Skip to comments.That Democratic rhetoric about taxing the rich? It's a con
Posted on 12/10/2017 9:44:31 PM PST by Oshkalaboomboom
Democrats have asserted for years that the rich arent paying enough in taxes. In her Democratic National Convention speech in 2016, Hillary Clinton put it in the party's characteristically way, saying Wall Street, corporations, and the super-rich are going to start paying their fair share of taxes.
Never mind that, according to the most recent data, the 1 percent pay more than 25 percent of all federal tax revenue, more than the bottom 60 percent of income earners combined. Democrats are usually loathe to give a specific number, but whatever the rich are paying, it isn't enough.
Or at least, that's how members of the party of the Left usually says things are. But they're not saying it so much right now. In their push for tax reform, Republicans are trying to eliminate tax breaks that primarily benefit those whom Democrats usually say aren't paying their fair share upper-income earners who earn in the six figures.
What an ungrateful crowd those Democrats are. Instead of thanking the GOP for getting the well-off to pony up a bit more, they're acting as though the sky is falling. You think we're exaggerating? House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., actually said of the tax bill: It is the end of the world. This is Armageddon.
What has happened? The answer is that Democrats are all for making the rich pay more as long as it's not their rich.
Republicans are trying to limit the deduction that can be taken against federal taxable income for state and local taxes paid. Pelosi and other Democrats representing high-tax states would prefer that low-income households claiming the standard deduction continue to subsidize wealthy households that claim the lions share of the value of the state and local tax deduction and the mortgage interest deduction.
Today, only about 30 percent of taxpayers itemize their deductions at all, and they're nearly all high-earning families. When the GOP tax reform bill doubles the standard deduction, even fewer Americans will bother to itemize. Those that do will skew even wealthier.
As of 2014, according to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, 88 percent of the state and local tax deductions value was claimed by households earning more than $100,000 a year. Only 1 percent of the deductions value was claimed by those with annual incomes below $50,000.
Yet, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., says eliminating the deduction will hurt firefighters, police officers, and teachers. Never mind that the Joint Committee on Taxation found that the bill would the bill would cut overall taxes for all income levels..
Democrats are also decrying a cap on the mortgage interest deduction. Rep. Elizabeth Esty, D-Conn., said a $500,000 home may be a mansion in Mississippi, but there are absolutely middle-class families in Connecticut. But Tax Foundation analysis found that capping the mortgage interest deduction would have virtually no effect on the incomes of the bottom 80 percent of income earners. Its the 1 percent who would see their incomes fall as a result of that measure. Democrats are falling all over themselves, rending their garments, to save tax breaks for that 1 percent.
When the chips are down, Democrats care more about their wealthiest constituents than their poorer constituents. The latter group will benefit from the Republican tax bill's larger standard deduction. The truth is that the Democrats' populist tax rhetoric has been a complete fraud, a deceptive and self-serving camouflage for Republican promises to cut taxes, which would be widely and wildly popular if not so traduced.
Especially on the state and local tax deduction, Democrats' rhetoric has been all about protecting their pals in Democrat-led state legislatures who favor high state and local taxes. Indeed, part of the case made for those high taxes is that are federally deductible, so other people will end up subsidizing the payment of the check. High taxes go to fund their pals in public sector labor unions, who in turn fund Democratic politicians, who in turn protect the state and local tax deduction, and so on in an unending and unvirtuous circle.
A single mother from Pelosis district who earns $30,000 a year, has one child, and doesnt itemize deductions pays about $800 a year in federal taxes. Thanks to a doubling of the standard deduction and the the larger child tax credit in the Senate bill, her tax bill would drop to zero..
Democrats in Congress would rather keep money flowing to themselves and their friends rather than give this single mother an $800-a-year tax cut. Who's supporting tax breaks for the wealthy?
If GOP tax reform passes, liberal states will finally have to pay the full burden of the high taxes that their Democratic politicians impose. Perhaps the loss of the deduction will at last do something to teach voters to elect fiscally responsible governments. In New Jersey, Democratic legislative leaders are already considering reforming their tax code to mitigate the damage. That sounds like good news. Just imagine the beneficial ripple effect if the tax bill passes and becomes law.
As it is, even the “welfare set” pays taxes, which are hidden in the prices of the things that they buy.
I’d like to see welfare’s gatekeeping move from government back to the church, and that based on private foundations. The church can offer spiritual viewpoints that can help the welfare set transcend its condition. I’m not a heartless chap. Rather I have too much heart for a lot of people. I won’t just say “Get a job.” I’ll say “Your job means something more than dollars or even living hand to mouth.”
That is what i would like to see also. Too many people are trying to equate being”Christian” with allowing the government to provide for these people.
The problem is twofold; the government does a lousy job at charity, and Jesus never told the government to do the job, He told us.
We saw that happen with FDR and the then-new Social Security plans.
He even propositioned church pastors to stand for this new “benevolence.” Well isn’t Christianity about benevolence? Who would be a sap and say no?
Well, there is true benevolence and faux benevolence. The church collectively wasn’t up to the challenge. The church collectively could have said “Ah! Now we see! A gospel opportunity beyond compare, through a widespread need!” Instead it rolled over and said thanks Franklin for the warm teddy, and went back to sleep.
There is no real church collective in the USA. There were churches which agreed and there were churches which ignore the federal government and do what Christ told us to do.
I wonder if there is a list of the churches FDR propositioned and where they are now?
I didn’t want to dig deeper because it’s a heartache in itself.
I suspect denominational defensiveness as militating against such ideas. Who cares about trying to approach those pesky Presbyterians, if we Baptists can look like we are voting for Santa Claus? Etc.
I found one Baptist church, decent enough today, that had gotten one of these FDR letters way back when. Did the pastor stump for FDR? I really don’t know.
I’m not confident the sorry remains of our republic can go on much further without repeal of the evil siblings, the 16th and 17th Amendments.
I suspect this is the outcome Trump had expected.
Actually many of those who itemize live in high-cost parts of the country and are simply middle class. Or have extensive medical bills, a good-sized mortgage, etc.
Definitely should be phased out like all this other kind of stuff — mortgage deduction, tax-deductibility of employer-provided insurance, etc.
But Ivanka’s massive new break for private schools, etc., will not only favor the rich more significantly and bust the budget unimaginably, but it also will provide yet more incentive for young mothers not to stay home with their children. A horrific example of when “good intentions” get legislated into tax law.
(And yes, this one is on Trump for indulging his “princess”.)
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.