For those who believe the GOP anti tax rhetoric here is yet more proof it's an illusion. Republicans have no problem with tax hikes on people provided they're not rich. Listen to Rep. Pat Tiberi (R-OH), a member of the House Ways and Means Committee:
TIBERI: I think the federal government has an obligation to make sure that we deal with people who have difficulties. But at the same time, the tax code shouldn’t be used as a tool to just bring revenue in and beat up people who are trying to be successful…So I think we’ve got to lower the tax rates, both for corporations and for American individuals. And let them try to grow our economy and grow jobs so people like you and me can have an opportunity to work.
KEYES: But you’re only talking about lowering tax rates on individuals in the upper income areas. You’re talking about raising taxes…
TIBERI: Well, it’s hard to lower taxes on people who don’t pay taxes. As you know, you have the Earned Income Tax Credit, so you have folks who are actually getting a check and not paying income tax…If you don’t have skin in the game, even if it’s ten bucks a quarter, I think it changes the debate on what the role of the federal government is and what the role of state government is.:
http://thinkprogress.org/page/2/
Aha! The poor need skin in the game. Where have we heard that phrase before? Well House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said the same thing.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) revived one of the GOP’s favorite talking points this morning, telling attendees at a Politico-sponsored breakfast event that it was imperative that Congress address the “problem” that “more than 45 percent” of Americans aren’t paying income taxes.
The GOP has repeatedly made the claim that the poorest Americans need more “skin in the game.” Today, response to a question by ABC’s Jon Karl, Cantor made it clear that Republicans are interested in raising taxes on the poor while lowering tax rates for everyone else as part of any comprehensive tax reform plan:
CANTOR: We also know that over 45 percent of the people in this country don’t pay income taxes at all, and we have to question whether that’s fair. And should we broaden the base in a way that we can lower the rates for everybody that pays taxes. [...]
KARL: Just wondering, what do you do about that? Are you saying we need to have a tax increase on the 45 percent who right now pay no federal income tax?
CANTOR: I’m saying that, just in a macro way of looking at it, you’ve got to discuss that issue. … How do you deal with a shrinking pie and number of people and entities that support the operations of government, and how do you go about continuing to milk them more, if that’s what some want to do, but preserve their ability to provide the growth engine? … I’ve never believed that you go raise taxes on those that have been successful that are paying in, taking away from them, so that you just hand out and give to someone else
But here is someone else who used this same phrase.
"In the long run we should reform UI to give workers more “skin in the game” (and idea progressives seem to hate.) If it’s going to worsen inequality, then accompany it with actions that make the payroll tax more progressive."
This was Sumner last November. http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=12198
As a progressive it's not so much that I hate the "skin in the game" idea as I think it's misconstrued. Workers already have "skin in the game." They certainly already pay taxes contrary to Tiberi's comments. Of course we keep hearing this phony number that "almost 50 percent of Americans pay no tax."
For whatever reason, they insist on only looking at income taxes. In reality all workers pay pretty high payroll taxes-or for that matter they pay considerable state taxes including sales taxes in most states. As to Sumner, if he really meant it I'd take him up maybe on making the payroll tax more progressive but I doubt he really supports this. Why? He has already griped about the small payroll tax holiday tax we have had. He declared that he and his wife are high income individuals who don't need it.
He probably doesn't but many workers have considerably more modest wages than him. In any case, it's not clear that in exchange for a cut in UI this is a good deal for workers.
What's good about Cantor and Tiberi's comments is they show the GOP doesn't oppose tax cuts per se. They actually support tax hikes if they hit the nonrich. This is the GOP intent which is why Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney have not supplied us much details about how they will pay for the deep tax cuts for the rich they have called for.
"
"
No comments:
Post a Comment