As most readers of this blog are painfully aware, the vast majority of Republicans -- and virtually every newly-elected Teapartier in the 112th Congress - is a signatory of Grover Norquist's"I-will-never-ever-under-any-circumstances-even-at-the-point-of-an-AK-47-vote-for-any-tax-increase" pledge. Likewise, most of us are also painfully aware that many members of Congress signed on to the Norquist pledge even prior to taking their official oath of office -- the one in which they swear to " . . . support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. . ."
I don't know about you, but I think there ought to be a law against this sort of thing. Hey, come to think of it, there is a law against this sort of thing; for does not the Bible clearly state not once, but twice (Ex. 20:3-5 Deut. 5:7-9) that it is a massive wrong to make or bow down to any idol or false god? To "engrave" Mr. Norquist's "no taxes, no how" commandment onto the tablet of a political career is, in my estimation, as blasphemous as worshipping at the altar of Baal.
Over the past few days, President Obama has, like Abraham of old, taken an axe to the idols of Terach; with stiffened spine, he has unequivocally stated that in order to create jobs and begin fixing a broken economy, it will be absolutely necessary to spend money AND to raise taxes on the wealthy. In throwing down the gauntlet and picking up the axe, the president has, for the first time in a long time, started sounding like a Democrat. Not surprisingly, those who are committed to praying at the anti-tax "high places of wickedness" (c.f. Hosea 10:8) believe that the president has signed his political death notice; that the public shares their "no taxes" orthodoxy.
Once wonders . . .
Recent polling indicates that the great unwashed public is fed up with both Republicans and Democrats. They are beginning to understand that President Obama and the Democrats are not nearly as responsible for the economic nightmare on Main Street as the speculators, manipulators and banksters of Wall Street. The public is also beginning to understand that any country that can fund wars of whim and back bailouts and tax breaks for billionaires is not broke. As John Nichols noted in this week's The Nation, "There is money. It's just misallocated. The demand for jobs must be coupled with demands for better budgeting and new sources of revenue."
That's precisely what the president is talking about of late . . .
One proposed source of new revenue is a minuscule (less than .05%) tax on Wall Street trading of stocks, derivatives, currencies, credit default swaps and futures -- the same speculative financial instruments that got us into our mess in the first place. There is already a legislative proposal (H.R. 4191) before Congress that has collected more than 5 dozen cosponsors. Co-authored by Oregon Representative Peter DeFazio and Iowa Senator Tom Harkin H.R. 4191, the "Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Act" was originally submitted in 2009. It has garnered the support of economists, Wall Street investors, labor organizations and consumer groups. By one conservative estimate this transaction tax could raise a minimum of $150 billion in new revenue, thus forcing the banksters of Wall Street to pay for at least some of the devastation they caused to the folks on Main Street. (Not surprisingly, DeFazio's bill has also drawn fire from many others, who claim that it will kill jobs by placing yet another layer of regulation on an already over-regulated financial world.)
The DeFazio bill is written in such a way as to ensure that the tax is targeted at speculators, and "has no impact on the average investor and pension fund." The tax will be refunded for:
- Tax-favored retirement accounts
- 401(k)s
- Mutual funds
- Education Savings Accounts
- Health Savings Accounts, and
- The first $100,000 of transactions annually that are not already exempted.
In a recent New York Times article, University of Massachusetts economics professor Nancy Folbre came out in support of the initiative: "Purchases of stocks, bonds and other financial instruments in the United States go untaxed but for a tiny fee (less than a half-cent) on stock trades that helps finance the Securities and Exchange Commission. In Britain, by contrast," Professor Folbre wrote, ". . . a 0.5 percent tax on stock transactions raises about $40 billion a year. President Nicolas Sarkozy of France and Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany recently announced plans to introduce a similar tax in the 27 nations of the European Community. Our current tax policies favor speculative investment in financial instruments over productive investments in human capabilities. . . "
On September 1, thousands of members of "National Nurses United" flocked to Capitol Hill, lobbying more than 5 dozen members of Congress. They called it the "National Day of Action to Tax Wall Street." Representatives were urged to sign a pledge in support of the Wall Street transaction tax. Unlike the Norquist pledge -- a sweeping across-the-board anti-tax stance signed by virtually every member of the GOP -- this one was in support of a single piece of legislation whose affect would be felt not on Wall Street, but rather on Main Street.
Without question, jobs and unemployment are going to be the major issues of the 2012 election. If the president and the Democrats will continue holding firm and show by both word and deed that they are fighting on behalf of Main Street, they may just pull off a major victory over Wall Street. The "Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street" bill is one weapon in their arsenal. And whether or not it passes Congress (it will not) is actually irrelevant; it serves to underscore just who is fighting for the middle class . . .
©2011 Kurt F. Stone
The concept of re-taxing the financial sector is a valid step towards righting the listing ship-of-state. We would be also in favor of re-applying the Florida Intangible tax that Jebby Bush jettisoned during his tenure!
However, we would love to see a Congressional Hot-Air tax which would be applied to words used to address either the Senate or House! ( 5 cents per?) Let it fund the homeless!
Next, let the Democratically-controlled Senate pass a resolution of censure condemning Grover Norquist as an "enemy of the state..."
Posted by: Paul | September 21, 2011 at 06:24 AM
If fairness is your bag, especially punishing those that got us into this mess in the first place, one suggests you start with the enablers such as Alan Greenspan, the myopic Fed. Chairman, who failed to see all the excess condos and homes being built in Hallandale, Sunny Isles, California, Nevada , Arizona, and stupidly left interest rates at such low levels, that chimps could buy $800,000 condos. He, who basked in the glow of congressional approval, of all his wayward policies, and said everything was going smoothly. Then go to Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, who wanted the underclass to get an opportunity to buy a home, which encouraged, no down payment, and no payments for the first year, and yes we'll throw in some furniture also. Our legislators were greedy for votes, Wall Street was greedy for , what else, money, only the former has the law on their side, and are like vultures, who come in when all the carcasses of financial ruin are on the ground, and feast on the remains. Yes punish Wall Street, mortgage brokers, bankers, for the sub-prime mess,tax them, if you want, but is there something in the bible that talks about personal responsibility (on the part of the public) and FAIRNESS spread around??? Punish who??? By the way, if clueless Obama had focused on jobs first, ( in January of 2009, when the financial world was crumbling) instead of the healthcare program, maybe this discussion would not have been necessary
Posted by: Midnight Owl | September 21, 2011 at 06:18 AM
Fortunately, there is no law against that or this or any particular sort of thing called political belief. I don't have time to debunk all of your topics. Just a couple.
The IRS has stated that there are 230,000 US taxpayers who claim earnings in excess of one million USD ($1,000,000.00) per year. If you were to tax an additional one million from each of those 230,000 millionaires the total amount generated would be $230,000,000,000.00 That is Two Hundred Thirty Billion USD.
If Pres. Obama would agree to cut annual spending across the board by just 1%, we would achieve double that amount. As much as I do agree that the Mega Rich Billionaires should pay more, it is a case of diminishing returns. The more you tax those Mega Rich guys & girls, the more investments they make outside the borders of the good old USA.
Our federal corporate tax is 39.25%. It is the 2nd highest in the world. Japan beat us by a lousy 0.39%.
If you ran a BIG publicly owned company and you do business all over the world, where would you position your HQ's? In Ireland at 12.5% corp tax or the good old US of A at 39.25% ?
However, lets say your BIG company has a profit margin of 9.34% (like GE) on $170 billion in revenue (like GE) and your BIG company HQ's was in the USA therefore your BIG company should have paid about $16 billion in corporate taxes. But if you are the CEO (like GE's Immelt) who moves your aircraft division to China (along with 20,000 jobs) and your electronics division to Mexico (along with 5,000 jobs) and your software division to Ireland (along with just 3,500 jobs) and your IT division to Switzerland (along with 1500 jobs) and lo & behold you wave your magic wand and your BIG company has ZERO corporate tax for 2010. ZERO, ZIP, NADA, NOTHING, OoFah !!
And then as recognition of the great job you are doing for your BIG company by moving 30,000 US jobs overseas, and paying zero corporate taxes, you are appointed the honored cabinet title of "Jobs Czar " by President Obama.
Does that make any sense at all? The guy whose company has multiple union contracts - screwed his union employees, screwed the USA out of billions in tax revenue, and built giant factories everywhere but in the USA and he is Obama's "JOBS CZAR" !
and by the way - Would you sign a contract before you read it? Thats what our president wants congress to do on his Jobs Bill.
Finally - I know you have stated that he is a strong supporter of Israel, but i don't see it - to my understanding - Obama ain't been to friendly to Israel, and in general, to us Jews.
Every day is a beautiful day, enjoy it!
Posted by: Donald | September 21, 2011 at 05:42 AM
A great idea. I think there should be transaction taxes on horse racing tickets, lottery tickets and etc...
Posted by: Alan Weiss | September 20, 2011 at 01:53 PM