Posted on 11/12/2012 8:07:06 AM PST by SeekAndFind
This is called surrendering before the war starts: Conservative commentator and Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol said Sunday the Republican Party should accept new ideas, including the much-criticized suggestion by Democrats that taxes be allowed to go up on the wealthy.
*****
"It won't kill the country if we raise taxes a little bit on millionaires," he said on "Fox News Sunday." "It really won't, I don't think. I don't really understand why Republicans don't take Obama's offer."
"Really? The Republican Party is going to fall on its sword to defend a bunch of millionaires, half of whom voted Democratic and half of whom live in Hollywood and are hostile?" he asked.
One of the biggest fights as Congress returns will be over taxes, as cuts put in place by former President George W. Bush are set to expire at the end of the year. Republicans want to extend those tax cuts for all income brackets, while Democrats want to raise revenue by allowing them to expire for wealthy Americans.
Exit polls last week found that six in ten voters supported ending the tax cuts on the wealthy, but House Republicans have remained adamantly opposed to allowing any of the rates to expire, instead supporting other changes to the tax code. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) indicated on Friday that was unlikely to change.
*****
First of all, if Kristol wants to go belly up and grovel before Obama before negotiations even begin, that's his business. Leave the rest of us out of it.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Billy has outed himself as the COMMUNIST he is.
They’ll feel it if subscriptions to the National Review are totally gone...
RINOs might keep it afloat...conservatives should have NO part of it.
Nashville and Memphis?
Convince ‘em “Californee is the place you oughta be”.
I'd say it sounds like a damn good idea.
Let the taxes go up and the economy crash. The rats own it now.
Perhaps it will educate the voters that suffer the most.
How many millionaires and billionaires have you seen go broke these past four years? Obama is just a grifter. He’s not a socialist. How many times did you see Stalin or Mao or Castro play golf? Obama is a con man. If he tells you something, put your hand on your wallet because he’s getting ready to take it. He threatens to tax the rich? OK. Let’s see what they say and do. If they start donating millions to the Republicans, then we’ll know it’s real. If not, it’s just more baloney from a grifter trying to confuse you so he can get your wallet.
...in exchange for shutting down the Dept. of Education.
There is no shame in an organized retreat to regroup and consolidate.
Good advice, but property taxes in Tennessee are 20 - 25% of the same in New England, if that.
I don’t really understand why Republicans don’t take Obama’s offer.
See post #27,Obama&Co goal isn’t to make the poor rich buy make the rich poor.So far the plan is working.
RE: in exchange for shutting down the Dept. of Education.
Let me add the two others Rick Perry forgot when he had a brain freeze in the Primary debates — Department of Energy and Department of Commerce.
We did not have those departments until Jimmy Carter came along and went along just fine ( heck, we did even better ).
ELIMINATING THOSE would be a good start.
The debate should be between The Fair Tax and a Flat Tax and or going back to the Reagan reforms in 86-88 time-frame.
Better yet why are not emulating the Czech Republic's code?
We are so over Kristol, Noonan etc....
There is one way to tax the rich in an intelligent manner.
That is not to tax them on how much they earn, but *how* they earn it. Here’s the logic.
Beyond a given amount of money, typical investments become much harder to make, while still getting a reasonable rate of return. Eventually, investments are oriented both towards yield *and* hedging against unpredictable losses.
Finally, on the high end, investments become more and more like a rigged gambling game, where “heads I win, and tails, somebody else loses.” These often do not help the economy and can even be destructive to it.
So intelligent taxation should be designed less to raise revenue, than to steer investors towards more beneficial investments and away from gambling. This is not a particular hardship to them, being easily able to *avoid*, legally, the tax.
But it does help the economy considerably.
Some of the worst problems facing our economy have come from places like the unregulated derivatives markets, where they gamble literally trillions of imaginary dollars that someone else is eventually supposed to cover. Such markets can be devastating to our economy, while contributing nothing to it.
So if someone wants to invest in derivatives, they should get a serious tax slapped on them. This will make derivatives much less attractive, compared to other investments that actually help our economy - their choice of what they will be.
Directly, the government would likely not get a dime from these new taxes on the wealthy. Indirectly, because of economic improvement, they would get a LOT more revenue.
You KNOW all the millionaires in congress will exempt themselves just like they did with Barrycare.
Yikes, that would be prohibitive then in NE. For example, we successfully de-annexed from the city where our property in TN is located in 2010. They annexed the area but didn’t provide anything but taking tax money and we fought them and won, it wasn’t easy either. Our taxes thus cut in half since we only now pay county. The people who already have built homes, in the 500-600K range . . . were paying almost 6K or so per year in taxes with both city & county, now they’re paying less than half of that. I’d hate to have to pay 20-25K a year in property taxes alone in the northeast PLUS income tax. Although TN does tax investment income, not earned income.
“Millionaires” is a term that describes one’s assets.
But we’re not taxing assets, we’re taxing income.
Income is the means by which non-millionaires become millionaires.
So taxing income is the primary way the rich stay rich, and the rest of us stay in our place. No wonder the wealthy support Democrats.
If we really want to “tax the rich”, let’s start going after those who have large assets, then watch funding for Democrats evaporate.
(Note: I don’t think we should to that, just pointing out what “taxing the rich” would really look like)
Yes it will.
Taxation on the rich hurts the workers because:
Confiscatory taxation on the rich is an assault on savings, investment, and capital accumulation.
Saving, investment, and capital accumulation are institutions of capitalism that are necessary for a modern proper system of division of labor, which is necessary for a modern process of production, which leads to increased creation of wealth, which leads to increased prosperity, economic progress, and higher standard of living for the average worker. These conditions are beneficial to everyone including the poor.
Confiscatory taxation on the rich is an assault on savings and capital accumulation, which ends up hurting everyone in the economic system in the long run and the workers more than the rich. The average worker is harmed because reduced saving leads to decreased investment, which leads to less productive expenditure, which leads to reduced demand for labor, which leads to lower money wage rates for the average worker and higher unemployment.
Reduced savings and investment also leads to lower demand for capital goods relative to consumers’ goods and reduced incentives to improve production, which leads to lower productivity of labor, which leads to lower real wage rates for the average worker.
When production is decreased due to lower savings and investment, there is a reduction in aggregate supply, which leads to higher average prices, which reduces the standard of living of the average worker.
They should eliminate the tax investment income, and double the sales tax and property tax in Shelby and Davidson counties... :-)
I currently live about 4 miles from the TN state line, so I buy some of my furniture, flooring and other items to have delivered in AL and pay no sales tax. I think it is 9 or 9.25 across the state line.
If we’re going to raise taxes on “the rich” then you’d have to raise it on unearned income. Also, let’s do away with all tax loopholes for Hollywood.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.