Does Clark's tax plan make him more liberal than Dean?

[tameszu]

Clark: would maintain current tax burden on middle-class non-parents, reduce it on poor non-parents (by expanding the EITC by 30%), and eradicate it on poor and middle class parents and children, by raising the tax burden of the rich back to Clinton levels and further increasing it for the super-rich.

Dean: would increase current tax burden on everyone (although disproportionately on the rich) to Clinton levels by reversing all of the tax cuts passed in the last 3 years.

Please no arguments on how Dean's plan benefits the poor and middle-class because he would spend more money on education and health care for all, unless you can point to a specific set of policy proposals in which Dean actually proposes significantly more spending in these areas--so far as I know, although there are some differences between their plans, both Dean and Clark are planning similar and significant new outlays and initiatives in both of these areas; in any case, Clark's tax plan is entirely deficit neutral in itself, so it has no impact on how much spending he can do.

It's interesting that in the comments by Dean supporters attacking Clark's tax plan, there have been an almost shockingly high number of comments arguing that Clark's tax plan is unfair, not because it benefits people who are already privileged, but because it doesn't benefit them (singles without children)--even though the plan helps many needy families and only increases the real financial burden of the rich and super-rich. Frankly, these are non-progressive arguments, like the ones used by whites and males who oppose affirmative action, or, indeed, by libertarians who support the flat tax.

Maybe I shouldn't be surprised though--there have been lots of people who have seen for some time that Dean is actually a centrist who is trying to use rhetoric to attract liberals.

[Bombtrack]

1. More populist, period

the middle class will have more money, all-together, under clark.

[BobbyJay]

2. It makes him more DEMOCRATIC and even more electable than he already is

[OrAnarch]

3. Does Bush's Tax Cuts make him more liberal than Clark?

No, as such a concept is most certainly never deemed too liberal in general, because no liberalistic institutions or rights are being formed when a tax happens, period.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

10. Your post is meaningless

or if it has meaning, it escapes me. What are you trying to say?

[BobbyJay]

15. I agree. At first I thought he was trying to be insulting, but WAS HE? lol

qiglbfqbfiewrbflclrr

[Dookus]

4. yes...

but even before the tax plan, Clark was more liberal than Dean.

[mydawgmax]

5. progressive taxation

Dean hasn't really spoken about making the tax system more progressive. His plan makes it more regressive and that is one of the things that has troubled me about his candidacy. Progressive taxation is a pretty core liberal value.

[rogerhall]

6. Yes, I believe it does!

Who knew? :}

[Hep]

7. ???

One part of one policy?

Lemme guess, if you are pro-Dean, no, if you are not pro-dean, yes.

Tough one.

[quaker bill]

8. A question or two

I haven't read Clark's plan yet, but I will.

Does Clark's plan eliminate the transfer of Social Security taxes to general revenue to offset the budget deficit?

Current Bush policy effectively converts a substantial portion of the Social Security witholding tax to the functional equivalent of income taxes by doing just this. This is the most regressive tax as a millionare pays not one penny more than a person making $85,000 a year.

Does Clark's plan address the 25 trillion dollar unfunded deficit in Social Security that has resulted from decades of this largely republican mismanagement?

While this plan sounds good on the surface, I for one, will want to see the details before I support removing a large swath of the public from the tax roles.

Finally, the OP is disingenuous, all government services are paid for with taxes. When taxes are cut in the manner Bush did it and services are not cut, then local taxes and fees must rise to accomodate it and they have done so. If mandates, like "no child left behind" are passed by the Feds but are not funded, local services must either fall or taxes increase. While restoring the tax code may or may not result in a rollback of these fees, it could easly prevent or postpone future increases.

I am not saying that Clark's plan is at all like the Bush* plan. As I said, I haven't read it yet. But, since Bush* came along, I look at all tax cut proposals with an eye toward political pandering.

[OKNancy]

9. No

He has always been more liberal than Dean.

And unlike Dean, Clark came right out and said he was proud to be a liberal.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

11. Isn't Dean about the most conservative candidate running

based on his record, that is, rather than his rhetoric?

[liberalnurse]

12. Here is what Neil Boortz said today

on his radio program....regarding Clarks's tax plan.


<snip>

www.boortz.com

The goal? Come on, now. It's so simple. Once you have a majority of Americans not paying any taxes, then you have a majority of Americans who don't really care that much about how high taxes get! After all, it's not like they're having to pay them.

Now Wes Clark has come out with his grand tax plan. If (huge if) Wes actually becomes president he will, if the congress goes along, bring about a law that would make all families of four who make under $50,000 completely exempt from all federal income taxes. There will be additional tax breaks for families of four making less than $100,000. And what of the high income earners? What about the businessmen and women who provide employment for the vast majority of Americans? What about the high-achievers who truly power our economy? Well ... Clark wants their taxes to go up.

Open your eyes, folks. This is pure, unadulterated class warfare ... and brilliant political strategy. Think about it. You're in an election. Over one-half of the voters don't pay any federal income taxes. Less than one-half do. All you have to do is tell those folks out there who don't pay taxes that if the other guy wins he is going to start making them pay. Easy enough. People love a free ride ... and they'll go to the polls to protect that privilege. Democratic politicians have been working toward this state of political nirvana for decades. Strangely enough, Republicans, on occasion, have been eager to help them.

We were warned over 100 years ago that democracy will fail once the electorate realizes that they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. We're there.

One more thing. Wes Clark says he is going to cover the tab for removing all these people from the tax rolls by closing corporate tax loopholes. This is Clark telling you that he thinks you're stupid. Clark knows that corporations don't pay taxes. He knows that corporations collect taxes from customers, employees and shareholders and pass them off to the federal government. When Clark says that he is going to close corporate tax loopholes he is really saying that he is going to raise taxes on corporate employees, consumers and shareholders. A tax is a tax whether it is paid directly to the IRS or handed to a corporation or business to be passed on to the IRS. If the celebrity and sports obsessed American people could simply learn this one simple economics lesson politicians like Clark would lose a powerful rhetorical weapon and would be forced to deal more honestly with voters.

......

Now it's coming from a Libertarian...they base their politics on taxes......

[BobbyJay]

14. Here is what Neil Boortz said about Howard Dean

Speaking of the election .. as the cover of National Review says, PLEASE nominate Howard Dean. Here is a man who isn't sure if Osama is guilty, and wants him tried in an international court of some kind. He attacks America, and Howard Dean wants him tried in an international court. This is a man who also said he would have more than happy to deal with Saddam Hussein, but only if the United Nations gave him permission. This is a man prepared to surrender the sovereignty of the United States as soon as he gets into office.


http://boortz.com/nuze/200312/12292003.html

[OKNancy]

20. hahahaha

you type faster than I do!

[OKNancy]

19. If I, as a Clark supporter, quoted Neil Boortz to back

up my opinion about Dean, most people would be outraged.

I've never posted or looked up a negative article about Dean, much less on trash sites like Boortz....but there is always a point when disgust becomes overwhelming.

So here is just a tiny tidbit of some of the negative about Dean from Boortz.

Speaking of the election .. as the cover of National Review says, PLEASE nominate Howard Dean. Here is a man who isn't sure if Osama is guilty, and wants him tried in an international court of some kind. He attacks America, and Howard Dean wants him tried in an international court. This is a man who also said he would have more than happy to deal with Saddam Hussein, but only if the United Nations gave him permission. This is a man prepared to surrender the sovereignty of the United States as soon as he gets into office.

Brenda Stokeley is the president of District Council 1707 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). AFSCME recently endorsed Howard Dean. Stokeley was recently speaking to the Workers World Party national conference. During her speech she told the audience "The first thing we have to do is remind ourselves that we are fighting for socialism." Well, how do you like that? Endorsing socialism and endorsing Howard Dean; who, by the way, often states his determination to "re-regulate" American business when he occupies the Oval Office. If Brenda Stokeley is all ga ga over Howard Dean, just imagine how she's going to glow when Hillary runs.

[blm]

13. Clark has always been to Dean's left.

From everything I have noted.

[Hoppin_Mad]

16. ALWAYS ? LOL ! He was supporting repugs till recently -eom-

[TacticalPeek]

17. Agreed.

I am unaware of any issue on which Dean is more liberal than Clark.

And I have looked.

Anyone know of an exception?

[Lefty48197]

18. Clark's tax plan is a good one

basically, he wants to repeal Shrubbie's tax cuts and give them to people that actually need them, i.e. families making UNDER $100,000 per year. Clark even thinks that families making under $50,000 per year should pay NO taxes. I think he borrowed that last one from me, but I won't squeal.