheney2004]

If your going to reset tax rates, reset them all. I think just the loopholes should be closed and spending cut as per bon ams suggestion.

I agree...let the income tax reductions expire as intended, not extended by President Obama. Also stop the payroll taxes holiday.

[Smallc]

If your going to reset tax rates, reset them all.

What? Why? Because you don't agree with raising the upper rates, and you're trying to paint them as communist?

[Michael Hardner]

It's the rhetoric that's he big issue. The democrats have successfully used the rhetoric that the rich must pay more and are using lynch mob style tactics of a similar but lesser degree used in 1917 Russia, venezuela, et. Al. the rhetoric used also fits the term reality politics.

How is it 'rhetoric' to say that the rich will pay more ? You call it rhetoric, but I call it 'talking'.

Then, again, back to the Communist revolution talk.

Yes, again I say that Reality Politics seems to work as a catch phrase.

[BubberMiley]

The democrats have successfully used the rhetoric that the rich must pay more and are using lynch mob style tactics of a similar but lesser degree used in 1917 Russia, venezuela, et. Al.

EIther you have no concept of reality or you have no idea what a lynch mob is.

[cybercoma]

The hyperbole from the right on raising the tax rate a few percent on the top income earners is complete insanity: 1917 Russia? Lynch mobs? You've got to be kidding me. Was the US a Communist State when Regan or Eisenhower were presidents? Of course not, yet the top marginal rate was more than 10% points higher under Regan than Obama's proposal and over 50% points higher under Eisenhower. I guess Eisenhower is a bad example, since the US really did have lynch mobs then, except they weren't targeting the rich.

Edited December 2, 2012 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

And thus, reality-based politics. The idea that the US would somehow become Russia 1917 or that this is anything like the French Revolution with "lynch mobs" murdering the rich is Complete Nonsense^®. In fact, it's total absurdity that has no basis in reality.

Here's a look at the figures:

Yet, at no point in time in history was the United States a Communist or even Socialist state.

So why the resistance from the rich and their middle-class supporters? Pure selfishness with no sense of community. Because frankly it isn't all rich nor is it all middle class that agrees with these arguments. It's those that subscribe to the idea of the war of all against all. It's the ideology of the selfish and it's appalling.

[Wilber]

Warren Buffet said he has been selling stocks since he was twenty. People bought them when taxes were high and when they were low. He said that in fact, the US economy has had some very good runs when taxes were a lot higher than they are now.

[dre]

Care to provide some evidence demonstrating how the stupidity of the electorate has increased over time?

The evidence, is that these simplistic slogans and catchphrases are so successful. Talking to us like children is a highly successful tactic.

And by "stupidity" i dont necessarily mean our IQ's are lower.

[bush_cheney2004]

Warren Buffet said he has been selling stocks since he was twenty. People bought them when taxes were high and when they were low. He said that in fact, the US economy has had some very good runs when taxes were a lot higher than they are now.

Warren Buffet has also pretended to represent the "1%" in advocating for higher taxes. Accordingly, and as a member of the "99%", I advocate for increasing U.S. income taxes FOR ALL MARGINAL RATES, including the rich. Go right back to the Clinton era rates that the lefties want so bad, FOR EVERYBODY (well, at least the 53% who do pay income taxes).

This way Canadian lefties will be happy and the U.S. Treasury will get some much needed revenue.

[Wilber]

I don't think Buffet is pretending to represent anyone except himself and his own opinion. The notion that somone's personal income represents the number of jobs they create is rediculous. If you want a tax credit for creating jobs, show that you actually created some.

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't think Buffet is pretending to represent anyone except himself and his own opinion.

Then he shouldn't be advocating otherwise:

Billionaire Warren Buffett urged Congress to raise taxes on the nation’s wealthiest individuals

to help cut the U.S. budget deficit, saying it won’t inhibit investment or job growth.

“My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress,” the chairman and chief executive officer of

Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A)

wrote in an opinion article published in the New York Times. “It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.”

Warren Buffett said that

for those making more than $1 million

-- there were 236,883 such households in 2009 --

he would raise rates immediately

on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including dividends and capital gains.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-15/buffett-urges-congress-to-raise-taxes-on-coddled-billionaires.html

The notion that somone's personal income represents the number of jobs they create is rediculous. If you want a tax credit for creating jobs, show that you actually created some.

I agree....and if there is little to no such correlation, then raise ALL MARGINAL RATES back to what they were. This would quadruple tax revenue compared to just raising taxes on the evil rich people.

[Wilber]

Then he shouldn't be advocating otherwise:

Billionaire Warren Buffett urged Congress to raise taxes on the nation’s wealthiest individuals

to help cut the U.S. budget deficit, saying it won’t inhibit investment or job growth.

“My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress,” the chairman and chief executive officer of

Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A)

wrote in an opinion article published in the New York Times. “It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.”

Warren Buffett said that

for those making more than $1 million

-- there were 236,883 such households in 2009 --

he would raise rates immediately

on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including dividends and capital gains.

http://www.bloomberg...llionaires.html

I agree....and if there is little to no such correlation, then raise ALL MARGINAL RATES back to what they were. This would quadruple tax revenue compared to just raising taxes on the evil rich people.

He can advocate anything he wants, just like you and I.

Tax rates need to be adjusted when they get out of whack. If they can't be adjusted now, there was no justification for ever adjusting them in the past.

[bush_cheney2004]

He can advocate anything he wants, just like you and I.

Tax rates need to be adjusted when they get out of whack. If they can't be adjusted now, there was no justification for ever adjusting them in the past.

Right...so let all the tax cuts and payroll tax holidays expire...FOR EVERYBODY. Clean...simple...requires no new legislation. Or is this really about just sticking it to the RICH to pay their FAIR SHARE ?

President Reagan got burned by the Democrats with a tax now - cut spending later deal. This time the cuts are going to be automatic.

[Wilber]

Right...so let all the tax cuts and payroll tax holidays expire...FOR EVERYBODY. Clean...simple...requires no new legislation. Or is this really about just sticking it to the RICH to pay their FAIR SHARE ?

President Reagan got burned by the Democrats with a tax now - cut spending later deal. This time the cuts are going to be automatic.

OK, if that's what you want. I'm just saying that adjusting tax rates for different income groups has been around as long as income tax itself.

I do agree that increasing the tax rate for upper incomes alone isn't going to solve the problem at hand, all by itself. I think tax increases are in our future as well.

[bush_cheney2004]

OK, if that's what you want. I'm just saying that adjusting tax rates for different income groups has been around as long as income tax itself.

That's what is so politically whacked about this issue. The so called "Bush Era" tax cuts were scheduled to expire 2 years ago, but Obama extended them and added payroll tax holidays to boot. If tax cuts do not correlate to more jobs and economic growth, then they should have never been extended, recession threat or not. We are told that half of the record deficits were due to tax cuts, not just for the rich, but all marginal rates.

Now those same tax cuts are sacrosanct and being protected by not just the right, but the left as well.

I do agree that increasing the tax rate for upper incomes alone isn't going to solve the problem at hand, all by itself. I think tax increases are in our future as well.

No it's not, but it does make for grand political points. Raising taxes for EVERYBODY is more than just what I want...it is absolutely essential to stop the fiscal bleeding.

[Wilber]

That's what is so politically whacked about this issue. The so called "Bush Era" tax cuts were scheduled to expire 2 years ago, but Obama extended them and added payroll tax holidays to boot. If tax cuts do not correlate to more jobs and economic growth, then they should have never been extended, recession threat or not. We are told that half of the record deficits were due to tax cuts, not just for the rich, but all marginal rates.

Now those same tax cuts are sacrosanct and being protected by not just the right, but the left as well.

I don't think we differ all that much. Taxes will have to increase across the board but that doesn't mean the ratio between income groups hasn't got out of whack.

No it's not, but it does make for grand political points. Raising taxes for EVERYBODY is more than just what I want...it is absolutely essential to stop the fiscal bleeding.

Agreed. Even if they can put their rampant partisanship aside, do you think these guys are smart enough to figure it out? I'm starting to wonder.

Edited December 2, 2012 by Wilber

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't think we differ all that much. Taxes will have to increase across the board but that doesn't mean the ratio between income groups hasn't got out of whack.

Solved by going back to the Clinton-era rates, save for capital gains taxes staying at 15%. Raise those too if that will give the left their pound of rich flesh.

Agreed. Even if they can put their rampant partisanship aside, do you think these guys are smart enough to figure it out? I'm starting to wonder.

No, as election exit polls only found 13% of voters supporting tax increases, while still wanting entitlements at present or even greater levels. They have become spoiled by lower levels of taxation and greater debt. And a guy like Romney gets slammed for pointing out the percentage of people who pay no income taxes at all.