http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...2/05/gIQAR7D6IP_story.html?wpisrc=al_national
One way to fix this is a more progressive tax.
One way to fix this is a more progressive tax.
Warren Buffet on the inequities of us tax policy
- Thread starter salgueiro
- Start date
Lee Cooperman’s Letter to Obama:
http://blog.stephenlweiss.com/2011/11/29/lee-coopermans-letter-to-obama/
http://blog.stephenlweiss.com/2011/11/29/lee-coopermans-letter-to-obama/
In the linked piece Cooperman writes:dennisr said:
But what I can justifiably hold you accountable for is your and your minions’ role in setting the tenor of the rancorous debate now roiling us that smacks of what so many have characterized as “class warfare”. Whether this reflects your principled belief that the eternal divide between the haves and have-nots is at the root of all the evils that afflict our society or just a cynical, populist appeal to his base by a president struggling in the polls is of little importance. What does matter is that the divisive, polarizing tone of your rhetoric is cleaving a widening gulf, at this point as much visceral as philosophical, between the downtrodden and those best positioned to help them.
What I thought was missing in Cooperman's unctious plea for less "polarizing", "class warfare", "demagoguic" rhetoric on Obama's part were examples of the kind of Obama talk Cooperman decries. Incorporating by reference articles written by others makes this piece a bit difficult to assimilate. Worse, Cooperman gives no clue what the other writers opine. What exactly is he complaining about if, as he would have us believe, it is not Obama's proposal to increase taxes on the megarich per se? Frankly, I don't find it all that persuasive of anything except that perhaps Cooperman doesn't think Obama is making sufficiently "genteel" arguments in support of his proposals to roll back income and capitol gains tax rate cuts - tax cuts that have unjustly benefitted the wealthy and which have greatly exacerbated the unequal distribution of wealth in US society.
Maybe If Cooperman had given some concrete examples of what he thinks has been Obama's demagoguic, polarizing, class warfare rhetoric or specified arguments he thinks Obama should be making I might have been more sympathetic to his plea. As it is, he just comes across as a disaffected naysayer, one whose credibility is strained when he, a billionaire, ex-Goldman Sachs partner, hedgefund CEO, would ask us to believe " My story is anything but unique." Yeah, right.
What I have observed, albeit from afar because I have pretty much stopped following Republican party polemics (too depressing), is that it is the Republicans who have constructed the demagoguic class warfare scenario as a tactic to win back the White House. It is they, the party of no, who have tried to paint Obama as a typical tax and spend liberal. In the process they ignor the seriousness of both the budget deficit and the unequal distribution of wealth. I just hope that kind of demagoguery fails to convince the average Joe.
Bottom line -I really don't care if billionaire hedgefund managers are offended by the style of the discussion of the haves vs have nots. Ante up along with Buffet and Gates. Consider it a fair payback to a country that provided the environment that allowed you to amass great wealth.
p.s. I managed to go through Keller's Beyond Occupy NYT's piece (one of several referenced by Cooperman, all of which seem to be authored by Republicans) and was not impressed...with anything Keller had to say. It did, however, convince me that what Cooperman and his Wall St colleagues really fear is some kind of attack on capitalism, or at least the way it's conducted by the greedy Wall St crowd Cooperman hangs with. He has nothing to worry about from Obama on that score. "Yes we can" is pretty much a "No, we can't" when it comes to punishing Wall St scoundrels much less deconstructing the system itself. See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-...s_b_1157915.html?ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false Wall St loves Obama if campaign contributions mean anything.
Dennis, having read the Rolling Stone article you just posted I am left wondering why you posted the Cooperman letter to Obama without any comment. That would only lead one to think you buy into Cooperman's sanctimonious bullshit. I hope that the RS piece, ridiculing Cooperman and other unethical billionaires, accurately reflects your thinking. Does it?
captainmcd
Registered
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2011
- Messages
- 159
- Likes
- 116
We debated this in earlier posts regarding progressive tax, is it fair?
Probably not. But when the tax rate is increased, the wealthy find ways to avoid the tax, and revenues actually decrease. They are close to the "sweet spot" at present.
My feeling is that there will always be rich and poor. When the government collects more money, it gives the government more power, and those who have the power and money will be rich. The poor will always exist, they need opportunity to get ahead, but getting help from the government seldom benefits them in the long run. I think that the government programs often have the opposite effect because they discourage charity, when people help eachother. The person giving feels the benefit and reward for his charity, and the person receiving charity feels thankful for it.
Another problem with progressive tax is that it will not make much of a difference in our budget shortfall. As I said before a 3 or 4% increase on the highest two brackets would be a drop in the bucket, even a 30 or 40% increase would still leave a huge budget deficit, and as I said before would probably decrease tax revenue because the rich can find loopholes or send the money overseas as they do in Argentina.
Probably not. But when the tax rate is increased, the wealthy find ways to avoid the tax, and revenues actually decrease. They are close to the "sweet spot" at present.
My feeling is that there will always be rich and poor. When the government collects more money, it gives the government more power, and those who have the power and money will be rich. The poor will always exist, they need opportunity to get ahead, but getting help from the government seldom benefits them in the long run. I think that the government programs often have the opposite effect because they discourage charity, when people help eachother. The person giving feels the benefit and reward for his charity, and the person receiving charity feels thankful for it.
Another problem with progressive tax is that it will not make much of a difference in our budget shortfall. As I said before a 3 or 4% increase on the highest two brackets would be a drop in the bucket, even a 30 or 40% increase would still leave a huge budget deficit, and as I said before would probably decrease tax revenue because the rich can find loopholes or send the money overseas as they do in Argentina.
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/poli...ssman-scraping-only-400000-after-taxes/42655/
Congressman who owns number of subway sandwich stores bemoans his tough going.
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2011/12/congress-wealth-gap/46662/
The wealth gap between elected reps and constituents is growing.
Both The New York Times and The Washington Post have separate reports today about the widening wealth gap between members of Congress and the people they represent. Almost half of all Congresspeople are millionaires and their median net worth has climbed to $913,000, compared to $100,000 for the rest of America households. According to the Post, that number drops to $725,000 when excluding home equity (and adjusting for inflation), but the same median figure for American families is just $20,500. And that gap has only grown wider in recent years.
Even putting aside the questions of influence and corruption, the biggest concern is that those elected to Congress are more out of touch with the world of their constituents than ever before. How can lawmakers be expected to look out for the interests of everyday citizens when the biggest issues facing them — unemployment, health care, wages — are unknown to most of those who are making the laws? Or worse when addressing those issues means directly contradicting their own interests, as when millionaires are asked to vote on a "millionaire's tax"?
Congressman who owns number of subway sandwich stores bemoans his tough going.
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2011/12/congress-wealth-gap/46662/
The wealth gap between elected reps and constituents is growing.
Both The New York Times and The Washington Post have separate reports today about the widening wealth gap between members of Congress and the people they represent. Almost half of all Congresspeople are millionaires and their median net worth has climbed to $913,000, compared to $100,000 for the rest of America households. According to the Post, that number drops to $725,000 when excluding home equity (and adjusting for inflation), but the same median figure for American families is just $20,500. And that gap has only grown wider in recent years.
Even putting aside the questions of influence and corruption, the biggest concern is that those elected to Congress are more out of touch with the world of their constituents than ever before. How can lawmakers be expected to look out for the interests of everyday citizens when the biggest issues facing them — unemployment, health care, wages — are unknown to most of those who are making the laws? Or worse when addressing those issues means directly contradicting their own interests, as when millionaires are asked to vote on a "millionaire's tax"?
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith
Republicans...describe beloved American programs like Medicare and Social Security as charities – using the euphemism “entitlements.” Like mortgages from the Bailey Building & Loan, Medicare and Social Security are not charities. They’re the American people depositing and pooling their money for the benefit of the American community.
The GOP tries to destroy programs like these that aid the middle class, the vast majority of Americans – the 99 percent – while Republicans protect tax breaks and special perks for the rich – the one percent, the Henry Potters.
This time last year, Republicans demanded extension of tax breaks for the 1 percent, contending tax breaks stimulate the economy.
For the past three months, however, Republicans have fought extension of payroll tax cuts, contending a break benefiting 160 million middle class Americans did not stimulate the economy.
All year, Republicans have demanded an end to programs the middle class created to aid the majority, the 99 percent. The GOP wants to reverse the new banking regulations that were passed in an attempt to prevent another economic collapse caused by risky Wall Street practices. The GOP tried to to rescind the healthcare reform law that prevents insurance companies from terminating coverage when beneficiaries get sick and prohibits the practice of refusing coverage to people with pre-existing conditions...
Republicans have decided to be the party of Henry Potter, the “meanest man in the county,” a man about whom George Bailey’s father said: “he's a sick man, frustrated. Sick in his mind, sick in his soul, if he has one.”
http://www.truth-out.org/republicans-try-impose-selfishness-american-people/1325081042
Republicans...describe beloved American programs like Medicare and Social Security as charities – using the euphemism “entitlements.” Like mortgages from the Bailey Building & Loan, Medicare and Social Security are not charities. They’re the American people depositing and pooling their money for the benefit of the American community.
The GOP tries to destroy programs like these that aid the middle class, the vast majority of Americans – the 99 percent – while Republicans protect tax breaks and special perks for the rich – the one percent, the Henry Potters.
This time last year, Republicans demanded extension of tax breaks for the 1 percent, contending tax breaks stimulate the economy.
For the past three months, however, Republicans have fought extension of payroll tax cuts, contending a break benefiting 160 million middle class Americans did not stimulate the economy.
All year, Republicans have demanded an end to programs the middle class created to aid the majority, the 99 percent. The GOP wants to reverse the new banking regulations that were passed in an attempt to prevent another economic collapse caused by risky Wall Street practices. The GOP tried to to rescind the healthcare reform law that prevents insurance companies from terminating coverage when beneficiaries get sick and prohibits the practice of refusing coverage to people with pre-existing conditions...
Republicans have decided to be the party of Henry Potter, the “meanest man in the county,” a man about whom George Bailey’s father said: “he's a sick man, frustrated. Sick in his mind, sick in his soul, if he has one.”
http://www.truth-out.org/republicans-try-impose-selfishness-american-people/1325081042
captainmcd
Registered
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2011
- Messages
- 159
- Likes
- 116
Not only does a tax increase prevent me from spending my own money, it is used in non-productive things and may hurt the United States. An increasing number of Americans (including Republicans), are finally waking up to the reality that a country that spends more than half of every tax dollar on its military, its wars, including unsuccessful wars on poverty, drugs, and terrorism, the debt for those wars, and on its secret spying operations, and that has itself on a permanent war footing, cannot prosper or even long endure.
Distribution of wealth and gap between rich and middle class a subject of concern for GB, too.
http://en.mercopress.com/2012/01/08...ewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=daily
http://en.mercopress.com/2012/01/08...ewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=daily