Skip to main content

View Diary: Actual Fiscal Curb Deal #'s - or - Why the angst re: $400K/$450K when the CED rates are ~600% worse? (33 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Tax income and Capital Gains the same. (5+ / 0-)

    My assumption is that the Progressive position is to tax capital gains and income at the same rates.  ("Stop favoring wealth over work.")  Thus the differential between what that tax would have raised, and the $59B that it does raise, is the actual cost.

    You're correct that the diarist does not indicate that number.

    -7.75 -4.67

    "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose."

    There are no Christians in foxholes.

    by Odysseus on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 08:43:17 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks, that's a better way to put it (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lujane, divineorder, Aspe4

      I was kind of trying to stay away from getting into a debate about whether the deal represented tax cuts or tax increases.

      But it's sounding like it would have been better if I had just said from the outset that I'm considering everything tax-related in the deal to be a tax cut, and then presented what I figured the good tax cuts were versus the bad tax cuts.

      So yes, I come firmly down on the side that capital gains and dividends should be taxed as ordinary income (and would be taxed like ordinary income right now if the CED wasn't included in the deal, I think).  I also think that the estate tax should be much more powerful, which it would have been without the estate tax inclusion in the deal.

      So perhaps a better summary is that the CED stuff was a massive tax cut for the rich -- around 600% bigger than the cost of the tax cuts for the 33% and 35% brackets. In other words, CED tax cuts are around 600% worse than marginal tax rate adjustments.  And all that is with uncertain long-term benefits for progressive causes.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site