Home | About | Donate

As Critics Struggle to Portray 70% Tax Rate for Rich as Unrealistic, Dems Line Up Behind Idea Ahead of 2020 Election


#1

As Critics Struggle to Portray 70% Tax Rate for Rich as Unrealistic, Dems Line Up Behind Idea Ahead of 2020 Election

Julia Conley, staff writer

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's (D-N.Y.) unflinching support for taxing the wealthiest Americans at a rate doubling what they currently pay each year made waves among conservatives over the weekend—but at least one likely Democratic presidential candidate's backing of the proposal may indicate that it may soon get broader support from the party.


#2

Looks like Alexandria has started this ball rolling downhill.

Apparently, girls can play hardball.


#3

Memo to progressive Ds:

It might be useful to ask those critical of 70%+ marginal tax rates if they would be personally affected—“liberal media,” my wrinkly white butt. They’re all millionaires reading teleprompters on behalf of their billionaire bosses, and should be continuously called out for pushing their class interests over facts.


#4

In case you missed it:


#5

A 70-90% tax rate for the rich? Seems like a bipartisan proposition. That’s something I won’t mind politicians patronizing “its what the American people want”.


#6

Even if we can get a 70% tax rate, what’s to prevent another Reagan from lowering it again? The rich are able to manipulate the economy in their favor.

We can change the rigged system, or the rich would regress the nation to oligarchy.


#7

The real question is, “How can we prevent the CAPITALISTS from electing another Reagan?”
Simple. Take away their corporate property and give it to democratic worker and community co-ops.
Until then, we will never be safe.


#8

I suppose that now we will start to hear the old line from the right, “take money from the rich and there won’t be money for investing in growth businesses.”
Some of the growth can actually be made by government instead of capitalistic oligarchs.


#9

“…ahead of 2020 Elections” …

But what really happens AFTER the election counts more –

Detest Gingrich – but think the idea of signing everyone up to increase taxes on
the rich would be protection for every ONE legislator who is willing to do it AFTER
the election. Safety in numbers. And a written promise to the public.

All of our States, local governments, communities, tax payers are suffering from this
right wing game-playing of rewarding the rich and punishing the working class and the
impoverished, the sick, US children – and the homeless we hear so little about.

Kharma will not work for us until we begin to stand up against the cruelty and brutality
of our own government.


#10

They haven’t been “investing” in anything – it seems to be more like take the money
and run –

In Ireland they are trying to negotiate at least that with those many corporations who use
Irish financial institutions to shelter their wealth from taxes. To have these corporations
actually make real contributions to the Irish nation and to invest in actual businesses.


#11

US national resources must be nationalized – returned to the control of our citizens.

“Return” is an odd choice of words because immediately Our Founders privatized ALL of
our natural resources for benefit of Elites/wealthy –


#12

That makes so much sense that it will never happen here.
Perhaps we need something like the 70 1/2 rule for taking a distribution from your IRA.
Or the ACA mandate that insurance companies must spend at least 80% I think it is, on healthcare directly, and none of that 80% for advertising.


#13

Of course, Pelosi works for capitalists and is here to defend their system –
but she does feel the forces of anti-capitalist sentiments rising and think she
had to acknowledge that – but certainly the article does.
People like Pelosi – imo – follow power and will be wherever they detect power
is moving. The socialist payoff may be much less, or even nothing, but if
capitalism is going down, she will jump ship – again IMO.

The future of anything like IRA has been threatened by Elite control of government
where criminal legislators have corrupted Social Security to move it from a system
which was “pay as you go” to a system which has been forced to raise huge surplus
amounts which have since served as “slush funds” for the rich and used for wars and
tax cuts for the rich. These surpluses have over-burdened average citizens who are
the primary supporters of Social Security since SS FICA payments by the wealthy have
not been increased, nor has the ceiling on earnings been increased in a very long time.
Used to be automatic.

PLUS Social Security is now also threatened by 10 years of pretty much elimination of
COLA’s while we have had inflation at rates even higher than 6.5%.

So – anything that depends on future payoff has to be judged by our governments criminal
intrusions on these programs. COLA’s were intended to keep the “paycheck/pension” honest.

However, as we saw during Obama’s reign where he stopped the SS COLA’s for two full
years and then assigned decisions about resuming them and how they would resume to the
GOP/Alan Simpson, a lifelong opponent of Social Security. COLA’s now provide little or no relief.

Combined – we have betrayal by our own DP which has colluded with the right wing GOP and
its corporatist agenda in destroying these programs – and basically our futures.

All investments that pay off in some “future time” are threatened, naturally, by this criminality
of our own government.

The US government has been lying to the public about the rate of inflation since the Vietnam War.


#14

We won’t get it, but if we did, we’d be in serious trouble. Can you say, “capital flight”? Don’t think for a minute that we’re immune. These companies could all just up and leave, and take their capital with them.


#15

What was the name of the agreement – Bretton Woods? – which kept capitalism
from taking flight? Overturned by Nixon, I think.

But LABOR cannot as easily jump borders.

If LABOR can’t actually unite, it is important for all of us where we can (imo) to let those
in protest know that we support them. And, finding ways to do that, of course.