Why the GOP should give Obama the higher taxes he wants

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 29, 2011 11:11 PM GMT
    http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2011/08/sunday-reflection-why-gop-should-give-obama-higher-taxes-he-wants

    Well, the debt deal is behind us, but it's clear that the White House wants more taxes. Instead of fighting this head-on, the GOP might want to think about future ways of giving President Obama what he says he wants. Done properly, it just might be what academics like Obama call a "teachable moment."
    One of the things that's been floating around the Web over the past week is a video clip from 1953. It's a short film produced by the motion picture industry, seeking the end of a 20 percent excise tax on movie theaters' gross revenues that had been imposed at the end of World War II as a deficit-cutting measure. (Yes, gross, not net).

    In the film, figures ranging from industry big shots to humble ticket collectors talk about how the tax is hurting their industry and killing jobs, and ask Congress to repeal the tax.

    They even explain, in a sort of pre-Art Laffer supply-side way, that a cut in theater taxes might actually produce an increase in federal revenues as the result of greater economic growth.

    The effort -- which includes a call aimed at "Congressman John Dingell," father of the current Rep. John Dingell, who took over from his father a mere two years later in 1955 -- ultimately succeeded.

    But while I'm usually for tax cuts, in this case I think that's too bad. Because with this battle over, Hollywood stopped talking loudly about the damage done by high taxes, pretty much for good.

    When, since, have we seen such a firmly expressed appreciation of the harm that excessive taxation can do to the economy, voiced by representatives of the entertainment industries?

    Today, those industries are a major source of Democratic contributions and spread-the-wealth rhetoric, even as they prosper based on this tax cut, and numerous other bits of favorable treatment scattered throughout the Internal Revenue Code. It's time for a change.

    Were I a Republican senator or representative, I would be agitating to repeal the "Eisenhower tax cut" on the movie industry and restore the excise tax. I think I would also look at imposing similar taxes on sales of DVDs, pay-per-view movies, CDs, downloadable music, and related products.

    I'd also look at the tax and accounting treatment of these industries to see if they were taking advantage of any special "loopholes" that could be closed as a means of reducing "tax expenditures." (Answer: Yes, they are.)

    America, after all, is facing the largest national debt in relation to GDP that it has faced since the end of World War II, so a return to the measures deemed necessary then is surely justifiable now.

    The president's own rhetoric about revenues certainly suggests so. Perhaps the bill could be named the "Greatest Generation Tax Fairness Act" in recognition of its history.

    Should legislation of this sort be passed -- or even credibly threatened -- I think we can expect to see Hollywood rediscover the dangers posed by "job killing tax increases," just as pro-tax-increase Warren Buffet changed his tune once his own corporate-jet business was threatened.

    And, given the entertainment industries' role as the Democrats' campaign finance ATM, it seems likely that the president might soon reconsider his rhetoric as well.

    And that's not the only "revenue enhancement" we might employ. I note that FCC Commissioner Meredith Attwell Baker, who approved the Comcast merger, left the commission to take a lucrative job at Comcast, just as many members of the not-so-successful Obama economic team have left their government positions for lucrative jobs in private industry.

    Obamacare drafters went to work for the health care industry at inflated salaries. And drafters of the Dodd-Frank financial bill have gone on to big-shot lobbying and consulting jobs at high salaries.

    Because much of their value to their employers comes from their prior government service, I think that the taxpayers deserve a share of the return, say in the form of a 50 percent surtax on any earnings by political appointees in excess of their prior government salaries for the first five years after they leave office.

    Some would say that a 75 percent tax on "revolving-door profiteers" would be more appropriate, and I'm certainly willing to entertain arguments to that effect; I'd also like to extend this to members of Congress, but I don't think Congress would ever pass that bill.

    Democrats already understand this approach. Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., plans on attaching a "poison pill" to the Balanced Budget Amendment that would forbid tax cuts for people making over $1 million a year.

    But why should Democrats be the only ones to enjoy the fun of taxing people they dislike?

    Businesses that support Democrats have had a good deal up to now. When Democrats are in power, they get the kind of special deals that Democrats dole out to their supporters.

    When Republicans are in power, their taxes don't go up because Republicans don't like tax increases. Well, perhaps Republicans should take Democrats seriously in their call for "shared sacrifice."

    Such an action would, of course, run counter to the Republicans' no-new-taxes pledges, the importance of which was recently reaffirmed by Grover Norquist in the New York Times.

    But even Norquist has allowed that in some cases loophole-closing may not be quite the same thing as a general tax increase, and perhaps he could be persuaded to make an exception, just this once, in favor of higher taxes -- for the educational value, if nothing else.

    Because apparently Hollywood and the Democrats have a lot to learn.

    Examiner Sunday Reflection contributor Glenn Harlan Reynolds, a law professor at the University of Tennessee, hosts "InstaVision" on PJTV.com.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Nov 29, 2011 11:36 PM GMT
    Because apparently Hollywood and the Democrats have a lot to learn

    .... and I see that you will TEACH us by having the republicans plan corporal tax hikes on DVD's and movie theater tickets?????

    Are you insane Rid?

    Obama wants to repeal tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans who have crippled our economy and have PROVEN once and for all that Reagan Trickle Down economics have Failed horribly ... only contributing to our recession and is stalling our recovery
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 30, 2011 12:37 AM GMT
    GQjock saidBecause apparently Hollywood and the Democrats have a lot to learn

    .... and I see that you will TEACH us by having the republicans plan corporal tax hikes on DVD's and movie theater tickets?????

    Are you insane Rid?

    Obama wants to repeal tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans who have crippled our economy and have PROVEN once and for all that Reagan Trickle Down economics have Failed horribly ... only contributing to our recession and is stalling our recovery


    Are you aware of all the tax breaks that Hollywood gets? Was it the wealthiest Americans who have crippled the economy? No. That would be your political leaders. Further, if you actually looked at the numbers, there are more medical professionals than finance professionals in the top 1%.

    What's failed miserably isn't the laws of economics but rather your political class.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Nov 30, 2011 1:19 AM GMT
    Ummm Rid?

    Was there a quota on the TYPE of people in the 1% that I didn't know about?

    If the Bush tax cuts are repealed it doesn't matter if you made your money in Hollywood in Medicine or ... in ERL icon_cool.gif
    It be the same dam thang
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 30, 2011 1:42 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    GQjock said

    Obama wants to repeal tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans who have crippled our economy


    1) A single person earning over $200,000 is not a "wealthy American."

    2) Being among the people who are earning more than $200,000 I currently employ 15 other people at my company. How is this "crippling the economy?"



    It's not those who are earning $200,000. It's the top 0.01% of the wealthiest that are crippling the economy by hoarding all the resources and not investing in the country.

    Of course, what's on the table is to tax those who earn $1 million a surtax on what they make over $1 million

    And those earning $200,000 for an individual could probably pay 38% instead of 35%. I would pay a couple of percentage points more as part of shared sacrifice.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 30, 2011 3:10 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    2) Being among the people who are earning more than $200,000 I currently employ 15 other people at my company. How is this "crippling the economy?"

    I dont believe that for a "southbeach" moment!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 30, 2011 3:14 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    GQjock said

    Obama wants to repeal tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans who have crippled our economy


    1) A single person earning over $200,000 is not a "wealthy American."

    2) Being among the people who are earning more than $200,000 I currently employ 15 other people at my company. How is this "crippling the economy?"



    It's not those who are earning $200,000. It's the top 0.01% of the wealthiest that are crippling the economy by hoarding all the resources and not investing in the country.

    Of course, what's on the table is to tax those who earn $1 million a surtax on what they make over $1 million

    And those earning $200,000 for an individual could probably pay 38% instead of 35%. I would pay a couple of percentage points more as part of shared sacrifice.



    I thought you were being funny, then I made myself sad. Americans? Sacrifice? >sigh
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 30, 2011 3:45 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    GQjock said

    Obama wants to repeal tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans who have crippled our economy


    1) A single person earning over $200,000 is not a "wealthy American."

    2) Being among the people who are earning more than $200,000 I currently employ 15 other people at my company. How is this "crippling the economy?"



    It's not those who are earning $200,000. It's the top 0.01% of the wealthiest that are crippling the economy by hoarding all the resources and not investing in the country.

    Of course, what's on the table is to tax those who earn $1 million a surtax on what they make over $1 million

    And those earning $200,000 for an individual could probably pay 38% instead of 35%. I would pay a couple of percentage points more as part of shared sacrifice.



    Hahahahahahahahah, the wealthy dont invest in the country?? They pay the majority of the taxes. Its time the 47% that dont pay taxes start investing.



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 30, 2011 4:39 AM GMT
    How about a 10% flat tax across the board for everyone making over $100K/year, and 5% for everyone making from $50,000 to $99,999?

    No loopholes, no shelters, no special deductions (thereby removing an aspect of the marriage debate - might even get women back in the kitchens where they belong, making sammiches for their men!

    s4xqhk.jpg.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 30, 2011 5:02 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    GQjock said

    Obama wants to repeal tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans who have crippled our economy


    1) A single person earning over $200,000 is not a "wealthy American."

    2) Being among the people who are earning more than $200,000 I currently employ 15 other people at my company. How is this "crippling the economy?"



    Did you know that you get to write off the wages you pay to your employees?
    When the tax correction comes (taxes back to Saint Reagan tax rates) you will have no choice but to hire more people and give them raises so that you can exclude all your business earnings from income taxes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 30, 2011 5:26 PM GMT
    CHRISTOPHER34 said
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    GQjock said

    Obama wants to repeal tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans who have crippled our economy


    1) A single person earning over $200,000 is not a "wealthy American."

    2) Being among the people who are earning more than $200,000 I currently employ 15 other people at my company. How is this "crippling the economy?"



    It's not those who are earning $200,000. It's the top 0.01% of the wealthiest that are crippling the economy by hoarding all the resources and not investing in the country.

    Of course, what's on the table is to tax those who earn $1 million a surtax on what they make over $1 million

    And those earning $200,000 for an individual could probably pay 38% instead of 35%. I would pay a couple of percentage points more as part of shared sacrifice.



    Hahahahahahahahah, the wealthy dont invest in the country?? They pay the majority of the taxes. Its time the 47% that dont pay taxes start investing.


    There is no 47% who don't pay taxes. 47% do not pay federal income taxes largely due to Republican policies. This same 47% does pay payroll taxes, which now make up a larger portion of federal revenue than corporate income tax.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 30, 2011 5:50 PM GMT
    Christian73 said

    There is no 47% who don't pay taxes. 47% do not pay federal income taxes largely due to Republican policies. This same 47% does pay payroll taxes, which now make up a larger portion of federal revenue than corporate income tax.


    After decades of tax cuts, the GOP should be proud : they've cut the income tax of 47% all the way to zero. Also GE, ExxonMobil, Citibank and other very large corporations (which are also people)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 30, 2011 6:00 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 said
    GQjock said

    Obama wants to repeal tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans who have crippled our economy


    1) A single person earning over $200,000 is not a "wealthy American."

    2) Being among the people who are earning more than $200,000 I currently employ 15 other people at my company. How is this "crippling the economy?"



    It's not those who are earning $200,000. It's the top 0.01% of the wealthiest that are crippling the economy by hoarding all the resources and not investing in the country.

    Of course, what's on the table is to tax those who earn $1 million a surtax on what they make over $1 million

    And those earning $200,000 for an individual could probably pay 38% instead of 35%. I would pay a couple of percentage points more as part of shared sacrifice.


    You mean like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates?

  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Nov 30, 2011 6:04 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    GQjock said

    Obama wants to repeal tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans who have crippled our economy


    1) A single person earning over $200,000 is not a "wealthy American."

    2) Being among the people who are earning more than $200,000 I currently employ 15 other people at my company. How is this "crippling the economy?"



    Awww... SB I hate to break the news? But makin just over 200,000? Does not place you anywhere near the top 1%

    My condolences ..... I'll send a lithium bouquet for your feelings of grandeur