What's Up With The Whig -- Part Ummm...?
Today's Herald-Whig has a letter-to-the-editor that suggests Republicans should give in to Democrats regarding the Debt Ceiling debate so as to tie the 'higher taxes' label around President Obama's neck. Interesting and a bit different from the usual Rightist militancy. Let's examine the writer's points:
1. the rich, whose taxes Obama and the Democrats wish to raise, are the job creators.
Except that these 'job creators' were paying the rate Democrat's now suggest during the Clinton years--and even more before that--and yet that decade under Clinton is considered, wistfully, as a 'boom' period.
2. "the massive increase in the national debt during the president's watch...would seem to lend credence to the (view that) ... the problem is spending..."
Except that the deficit under the Bush whitehouse was massaged to look smaller than it was. It was only when Obama began including the costs of our wars that the total went over a trillion a year. The only spending that Obama has added involved Stimulus to get the economy out of recession. The approximate share of responsibility for our annual deficits is 75% / 25%, Bush / Obama. This is because of the wars, the tax cuts (which were supposed to 'goose' the economy, but didn't) and the expansion of Medicare, all under Bush, compared to the Stimulus and automatically triggered recession-related spending (unemployment benefits, etc.) under Obama. In other words, Bush's decisions bore fruit.
3. "the country has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world."
Except that many corporations pay no taxes. How can this be? Because our tax code is riddled with loopholes and credits. So, the rate may be high, but US corporations actually pay much less than many of their counterparts in say, Europe.
4. "the rich already pay most of the income taxes in this country..."
Except that the rich are the only ones who have increased their income recently. Everyone else is just keeping up or has lost earning power. So, no wonder they're paying so much, it's because they're the ones raking in the money. For example, the difference between a corporate executive's salary and that of an employee's has changed dramatically over the past few decades. It used to be something like 10-to-1. It's now something like 80-to-1.
5. "about half the population in the lower income brackets pays little or no income tax..."
Except they pay all kinds of other taxes (sales, state, property, social security, etc.) The total tax burden is actually favorable to the rich. Plus, who wants to tax a retiree's Social Security benefits or a young family with kids and their minimum wage jobs?
6. "...and yet (the lower income brackets) as a group receive massive government entitlements."
Except the rich receive even more. A rich Senior enjoying Medicare coverage or deducting his employer-provided health care coverage is getting the better deal. And if you compare the tax breaks for things like mortgage deductions on second homes, etc., to a family on Food Stamps, for example....
So, I do hope the Republicans in Congress take the writer's advice and give Obama what he wants. The worm will turn and the Republican party can begin finding its way again.
