Well, this isn't so much of a guest post, but some articles about the economy that he thought were worth reading. ( Check 'em out! )
I Ask the Economist, so you don't have to! Carry on. (And thank you, sweetie.)The Republicans are like the Mafia -- they'll do you a favor, but they'll always expect you to do them a favor later. And somehow the favor they want from you hurts you more than the favor they do for you hurts them.The numbers in that e-mail are correct, but they don't tell the full story.The tax rates shown in that e-mail are on earned income. Earned income is income that you get for working. The change in tax laws back in 2003 cut taxes a little bit on earned income for everyone. That's the favor the Mafia did for us.So what's the favor that we did for them? The favor they expected in return came in two parts. The first part was a massive reduction in capital gains, dividends, and inheritance taxes. For the rich, capital gains and dividends taxes were essentially cut in half. You can actually see this from the same website linked to in that earlier e-mail:To sum up those two links, capital gains taxes for the richest Americans dropped from 38% to 15% (or from 20% to 15%, if the asset was owned for longer than one year) and dividends taxes dropped from 38% to 15%.The estate tax (called the "death tax" by trust fund kids) is set to disappear completely in 2010.So, in 2010, Bill Gates could leave his entire fortune to his kids and the kids would pay no tax at all on receiving that inheritance, and then they would pay a tiny tax on interest earned off of that inheritance. And then they could leave that money to their kids, and so on. Basically, the Republicans are creating an aristocracy of people who never have to work and just live off of old money (ie, people like them).So the bottom line of these tax changes is that the spoiled trust-fund kids of the world (people like George Bush) -- that is, people who inherit most of their money and live off of income earned from dividends and capital gains (not work) -- got a HUGE tax cut. The rest of us got a little tax cut.Now, you might ask -- so what? At least we got a small tax cut. Who cares if the super rich got a bigger tax cut?Well, this is the second part of that favor that we owe the Mafia (i.e., Republicans).These big tax cuts to the rich (along with the cost of the Iraq war) resulted in a big increase in the budget deficit (remember that under Clinton, we had budget surpluses). That budget deficit has to be paid for somehow, and you can bet that it wasn't going to be the super rich who would pay for it. It would most likely be working people, and it would most likely happen using Social Security.There is a great historical example of how the Republicans use Social Security as a way to pay for tax cuts on the rich. Back in the 1980s, Reagan cut taxes on everyone, but particularly on the rich. The result was a massive budget deficit. At the same time, people warned about a "crisis" with Social Security. This "crisis" was "solved" by a massive increase in the Social Security payroll tax. But guess what -- the SS payroll tax is not paid on income over about $90,000 (in today's dollars). So, in effect, the tax cuts on the rich back in the 1980s were paid for by an increase in Social Security taxes on working people. Obviously they never described it that way, but that's what essentially happened.I suspect that this was Bush's plan, too. Remember that he wanted to make all sorts of changes to Social Security after he won in 2004? The Democrats managed to stop him from doing that. But if they hadn't, I suspect that those tax cuts on the super rich would have been paid for either with cuts in SS benefits or an increase in SS taxes, or both.
![]() |
You are viewing Create a LiveJournal Account Learn more | Explore LJ: Life Entertainment Music Culture News & Politics Technology |