To Grow Our Prosperity, Let My Tax Cuts Expire (TURN BACK THE CLOCK ALERT)

Congress should do the responsible thing and let tax cuts for high earners expire at the end of this year.

As someone who has benefited from these tax cuts, I believe we must restore balance to a federal tax system that has been tilted in favor of the wealthiest 5 percent for a generation.

I've had a lifelong interest in the vital role of social entrepreneurs, the local heroes who take risks to lead innovative nonprofit organizations to solve problems at the local level.

I'm a big believer in the importance of mentorship, of helping the next generation of business and community leaders find their way.

But I also view efficient government and adequate tax revenue as essential ingredients in fostering the fertile soil for business development and healthy communities. Just as a healthy farm or garden needs a balance of nutrients, our country needs a balanced and fair tax system.

Yet the overheated anti-tax rhetoric is alarming. There are loud voices that will object to any tax and claim that raising taxes on higher-income people will destroy economic growth and punish success. They argue that we don't need additional revenue, that we simply can reform entitlements, cut spending and root out waste.

We obviously should press for greater government efficiency and accountability. But it is irresponsible to suggest that we can proceed without increasing tax revenue. No gardener or farmer would expect their crops to grow year after year without regular additions of fertilizer.

We have racked up more than $13 trillion in national debt, thanks to borrowing to pay for two wars and a decade of tax cuts. Yet we have long overdue investments in education, reducing our dependence on foreign oil, and public infrastructure, such as roads, bridges and broadband access, and market protections. Where will the money come from?

Generous tax cuts for the wealthy, passed by Congress in 2001 and 2003, are due to expire at the end of this year. Between 2002 and 2009, households with incomes of more than $250,000 received more than $700 billion in tax cuts, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. This essentially was added to our national debt.

The higher-income people I know didn't lobby for these original tax breaks and recognize the need to allow them to expire. If we retain these tax cuts, we'll add another $700 billion to the debt over the next decade. These are funds better spent in deficit reduction and targeted investments.

The retired business leaders I serve with on community boards are thankful for the opportunities we've had to do business and grow wealth in this remarkable nation and free market economic system. None of us exist on an island, and no wealth can be created without a society that provides a fertile ground of opportunity for everyone.

In the 30 years after World War II, 1947 to 1977, we taxed ourselves at significantly more progressive tax rates than today. The highest earners paid twice as much of their income in taxes in 1960 as they do today, according to a new study by Wealth for the Common Good.

With that money, we made investments in public infrastructure, affordable homeownership and expanded education at all levels. Far-sighted leaders supported policies that propelled millions of Americans into the stable middle class.

Today, young people are graduating from college with $100,000 in school debt as undergraduates. We're coasting along on previous generations' investments in water treatment facilities, bridges and other essential infrastructure - and we're leaving too many talented young people behind. Our failure to make investments today will undercut prosperity for the next generation.

Congress will be under tremendous pressure to continue providing tax breaks to high-income groups. Let's hope it has the fortitude to let mine expire. The fertilit y of our economic soil depends on it.

PETER HEEGAARD IS RETIRED FROM BANKING AND IS A FORMER MANAGING PRINCIPAL OF LOWRY HILL, A SUBSIDIARY OF WELLS FARGO. HE IS FOUNDER OF URBAN ADVENTURE AND AUTHOR OF "HEROES AMONG US: SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURS STRENGTHENING FAMILIES AND BUILDING COMMUNITY" (NODIN PRESS). DISTRIBUTED BY THE AMERICAN FORUM.

“We might indeed have to pay higher taxes to reduce our debt. The problem is paying ever higher taxes to fund ever higher government spending.”

100% wrong. At our current tax rates for the higher brackets, increases in taxes depress the economy more than the increases confiscate wealth. IOW, higher top marginal rates will result in LESS revenues, not more. See JFK and Reagan for counter-examples. See Carter for an example.

Also Pete doesn’t mention that NOBODY, even the poorest Americans would tolerate living in 1960 conditions for more than about 3 days. No HDTV, no computers, no internet, microwave ovens, 1000sf houses for entire families,cable TV, cell phones, dvds, Cds, grocery stores that had 1/5 th of the items they have now, polio, 1960 level medical care, etc. I mean yes there were nice things about 1960 life, but I still wouldn’t want to live like that.

Sir, if you think you are not paying enough taxes, there is a simple solution that won't hurt anybody. All you have to do is sit down, pull out your checkbook, and write a check payable to the Treasury of the United States for whatever taxes you think you should be paying. They will cheerfully accept it and cash it.

I'll call that good idea & raise it with an even better one:

Let this self-righteous dipstick arrange it so that his entire "stash" of assets is turned over to the Gubmint. Also, all future paychecks, 401k distributions, winnings at Vegas, etc. are automatically deposited straight to the Treasury. And let some faceless pinhead bureaucrat in an underground bunker somewhere in D.C. decide how much of a weekly allowance Mr. Heegaard is entitled to. And the same goes for any Hollywood big mouth who spews that same nonsense.

Not paying enough? Fine. YOU nitwits put your faith in Gubmint and stop volunteering my health, wealth & happiness to make you feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeel better.

I've had a lifelong interest in the vital role of social entrepreneurs, the local heroes who take risks to lead innovative nonprofit organizations to solve problems at the local level.

Great, now try a for profit enterprise. Nonprofit usually means that the profits are distributed quarterly to at least the executive staff - thereto no profit at the business level.

For profit enterprises actually reinvest some of their money into the economy.

Nonprofit typically means no profits for the economy, plain and simple.

Sounds noble at face value, but in reality - it's just a group of people that found a way to sucker money from people and not have to make a damn thing of real intrinsic value in return...

Like, if we get Clinton’s tax rates, we’ll have Clinton’s economy?

Just bring back Newt Gingrich and the GOP contract with America, too

and go back to funding the govt at the Cinton budget level, too

sarc

Remember when John Kerry chose to pay the lower Tax Rate on his MA Taxes?

Remember when John Kerry got caught not paying the MA Tax Rate on his Yacht?

Remember that Obama’s friends at Google moved their business off shore to avoid a $60 Billion Dollar Tax Liability?

Then there is Barney Frank and Maxine Waters and Charlie Rangle and on and on and on.

We have racked up more than $13 trillion in national debt, thanks to borrowing to pay for two wars and a decade of tax cuts.”

You CANNOT “pay” for ‘tax cuts’ - tax cuts reduce revenue ... you rack up debt because you SPENT TOO MUCH.

We spent about $20 TRILLION in the past 8 years.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.