SEEMINGLY FORTIFIED by his reelection, president obama insists he will veto any budget bill which does not include a small federal income tax increase for people making over a quarter million a year. His republican foes are saying that such a tax increase is unfair, and would not raise revenues enough to make it worthwhile.
This sounds a bit contradictory. Obama's proposed tax increase on the wealthy would be large enough to be unfair, to hurt the wealthy, but not large enough to help anyone. How can it be both at the same time?
The republicans want to raise revenue by closing tax loopholes, which sounds great, but is it really possible to do this? Would closing one loophole merely open another? To the extent that closing tax loopholes is possible, by all means, let's close 'em.
Mainly, in order to reduce the deficit, the conservatives aka republicans want to "shore up" entitlements, so sayeth speaker of the house john boehner, which is code for reducing entitlements, such as social security, medicare, and medicaid.
And the conservatives aka republicans wonder why they lost the election. They lost because there are far more poor people than wealthy people in america. They lost because they blame the poor for being poor, and the democrats blame the wealthy .
Say whatever you want, which point of view is gonna attract more votes in a country where even the poor people, in most cases, have plenty of opportunity to vote? If the poor people in america gave a damn, the occupy wall street movement would be a flaming success.
maybe the wealthy folks are lucky the poor people don't give a damn...
No comments:
Post a Comment