MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
Op-ed by Thomas B. Edsall @ NYTimes.com, June 1
In the past, Democrats could support progressive policies knowing that the costs would fall largely on Republicans. Not anymore.
Before y'all start screaming, if you don't know Edsall's background, check out the entry on him on Wikipedia.
Comments
A taste:
by artappraiser on Thu, 06/01/2017 - 3:55pm
Edsall's bottom-line thesis that Bernie's tax plan would gore many Democratic voters is questionable. First, the Tax Policy Center's analysis may significantly overstate the cost of Medicare-for-all and thus either the size of the tax hike necessary to fund it or, to the extent it is not paid for out of tax revenues, the resulting increase in the budget deficit. Second, middle-income taxpayers may see a tax increase but they will also see significant benefits from Medicare-for-all and are quite likely to see benefits from tuition-free higher education and many of Bernie's other proposals. Only those who are well-ensconced in the the top quintile would likely see tax increases that would outweigh the significant cost savings that most Americans would enjoy.
by HSG on Thu, 06/01/2017 - 4:15pm
There just is not that much money out there as in socialist dreams in EARNED INCOME, the type that the government taxes in INCOME taxes. People should at least have learned this from reading up on Trump deals: the billionaires and mega millionaires you read about, many do not have earned income. The CEO's that get high salaries are very few. The mega wealthy have corporations, they have capital, they have assets. They may not even have much money at all, but stock in a corporation they founded, stock which goes up and down in value.
I am not a economic numbers person, but I suspect that to truly get the wealthier to pay for socialist dreams, there would have to be a very radical change in the way federal taxes work. A change so radical that it would upset the whole economy into uncharted and unknown places.
Without that change, with just tinkering, you will just have the wealthy's accountants moving the "money" from the taxed type of income or asset or profit to somewhere else.
by artappraiser on Thu, 06/01/2017 - 4:47pm
I can agree that it's likely that the "socialists" eyes are bigger than their stomachs. That being said there needs to be radical change in the way taxes are collected. Not just on the federal level but also by states and most countries around the world. There also needs to be substantial reworking of the ways we regulate LLC's. By coincidence I just read another short article about the amounts and ways the ultra rich use to hide the income.
While this study focuses on Norway, Sweden, and Denmark the conclusions are likely similar in other developed countries.
by ocean-kat on Thu, 06/01/2017 - 6:00pm
This is a great cite, ocean-kat. Taking it outside the same old same old blame the GOP box, if only we were like Sweden, yadda yadda. Given that the idea is to solve problems, not just take on new and different ones copied from elsewhere...
by artappraiser on Thu, 06/01/2017 - 7:35pm
Comes to mind that V.A.T. is the way many countries fund a lot of social programs, not income tax. Progressive in taxing consumption of goods and services. I'm not very savvy in economics, but it I have seen it argued that it depresses growth and/or trade. If people have high income but they save or invest it rather than spend it, their wealth is not so heavily taxed. We are currently an economy focused on consumption. My understanding is that V.A.T. is not beloved by small businesses, the bureaucracy level is along the lines of handling health insurance as a small employer here. What would it do to the craftspeople trying to create a business on like, Etsy.com?
Also comes to mind that states like FL with no income tax are popular with some for that reason. Sales tax by the state is 6%. There must be whopping property taxes for the schools...
Edit to add: if a party would want to go whole hog heavy taxation of profits, it might as well be anti-immigrant as well, because you'd bascially lose most of the legal immigrant vote by doing that.
by artappraiser on Thu, 06/01/2017 - 5:47pm