Saturday, December 08, 2012

The Future Hinges on Republican Changes

Someone once said that being lucky is better than being smart. Mitt Romney wasn’t lucky. In a campaign for the presidency when the man in the street believed that the structure of the US economy is stacked against the middle class, and that the wealthy pay too little in taxes, Romney gave us double-talk on his tax plan, and was shown to pay a small percentage in taxes.

The fact that the US distribution of wealth and income has become dangerously skewed toward the upper 1% should become apparent to anyone who looks at the data with an open mind, and yet Republican leaders kept saying they would never increase taxes on the wealthy. Good-bye Romney.

Now the Republican leadership seems to be accepting that all taxes on the very wealthy must be raised, but are constrained by the base to get out in front on this problem. WE NEED REPUBLICANS TO WAKE UP BECAUSE ONLY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY CAN SAVE THIS COUNTRY!

We are still suffering from the unintended consequences of the presidency of Lyndon Johnson, who gave us the Vietnam War and the Great Society, which then gave us programs that resulted in hordes of fatherless children and a society that is falling apart. Carter and Clinton gave us a program that forced banks to give mortgages to deadbeats, and that, in turn, led to the collapse of housing values and middle-class wealth. This same mentality has now resulted in carbon taxes and strangling regulations and in a government run healthcare program (Obamacare) that places such cost burdens on businesses, that they are engaged in a mass effort to cut hours and employees to avoid them.

Republicans must again become the majority party and again embrace limited spending, limited government and states’ rights. They can only do so by throwing Grover Norquist in a ditch and face facts about the needed changes in income and estate taxes so that the man in the street sees some fairness as existed from the 1950’s to the 1980’s. The Republican Party must not be seen as the protector of the very rich, but as the protector of a system where anyone who wants to work hard can make it.

A continuation of government by modern liberals will change America for the worse for all time.


AddThis Social Bookmark Button


At 10:35 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fair Taxation by Wayne Allen Root

“President Obama is right. It is time for "fairness." It is time to ask some Americans to do more, contribute more, sacrifice more.

At 11:10 AM, Blogger RussWilcox said...

The comment and the article cited above are sarcastic - and also wrong. The article states that the upper 20% pay almost 100% of income taxes, but, according to Bloomberg, the facts are that they earn 60% of the income and pay 63% of the taxes.

At 11:16 AM, Blogger RussWilcox said...

Another interesting comment from Bloomberg was this:
"The Republican presidential candidate’s comments that 47 percent of Americans don’t pay income taxes and see themselves as “victims” dependent on the government signifies a shift in the party’s thinking. Republicans backed refundable tax credits and expanded entitlement programs under George W. Bush. Now they want to curtail entitlements and express concern that not enough people are paying taxes.
“The working people who don’t pay income tax, that is by and large the result of Republican policies,” said Michael Linden, director of tax and budget policy at the Center for American Progress, a Washington group aligned with Democrats. He said he didn’t “understand why they’re not trumpeting this.”"

At 12:54 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I keep hearing about how the rich don't pay their "fair share". What is "fair"? Is it fair that a good percentage of US citizens pay NO income tax? Cut the crap here.

All you PHD's out there, come up with a definition of what you consider "fair" and then we can debate how well that would work to solve the real problem of our government spending too much. But I haven't seen anyone come up with a "fair" tax level. Is't that like trying to come up with a definition of what "beautiful" is? Sort of resides in the eye of the behoder, doesn't it.

Maybe some of you bright people who want more taxes should ask Tim Geithner to come up with a definition of a "fair" level of taxes for the high achievers to pay. Also, get a fair tax level for those who pay zero. That should be interesting.

At 4:40 PM, Blogger RussWilcox said...

You just have your facts wrong, and if you and others persist, the Republican Party is finished. From
"Let’s take a closer look at the 46.4 percenters.
According to the Tax Policy Center, about half of those who owe no federal income tax are people whose incomes are so low that when standard income tax provisions — personal exemptions for taxpayers and dependents and the standard deduction — are factored in, that simply leaves no income to be taxed. Those are people who earned less than about $27,000.....
So that’s half of Romney’s 46.4 percenters. The rest pay no federal income tax due to tax benefits and credits. Here’s the rest of the breakdown:

* 22 percent receive senior tax benefits — the extra standard deduction for seniors, the exclusion of a portion of Social Security benefits, and the credit for seniors. Most of them are older people on Social Security whose adjusted gross income is less than $25,000.
* 15.2 percent receive tax credits for children and the working poor. That includes the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit. The child tax credit was enacted under Democratic President Bill Clinton, but it doubled under Republican President George W. Bush. The earned income tax credit was enacted under Republican President Gerald Ford, and was expanded under presidents of both parties. Republican President Ronald Reagan once praised it as “one of the best antipoverty programs this country’s ever seen.” As a result of various tax expenditures, about two thirds of households with children making between $40,000 and $50,000 owed no federal income taxes.
* The rest ended up owing no federal income tax due to various tax expenditures such as education credits, itemized deductions or reduced rates on capital gains and dividends. Most of this group are in the middle to upper income brackets. In fact, the TPC estimates there are about 7,000 families and individuals who earn $1 million a year or more and still pay no federal income tax.

At 8:10 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think the problems of our country go must deeper than the end of the Republican Party. We have approx. 50% (those who voted for a socialist/communist Obama) who want to take money (taxes) from those who worked hard and hand it over to those that did not work hard, if at all. Sort of reminds one of the political philosphy "to each according to their need, from each according to their ability". That didn't work out so good, did it.

If most people feel that taking from other people is the answer, not just the Republican Party is at risk. Our great country is in decline. History of great republics tells us that most all of them decayed from within. When you feel that taking from someone else is the answer, we are in deep trouble. And that is why and how we have such a pathetic person in the Whitehouse. But he unfortunately represents the crowd who think that taking from the "rich" and redistributing it to the masses is "fair". That thinking will doom our nation.

Also, what is the definition of "rich"? And what is the definition of what is the "fair share"? And does the person who pays more taxes actually receive more benefits than one who pays less? Some would argue the the poor person paying less taxes actually receives more in benefits (subsidized housing, free medical/dental/food stamps/utility subsidies/free tuition or scholarshipts/ access to low interest loans/etc.)

At 10:54 AM, Blogger RussWilcox said...

Are you defending a system where the average CEO earns 400X the income of the average worker in this country? That's $28,000 for the average worker and $13,000,000 for the average CEO.

At 11:47 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes.I am. The person making whatever amount he/she makes has, under our present system, the opportunity to make a much greater amount if they work hard and work smart and are willing to take some risk (good luck and timing are also in this).

The person making $28K may or may not be happy with his lot but he has a chance(in most cases) to change that if he chooses and fits into the criteria above.

And because a person makes whatever amount, that does not "entitle" he/she to someone else's money confiscated by the government by way of taxation. I don't envy the rich and I don't nessarily feel sad for those who make less money.

What Obama has made a central part of his politics is pitting "rich" against poor. Unfortunately, many people have fallen for this class warfare bull. Sort of reminds you a little of how the Nazis pit all the economic ills of Germany on the Jews. Unfortunately, many people bought into that falsehood with horrible results.


Post a Comment

<< Home