>> Thursday, December 02, 2010
While the Republicans are calling it a tax hike, it actually is a tax cut that is expiring. I do admire how they can twist a fact every time and make all their members spread it naturally. These PR sound bites are produced fast and on point with no one calling them out like the liars that they are. Instead of being investigative, the news media pretty much turned into a passive reactionary useless soundboard, which is a shame.
The rich wants Bush's Tax Cut For The Rich (a term that needs to be repeated again and again) to remain intact, and so the Rich donates to politicians to make that happen. Since Obama is in power and he stated that he would let the cut expire on its own, the Democrats will not blatantly contradict their own leader, so it's left for the Republicans to come out with trickle down theories or "raising tax for someone is raising it for everyone" or Obama is Hitler to rally for the cause. No one would want to associate their own name with a tax hike, except perhaps this guy:
I guess since the guy is an Independent and doesn't belong to any party, he can feel free to say whatever he likes. Maybe Independents don't get much corporate donations? Whatever the case, I'm glad someone came out to point to the obvious. We are in somewhat of a recession with an unemployment rate of 10%, how do you convince folks that the rich really needed that tax cut? By invoking the general bad feelings of an administration headed by a black guy? By invoking camaraderie between castes that was never really there in the first place? Or by creating a fantasy that the poor will somehow benefit from the tax cut as well?
Here's Sarah Palin trying her bat at option 1, clearly trying to associate the tax hike to the big scary ObamaCare. Why reinvent the wheels when it worked so well last time? I'm still baffled on how this woman become the Right's go to person on knowledge when all she offers are nonfactual soundbites like thinking that the action of Wikileaks can be considered as treason. The woman is nothing but a female wannabe version of W. at best.
Giving rich people money and wait for it to trickle down is no different than giving poor people money and wait for it to trickle up. No matter who you're giving money to, they will eventually spend it and it will stimulate the economy. The only different is that rich folks buy big items and their money will end up benefiting Europe and poor folks buy small mass manufactured items and their money will likely end up benefiting Asia. The problem is that US doesn't manufacture much anymore, the best we can do is to give the money to middle class who's most likely to purchase local products and services. And no, not many people get to the top 1% income bracket overnight, so it's still hard for me to understand why people would follow the thinking process of benefiting from the tax cut when we get rich. It just doesn't happen like that.
However, I am stumped when a guy in the forum (presumably rich) asked why he needs to pay so much more amount-wise to get the same crappy services that everyone else is getting and I sometimes wonder the same on gay people not getting the same rights and paying for things like school tax that may not benefit us at all. I would assume, though, that rich people have a lot more at stake, so I don't think it'll help anyone to see the country's economy goes down the drain and if the whole country does so poorly that all the local industries can easily be bought up by foreign countries, that wouldn't do anyone any favors either. On top of it, bad economy usually translate to a higher crime rate and the rich are far bigger targets than anyone else.
One unsettling rumor is that the Democrats are trying to used the remainder of the year to pass a few important legislation during the upcoming lame duck session and the GOP sworn to block every bill until the Tax Cut For The Rich is extended. Democrats might cave into their demands just to get bills including the DREAM Act passed. First, even those bills might be important, are they really worth the trade off on a solution that can reduce the national deficit? I'm not into negotiating with hijackers and terrorists alike. I much rather the American people suffer through two years of seeing Republicans blocking every proposal passing through congress, at least then they might see how destructive they can be and Obama might still have a chance in 2012. Though if the tax cut really get extended as a trade off, I'm sure some Democrats who receive big donations can give a sigh of relief while still blame the Republicans for being corrupt in the same breath.