Carl Gibson writes, "Despite billionaire Warren Buffett's pleas to reduce the deficit by shifting the tax burden to the super-rich, Republican members of Congress have officially come out in favor of raising taxes on the poor, while fiercely protecting trillions in tax handouts for billionaires, big oil and corporate jet owners. Right-wing politicians and corporate-media pundits have now set their sights on 'lucky duckies,' or the bottom half of Americans who don't pay federal income taxes."
A low-income single mother faces financial hardship and homelessness. (photo: Center for Justice, Tolerance snd Community)
GOP's Debt Solution: Soak the Poor
27 August 11
Reader Supported News | Perspective
�
magine a bulky schoolyard bully routinely holding you and your classmates upside-down by your shoes and pocketing the money that falls out, using the amount gained from his extortion to buy a new bike at the end of each semester. Now imagine enduring this process every day, all year, throughout each grade of school.
What if one day, the bully actually complained that you weren't bringing enough lunch money to school because he wanted a nicer bike? Would you comply and let him rob you of a larger amount, or would you and your fellow classmates surround the teacher and demand the bully return the money he stole?
Despite billionaire Warren Buffett's pleas to reduce the deficit by shifting the tax burden to the super-rich, Republican members of Congress have officially come out in favor of raising taxes on the poor, while fiercely protecting trillions in tax handouts for billionaires, big oil and corporate jet owners. Right-wing politicians and corporate-media pundits have now set their sights on "lucky duckies," or the bottom half of Americans who don't pay federal income taxes. As law professor Edward Kleinbard noted, this statement is misleading and ignores the need for meaningful reform of our tax code.
Jon Stewart creatively dismantled the poor-people-don't-pay-taxes argument on The Daily Show, highlighting conservatives who dismissed the $700 billion in revenue gained from ending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy in 2010. According to Stewart's calculations, taking exactly half of everything owned by the bottom 50% of Americans would also generate $700 billion, exactly as much revenue as increasing the tax rate for the richest Americans by a modest 3%. Stewart sarcastically suggested Republicans trim the deficit by seizing all assets owned by the bottom half of Americans.
It's incredibly audacious for the rich to ask the poor to pay more in taxes in order to protect their budget-busting tax breaks, especially considering America's wealth disparity. The gap between the richest and everyone else has grown to levels even greater than on the eve of the crash that triggered the great depression, with the top .001% of Americans now owning 976 times more than the bottom 90%. In 1928, the richest only owned 892 times more than the bottom 90%.
And of course, those accusing the working poor of freeloading ignore the fact that 1 in 4 American jobs don't even pay poverty wages, or that the federal income tax is inherently designed to avoid hitting the poor, the elderly and working families with children. Such bold accusations also ignore the reality that all of the aforementioned groups still pay roughly one-third of their income in sales, property, payroll and excise taxes.
A single mother struggling to keep a roof over her child's head would probably love to trade places with a six-figure earner and bear the burden of paying federal income tax on a comfortable salary. But would a six-figure earner be willing to work three part-time minimum wage jobs and still worry about how the rent is going to be paid at the end of the month? Would he really be eager to forgo paying federal income tax if it meant he had to scrape quarters together to buy beans, lentils and ramen noodles for dinner?
Big oil doesn't need $4 billion per year in taxpayer subsidies - they're making record profits. Excessive tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires won't create jobs - the unemployment rate doubled after ten years of the Bush tax cuts. And corporate jet owners don't need a tax break while public employees nationwide are losing their jobs to budget cuts.
America needs to surround our teacher before recess and make a strong statement together - the bullies don't need to rob us of our lunch money to continue their excessive lifestyles. Let's stop subsidizing wealth for the sake of wealth, and leave struggling middle-class families alone.
Carl Gibson, 24, of Lexington, Kentucky, is a spokesman and organizer for US Uncut, a nonviolent, creative direct-action movement to stop budget cuts by getting corporations to pay their fair share of taxes. He graduated from Morehead State University in 2009 with a B.A. in Journalism before starting the first US Uncut group in Jackson, Mississippi, in February of 2011. Since then, over 20,000 US Uncut activists have carried out more than 300 actions in over 100 cities nationwide. You may contact Carl at carl@rsnorg.org.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
yes the system works - like in Finland - free education, healthcare - quality and affordable.
"Health care in Finland consists of a highly decentralized, three-level publicly funded health care system and a much smaller private health care sector. Although the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health has the highest decision-making authority, the municipalities (local governments) are responsible in providing health care to their residents.
Finland offers its residents universal health care. Health promotion, including prevention of diseases has been the main focus of Finnish health care policies for decades. This has resulted in the eradication of certain communicable diseases and improvement in the health of population.
The quality of service in Finnish health care is considered to be good; according to a survey published by the European Commission in 2000, Finland has the highest number of people satisfied with their hospital care system in the EU: 88% of Finnish respondents were satisfied compared with the EU average of 41.3%.[1]"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Finland
On a personal note - I stopped first at the local Dem. headquarters, as I'd been invited to do, and found only a small handful of people present to watch the debate. I then very quickly left for the Bernie Sanders supporters' debate watching gathering, which I'd also been asked to attend, and found approx. 80 folks present.
The claps and shouts for what Bernie had to say was intense, while the grim plus faces, with head shaking 'no's', was what prevailed when Hillary spoke.
Following what I learned in New York, while on the plaintiffs' legal team at the Hedges, et. al. v. Obama, et. al. trial, re. the Clinton Foundation's and Hillary's corruption, I do believe that the 1%ers and their puppet cronies are doing all they can to make certain that Hillary is the Dem. nominee, and Trump or Jeb is the G.O.P. nominee.
The 1%ers must vomit at the thought of Bernie Sanders getting the post-debate overwhelming approval he got online, following the debate, and the vast numbers (1 mil.) of 'small' donations that came to him, from his ever growing numbers of regular supporters (myself included). All the while, as the 'mess' media declared Hillary Clinton to be the 'debate winner'.
We need a genuine progressive who sees that revolution is necessary to return this country to a path of sanity and equality for all. Bernie Sanders is the ONLY genuine article.
Time for Liberals, Dems, and Progressives to unite to get their base to the polls in EVERY election and to begin real face-to-face grass roots organizing.
Read past my first statement (which was criticism) to the heart of my comments. I'm not interested in a smooth performance, I want the genuine article. Hillary only shifted left to compete with Bernie & we need a genuine progressive for sanity and justice. Bernie is the ONLY progressive candidate for President.
Added a few sentences in the original comment to make what I meant, clearer.
Agreed!
A "Polished performance" is just that. Any seasoned Actor can give a "Polished" performance; that's their stock-in-trade and then it's up to their creative abilities that give the performance their own stamp to make it memorable.
Clinton is not about to step on her wealthy donors' tootsies -including Wall Street and the defense (a.k.a. War machine) industry- by telling hard, unpalatable truths and challenging the entrenched status-quo and underlying power structure.
Sanders on the other hand, makes it his outspoken business to do just that.
Clinton is completely shielded from populist issues just by virtue of her long term embedment in the Beltway culture. Sanders goes right out into the crowds and meets them -far from the "pressing the flesh; kissing babies" condescending attitude of those who are show-people and little else.
I've never seen such forthrightness in ANY candidate in my long association with and residence in the US of Armaments.
Yes, it was a good performance--sh e convinced me that she's got the answers down that poll best and work with the audience she's trying to reach.
But BERNIE convinced me, yet, again, that he speaks from the heart and his compass is set for True North. I trust Bernie. He's the real deal. I don't trust Clinton's "right" answers, however good they sounded, one whit.
Eh????
You means to round up Bernie Sanders??!!
FYI: The public donated another $1.3 million to Bernie's campaign after the debate.
Also, see: Bernie Won All the Focus Groups & Online Polls - So Why Is the Media Saying Hillary Won the Debate?
http://www.alternet.org/print/media/bernie-won-all-focus-groups-online-polls-so-why-media-saying-hillary-won-debate
This is the message Hillary just doesn't get.
Hilary's points were all about incrementalism. We only need to "tweek" the system. Sorry, Hilary. We need to do more than fix the system on the marginal. As Sen. Warren keeps saying, the system is rigged against the common people!
Examples to look at: Why is it taking so long for Mary Jo White to go after the crooks on Wall Street? (Check her husband's connections.) Why was Arne Duncan a stooge for the corporatists who want to take over public education? What is Loretta Lynch doing about the voter ID fraud being perpetrated by the Rethugnicans in Alabama? And on it goes - the need for systemic change in EVERY Federal department.
Not a revolution so much as this: Yer not liberal enough if you don't think a sea change is due for this country. Perhaps, I'm idealistic, maybe too idealistic, but The US needs to go in a very different direction, and very soon. Our pal, the State Senator from here, mentioned a while ago that we have seen twenty years of Dem and twenty years of Repub, but haven't seen any deviation from what seems a ruinous course of corporatism in all that time. One party has been predatory and the other party has been cowardly (you can guess who's who), so I figure a new paradigm is called for and Bernie shows me it might be possible. I was impressed, also, that all involved did not turn the evening into a teenage food fight, as did our far right wing brothers last week.
Period.
End of argument.
My Daddy had just died? Really? Well, my Dad died as well and I still knew that Glass Stegall was a major help to regulate big banks.
Every GOP armaments industry - shill has a profit$ motive for supporting right wing wackos like Netanyahu, and the creepy "Christian" evangelists only have programmed end-of-days rationales for helping the otherwise hated and despised by them Jews (in Israel and here both.)
I think it's the states duty to see that all children get Public Education of the highest quality, equally. These are our future leaders. We need them to be the top to compete in a global economy
- bernie drives the dem debate progressive, as he drives hill progressive, as he drives the dem party progressive, as he drives the country progressive, as he drives the earth progressive
where else but here, is hill shifting progressive a bad thing? get over it, soreheads!
says - # GreenBee 2015-10-14 13:49 "We need genuine progressives in the State legislatures and Congress or Bernie, if elected, will be obstructed by the same forces that obstructed Obama and everyone who is progressive.
"Time for Liberals, Dems, and Progressives to unite to get their base to the polls in EVERY election and to begin real face-to-face grass roots organizing."
That said, remember that people have 'blindly' voted for men for centuries "just because they were men". In fact, if you weren't male, you had zero chance.
Many women ARE likely to vote for a woman who supports REAL change for women's lives today.
Almost 100 years after getting the vote, women are STILL treated as second class, no full equality or equal pay, no parity in corporate leadership, no family values corporate policies. Women were shut out from running for President for centuries, until 2008. The only woman with the cajones to take the risk--Hillary-- was mocked and ridiculed and treated with unparalleled disdain. Yes, her positions on most issues are too conservative, but that's not why she was treated with such disrespect.
Democrats have had 40 years since the birth of feminism to change the realities for women and work on all the other critical issues. They did almost nothing.
Clearly an important reason for Democrats to finally get ahead of the curve and take MUCH stronger stands for women and on all the other issues that need addressing.
Bernie has supported REAL CHANGE on all the issues for DECADES. We just have to help women see that Bernie has been with us all the way for 34 years AND he's a progressive on all the other issues, as well, unlike Clinton.
Too bad, though I prefer Bernie, Hillary is clearly head and shoulders above the other candidates --- those GOP clown car males and the granite blocks or standard issue DNC males like Chaffee, Biden et sl.
Well she was the ONLY one who actively addressed the GOP 'War On Women' issues that, aside from a bit by Bernie, the males in the debate carefully avoided addressing.
Yes. But only if those who are for him are REALLY for him and become part of a tidal wave of grass roots support, and conscientiously work to promote his progressive agendas. And of course, voting the near treasonous tea party trogs out of office, as well.
Horse shit. Stop falling for the establishment propaganda and start working to put Bernie Sanders in the White House.
Were are you ?
Bernie Sanders and the American people need you to support Bernie.
http://readersupportednews.org/pm-section/78-78/32928-the-democratic-debate-wasnt