Showing posts with label REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED STATES. Show all posts
Showing posts with label REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED STATES. Show all posts

Friday, June 14, 2024

Americans Are Wising Up to the GOP’s Tired Trickle-Down Scam

 

Americans Are Wising Up to the GOP’s Tired Trickle-Down Scam

Trump and other Republican politicians are trying their best to revive their nonsensical horse-and-sparrow supply-side rationale so the rest of us can pay to make the rich far richer.

They’re at it again. And it’s not even original: The trickle-down economics that two-dozen Republican governors and former U.S. President Donald Trump are reviving as you read these words has a long history.

“Trickle down,” of course, was the theory advanced by former President Ronald Reagan that if America only made rich people massively richer with staggering tax cuts, ending anti-trust regulation, and government subsidies for their industries, they would use all that extra free money to build new factories, hire people, and the abundance would trickle down to the average worker.

It was a lie, but it wasn’t the first time the GOP had tried that lie. Then knew exactly what they were doing, and what outcome it would produce. Instead of raising the pay of their workers, the rich people on the receiving end of Reagan’s, Bush’s, and Trump’s tax cuts simply added the cash to their money bins and investments, bought new yachts or trophy wives, and blasted themselves into outer space on penis-shaped rockets.

Thankfully, the Biden administration and this generation of Democratic politicians have rejected Reagan’s neoliberalism and low-tax ideology in favor of what centuries of history shows us works: for the wealthy to again pay their fair share of taxes to sustain the commons.

Nonetheless, Republican politicians think we haven’t noticed and they’re trying to pull it off again at both the state and federal level. A bill with 102 GOP co-sponsors (the Tax Cuts and Jobs Permanency Act) is in motion in the House of Representatives right now to double-down on Trump’s tax cuts.

How did we get here, and why are they still pushing something that’s so discredited it’s become a punch-line for late-night comedians?

The GOP was captured by the morbidly rich in the 1880s and has been dancing to their tune ever since, regularly throwing bones to bigots, religious zealots, womanhaters, and gun nuts to get enough votes to hold power.

Ever since that era, their main focus has been to increase the wealth of the morbidly rich while keeping down wages and saddling average people with as much debt as possible. As I’ve explained before, conservatives believe this crushing of the middle class is the best way to “ensure social stability” and thus “save America.”

The first Democratic president to call Republicans out for that era’s version of trickle-down economics (which back then, before income taxes, had to do with suppressing wages, fighting the early union movement, and letting industrial oligarchs wipe out small competitors) was Grover Cleveland, in his 1888 State of the Union speech:

As we view the achievements of aggregated capital, we discover the existence of trusts, combinations, and monopolies, while the citizen is struggling far in the rear or is trampled to death beneath an iron heel. Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people’s masters.

But the first tax on wealthy Americans went into place way before that, in 1839, shepherded through Congress by Representative Abraham Lincoln. It was a tax on luxury items and expensive land exclusively owned by rich people. As Lincoln wrote to his friend William Wait on March 2, 1839:

I believe it can be sustained, because it does not increase the tax upon the “many poor” but upon the “wealthy few”… [which] by taxing [luxuries and land], as is well known, that belong, not to the poor, but to the wealthy citizen.

On the other hand, the wealthy can not justly complain, because the change is equitable within itself, and also a sine qua non to a compliance with the Constitution. If, however, the wealthy should, regardless of the justness of the complaint, as men often are, when interest is involved in the question, complain of the change, it is still to be remembered, that they are not sufficiently numerous to carry the elections.

Lincoln followed up as president with the nation’s first income tax in 1861, put into place to fund the Civil War. It was also a progressive tax; it only hit people who made above $800 ($32,000 today).

However, taxing the rich to pay for the needs of the nation was also an idea that long predated even Lincoln. As former President Thomas Jefferson wrote to Pierre Samuel Du Pont de Nemours in 1811:

We are all the more reconciled to the tax on importations, because it falls exclusively on the rich, and, with the equal partition of intestate’s estates, constitute the best agrarian law. In fact, the poor man in this country who uses nothing but what is made within his own farm or family, or within the U.S. pays not a farthing of tax to the general government, but on his salt; and should we go into that manufacture, as we ought to do, he will pay not one cent.

Our revenues once liberated by the discharge of the public debt, and its surplus applied to canals, roads, schools, etc., and the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated, and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone without his being called on to spare a cent from his earnings. The path we are now pursuing leads directly to this end which we cannot fail to attain unless our administration should fall into unwise hands.

Following Cleveland’s calling out of the morbidly rich of his day, late 19th-century advocates for that class came up with the “horse and sparrow” theory of taxation. This was back in the day when everybody used horses for transportation and people were used to seeing small birds pecking undigested grain from the horses’ droppings that filled America’s streets.

The sales-pitch was that if you fed horses extra oats, more than they could normally digest, they’d pass through all that undigested oat into their manure for the sparrows to pick at; rich people’s excesses, in other words, would spill over to the average “sparrow” working person. It was embraced by Republicans in Congress and not only didn’t it work; it was blamed, in part, for the Panic of 1896.

Republican Warren Harding revived Horse and Sparrow economics in 1920 (many people still owned horses) when he campaigned on dropping the then-91% top income tax bracket down to 25%. He was elected and kept his promise, the result being the “Roaring 20s” when the rich got fabulously richer while working people saw their wages actually drop (leading to an explosion of unionization efforts by pissed-off workers that were violently suppressed by employers and police).

It all came to a startling and final end in October, 1929 with the Great Crash that set off what was then called the Republican Great Depression (the “Republican” part of that label largely wore off after the election of Republican President Dwight Eisenhower in 1952).

Republicans stopped talking about horses and sparrows around that time, but the theory never really died; Reagan simply reinvented it in 1980 as “Supply-Side Economics,” aka trickle-down.

Today, Republican politicians—heavily supported by right-wing billionaires since five Republicans on the Supreme Court legalized political bribery—are trying their best to revive their nonsensical horse-and-sparrow trickle-down rationale so the rest of us can pay to make the rich far richer. Trump promises to renew his expiring tax cuts for billionaires if he’s elected, which the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) says will add another $4.6 trillion to the $7 trillion deficit he gave us during his four years in office.

In Kansas, Republican legislators keep pushing through new tax cuts for the rich (one would reportedly cut Charles Koch’s tax bill this year by almost a half-million dollars) and Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly keeps vetoing them. Republican legislatures in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania just passed tax cuts for the wealthy totaling $2 billion and $3 billion respectively, although both states have Democratic governors who will veto such legislation.

In Mississippi, however, Republican Gov. Tate Reeves and his GOP colleagues in that state’s legislature have radically and repeatedly cut taxes, threatening to eliminate the income tax (which produces a third of the state’s revenue) altogether. Rich Mississippians will be fine; the necessary cuts will fall on the poor and the state’s educational and physical infrastructure, which are not much used by the very wealthy who fund Reeves anyway; they send their kids to private schools and fly private jets.

Other Republican-controlled states are seeing similar actions to raise taxes and fees on working class people while cutting taxes on the morbidly rich. Georgia’s Republicans just cut state taxes by a billion dollars; North Carolina reduced their income tax on the richest from 5.5% to 3.99%; and Iowa is trying to transition to a flat tax so that even the poorest of workers must pay the same tax rate as that state’s most wealthy, who will see a huge tax cut.

Altogether, The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities notes, just between 2021 and 2023:

Twenty-six states cut their personal income tax rates and/or corporate income tax rates, 13 of them multiple times… Combined, the cuts will cost those 26 states an estimated $124 billion by 2028, including $13 billion that they have already lost (2022-2023) and $111 billion over the next five years (2024-2028)… This 3.6% share is equivalent to more than a third of states’ general fund spending on higher education and more than half of what goes to state correctional systems.

Thankfully, the Biden administration and this generation of Democratic politicians have rejected Reagan’s neoliberalism and low-tax ideology in favor of what centuries of history shows us works: for the wealthy to again pay their fair share of taxes to sustain the commons.

As President Joe Biden told an audience just last week:

We’ve gone from trickle-down economics to the point where we’re in a situation where we build from the middle class out and the bottom up. And that way the wealthy still do very well. No one wealthy is hurting at all. We’re in good shape. So, we have to keep it going that way.

Republicans have been hustling this scam for over 150 years, and in the states they control educational outcomes are plummeting, child and infant mortality is skyrocketing (along with homicides), and infrastructure threatens to disintegrate as funding cuts come online.

Nonetheless, it finally seems Americans are catching on and increasingly rejecting horses, sparrows, and politicians who try to sell them on more trickle-down tax cuts for the rich.

More Americans need to know this history. Pass it along.



Monday, October 17, 2022

RSN: FOCUS: Robert Reich | Republicans Are Trying to Win by Spreading Three False Talking Points. Here’s the Truth

 

 

Reader Supported News
17 October 22

Live on the homepage now!
Reader Supported News

WE SERIOUSLY NEED A GOOD DAY OF FUNDRAISING — CAN YOU HELP? — All it takes to turn a very bad fundraising day into a reasonable one is a few decent donations. That’s it. This has been a month with very few reasonable fundraising days. Now we have a problem. Who can reasonably help.
Marc Ash • Founder, Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!

 

Economist and writer Robert Reich. (photo: Getty Images)
FOCUS: Robert Reich | Republicans Are Trying to Win by Spreading Three False Talking Points. Here’s the Truth
Robert Reich, Guardian UK
Reich writes: "Republicans want midterm voters to believe lies about crime, inflation and taxes."

Republicans want midterm voters to believe lies about crime, inflation and taxes. This is what they’re claiming – followed by the facts

Republicans are telling three lies they hope will swing the midterms. They involve crime, inflation, and taxes. Here’s what Republicans are claiming, followed by the facts.

1. They claim that crime is rising because Democrats have been “soft” on crime

This is pure rubbish. Rising crime rates are due to the proliferation of guns, which Republicans refuse to control.

Here are the facts:

While violent crime rose 28% from 2019 to 2020, gun homicides rose 35%. States that have weakened gun laws have seen gun crime surge. Clearly, a major driver of the national increase in violence is the easy availability of guns.

The violence can’t be explained by any of the Republican talking points about “soft-on-crime” Democrats.

Lack of police funding? Baloney. Democratic-run major cities spend 38% more on policing per person than Republican-run cities, and 80% of the largest cities increased police funding from 2019 to 2022.

Criminal justice reforms? Wrong. Data shows that wherever bail reforms have been implemented, re-arrest rates remain stable. Data from major cities shows no connection between the policies of progressive prosecutors and changes in crime rates.

Research has repeatedly shown that crime is rising faster in Republican, Trump-supporting states. The thinktank Third Way found that in 2020, per capita murder rates were 40% higher in states won by Trump than in those won by Joe Biden.

Let’s be clear: it’s been Republican policies that have made it easier for people to get and carry guns. Republicans are lying about the real cause of rising crime to protect their patrons – gun manufacturers.

2. They claim that inflation is due to Biden’s spending, and wage increases

Baloney. The major cause of the current inflation is the global post-pandemic shortage of all sorts of things, coupled with Putin’s war in Ukraine and China’s lockdowns.

The major domestic cause of the current inflation is big corporations that have been taking advantage of inflation by raising their prices higher than their increasing costs.

Here are the facts:

Inflation can’t be explained by any of the Republican talking points.

Biden’s spending? Rubbish again. That can’t be causing our current inflation because inflation has broken out everywhere around the world, often at much higher rates than in the US.

Besides, heavy spending by the US government began in 2020, before the Biden administration, in order to protect Americans and the economy from the ravages of Covid-19 – and it was necessary.

American workers getting wage increases? Wages can’t be pushing inflation because wages have been increasing at a slower pace than prices – leaving most workers worse off.

The biggest domestic culprits are big corporations using inflation as an excuse to raise prices above their own cost increases, resulting in near-record profits.

US corporate profits are at the highest margins since 1950 – while consumers are paying through the nose.

Let’s be clear: the biggest domestic cause of inflation is corporate power. Republicans are lying about this to protect their big corporate patrons.

3. They say Democrats voted to hire an army of IRS agents who will audit and harass the middle class

Nonsense. The IRS won’t be going after the middle class. It will be going after ultra-wealthy tax cheats.

Here are the facts:

The Inflation Reduction Act, passed in July, provides funding to begin to get IRS staffing back to what it was before 2010, after which Republicans diminished staff by roughly 30%, despite increases since then in the number of Americans filing tax returns.

The extra staff are needed to boost efforts against high-end tax evasion – which is more difficult to root out, because the ultra-wealthy hire squads of accountants and tax attorneys to hide their taxable incomes.

The treasury department and the IRS have made it clear that audit rates for households earning $400,000 or under will remain the same.

Let’s be clear: the IRS needs extra resources to go after rich tax cheats. Republicans are lying about what the IRS will do with the new funding to protect their ultra-wealthy patrons.

None of these three lies is as brazen and damaging as Trump’s big lie. But they’re all being used by Republican candidates in these last weeks before the midterms.

Know the truth and share it.


READ MORE

 

Contribute to RSN

Follow us on facebook and twitter!

Update My Monthly Donation

PO Box 2043 / Citrus Heights, CA 95611






Monday, March 21, 2022

These are the most and least federally-dependent U.S. states

 

REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED STATES FAIL THEIR RESIDENTS IN MANY CATEGORIES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED, SUCH AS POVERTY, HEALTH CARE, EDUCATION, ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES, MATERNAL MORTALITY AND OTHER CATEGORIES. 

IT'S NOT COINCIDENCE. REPUBLICANS DON'T REPRESENT AMERICANS.

These are the most and least federally-dependent U.S. states


Republican-leaning states tend to be more reliant on federal funding, according to a recent study from WalletHub.

The analysis looked at the return on taxes paid to the federal government, the share of federal jobs, and federal funding as a share of state revenue, and weighed the federal aid dependence of each state's government and their residents separately.

"Overall, blue states are less dependent on the federal government than red states," WalletHub Analyst Jill Gonzales told Yahoo Finance. "States with high taxes and GDP have a lower dependency on the federal government, while states with low taxes and GDP depend more on federal aid."

Alaska was ranked first overall as being the most federally-dependent state while Delaware was the least dependent and also first in the lowest amount of other financial assistance received.

A majority of the five states with the lowest GDP — South Carolina, Alabama, West Virginia, Arkansas, and Mississippi — are also among the most federally dependent states on the list. (Interestingly, however, Alaska is among the top five states for highest GDP despite being the most federally dependent state in the nation.)

States that ranked higher for financial independence — such as New Jersey, Minnesota, and Massachusetts — received exponentially fewer federal contracts and grants between 2021 and 2022 than states on the other end of the spectrum, like Mississippi, New Mexico, and West Virginia.

Dr. Benjamin Clark, an associate professor at the University of Oregon, told Yahoo Finance that certain state programs can create "an appearance of dependence" even though they are sometimes driven by federal investments "that have nothing to do with entitlement programs." For example, he said, some states have a "disproportionately" large number of military bases, which creates more federal job opportunities.

President Biden stands by with Labor Secretary Marty Walsh prior to signing an executive order on federal construction project contracts and labor agreements during a visit to Ironworkers Local 5 in Upper Marlboro, Maryland, February 4, 2022. REUTERS/Leah Millis
President Biden stands by with Labor Secretary Marty Walsh prior to signing an executive order on federal construction project contracts and labor agreements during a visit to Ironworkers Local 5 in Upper Marlboro, Maryland, February 4, 2022. REUTERS/Leah Millis


Clark added that focusing on income tax "ignores the fact" that it's not the only tax collected by the federal government.

"Excise taxes, corporate income taxes, tariffs, Social Security, and Medicare and Medicaid all have separate ways in which they bring in money to the federal government coffers," he said. "Some of these taxes may be a much larger burden on residents of these 'dependent' states than those in wealthier ones."




FOCUS: Rogé Karma | The Lisa Cook Case Could Be the Whole Ball Game

    28 August 25 An All-Out Effort to Finish this Fundraiser — We cannot let this fundraiser drag on any longer. We must pull out all the st...