Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Economic Insanity and Job Destruction Continue

Economic Insanity and Job Destruction Continue

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

You don’t want to believe it. You want to have faith in humanity and a more positive outlook on the world. But there comes a point where you can’t make any more excuses or look for the faint silver lining. Today I had to admit that the only explanation for the behavior of the Democrats and the Obama administration is that they are deliberately trying to destroy the US economy and bring about a total economic collapse, presumably to use as a pretext for the implementation of complete central state control of our society.

There really is no other explanation. I’ve tried to excuse them as inept and ideologically misguided, but it’s gone on too long and it’s reached the point where their mismanagement of the economy is so gross and so ridiculous that it can only be explained as intentional. I hate to use the dreaded “T” word, but the grim truth is that they are engaged in treason against the United States. They are laying the groundwork for a political coup which will overthrow our constitution and the rule of law using an economic collapse which they have deliberately engineered as the justification for tyranny.

The latest example of this is the passage of an extension of the Estate Tax in the House of Representatives. The economy was scheduled to get a big boost in 2010 when this extremely regressive, job-destroying tax was set to expire. Now the Democrats plan to continue the tax at a rate of somewhere between 35% and 55% depending on the outcome of the Senate bill. Estates below $3.5 million are exempted in the House bill, but that limit may be substantially lowered by the Senate.

As was debated at length when the Bush administration sought to lower and eventually eliminate the Estate Tax, the harm which this tax does is devastating on two levels.

First, on the purely individual level, it destroys small businesses and in particular family farms. With the estate tax so high, family-owned businesses and farms which have little cash on hand and have property as their main asset find themselves forced to shut down and sell off part or all of that property to pay the tax bill. When there is more than one heir, this becomes the only way to resolve the need to split assets among the heirs and also satisfy the government. That means the end of that business and the jobs which it may have provided. The impact is also devastating for families whose estates are property rich but cash poor. If the family’s assets are tied up in land or valuable family heirlooms or other real property it may be necessary to sell off the family’s heritage to pay the tax bill. Should I be forced to sell my parents’ furniture and the art they’ve collected over the years, including the bed my great-grandmother was born in, and family portraits in order to keep the house in which I grew up? That just seems needlessly cruel.

The second argument against an estate tax is that inheritance of wealth is one of the most effective ways of concentrating enough capital to start new businesses. Many, many small businesses came into existence primarily because a family inheritance gave someone the substantial lump of cash necessary to start their own business. If inheritances are larger that will mean the creation of more businesses and more of that money going out into the economy. And those new businesses will also create more jobs and that will do even more to stimulate the economy. Eliminating the estate tax is one of the most powerful possible ways to expand the job market and encourage economic growth.

Either way you look at it, continuing the estate tax is yet another effort from the Democrats which will weaken the economy and cost the country jobs. That they are taking this step suggests that they have no real interest in resolving the current economic crisis and I really can’t see it as anything but a deliberate and (yes, I’ll say it again) treasonous effort to drive the economy even further down so that they can create an environment of despair in which the people will finally give up their rights and welcome bigger and more invasive government as their savior.

All of these job-killing and economy-depressing initiatives, from massive bailouts and deficit spending, to health care legislation written by and for insurance companies and trial lawyers, to cap-and-trade and expensive green fantasies, to huge tax increases, are so poorly conceived and so destructive when we’re already in the middle of a recession, that they go beyond mere foolishness and can only be the intentional first steps on the road to tyranny.

Powered by

About Dave Nalle

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “. . .using an economic collapse which they have deliberately engineered . . .”

    That’s quite a charge!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Talking about conspiratorial theories, with respect to which Mr. Nalle is dead-set against.

  • http://marksaleski.com Mark Saleski

    i used to merely disagree with you, but this incessant conjugation of fox news is beneath you. or maybe it’s not.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    And since there is a 3.5 million exemption, what’s the big deal? Unless the idea is to perpetuate the class of filthy rich whose main purpose in life, let’s face it, is to get richer still.

    But of course, we’re talking here about the most productive members of the society, on whose largesse we all must depend. The idea that wealth necessarily coincides with, and implies, productivity and entrepreneurial spirit, rather than what’s more often than not a parasitic existence, is another myth proclaiming freedom and liberty to Everyman but in actuality reserved for the propertied class.

    And consider the lament:

    “Should I be forced to sell my parents’ furniture and the art they’ve collected over the years, including the bed my great-grandmother was born in, and family portraits in order to keep the house in which I grew up? That just seems needlessly cruel.”

    I don’t think you’ll ever be in that position, Mr. Nalle. Just borrow money against your estate so you can keep your heirlooms.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “. . . this incessant conjugation of fox news . . .”

    “Regurgitation” is another term.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    He’s either being deliberately provocative or he’s finally gone off the deep end. I honestly don’t know which is the more probable explanation for this piece of paranoid waffle.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    And since there is a 3.5 million exemption, what’s the big deal?

    Roger, do you have any idea how little real property it takes to reach that $3.5 milion mark?

    Unless the idea is to perpetuate the class of filthy rich whose main purpose in life, let’s face it, is to get richer still.

    Which they do by investing and operating businesses, but I guess that’s a bad thing.

    And you bring up another point here which I should have mentioned – the deliberate encouragement and stoking of vicious class envy, which seems to be another objective of the Democrats.

    But of course, we’re talking here about the most productive members of the society, on whose largesse we all must depend. The idea that wealth necessarily coincides with, and implies, productivity and entrepreneurial spirit, rather than what’s more often than not a parasitic existence, is another myth proclaiming freedom and liberty to Everyman but in actuality reserved for the propertied class.

    You don’t become a wealthy parasite at the level of a few million dollars. That’s the wealth level of those who are indeed truly productive.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    As regards your last point, I totally agree. My sister and brother-in-law, both MDs and still working, have six million dollars worth of assets and they’re barely upper-middle class. Can’t afford a full-time domestic.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    The point still remains, Dave, that ingenuity and wealth don’t necessarily coincide. People like John D. Rockefeller have started from scratch, not from inherited fortunes.

    One might as well argue in the opposite direction, namely, that ambition and desire to succeed, American style, are the motivational factors par excellence. Which is one reason why we speak of some people as having been born with a silver spoon.

    How did George Dubya, for example, contribute to the well-being of the economy? By buying the Rangers?

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Dave –

    We Dems are “deliberately” committing treason?

    Welcome to the ranks of the silly, wacked-out conspiracy theorists, Dave.

    I thought you were better than this. I guess I was wrong.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    For all, on the ‘death tax':

    The estate tax was enacted in 1916 with broad public approval. Early supporters of estate taxes included Teddy Roosevelt, William Howard Taft and Andrew Carnegie.

    In 2009, the ‘death tax’ applied ONLY to those whose estates were worth 3.5 million dollars or more, and the top tax rate was 45%.

    The 2001 tax act will repeal the estate tax for one year (2010) and then readjust it in 2011 to the year 2002 exemption level with a 2001 top rate. In other words, it will reset to affect estates of $1 million or more, with a top rate of 55%.

    And it should be noted that the legislation driving this ‘extension’ of the death tax is the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001…which was passed on June 7th, 2001 under a majority-REPUBLICAN congress and signed into law by a REPUBLICAN president!

    But Dave just knows this is really a treasonous, deliberate plot by the Democrats!

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/christine-lakatos/ Christine

    Dave, do you think this is like the “Cloward-Piven Strategy”?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    But good ole Teddy is Dave’s hero. What goes?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    For those not in the know.

    It’s kind of cynical of you, Christine. Do you really think the Democrats are that perfidious? That’s giving human beings more credit than they deserve.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    There’s been a substantial estate tax for decades. Through economic good times and bad. This is not a new development, but a continuation of what has been the status quo for a generation or two…with higher exemptions now!

    Objecting to the estate tax [proud of you for not using the usual pejorative, ‘death tax,’ ha] is one thing.

    Accusing Democrats of deliberately destroying the economy is silly, over-the-top, pernicious, dare I say desperate nonsense.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, Dave has a flair for the dramatic.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    The exemption is $3.5 million for individuals, %7 million for couples. This is up from about $700,000 before the Bush ‘reforms.’

    The net effect is that only 1 estate out of 500 is taxed at all.

    But it does provide about 2% of total tax revenue.

    I would say this is more of a deficit control measure than anything else.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    handy!

    It’s a VAST left-wing conspiracy! Don’t you know that yet???? Just ask Dave – that’s what he’ll tell you!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    So what’s the tax rate on a seven million estate, Handy?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Just like “we” engineered the present economic crisis, as both Dave and Christine seem to allege.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    It’s a big tax rate after the exemption, 45%.

    On a $3 million estate, zero tax.

    On a $5 million estate, $675,000.

    On a $10 million estate, nearly $3 million.

  • http://www.EurocriticsMagazine.com Christopher Rose

    Once again Dave Nalle demonstrates why weapons ownership needs to be curtailed as he shoots both himself in the foot and his cause in the ass with another hysterically over the top article. :-)

    More seriously, it is in fact an outrage when any government levies an inheritance tax, not least because any wealth that people have managed to build up in their lives has already been taxed and there is simply no justification for taxing it again simply because someone has died.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/christine-lakatos/ Christine

    Roger #14) thanks for the link, I assumed “ya all” knew what I was talking about. But who knows what the Dems are up to intentionally or otherwise (motives included), but it all looks bad.

    Roger, perfidious, new word for me, a second thank you. Love new words.

  • Lumpy

    I think it’s just that they are stuck at Joe Biden’s intellectual level so he doesn’t get held back and lose self esteem.

    But seriously they don’t have to be clever or conspiratorial. They can just follow the playbooks left to them by Mao And Alinsky like good little Marxists.

    If we want to save the republic we need them out now. Joe McCarthy was right. Marxism is treason and cannot coexist with a free society.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    The level of discourse among conservatives on this site is just…deranged. Does everything have to be exaggerated in apocalyptic terms? It would be a joke, but it’s not very funny.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Handy, the fact that you choose to turn a blind eye to what’s happening in this nation is part of the problem. Some on the left are waking up to what’s going on. More and more of them, in fact. You can keep defending the tyrants, but ultimately you’ll come around — though by then it will likely be too late.

    And Christopher. What is the current inheritance tax in the UK? I was surprised to see that you realize how negative the impact of this sort of tax is.

    Dave

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Your silly overuse of the word ‘tyrant’ does not raise the level of the discussion even slightly.

    At any rate, the tax has been around in some form since 1916. The exemption is now much larger than it ever has been before. Pretending that this is some fresh new mischief by the Democrats is just rhetorical gamesmanship, aka propaganda. They’re preventing the tax from expiring, not changing it otherwise in any way.

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    Conservatives are on fire right now. Their supposed outrage masks the joy they are taking while being on the outs.

    In fairness they had to endure 8 years of left wing haranguing of GW & company. Now, they not only want their bitchin’ payback, they feel it necessary to stretch the envelope, or to take it to another level – to demonize the opposition to the extent that we are treasonous bastards. The cat is being let out of the bag. It’s the same mantra that nazi slut, Ann Coulter has been spewing for the past few years.

    The main problem with what is happening now is that a great majority of the right is also armed to the teeth. We saw in the reaction to the recent murder of abortion provider, Dr. Tiller many felt that on balance his murder was okay – Tiller had it coming. The right wing gunsters feel more and more that they have an implied license to commit violence. They appear to be more accepting of the radical muslim model of making the ultimate sacrifice for their “holy” cause.

    Given Dave’s suppositions in his piece, and following them to their logical conclusion, we can then assume that if he feels the Dems are committing treason, and that treason is punishable by death, that he, too, is prepared to at least condone or perhaps even carry out such punishment in defense of his vision of freedom. He is generally armed, is he not?

    B

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Bari, it’s not my job to be judge, jury and executioner. We have courts and prisons and a death chamber in Indiana for that purpose.

    As for enduring the attacks on GWB, it’s really worse than that. We had to endure not only the attacks on Bush, but also his perversion of the ideals of the GOP, his ultimate betrayal of so many conservative values and his ongoing negative legacy.

    All of that aside, your assumption that the armed and pro-liberty part of the population is going to start going berserk and shooting people is ridiculous. We’re the ones who believe in the Constitution and the rule of law, remember. We don’t believe in extra-legal violence just as much as we don’t believe in using the force of government to oppress the people. Guns are for defense of family and property.

    Dave

  • http://www.EurocriticsMagazine.com Christopher Rose

    Dave, you’d be surprised about a lot of things if you could get those ideological lenses off your eyes, although that would probably require surgery.

    I think all inheritance taxes are nothing short of outright theft. It doesn’t matter if there is a billion dollar exemption and the tax rate is only 1%.

    There is absolutely no justification at all for taxing money that was already taxed when it was earned and other assets that were bought with money that has been taxed.

    In the UK there is a £325,000 exemption (a little over half a million dollars) and the rest is taxed at a brutal 40%.

    It is a scandal in my opinion, whatever the levels.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Guns are for defense of family and property.

    But Dave, if you generally believe this, wouldn’t it stand to reason that like-minded individuals would indeed take up arms against those who, through their own logic, believe the government is “attacking” their family and property?

    Those who honestly and firmly believe in a lot of the tripe you shovel, like how government health care infringes on “liberty” and how this government is taking away freedoms, wouldn’t have to be all that far gone to turn to violence in order to protect their families and their property from an Obama Administration that threatens their wellbeing and existence.

    Why is that such a “ridiculous” concept in your point of view? It seems like a perfectly logical conclusion given the foundation of your ideology and to what purposes you’ve given to violence.

  • Jordan Richardson

    In other words:

    When you use language like “tyrant” and so forth, are you prepared to back up what connotations those terms have to many individuals prepared to use guns and weaponry to defend their lives, their families and their property from certain doom?

  • treasonous bastard

    There ought to be a war on capitalism. Estate taxes can be seen as attempts to counteract the self-destructive logic underlying capital accumulation and stagnation; this is an error, however. Even when not handed over to them directly in subsidies, taxes overwhelmingly benefit capitalists by, for example, supporting the surplus labor force systemically necessary to restrain the price of labor and enable their ‘entrepreneurship’ in the first place.

  • Arch Conservative

    Why do you bother Dave? The truth is not appreciated around here very often, especially when it comes to “the one.”

    It’s obvious that he’s in way over his head and has no fucking clue how to create job 1 never mind the thousands of ficticious jobs he’s claiming to have created or “Ssaved” but the steady stream of moonbats that respond to your articles, having invested in him by voting for him, are determined to defend him to the very bitter end.

    The SS Obama is sinking and many have already fled it’s decks but the kind of Obamabot you’ll find on BC is deeply entrenched in the messiah mythology. They’re shields are’t just constrcucted of you ordinaryy hope and change. No, they’re infused the messiah’s very own visions for hope and change. they’re downright impenetrable to reason, logic and the reality of our economic predicament.

    They have their shovel ready jobs, their government jobs saved website, their dog and pony show jobs summit and most improtantly, the word of “the One” himself that he will make everything right. What else does a guy need to sleep soundly at Night Dave?

    Oh since it’s almost 2010 I don’t think there’s really going to be much competition in the BC most ridiculous statement of the year competition to handy’s assertion that conservatives on this website (and by conservatives I’m sure he means anyone that hasn’t read the audacity of hype 615 times) are being melodramatic in expressing themselves.

    “The level of discourse among conservatives on this site is just…deranged. Does everything have to be exaggerated in apocalyptic terms? It would be a joke, but it’s not very funny.”

    Conservatives are being too dramatic? I guess we should all start calling handy Rip Van Winkle becausehe must have been asleep for the past eight years.

    After eight years of blaming Bush for everything from being behind 911 to hurricane Katrina….. eight years of calling Bush Hitler…..calling him a fascists and insisting he’d pull some power grab to stay in power (that was actually Sean Penn’s hero Chavez not Bush), eight years of protesting the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in the most dramatic fashion only now to have become mute with “the One” continuing the exact same policies…..eight years of insisting Bush would be the ruin of the nation and claiming “if he gets re-elected I’m moving to Canada” then not doing the rest of us the favor, eight years of Keith Olbemrann nightly running his mouth on and on and on……..eight fucking years bitching about some election fraud conspiracy that never took place only to ignore the fine folks at Acorn who are in actuality committing voter fraud…eight long years of rabid fanatical moonbatism …

    And now handy is calling for we conservatives to exercise restraint and not criticize Obama or the Democrats while they spend and spend and spend and pretty much do everything they can to exert the will of the federal government on the lives of the American people like the big black boot of some jackbboted Chicago thug?

    I don’t fucking think so.

    Not today. Not tomorrow. Never.

    We’re just getting started If you think things are bad now you ain’t see nothing yet handy. I promise you that. Take it to the bank pal!

    We’re not going to stand by and be good little hopey changers while that peice of garbage and that botoxed cunt bride of Satan turn this nation into France West. If you and your pantywaist candyass little bitch messiah don’t like that…….TOO FUCKING BAD!

    Just wait until next November. It’s coming and you’re all to fucking stupid to see it.

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    My comment regarding violence from conservatives in general and Dave in particular was tongue in cheek – partly. Dave had it coming owing to his charge that Dems are traitors.

    There is always a fringe element in any political/ideological movement which is willing to take the issue to extremes. Just as Jordan says, it’s only a small step to take in “defense of family and property” to take up arms against a government perceived as such a threat.

    Typically a “movement” will disavow any acts of violence taken in their name by some of those fringers. But given that we all understand such things can and often do happen, responsibility must be accepted for such acts.

    As to the estate tax, I actually agree with Dave and Christopher, but it is also true that it is in no way a Democratic witches brew. It has been around a long time.

    From a personal point of view – since I have next to nothing, my heirs will not be affected by any such tax burden.

    The major problem with capitalism is that it’s goal is for everyone to accumulate wealth. That automatically sets up a have/have not situation owing to what naturally becomes fierce competition for money and “stuff.”

    What is so ludicrous in most of western capitalist economies is the breadth of the divide. The poor are really poor and the rich are stupendously rich.

    The goal of a socialist economy is not suppression, but a more even distribution of wealth. No one should want for food, clothing, shelter, etc. In a society as plentiful as ours, there is no excuse for there being such a huge number of have nots.

    B

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    Oh, and…

    Dave says: “We had to endure not only the attacks on Bush, but also his perversion of the ideals of the GOP, his ultimate betrayal of so many conservative values and his ongoing negative legacy.”

    Poor babies. I feel so bad for you. But, you know what? Ya’ll voted for W – not once, but twice! Ya gits what ya pays for.

    I can see the smoke coming out of Arch’s ass. Look out world!

    B

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Bari, I never voted for Bush and the same is true of a great many Republicans and independents on the right. He won based on Democrat crossover votes and moderate independents, plus the core constituencies on the right he managed to win over with hardcore pandering.

    Dave

  • treasonous bastard

    hey Dave, why does Ken’s latest appear over your name in the ‘highlights’?

  • Baronius

    Dave, in all your time on Capitol Hill, did you ever meet anyone who was deliberately trying to make things worse?

    The problem with political discourse these days is demonization. If your opponent is evil, then it’s pointless to talk to him, dangerous to listen to him, and evil to compromise with him. I know, I know, Dave, you don’t believe in evil, but you know what I’m talking about. Use whatever word you’re most comfortable with to describe the sort of person who wants to ruin things.

    Not only is it nasty to toss around accusations, it eliminates any chance of finding workable solutions. Dave, you’ve been a supporter of a single-payer health care system. Would you have come to that decision if you thought that everything the Dems suggest is hazardous? Maybe you would have, but most people wouldn’t. I once heard a guy disagree with something spoken in a language he didn’t understand, because he knew the kind of person who was speaking.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Dave –

    I notice you didn’t reply AT ALL to the proof that the current system of ‘death taxes’ we have was passed by a REPUBLICAN congress under a REPUBLICAN president…yet you’re claiming this is a deliberate DEMOCRATIC attempt to sabotage the nation!

    You say it’s not your job to be judge, jury, and executioner…but in your article you did indeed place yourself in the positions of judge AND jury, declaring that we Democrats are deliberately sabotaging the nation.

    I’ve seen you make a few gaffes over the past year or so (and I’ve made quite a few of my own), but your article is the only one that caused me to have significantly less respect for you.

    You effectively called Democrats treasonous saboteurs…but you call me ‘shrill’.

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    Glenn has a very valid point Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Christopher Rose makes a valid point about inheritance tax, so along with Baritone, I concede. Also, B-man, an excellent analysis of the capitalist system, IMO, as to its inherent weakness/shortcomings.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Chris Rose does indeed make a valid point, in that money that has been taxed once by however many jurisdictions should not be taxed a second time.

    On the other hand, the 20-odd billion that inheritance taxes bring in would fully fund any of several small but crucial departments within the government…and no matter how much one wants to claim that taxes are a bad thing, taxes are absolutely necessary in order to preserve and improve the infrastructure that enables American (and Americans) to work.

    So these taxes must be garnered somewhere else – you can’t dodge this fact by simply claiming “cut it out of government waste” (unless it’s from the DOD). What else, then, should be taxed instead of inheritances?

    I say legalize marijuana and tax the be-whatever out of it.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    That’s another big topic, Glenn – our archaic tax code. I do agree with you about the marijuana tax, though, when legalized. It’s no more hazardous to your health than cigarettes are. But then, we’ve got the Moral/Christian Right to deal with before that can happen.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Dave, in all your time on Capitol Hill, did you ever meet anyone who was deliberately trying to make things worse?

    That was a long, long time ago and I think things were very different then. The generation which is now in power was on the bottom rungs of politics in those days, or even still in college.

    The problem with political discourse these days is demonization. If your opponent is evil, then it’s pointless to talk to him, dangerous to listen to him, and evil to compromise with him.

    Well, that certainly describes the ideological extremists who seem to be part of the Obama administration.

    I know, I know, Dave, you don’t believe in evil, but you know what I’m talking about. Use whatever word you’re most comfortable with to describe the sort of person who wants to ruin things.

    I prefer to call them ideological extremists, and they ARE in power now and their goals are inimical to the survival of this nation as the kind of nation I want it to be.

    Not only is it nasty to toss around accusations, it eliminates any chance of finding workable solutions.

    I think we’re beyond that point, at least when it comes to dealing with the extremists on the left. There’s no room for negotiating with fanatics.

    Dave, you’ve been a supporter of a single-payer health care system. Would you have come to that decision if you thought that everything the Dems suggest is hazardous? Maybe you would have, but most people wouldn’t. I once heard a guy disagree with something spoken in a language he didn’t understand, because he knew the kind of person who was speaking.

    Please note that the first thing the Dems were wiling to sacrifice was single payer and instead they held out for the public option. Single payer is much more compatible with capitalism, while the public option is directly hostile to capitalism. This in a nugget is the problem we’re dealing with here.

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    I notice you didn’t reply AT ALL

    Kind of a primadonna, aren’t we, Glenn?

    to the proof that the current system of ‘death taxes’ we have was passed by a REPUBLICAN congress under a REPUBLICAN president…yet you’re claiming this is a deliberate DEMOCRATIC attempt to sabotage the nation!

    I don’t dispute the history, Glenn. I’m just opposed to extending the tax. And the truth is that the most recent actions on the death tax were for Bush who is a Republican to try to eliminate it and for Obama and the Democrats now in power to try to extend it. Do you dispute this facts?

    You say it’s not your job to be judge, jury, and executioner…but in your article you did indeed place yourself in the positions of judge AND jury, declaring that we Democrats are deliberately sabotaging the nation.

    My judgement is just one person’s opinion. Maybe it will influence others and expose some truth, but it’s not part of the legal system. That’s the kind of fuzzy thinking which leads to the hostility that the current administration has shown to opposing media.

    I’ve seen you make a few gaffes over the past year or so (and I’ve made quite a few of my own), but your article is the only one that caused me to have significantly less respect for you.

    Glenn, the respect I once had for you has been nose-diving recently as well. You’ve assumed the role of apologist for actions and policies which are inexcusable.

    You effectively called Democrats treasonous saboteurs…but you call me ‘shrill’.

    If the shoe fits.

    Dave

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    We could wipe out the deficit if EVERYONE paid 10% of their income WITHOUT DEDUCTIONS!

    …Dear god I think I just said something that makes sense!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Sounds like a good plan, but how do you figure that?

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Mazel tov, Dave!!

    You finally have opened your eyes! You may not believe in G-d, but it is evident that miracles do happen. You are finally coming around!

    Well, you have made my day. When a fellow like you comes around to finally saying that Barak Obama is committing treason by engineering an economic breakdown to institute total state control in your country, that is a bright day for humanity indeed. An intelligent individual is finally waking up in America.

    But you know, there is a price to be paid. “True patriotic Americans” like Cobra will no longer consider you fit to debate with any further. You will just become another “anonymous commenter” (who happens to pump out an article every two days). You think you can handle it, Dave?

  • zingzing

    dave, when ruvy says, “When a fellow like you comes around to finally saying that Barak Obama is committing treason by engineering an economic breakdown to institute total state control in your country, that is a bright day for humanity indeed,” what does that say to you? i guess ruvy can fill you in on the forthcoming details by looking into the prophecies.

    and what about the fact that these economic conditions were in place more than a year before obama took office, and that what lead up to this had been building for years under republican control, what does that say about obama’s supposed “plan?” and was bush committing treason?

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    If every corporation in America and every worker legal and illegal gave only 10 percent of their actual income to government in taxes the U.S. would be solvent in five years.

    It’s the fucking deductions and phoney write-offs that are killing this country financially.

    Why is that so hard to understand, or for that matter argue with?

    An the crazy thing is it’s something everyone can afford… it’s just that the rich don’t want to pay their fair share so we have to keep jacking up their rates hoping we’ll get something that vaguely comes close to 10 percent, which we don’t now, nor will we ever.

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    What is so God-damned hard about typing out the word GOD? are you THAT terrified that your keyboard will blow up, or you won’t get to heaven. None of the rest of us seem to have that problem?

    geez

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    Zing-Dave is counting on the famous American short memory and their lack of knowledge of the economy. In less than a year Obama snapped his fingers and caused the stock market to crash more than six month before he took office.

    In less than a year Obama caused all of those 401Ks to evaporate into thin air because he’s an evil nazi socialist who couldn’t wait to completely destroy America and the American way.

    Hell, just yesterday that asshole bitch Palin backed the birthers in saying they had a valid point that Obama isn’t legally the president.

    The uneducated and the stupid of this world will believe any lie if you tell it often enough… which is why Mr. Nalle churns them out every other day… facts be damned

  • Baronius

    Dave, the current gang is peddling the same lousy ideas as the last generation. Somehow, all the people who used to think this way were trying to improve the country, and all of them now are malicious?

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    zing,

    The conditions leading to a breakdown were in place 5 years ago. I warned everybody that would listen that Bush’s overspending would drive the country bankrupt, and that your country was in the midst of bubbles that would burst, and that when they did, disaster would overtake you. And it is.

    Bush, trying to combat the collapse the only way he understood tried to bail out his friends on Wall Street. Obama got elected promising hope and change and he – bailed out more friends on Wall Street? Everything that Bush has done bad, Obama does worse and worsens.

    But I don’t want to confuse you with the facts, zing. The facts might give you a headache.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Are you suggesting, Baronius, that Nalle is unfair in thinking the current administration is committing treason?

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    I was right, he’s afraid his keyboard will blow up. I’m not afraid of God.

  • Arch Conservative

    The uneducated and the stupid of this world will believe any lie if you tell it often enough..

    Which is why Obama sits in the White House.

    In less than a year Obama has spent more than any other administration in history. His defenders claim it was necessary to pull us back from the brink but that’s a load of horseshit. We cannot spend our way out of debt and to economic prospertiy.

    “If every corporation in America and every worker legal and illegal gave only 10 percent of their actual income to government in taxes the U.S. would be solvent in five years.”

    Yes and if the fed govt. quit all the unnecessary bullshit spending we could all chip in 5% instead of 10%.

    “Dave, in all your time on Capitol Hill, did you ever meet anyone who was deliberately trying to make things worse?”

    That’s not the point. It’s just that people like Nalle and I view Obama and Pelosi’s version of better as worse. They want to fundamentally change the fabric of this nation and how things are done here.

    I get derided by you libs all the time for calling Obama a socialist but he clearly is. I’ve said it one thousand times……..if any political figure…on the left or the right….had a radical extreme agenda to transform a society and a nation how would he best go about it? by being honest about his radical transformational agenda? or by pretending to be something he’s not, a reasonable, moderate?

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    Roger, to Dave anyone who doesn’t agree with Rush Limbaugh is committing treason.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    But Baronius, in his fair-mindedness, appears to disagree (with Dave).

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    Still typing with your left eye closed and your left hand tied behind your back Arch?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Dave, the current gang is peddling the same lousy ideas as the last generation. Somehow, all the people who used to think this way were trying to improve the country, and all of them now are malicious?

    Baronius, there are substantial differences. The last generation of Democrats, your Ted Kennedy and Tip O’Neil and Robert Byrd types, were populists and democrats (small d) and socialists second. The newer generation are marxists and socialists first and use their populism and democracy in service of those ideologies. It’s a significant difference.

    The old line democrats were more pragmatic and the newer ones are much more dogmatic and fanatical.

    And Jet, I’ve never been a fan or a supporter of Rush Limbaugh. He’s part of the problem, not part of the solution.

    That’s not the point. It’s just that people like Nalle and I view Obama and Pelosi’s version of better as worse. They want to fundamentally change the fabric of this nation and how things are done here.

    Arch has a very good point here. Quoted for truth.

    Dave

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    If that’s true Dave, then why do you sound so much like him?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    No idea, Jet. I’m not a listener. I guess you’re the expert.

    Dave

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    That’s the difference between us Dave, I listen to all viewpoints, even Limbaugh’s before I form an opinion.

    I think, why does he or she feel so strongly about their opinion? and then after digesting it all, I form my own opinion based on the best points of all arguments.

    At least I don’t have my head so burried up my own ass that the only voice I can hear is my own.

    …but then again I’m a democrat nazi socialist so what do I know?

  • Glenn Contrarian

    So, um, Dave –

    You were SO offended when I referred to certain public Republican figures as chickenhawks, and you were SO offended when I showed how the Bush administration torture policy was not so different from that of the Nazis…

    …yet you have NO compunction about calling Democrats “treasonous saboteurs”.

    Most would call your choices hypocritical.

    I’m wasting my time here. I remember hearing that there are certain types of people with whom one should not argue.

    Goodbye.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “The last generation of Democrats, your Ted Kennedy and Tip O’Neil and Robert Byrd types, were populists and democrats (small d) and socialists second. The newer generation are marxists and socialists first and use their populism and democracy in service of those ideologies. It’s a significant difference.

    “The old line democrats were more pragmatic and the newer ones are much more dogmatic and fanatical.”

    You do have a point, there. However, I would argue that old thinking is no longer applicable. We can no longer return to the good ole US of A and turn the clock back. It is going to be a world government, sooner or later, and the “new” Democrats are, in that requisite sense, harbingers of the future.

    The world is changing, Dave, and so is America. And there is no stopping it.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    …but then again I’m a democrat nazi socialist so what do I know?
    But, Jet, do you think Tiger is cute? And, more important, do you think his fall from corporate grace will help the stock market? I mean that frees up $30 million for Nike alone!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Who the fuck needs Nike? Let them starve for all I care.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    People like Nalle are never offended.

    Since their game is deception and seduction of the innocent and the young – and no, I don’t mean the Socratic style – all protestations of offense are pretense.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    That’s the difference between us Dave, I listen to all viewpoints, even Limbaugh’s before I form an opinion.

    Jet, I’ve listened to Limbaugh enough to know where he stands on the main issues and to know that I disagree with him on many important ones, but I don’t have the opportunity to listen to him on a regular basis.

    You were SO offended when I referred to certain public Republican figures as chickenhawks, and you were SO offended when I showed how the Bush administration torture policy was not so different from that of the Nazis…

    Actually, Glenn, I don’t believe I had an opinion on the Bush torture issue and Nazis, unless maybe I pointed out a violation of Godwin’s law just on principle. Good luck finding any example of me defending Bush or anyone else’s position on torture. In fact, I was probably the first person on BC to come out against it.

    …yet you have NO compunction about calling Democrats “treasonous saboteurs”.

    Just call it like I see it.

    Most would call your choices hypocritical.

    More likely “consistent”, actually. At least those who are being truthful.

    I’m wasting my time here. I remember hearing that there are certain types of people with whom one should not argue.

    People who call you on your spin and misrepresentations?

    Dave

  • Clavos

    …it’s just that the rich don’t want to pay their fair share…

    Actually, the rich pay much more than their “fair share” of taxes. According to the WSJ:

    The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 40.42 percent of total federal income taxes in 2007, according to the most recent data from the Internal Revenue Service.

    This represents the second year in a row that the richest 1 percent paid more in federal income taxes than the bottom 95 percent (not, however, the bottom 99 percent). This was noted in a blog post from the Tax Foundation, an organization that promotes lower tax rates.

    One percent of the population pays more than ninety five percent of the population.

    WAY more than their “fair share.”

  • Clavos
  • treasonous bastard

    As that one percent receives only slightly more than twenty percent of total US income (2007) and controls a mere thirty four percent of total US wealth (2004), the situation is clearly unfair.

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    On paper they pay more Clavos-in actual fact with sweetheart deals, tax lawyers and sheltered income in offshore banks they pay very little or nothing…

    …and the sad thing is you know it.

  • treasonous bastard

    Jet, even with all their hidden loot skewing the numbers, they’re still carrying an unfair load by paying forty percent of the income taxes. If they could only use that money differently we’d have full employment and a chicken in every pot.

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    Treasonous there’s a difference between propaganda and facts. The propaganda is that on paper they’re being charged 40%-the fact is they’re paying far less.

    you know it, I know it, every reader here knows it. No one is that naive, no matter how often a lie is told.

    The fact of the matter is that the income tax level will probably have to be raised to 70% on the rich with their tax lawyers and loopholes before they actually pay even %15 of their actual income… if that.

    …and you know it
    …everybody knows it

  • treasonous bastard

    Do you mean to tell me that the good people over at the Tax Foundation might have an interest in deception? C’mon! You know as well as I do that the ‘numbers don’t lie’.

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    Okay, I’m wrong… you are that naive… or have I missed some sarcasm?

  • treasonous bastard

    the bastard (hearts) Jet

    xxoo

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    You must’ve clicked on my URL.

  • treasonous bastard

    …clicked on my URL

    I love it when people talk dirty.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Everyone knows that the raw rate of taxation doesn’t represent actual tax paid for anyone. But if we start raising the rates, the people who will suffer are those who are in the middle income ranges who don’t have the tax shelters and ways of diverting income which the rich do. So when you talk about raising taxes remember that it’s working families who will ultimately suffer. Plus, of course, taking more money out of the economy where it creates jobs and putting it in the hands of a wasteful government.

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    TB, if the top 1% receives 20% of the income and pays 40% of the tax, they are paying twice as much tax per dollar as anyone else. The situation is indeed clearly unfair, and that would be unfair to the top 1%.

    Dave

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    More propaganda Dave and diversion. I said to raise the rates on the rich, NOT the middle class or even the upper middle class. This is classic fat-cat GOP bullshit. The rich don’t want to have their taxes raised, so they throw up a smoke screen and scream loudly that taxes are being raised on everyone-which they’re not.

    I stil maintain that if EVERYONE paid 10% of their income with NO DEDUCTIONS this country would be solvent.

    The reason the rich don’t want that and are putting out smoke screen bullshit against it is because their taxe rate would be raised from what their tax accountants and loopholes net them of about 4% UP TO 10% so in that sense they’re telling the truth-their taxes would more than double… to 10%.

    Working families aren’t in the highest tax range and you know it Dave, but you’ll keep putting out the bullshit that they are and use scare tactics to keep those taxes on the oil billionaires down; won’t you?

    Raising the tax rate on the wealthiest to %70 would achieve a REAL WORLD goal-after they dumped most of it in off-shore accounts and their tax accountants and loopholes got done with whittling down their actual incomes, they would actually be paying about 30-35% or their real total… which is what they should be paying.

    Come down and live in the real world Dave…

    …Please???

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    And while we’re on the subject, any “church” that rakes in more than $150,000 annualy should be taxed.

    A neighborhood church is out to improve the neighborhood with bakesales and fundraisers to fix their roof or replace an antique organ.

    The corporate mega-church on the other hand exists as a tax shelter for the rich and serves only one god-the almighty dollar. Corporate megachurches suck hundreds of millions of dollars out of the economy every year-and deserve to be taxed, because they have stopped being religious organizations and have become businesses instead.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Well, Jet, C Street has lost its’ partial exemption, PRAISE JESUS! But let’s get to the heart of what’s ailing us…

    I don’t see why we can’t come to some kind of consensus in this country and make things at least efficient again. Take global warming. I really am tired of hearing about climate-gate or as Arch would call it clima-quiddick. And I point this out for later reference. Doesn’t it just make complete common sense to try and clean up our waste? I mean, come on, even if there isn’t a global warming problem, shouldn’t we find ways of being more respectful of nature? Is that an anathema to Jesus-ites?

    We need to get our economy back in the fast lane and there are creative ways we can do it. The problem is that sacrifice will be involved and, let’s face it, the ONLY sacrifice those on the right recognize is the “sacrifice” on the cross.

    Why not set a national policy where all government buildings from the lowly town hall in the woods of Colorado to the Rotunda which houses the most organized crime syndicate in human history are forced to become completely energy self sufficient within ten years? Why not have an “off the grid” policy which encourages businesses and home owners alike to adopt energy self containment which returns energy to the grid?

    Like it or not, we are moving to a new mode of thinking with regard to medicine. So why not make a hybrid of other systems in the western world? Is it so immoral to encourage the health industry to come out of the for profit paradigm? 30% of the medical expenses an individual incurs happen in the last 30 days of life. We need a new way of approaching medicine that encourages prevention and education equally with treatment. We are a fat, lazy society. Our diabetes rates are through the roof. We can’t exercise because it will take us away from our Internet, television and video games. Maybe it’s time to shut the power off for 6 hours during daytime.

    Folks like Mitt Romney go around this country promoting the conservative point of view. But may I remind you that Mitt Romney is to Burger King what Alan Greenspan was to the Fed? Mitt Romney, through his works, is a big part of the obesity problem. He goes around the nation in his three piece designer suits, meticulously coiffed hair and spray on tan. He’s attractive, articulate and ready to seize the nation’s call when the time comes to replace Barack Obama. Hell, if he wasn’t Mormon and a complete moron, I’d go out on a date with him!

    We also have to start looking in our own back yards for ways to improve our local economies. A few months ago, I wrote a letter to the CEO of Bank of America. It was a 5 pager which expressed my complete frustration over the nationalization of banks. The point to my letter was simple. How can BofA be “helpful” to small businesses when their own bank tellers wear name tags adorned with Home Depot, Sears and WalMart logos? How can the owner of a mom and pop hardware store feel secure in knowing that they’re using BofA for their own business accounts while BofA promotes the national chains? There’s a mixed message here.

    Long story short, I received a call from one of his secretaries and we spoke at length. She remarked that they had never received a letter quite like mine at that level in the corporate ladder. In the end, BofA will continue what they’re doing, but the bottom line is if more people became proactive and wrote letters, made phone calls or got educated we may very well turn this thing around.

    So back to Arch and his ilk. We’ve run out of time, my friends. The days of nonstop debate and division must come to a close. We are at the precipice more so now than in Lincoln’s time. Sure, this country was founded by a group of white, rich, imperialist land owners. And in our political evolution, we’ve found a way to insure that common men and women have a seat at the table of governance. We cannot count on those whom we have elected to get the job done because we’ve done nothing to entice them to heed our call. We need to get involved. We need to tear ourselves away from our televisions and computers and hit the streets. We need to demand a fair and equitable education for our children which is provided by fair and dedicated teachers who do not hide behind the union contract. And we need a fair system of taxation which does not cripple the poor and middle class but does not put the entire burden on the upper 1%. It has to be fair. And, in that fairness, to those whom much is given in this society, much must be demanded in return. And to the churches and tax free religious institutions? For every penny they spend in lobbying efforts and political affairs of other countries we must exact a stiff tax. If they spend $1 on an anti-abortion campaign – they must provide $1 in taxes to the government.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Read comment #87 a few times folks. You are reading the lines of a man with vision, a man who should be running your country.

    If only we had such a brave, honest and tough man here in Israel – one who spoke clear Hebrew, though.

  • Clavos

    @#75:

    Jet writes:

    On paper they pay more Clavos-in actual fact with sweetheart deals, tax lawyers and sheltered income in offshore banks they pay very little or nothing..

    No, Jet you’re wrong. As the WSJ article clearly indicates, those numbers are from the IRS, and they represent actual taxes paid, not tax rates, or deductions, but the taxes that were actually paid to the government.

    Once again:

    One percent of the population paid more in taxes than all of the bottom 95% paid.

    Fact, not speculation, not “on paper,” taxes actually paid, according to the government.

  • Baronius

    It doesn’t sound like much of a vision to me. It basically amounts to “let’s you and I agree that you’re wrong”. Anyone who says different from me is obstructionist; anyone who does different from me is lazy. Silas names some good policies, but he doesn’t argue for them. He just says that he’s tired of arguing. It doesn’t matter that we’re already cutting back on pollution and researching alternate fuels. It doesn’t matter that our health care system already contributes a large portion of care to the poor. Silas has said that it’s time for change, so let’s change.

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    The beautiful thing about the web Clavos is that you can find any website to back your opinion as can I.

    The fact that they’re paying more taxes doesn’t mean they’re paying their fair share.

    Five people made $100 each and paid $15 each in taxes or $60. Another made 1,000 and paid $100 in taxex… The rich guy may have paid more taxes than the other five combined-but that doesn’t mean he paid his fair share

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    Robin Williams just came up with the perfect solution to our congressional problems-make congressmen and senators wear nascar style jackets enblazoned with their corporate sponsors on them…

    …it’d explain a lot of those votes!

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Jet, I think most estimates of a flat tax rate are more like 15-20%. 10% wouldn’t be enough to pay our current bills.

    But although our conservative friends are appalled at the notion of soaking the rich, most Americans usually support it when asked by pollsters. Raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for insuring the uninsured? Sure, go ahead, say Joe and Jane Q Public.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    For every penny they spend in lobbying efforts and political affairs of other countries we must exact a stiff tax. If they spend $1 on an anti-abortion campaign – they must provide $1 in taxes to the government.

    So are we going to similarly tax every other supposedly non-profit group which takes political positions and lobbies for th causes it advocates? Because to single out churches because they happen to make an issue of abortion seems singularly unfair. Shall we also go after non-profit gay advocacy groups? How about labor unions? They’re tax exempt and they lobby the hell out of the government – far more than churches. Let’s tax them too.

    Dave

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    And I’ll point out the obvious: even after the top 1% pay all that tax [boo-hoo-hoo], they remain very, very wealthy. They are not suffering.

    And Obama won the rich vote in the 2008 election. Many wealthy people accept that it’s part of the way our society works that they subsidize others, and they don’t object — they support the idea.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    The rich don’t want to have their taxes raised, so they throw up a smoke screen and scream loudly that taxes are being raised on everyone-which they’re not.

    Except that the reality is that when taxes are raised on the rich, historically they have almost always been raised on others as well.

    I stil maintain that if EVERYONE paid 10% of their income with NO DEDUCTIONS this country would be solvent.

    That would be a fine system as far as I’m concerned. But it wouldn’t raise enough money and it would be unduly harsh on those in the lowest income groups. You’d have to at least exempt people below the poverty line.

    The reason the rich don’t want that

    Except that they absolutely would support that. They pay far more than 10% of their income on average now. Check the statistics on what people actually pay in taxes sometime.

    and are putting out smoke screen bullshit against it is because their taxe rate would be raised from what their tax accountants and loopholes net them of about 4% UP TO 10% so in that sense they’re telling the truth-their taxes would more than double… to 10%.

    Show me some evidence of this. I’m pretty familiar with how taxes can be manipulated and the feasibility of legally getting your taxes down that low without putting large portions of your income in a place where it’s basically unaccessible like a trust or retirement plan, is very low.

    Working families aren’t in the highest tax range and you know it Dave, but you’ll keep putting out the bullshit that they are and use scare tactics to keep those taxes on the oil billionaires down; won’t you?

    Not ALL of them are, Jet. But I know from personal experience that with me and my wife working we have skirted the edge of the top tax bracket in many years, and we sure don’t have a lot of extra money to throw around.

    Raising the tax rate on the wealthiest to %70 would achieve a REAL WORLD goal-after they dumped most of it in off-shore accounts and their tax accountants and loopholes got done with whittling down their actual incomes, they would actually be paying about 30-35% or their real total… which is what they should be paying.

    They tried this in England, Jet. What happened is that the rich didn’t just offshore some of their money, they just left the country entirely and took all their money and their taxes with them. There are lots of nice countries out there which would welcome our richest people for 10% of their income.

    And the other problem is that when the top rate goes to 70% you KNOW that congess will want to keep things neat, so the 2nd highest rate will go to 60% and the third highest to 50% and we’ll all be paying through the nose.

    And while we’re on the subject, any “church” that rakes in more than $150,000 annualy should be taxed.

    Do you realize how little $150K is, Jet? I work with charities. It costs money to operate a church. Hell, a lot of them have mortgages. One church I used to be involved with ran an AIDS hospice. It cost about half-a-million a year to operate. Should they be taxed?

    And if you make it a tax on net profit that still won’t work. As the scumbags at United Way demonstrated a few years ago, they could take their millions in potential profits and turn them into salaries, bonuses and perks for their top executives and make the profit go away.

    A neighborhood church is out to improve the neighborhood with bakesales and fundraisers to fix their roof or replace an antique organ.

    There’s a lot more to what even a small neighborhood church does than this. How about missionary work? Meals on Wheels? Sunday school? Daycare programs? Programs for the sick and elderly. All that stuff means a lot of fundraising and money flowing through the hands of the church. I’d rather see them doing a lot more of that stuff and not paying taxes.

    The corporate mega-church on the other hand exists as a tax shelter for the rich and serves only one god-the almighty dollar. Corporate megachurches suck hundreds of millions of dollars out of the economy every year-and deserve to be taxed, because they have stopped being religious organizations and have become businesses instead.

    I’m no fan of the giant churches, but most of them with very few exceptions are run as legitimate non-profits and do a lot of good along with their general sleaziness. And the ones who really are scum get caught because they can’t operate at a profit and hide the money and the malfeasance forever. Eventually they all get taken down.

    I hate to defend the status quo, but as far as keeping rapacious curches in line the system we have now actually works pretty well.

    Dave

  • http://jetsgaypride.blogspot.com/ Jet Gardner

    No Dave, I’m singling out churches that suck hundreds of millions out of the economy.

  • treasonous bastard

    …if the top 1% receives 20% of the income and pays 40% of the tax, they are paying twice as much tax per dollar as anyone else. The situation is indeed clearly unfair, and that would be unfair to the top 1%.

    Dave (and Clavos), the logic of this argument is that progressive taxation is either inherently unfair or unfair at the present level. If the latter, how do you propose to establish a fair level non-arbitrarily?

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Dave, I just used anti-abortion lobbying as an example. I’m in full agreement with you. If an organization has tax-exempt status they must be precluded from political debate. Yes, that even means anti-gay groups and gay groups. What I’m trying to accomplish here is quite simple. We need to cut lobbying out of the political equation. I don’t think this is such an unreasonable concept.

    What the majority of us continue to fail to recognize is we send members to Congress with the best of intentions. Once the elected official gets inside the Beltway, things change. It’s the culture of Washington. It’s the seduction of golf junkets, big money lobbyists and the Hollywood-style glitz of D.C. It’s Reality TV at its’ worst. We’ve become a nation obsessed with 15 minutes of fame. The Salahis, Jon & Kate, OctoMom, Balloon Boy… these are all symptoms of a larger problem our society faces. The only difference between the politicos that head to Washington and these Reality Celebrities is the politicians have a better safety net around them to shield them from too much exposure, especially if they’re being funded by the more powerful special interest groups.

  • Roger B

    The most prosperous and expansive period in our history was the Eisenhower years when the top personal tax rate was 91% and corp taxes were high enough to provide 75% of federal taxes.

    Since we’ve systematically reduced rich folks taxes and corp taxes we’ve done nothing but go downhill.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    The conservative/libertarian tax argument is ideological, not practical. But some then try to shoehorn a practical argument into the mix. Facts such as those cited by Roger B are awfully inconvenient when trying to prove supply-side ideology.

    Also consider that Clinton raised taxes and Bush cut them, and both actions were followed by first a boom and then a bust. So maybe other factors are more important in creating booms and busts than raising or lowering tax rates.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    You’re right. Handy. There are other factors — it ain’t all about taxes. The Reagan and Clinton Administrations have sold us yet another bill of goods. The bottom line – like it or not – is special interest lobbying. We’ve got an incredible special interest machine pulling the puppet strings all over Washington. Since when does the will of the people get eclipsed by the will of the corporations? Even unions, which were designed with the best of intentions, have become an albatross upon the American way of life. When union construction workers can get away with shoddy workmanship and cost overruns like those of the Big Dig, one has to ask when is enough enough? I predict within the next 20 years some sort of structural disaster will occur somewhere along the Big Dig. They’ll spend millions in investigations and litigation just to come up with no concrete (pardon the pun) answers because every step of the way elected officials dropped the ball in insuring workmanship and safety.

    Tomorrow there’s an election primary in Massachusetts to select the GOP and Dem candidates for Ted Kennedy’s seat. I am focused on the Dem primary because I’m a realist. The Democrat machine is just too powerful here in the Bay State. We have four candidates – the current Attorney General who is the favorite, a Congressman, a Community Organizer and a businessman with close ties to Mitt Romney. I’m supporting the “community organizer”. Why? Because he is the only viable candidate who recognizes that taking PAC and special interest money is its’ own brand of immorality.

    Our economy is a mess. Our tax system is unfair and outdated. Our education system is completely broken down. Our banking infrastructure is hanging on by a thread. Our politicians are seduced by special interest money. I hate to sound so damned negative — but, let’s face it, we have got to do something — NOW! Unless people like you and me get out from behind our monitors and start writing letters, making phone calls and hitting the voting booth — nothing will change. This is our last best shot before the United States goes by way of the USSR.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Aside from that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Aside from that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

    As I recall, the play ended with a bang.

  • Clavos

    And I’ll point out the obvious: even after the top 1% pay all that tax [boo-hoo-hoo], they remain very, very wealthy. They are not suffering.

    Never said they are, handy.

    And Obama won the rich vote in the 2008 election. Many wealthy people accept that it’s part of the way our society works that they subsidize others, and they don’t object — they support the idea.

    True. Which is a major reason why they ARE paying as much as almost all the rest of the population put together.

    To say they’re not paying their fair share (and I know you didn’t say that, handy) is ludicrous, when they are paying more than 95% of the population pays in the aggregate.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Good to have you back, Mr. C.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    No Dave, I’m singling out churches that suck hundreds of millions out of the economy.

    Jet, you cant actually suck money out of the economy very easily. Even if the preachers at those megachurches are spending the money on yachts, mansions and caviar it’s going back into the economy and creating jobs and income.

    Now, if they are burning it as a sacrifice in their churches, that’s different — let’s ban Budhism!

    Dave

  • ricseag

    The author of this critique is simply uninformed. He rants Limbaugh/Beck with the same disinterest and antipathy toward the facts. (The’liberal elite’ bother themselves with facts and numbers…..Real Americans operate by emotion)

    The FACT is that, despite all their hand-wringing and chest-thumping fervor, when pressed to point to actual examples of family farms being ruined by the Estate Tax, repeal proponents have been unable to produce even a single case. This has been repeatedly stated over-and-over again.

    Sadly, the biggest tyranny we endure in this country today, is the incessant moaning of these right-wing idealogues….