Skip to main content

My latest LTE to my local hometown conservative newspaper can be found here. Since my first letter on the subject the local Conservatives have been hammering me pretty good and have written a few letters themselves. What is interesting is that most people including those on our side cannot see the truth of what I am saying.

Income inequality with the exception of climate change is the problem of our times not only here but around the world. I believe the uber wealthy paying far less of their income by percentage in taxes is the driving force of this problem. We have to hammer home the truth of this for most people are unaware of the situation

Here is my letter:

It is interesting to read the comments of the conservatives to the thesis I laid out in my previous letter. I said that when you take into account all the taxes, whatever type, the über-rich such as Mitt Romney pay less in percentage than a minimum-wage worker and clearly less than a middle-class person. They have made no credible argument against this for it is the simple truth.

Mr. Baxter keeps saying that über-rich liberals pay less, too, so I guess that somehow makes it right. Mr. Liebich and Mr. Baxter keep harping on me to say what is their fair share, as if that is argument against my thesis. I am not advocating a solution but pointing out the problem. It seems as though they recognize the truth of what I am saying, but do not think it is a problem. They think it is OK that the über-rich pay less in percentage in taxes.

The economy is an engine that people who participate in make money because of its existence. If it did not exist, they would not be able to make any money. The economy requires money to maintain its ability for all of us to make a living from it. The fact that those who make the most money from it pay less in percentage on maintenance fees (taxes and fees) is unfair and frankly immoral. This situation has led to what most economists believe is the main problem of our time, which is income inequality.

Mr. Baxter would have you believe it is because all of a sudden, since Reagan, the American people have become lazy bums and moochers. The reality is that the über-wealthy, through buying lobbyists, the Republican Party and some Democrats, have shifted the real tax burden to the middle class through the tax code. This has hollowed out the middle class, and if this situation continues it will disappear.

Mr. Baxter is right when he talks about there being moochers. It is the über-wealthy.

Originally posted to Jlukes on Wed Jan 08, 2014 at 01:53 AM PST.

Also republished by Bending the Buzz.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Trying to get a conservative to admit to anything (9+ / 0-)

    that might cost the rich money is impossible. After all it take effort and a willingness to learn to pull your head out of the sand. Much easier to pretend like a problem does not exist than to work to solve it. Especially when it is your ideology that cause the problem  in the first place!

    Dogs and Philosophers do the greatest good and get the fewest rewards (Diogenes)

    by Out There on Wed Jan 08, 2014 at 05:08:29 AM PST

  •  I saw a great tweet the other day (19+ / 0-)

    that said something to the effect that Republicans believe tax cuts for the wealthy make them more productive while unemployment insurance and food stamps makes poor people lazy. Good summary of their position.

    I am so sick of listening to Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio slam the social safety net as something that makes us worthless and weak and then talk about how Social Security and college grants helped them become the men they are today. Hypocrites, every one...

    First the thing is impossible, then improbable, then unsatisfactorily achieved, then quietly improved, until one day it is actual and uncontroversial. ... It starts off impossible and it ends up done. - Adam Gopnik

    by theKgirls on Wed Jan 08, 2014 at 05:24:20 AM PST

  •  And they cost more. (7+ / 0-)

    Simply by having that much money and that much property, they put a much greater burden on our system because they have so much more that needs protecting.

    There's the SEC that makes sure they aren't cheated by their investment bankers, the various police and fire departments protecting all of their property, the various schools educating the police and firemen who protect their property and the workers they hire, the FAA which protects their private jets from being knocked out of the sky by the vortices of a passing jumbo jet, the Coast Guard which cruises out to save them if their yacht breaks down or runs aground or gets caught in a storm, and all of these other services that the uber wealthy use.

    Rich people cost us all more, and I for one am pissed that my tax dollars are subsidizing their way of life.

    They should pay their own way, which means paying a higher percentage, not a lower one.

    An Fhirinn an aghaidh an t'Saoghail. (The truth against the world.) Is treasa tuath na tighearna. (The common people are mightier than the lords.)

    by OllieGarkey on Wed Jan 08, 2014 at 05:25:16 AM PST

    •  1% appear to be consciously reducing reliance (6+ / 0-)

      upon gov't services.  They live in gated "communities" w/ private security.  Their kids attend private schools.  SS is irrelevant to them, and Medicare probably doesn't matter much, either.  

      Uncle Sam, meanwhile, does a lot for corporate America, starting w/ the massive corporate welfare program known as "The Department of Defense."  Keeping sea lanes open for supertankers has been a major mission of the Navy for decades.  Much of the NSA surveillance is being done by corporate entities for corporate entities.

      Hell, I recently read that the public tab for supporting fast food and other low wage workers is about $7 bn/year.  I guess it's not okay for unemployed workers to get UI benefits, but it is okay for barely employed workers to need SNAP and Medicaid to survive.

      Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

      by RFK Lives on Wed Jan 08, 2014 at 06:57:48 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Rightwingers have deep self-esteem issues (5+ / 0-)

    .... as evidenced by their eagerness to prostrate themselves and perform every conceivable type of degrading sexual service for the billionaires.

    •  They remind me of Joe Flaherty's (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      character in Billy Madison, who does the dirty work for Shooter McGavin and then expects to be friends with him. Of course, he blows him off.

      I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

      by CFAmick on Wed Jan 08, 2014 at 07:18:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Logged in just to tip and rec this. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jlukes, tardis10, kharma

    I know those referred to in the letter won't be swayed, but hopefully there will be a few reading without responding who will be.

  •  The rich need to pay more (10+ / 0-)

    since they benefit more. If taxpayers build infrastructure, say a road to a factory, the workers get the benefit of driving to work. The factory owner also gets this benefit of course, but also derives a benefit from from each of the workers driving, and from the trucks bringing raw materials to and products from the factory. The higher on the economic totem pole you sit, the more benefit you derive from a given piece of general infrastructure, by virtue of this cumulative benefit.

    P.S. I would say the middle class was hOllowed not hAllowed.

  •  The real takers. (10+ / 0-)

    Money is a representation of goods and services.  Those who make money through capital gains ( unearned income ) are taking money they did not earn.  They produce nothing.  They add nothing to the economy.  They simply take.   So I feel just as angry at people who are born with a platinum portfolio in their mouth who can sit and like Romney make 270 times my income without having to work, as I do about the low tax rate they pay for capital gains.   They pay less than 14% in taxes on that money.

    Here are some other related random thoughts.

    No one, no matter how hard they work is worth thirty thousand dollars per hour.   No one.

    Capitalism dedistributes wealth.  By it's very nature it eliminates competition and concentrates wealth and power.  
    We have government to help to govern that sucking of money to the richest 1%.  

    Next time someone comes back with that comment about how the rich pay more than half of the taxes.  Point out that they have over 90% of the money.  So logically they should pay 90% of the taxes.  

    Then there is the job creator argument.  
    You don't hire people because you were given or allowed to keep more of your money.
    You hire people because you have more paying customers.  Customers who make a living wage and can afford to be customers.  
    Trust me.. the richest one percent are not the job creators.  The middle class are the job creators.

    Prove me wrong and I'll change my mind.

    by willbjett on Wed Jan 08, 2014 at 05:59:26 AM PST

  •  Don't forget the Fall 2008 bailout (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NoMoreLies, Jlukes

    which encumbered $21 trillion of taxpayer funds to restore the accounts of Wll St denizens whose greed and fraud caused the meltdown. Handouts which allowed Wall St bonuses to be met, sanctity of contract.  The relative pittance provided to assist auto companies, tens of billions since paid back, required wholesale rewriting of union contracts ad compensaiton cuts for labor.

    Hard to ever again take seriously wealthy folks railing against what amount to barely subsistence payments to poor families after their feeding at the public trough these past few years. But of course they are entitled to government largesse whenever they need it because, well they're better than eveyone else, more important.

  •  Lots of discussion on raising the minimum Wage (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Here is my idea:  The minimum wage offered by a company must be a function, or rather a fraction, of the executive pay.  I would even expand this to say that all employee's compensation should be based upon the average executive pay for the company.  This would prevent the syndrome where a small percentage of the company make obscene wealth on the backs of their employees.

    "It's not surveillance, it's data collection to keep you safe"

    by blackhand on Wed Jan 08, 2014 at 08:12:47 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site