They want to sell tax breaks to the rich in exchange for “campaign contributions” which they will really spend on themselves . The taxes collected will actually go down as the objective is to raise their own income, not tax receipts.
Whats more, income inequality has been growing. Sparing the middle class higher taxes while requiring the wealthy to pay more would tip the scales slightly in the other direction.
"Tax what you want less of, subsidize what you want more of." It's interesting that the current crop of Democrats see the first part, but not the second part. So the second part is a no brainer: subsidize all-employee bonus distributions by allowing a deduction higher than 100 percent of the distribution.
I've written about this a few times before, so here is the short form: distribute a share of the profits equally to all employees, and take a 125-150 percent deduction from the company taxes (Schedule C). By taking away other deductions, it would encourage management, including Boards of Directors, to view this as a way of reducing their tax obligation.
This mirrors the "bonus pool" for management people (which I never understood), and the payout level is set the same way: management decides. It can range from zero to whatever.
When the Democrats becomes really interested in "money re-distribution" they will push for this idea. Let everyone who makes profits happen share in the rewards.
Democrats don’t make decisions based on what’s good for America. Democrats make decisions based on what’s good for them and the Democrat party. When the Democrats are in charge, we might as well change our name to The United States of the Democrat Party.
There’s more inequality because of the collapse of the two-parent family among mostly minorities. That is the result of government policy. Taxing the rich will do nothing to solve this problem.
It’s also caused by increased one-family households, many of them idiotic, preening, vapid Valley Girls who delay marriage until no one wants them and vote for Big Daddy Government in the process. Also a result of leftist ideology.
There’s more inequality because the Left has supported the max influx of low IQ peasants from around the world to guarantee more Leftists get elected. These illegal aliens and even legal immigrants drive down the cost of labor by undercutting native-born Americans. Again, the result of Leftist policies.
Finally, there has also been an increase in single person households because some people who once had to live with relatives are able to live on their own — the elderly, for example. This is not a negative for the economy, although it expands the appearance of inequality but not the reality.
It’s time to expose this insane push for redistribution and expose that it will be massive failure. With this idiotic rant from Wiesenthal, The Business Insiders build another brick in the wall of ignorance that passes for journalism today.
One of the reasons Democrats want to go on record as raising taxes on the “rich” is to score brownie points with their “poor” constituency. - They’ll find back door ways to reward their rich donors. (You know how it is, Dhimmicrats are more “for the poor” than those eeeevil rich Republicans.)
This comes right out of Saul Alinsky : “divide and conquer “
There's an irreconcilable difference between the actual needs of the gov't as defined in the Constitution, and the insatiable appetites of "Progressives".
I clicked on the thread thinking I was going to post one of those, “Of course! Everybody has known this all along,” replies.
Instead, I find the author is clueless.
The sole reason the scumbag rats want the Republicans to bend and agree to purely symbolic, drop-in-the-bucket tax hikes on “the rich” is to see if the GOP will actually commit party suicide. It is pure politics and nothing more. The American public deserves to have one party that stands for lower taxes and limited government and another party that doesn’t. If the Republicans agree to the confiscation of more taxes from the private sector for dumping down the government toilet, the party deserves to die. And it will.
And that includes the lame “additional revenues from closing loopholes and deductions” crap. More tax dollars confiscated and dumped down the government toilet is more tax dollars removed from the private sector and dumped down the government toilet, where Democrat politicians will use it for growing government and buying the votes of their moocher base.
It's all about envy. Inequality is just a fancy way of screaming "no fair!". The economy is better off with people good with capital controlling more of it because they create jobs. The rich have 24 hours in a day like everybody else and can only consume so much of it, so they carefully invest the vast majority of it. The government is mostly good at destroying that wealth on government hirelings and vote buying. The left doesn't care that the capital and jobs are destroyed. The nature of envy is not to acquire the objects of their envy but to destroy them. Envy is a side-effect of vanity, thinking way too highly of oneself. Humility is a virtue and leads to happiness. Envy is number one source of evil and leads to theft, destruction, murder, war, and misery.
It all boils down to CONTROL.
The Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto 1848 by Karl Heinrich Marx
A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
The 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, 1913 (which some scholars maintain was never properly ratified), and various State income taxes, established this major Marxist coup in the United States many decades ago. These taxes continue to drain the lifeblood out of the American economy and greatly reduce the accumulation of desperately needed capital for future growth, business starts, job creation, and salary increases.
How exactly would the Democrats’ tax rate increases on higher incomes reduce “income inequality”? The only possible answer is: By decreasing future gross income for top earners. The rate increases will not raise gross income for those at the bottom. It will almost certainly reduce it.
Will decreasing the resources of the investor class, discouraging productive use of capital, and encouraging inefficient tax avoidance improve the economy? No. It will reduce investment, growth, and employment.
So why do it? So envious dependency voters will be happy that someone else had their earnings stolen, in the ignorant belief that the stolen goods will end up in their pockets.