|
The problem is debt. The recession will be with us as long as we maintain so much debt. But I will deal with the suggestions point by point.
1. Taxing the rich sounds great. I am for raising the top tax rate to 40%, President Obama's chosen figure. But there's something else about taxation and the rich which is more important: the 15% tax rate on dividends absolutely has to end. This low tax rate on dividends encourages investment in corporations; in fact, you'll pay MUCH higher taxes by investing in small businesses (and being successful) than by investing in corporations. This low dividend rate encourages all investors to invest in corporations as opposed to any other kind of investment; that has to end immediately. Aside from the fact that this alone makes the top earners pay less in taxes, the low dividend tax rate has artificially boosted corporations to the point that there's literally a corporate stranglehold on the economy. FAR more important, I think, than raising that top rate is eliminating this George W. Bush imposed low dividend tax rate.
2. Totally with you here. Specifics, however, are necessary. I'd start with the Wal-Mart purchasing power; yes, the largest retailer in the world has every right to try to negotiate lower prices, but what Wal-Mart and now many other retailers do is set prices for manufacturers which then force the manufacturers to go outside the country in order to meet those prices and stay afloat. The list of outsourced jobs because of Wal-Mart alone is staggering. So a limit on the power of purchasing, or rather the extent to which a purchasing agent can coerce producers to meet their price demands, is worthy of consideration. I'm ready as anyone to get behind laws that will slow the off-shoring and encouraging American jobs, but I need specifics. One more idea is to simply offer lower tax rates to all-American corporations as opposed to international corporations.
3. Yup. Every so often the right-wing trots out its "fair tax" plan again and tries to argue for a "flat tax" (knowing full well it would increase the taxes on the poor). The next time you hear it, suggest a corporate flat tax. All-American corporations pay 14% (unless their income is less than say $50K); international corporations pay 18%. This law supersedes all existing corporate tax law, meaning companies with sweet government tax deals from decades ago and companies that moved their official mailing address to the Cayman Islands now all have to pay 18%. That tax rate is fairly low compared to what responsible corporations pay now, so a great chunk of the business community would actually get behind such a law. And the government would actually see a little bit more income from corporate sources than it currently receives. The four percent advantage for all-American corporations might encourage some out-sourced jobs to return, and if we can stimulate jobs, Uncle Sam will also see more revenue from the taxes these working people will pay.
4. Um, no. At most, a thousand bucks a person (man, woman, or child) as long as that person either pays taxes or counts as a deduction. So a family of five receives five grand, but a single individual gets $1000. But how much money is that? We're a nation of 300 million plus; that's $300 billion. And not one job gets created directly by those funds. However, for every billion dollars government spends in infrastructure, it creates 55,000 jobs. Multiply that by just 100, 1/3 the cost of this simple giveaway, and you've generated over five million jobs. And that $100 billion goes back into the economy, which creates more jobs based on the demands of the five million newly employed. Everyone who makes money in the process pays taxes, so the ultimate long term cost to government is reduced, in fact eliminated (every dollar spent on infrastructure returns over a dollar to the government). And when that pump-priming goes its course, we still have the bridges, highways, electrical grids and sewer lines installed to encourage growth. Look at it this way: suppose you are interested in someone's long-term well-being. Is it better to give them money or invest on their behalf? Infrastructure spending is investment which pays off almost immediately in the jobs created and continues to pay off by facilitating commerce through restoring or improving or creating new roads, bridges, waterways and so forth.
Si se puedo! Si se puedo! But let's do the right things.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
