April 10th, 2012
Sigh. This is what passes for great thinking in the post "Derb" NRO offices?
In his column today, Thomas Sowell first regurgitates long debunked smears about half of Americans not paying their "fair share" (that would be the poor half).
That this is mendacious propaganda is illustrated HERE, HERE and HERE.
Showing posts with label Corporate taxes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Corporate taxes. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Friday, January 13, 2012
Charting The Big Fix
Jan 13th, 2012
The chart below from Reuters adds to the picture of a tax system that is more corrupt than it is broken.
The chart below from Reuters adds to the picture of a tax system that is more corrupt than it is broken.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
The Truth About Effective Tax Rates, cont...
Jan 10th, 2012
As this is an election year, we can expect to hear a great deal from the GOP hopefuls regarding the 'crippling' tax rates on American businesses. Try and remember that this is straight up, one hundred percent bullshit.
HuffPo reports:
"The number of U.S. corporations structuring their businesses in such a way that they can avoid higher taxes has skyrocketed in the past quarter century,The Wall Street Journal reports.
As this is an election year, we can expect to hear a great deal from the GOP hopefuls regarding the 'crippling' tax rates on American businesses. Try and remember that this is straight up, one hundred percent bullshit.
HuffPo reports:
"The number of U.S. corporations structuring their businesses in such a way that they can avoid higher taxes has skyrocketed in the past quarter century,The Wall Street Journal reports.
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Republican Mythology, cont...
Aug 23rd, 2011
That line about us having cripplingly high taxes compared to other countries? Yeah, it's still not true.
That line about us having cripplingly high taxes compared to other countries? Yeah, it's still not true.
 |
| via |
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Hostage Taking
April 2nd, 2011
by F. Grey Parker
A follow up to "Raise. Taxes. Dammit."
Is there anybody out there who actually remembers the 80s? Seriously. I am not talking about the "Morning in America," "Rocky"-versus-the-mutant-Russian at the box office, skinny-tie-and-fluorescent-shoes 80s.
I am talking about the world as it actually existed.
I have been thinking a lot lately about the Iran-Contra affair. Not in the context of it's having been the worst violation of Constitutional limits in Presidential history. Not through the prism of obvious moral arguments. I have been thinking about it as an exemplar of strategically flawed elite behavior.
We gave the Iranians millions of dollars worth of weapons covertly in a bizarre attempt to get them to exert influence over Hezbollah and secure the release of a handful of American hostages in Lebanon. We also really hoped they would convince the crazy bastards to, you know, maybe stop taking more hostages. Some of our more dubious operators also made a pretty penny off of it on the side.
As fate would have it, surprise, it didn't work. The occasional release of a captive at the cost of treasure and a further destabilized Middle East (not to mention Central America) was generally followed by another kidnapping. This went on, in secret, for several years.
The lesson we failed to learn runs deeper than merely one of unwise military brinkmanship. The behavior of most opaque bureaucracies and their fundamental corruptibility are well illustrated by these events. This is about an insistence on deal making with the untrustworthy. This is about the simple truism that once you pay a ransom, you will be regarded as willing to pay more ransom. This is about having the basic sense to call it a day when a course of action continues to produce the same failed outcomes. This is also about stopping these trade-offs through the application of transparency no matter what benefits the players involved have carved out for themselves in the margins and in spite of the harsh readjustments that naturally follow.
The full failure of all things Reaganesque is on display here. And yet, this flawed thinking threatens us today in other ways. The same willful disregard of both facts as they unfold and the subversion of American traditions has permeated our economic policy.
Jobs creation didn't just recently grind to a halt in America. It has been pretty much collapsed for 10 straight years. In the same period, America has foisted more tax breaks, more new loopholes and more ways for wealth to be transferred from the majority to the minority than at any time in the previous eight decades. All this has been done in the name of promoting "growth." We have been told the same thing during every cycle since 2001; that the hiring will only happen when there is less "uncertainty." We have been lectured-to that we must let the "job creators" keep more of the fruits of our labor. Eventually, we are told to believe, this strategy will result in glorious rewards.
But there has been no positive in this equation for a vast majority of us for a long time. America's corporations basically send in lobbyists who tell our legislators that "growth" and "jobs" are explicitly being held hostage by "job crushing" taxes and social policy. Our representatives pay the ransom with our money. Then, the K street bagmen come back with more demands from the kidnappers. And we pay. And we pay. And we pay. Every time we we pay the ransom, there are still more hostages.
Once in a while, a big to-do is made of some new deal that we are assured represents a sign that we are entering a new period of expansion. Photos are taken of the bureaucrats grinning widely and pronouncing that they "have done it." Ribbons are cut. Here come the good times. But it's all for show. That is to say, the corporations have just released a hostage. The cameras then stop, the plotting recommences and they return to their usual activities.
The hostages here are ourselves. Most of us have still refused to acknowledge that we are, in fact, being held hostage. For some, in particular the so-called "Tea Party," there is also a serious case of Stockholm Syndrome at work. They have been fully subsumed into the world-view of their kidnappers.
How the hell to stop this using the tools at hand is a bigger and more frightening proposition than our nation has faced in a century. We really only have two choices, both horrible. We either drag the system screaming back to reality or we allow it collapse under it's own slothful weight. But choosing our own future has always worked better in America than allowing it to be chosen for us.
We can start by choosing not to pay any more ransoms.
by F. Grey Parker
A follow up to "Raise. Taxes. Dammit."
I am talking about the world as it actually existed.
I have been thinking a lot lately about the Iran-Contra affair. Not in the context of it's having been the worst violation of Constitutional limits in Presidential history. Not through the prism of obvious moral arguments. I have been thinking about it as an exemplar of strategically flawed elite behavior.
We gave the Iranians millions of dollars worth of weapons covertly in a bizarre attempt to get them to exert influence over Hezbollah and secure the release of a handful of American hostages in Lebanon. We also really hoped they would convince the crazy bastards to, you know, maybe stop taking more hostages. Some of our more dubious operators also made a pretty penny off of it on the side.
As fate would have it, surprise, it didn't work. The occasional release of a captive at the cost of treasure and a further destabilized Middle East (not to mention Central America) was generally followed by another kidnapping. This went on, in secret, for several years.
The lesson we failed to learn runs deeper than merely one of unwise military brinkmanship. The behavior of most opaque bureaucracies and their fundamental corruptibility are well illustrated by these events. This is about an insistence on deal making with the untrustworthy. This is about the simple truism that once you pay a ransom, you will be regarded as willing to pay more ransom. This is about having the basic sense to call it a day when a course of action continues to produce the same failed outcomes. This is also about stopping these trade-offs through the application of transparency no matter what benefits the players involved have carved out for themselves in the margins and in spite of the harsh readjustments that naturally follow.
The full failure of all things Reaganesque is on display here. And yet, this flawed thinking threatens us today in other ways. The same willful disregard of both facts as they unfold and the subversion of American traditions has permeated our economic policy.
Jobs creation didn't just recently grind to a halt in America. It has been pretty much collapsed for 10 straight years. In the same period, America has foisted more tax breaks, more new loopholes and more ways for wealth to be transferred from the majority to the minority than at any time in the previous eight decades. All this has been done in the name of promoting "growth." We have been told the same thing during every cycle since 2001; that the hiring will only happen when there is less "uncertainty." We have been lectured-to that we must let the "job creators" keep more of the fruits of our labor. Eventually, we are told to believe, this strategy will result in glorious rewards.
But there has been no positive in this equation for a vast majority of us for a long time. America's corporations basically send in lobbyists who tell our legislators that "growth" and "jobs" are explicitly being held hostage by "job crushing" taxes and social policy. Our representatives pay the ransom with our money. Then, the K street bagmen come back with more demands from the kidnappers. And we pay. And we pay. And we pay. Every time we we pay the ransom, there are still more hostages.
Once in a while, a big to-do is made of some new deal that we are assured represents a sign that we are entering a new period of expansion. Photos are taken of the bureaucrats grinning widely and pronouncing that they "have done it." Ribbons are cut. Here come the good times. But it's all for show. That is to say, the corporations have just released a hostage. The cameras then stop, the plotting recommences and they return to their usual activities.
The hostages here are ourselves. Most of us have still refused to acknowledge that we are, in fact, being held hostage. For some, in particular the so-called "Tea Party," there is also a serious case of Stockholm Syndrome at work. They have been fully subsumed into the world-view of their kidnappers.
How the hell to stop this using the tools at hand is a bigger and more frightening proposition than our nation has faced in a century. We really only have two choices, both horrible. We either drag the system screaming back to reality or we allow it collapse under it's own slothful weight. But choosing our own future has always worked better in America than allowing it to be chosen for us.
We can start by choosing not to pay any more ransoms.
Saturday, April 2, 2011
The Real Tea Party
April 2nd, 2011
The fact that modern so-called "Tea Partiers" so dutifully carry the water of corporate interests runs contrary to the very intent of the actual Tea Party Rebellions. I have been trying in vain to explain this to folks for the last year. Thom Hartmann does it better. Listen for yourselves.
Friday, April 1, 2011
Raise. Taxes. Dammit.
March 30th, 2011
by F. Grey Parker
I have never seen so many self-described "adults" issue public declarations that a glorious America can be achieved exclusively by allowing the rich to eat their cake and have it too. Honest liberals and conservatives are increasingly coalescing around what I have been saying for years; That is, that Reaganomic idealism is as naive as pure socialism. It is non-sustainable. It wreaks havoc over time. Most notably, it's childish. It is predicated on economic faith rather than statistical science. It's not a philosophy; it's a tee-shirt.
America faces a crippling crisis of revenue and not spending. Say it with me. "Revenue." The next person you hear who makes dire pronouncements about how "destructive" the United States' corporate or highest marginal individual tax rates are is either willfully stupid or they are lying.
One of the great ironies of the success American "conservatives" have achieved in utterly corrupting our tax code is that we, the American taxpayer, are essentially underwriting two thirds of America's publicly traded corporations. The right has, for all intensive purposes, begun nationalizing some of our businesses with the slick caveat that we receive no dividends for our investment. This is not hyperbole. For example, "Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits in 2009. Exxon not only paid no federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings."
Exxon Mobil made no commitment to domestic workforce expansion. They made no commitment to invest in our infrastructure. They made no commitment to keep more of their currency reserves in country. In fact, in 2009 they outsourced 1 billion dollars in contracts to India alone. They did nothing for the United States of America that warrants middle class taxpayers forking over $156 million dollars. Unless we are investors. When do we receive our shares? This is the real government Ponzi scheme, not Social Security.
The supply-side argument for decades has been that the more we "let businesses keep" the more they will invest. That this has turned out to be so provably untrue is completely ignored by "free market" fundamentalists. There is no arguing with those in our country who have bought into this nonsense. It turns out that the more we let the rich keep, the more they keep. Surprise. Cash hoarding takes less work than "innovation." It also involves less "risk." Most importantly, it incurs the least "uncertainty" as far as financial choices are concerned.
My "radical" suggestion since roughly 2003, when I first actually read Bush 2's jaw droppingly stupid tax proposals , has been to suggest a return to the Eisenhower Era code. Seriously. I am endorsing the economic worldview of one of our nation's great Republicans. I am not the only one who has noticed the absurd vilification that this sort of talk receives.
Andrew Sullivan wrote recently:
"Income tax rates are now lower than they were under Ronald Reagan and far lower than they were under Eisenhower. And yet it has become a Norquistian non-negotiable that no taxes can be raised at all on anyone, let alone the beneficiaries of the last thirty years - and those who differ must be "leftists" - even when the US is facing debt of historic and dangerous proportions. Someone advocating what Eisenhower was perfectly comfortable with would be regarded by the Republican right today as a communist. And yet, of course, Eisenhower was emphatically not a Communist, whatever the John Birch society believed. In retrospect, he might even be seen as the most successful small-c conservative of the 20th century. "
Sully went on to cite a tough piece by Glenn Greenwald titled Billionaire Self Pity and The Koch Brothers which I also recommend.
It's worse than this, though. There really are no more loopholes to create when you've reduced the majority corporate tax burden to zero. Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder may be tipping the hand we can expect to be played nationally by these folks. Having no other way to give our money to corporations in his state, he has now devised a scheme that actually raises taxes on the poor and middle class to do so. This is with no new expansion, construction or hiring guarantees. I am sure the corporations will do the right thing with our money.
The class war is on. The rich declared it on the rest of us. That they are winning is a testament not only to their long term planning and well organized propaganda, but to the inherent trust ordinary Americans had developed over several generations in a brighter tomorrow. They have used our own optimism against us. I'll spare you the frog in a cold pot metaphor but it is increasingly apt. The solution is also incredibly simple... Raise taxes, dammit.
by F. Grey Parker
I have never seen so many self-described "adults" issue public declarations that a glorious America can be achieved exclusively by allowing the rich to eat their cake and have it too. Honest liberals and conservatives are increasingly coalescing around what I have been saying for years; That is, that Reaganomic idealism is as naive as pure socialism. It is non-sustainable. It wreaks havoc over time. Most notably, it's childish. It is predicated on economic faith rather than statistical science. It's not a philosophy; it's a tee-shirt.
America faces a crippling crisis of revenue and not spending. Say it with me. "Revenue." The next person you hear who makes dire pronouncements about how "destructive" the United States' corporate or highest marginal individual tax rates are is either willfully stupid or they are lying.
One of the great ironies of the success American "conservatives" have achieved in utterly corrupting our tax code is that we, the American taxpayer, are essentially underwriting two thirds of America's publicly traded corporations. The right has, for all intensive purposes, begun nationalizing some of our businesses with the slick caveat that we receive no dividends for our investment. This is not hyperbole. For example, "Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits in 2009. Exxon not only paid no federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings."
Exxon Mobil made no commitment to domestic workforce expansion. They made no commitment to invest in our infrastructure. They made no commitment to keep more of their currency reserves in country. In fact, in 2009 they outsourced 1 billion dollars in contracts to India alone. They did nothing for the United States of America that warrants middle class taxpayers forking over $156 million dollars. Unless we are investors. When do we receive our shares? This is the real government Ponzi scheme, not Social Security.
The supply-side argument for decades has been that the more we "let businesses keep" the more they will invest. That this has turned out to be so provably untrue is completely ignored by "free market" fundamentalists. There is no arguing with those in our country who have bought into this nonsense. It turns out that the more we let the rich keep, the more they keep. Surprise. Cash hoarding takes less work than "innovation." It also involves less "risk." Most importantly, it incurs the least "uncertainty" as far as financial choices are concerned.
My "radical" suggestion since roughly 2003, when I first actually read Bush 2's jaw droppingly stupid tax proposals , has been to suggest a return to the Eisenhower Era code. Seriously. I am endorsing the economic worldview of one of our nation's great Republicans. I am not the only one who has noticed the absurd vilification that this sort of talk receives.
Andrew Sullivan wrote recently:
"Income tax rates are now lower than they were under Ronald Reagan and far lower than they were under Eisenhower. And yet it has become a Norquistian non-negotiable that no taxes can be raised at all on anyone, let alone the beneficiaries of the last thirty years - and those who differ must be "leftists" - even when the US is facing debt of historic and dangerous proportions. Someone advocating what Eisenhower was perfectly comfortable with would be regarded by the Republican right today as a communist. And yet, of course, Eisenhower was emphatically not a Communist, whatever the John Birch society believed. In retrospect, he might even be seen as the most successful small-c conservative of the 20th century. "
Sully went on to cite a tough piece by Glenn Greenwald titled Billionaire Self Pity and The Koch Brothers which I also recommend.
It's worse than this, though. There really are no more loopholes to create when you've reduced the majority corporate tax burden to zero. Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder may be tipping the hand we can expect to be played nationally by these folks. Having no other way to give our money to corporations in his state, he has now devised a scheme that actually raises taxes on the poor and middle class to do so. This is with no new expansion, construction or hiring guarantees. I am sure the corporations will do the right thing with our money.
The class war is on. The rich declared it on the rest of us. That they are winning is a testament not only to their long term planning and well organized propaganda, but to the inherent trust ordinary Americans had developed over several generations in a brighter tomorrow. They have used our own optimism against us. I'll spare you the frog in a cold pot metaphor but it is increasingly apt. The solution is also incredibly simple... Raise taxes, dammit.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
A Sad Devotion To A Failed Religion
March 22nd, 2011
The near fundamentalist conservative mantra that "pro growth tax cuts always create jobs" is no longer merely dubious or cynical or even statistically wrong. It is either delusional or it is willfully evil. Last week, Scott Keyes of Think Progress interviewed Newt Gingrich regarding his beliefs regarding revenue, corporate tax loopholes and growth. Newt's responses are nothing less than stunning. It's one thing that Newt declares continued allegiance to this particular falsehood:
"GINGRICH: I just want to say this because it’s an important difference in how we approach this. If we give you an incentive to do something right that creates more jobs, that is not a loophole. That’s an incentive. If you then intelligently follow that incentive and create more jobs, we should celebrate that as a good thing."
Fair enough. If, however, the policy in question not only fails to create jobs but actually corresponds to the worst job creation in American history, the appropriate response is not to argue a decade later that you need to do more of it. What's genuinely frightening and corporatist to a degree not heard since the early part of the last century (the second quote) is this:
"GINGRICH: First of all, if they make millions and millions in profit, they probably employ thousands and thousands of people and those thousands and thousands of people are contributing a lot to America."
Read that again. He declares that corporations need pay nothing. Because their workers pay taxes. Corporations shouldn't. I should. And you should. And that single mother working from week to week should. Again, this is either madness... or it is pure fucking evil.
The near fundamentalist conservative mantra that "pro growth tax cuts always create jobs" is no longer merely dubious or cynical or even statistically wrong. It is either delusional or it is willfully evil. Last week, Scott Keyes of Think Progress interviewed Newt Gingrich regarding his beliefs regarding revenue, corporate tax loopholes and growth. Newt's responses are nothing less than stunning. It's one thing that Newt declares continued allegiance to this particular falsehood:
"GINGRICH: I just want to say this because it’s an important difference in how we approach this. If we give you an incentive to do something right that creates more jobs, that is not a loophole. That’s an incentive. If you then intelligently follow that incentive and create more jobs, we should celebrate that as a good thing."
Fair enough. If, however, the policy in question not only fails to create jobs but actually corresponds to the worst job creation in American history, the appropriate response is not to argue a decade later that you need to do more of it. What's genuinely frightening and corporatist to a degree not heard since the early part of the last century (the second quote) is this:
"GINGRICH: First of all, if they make millions and millions in profit, they probably employ thousands and thousands of people and those thousands and thousands of people are contributing a lot to America."
Read that again. He declares that corporations need pay nothing. Because their workers pay taxes. Corporations shouldn't. I should. And you should. And that single mother working from week to week should. Again, this is either madness... or it is pure fucking evil.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Quote Of The Day
March 21st, 2011
"As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there's a twilight where everything remains seemingly unchanged, and it is in such twilight that we must be aware of change in the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." -- Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
