Skip to main content

View Diary: Conservative pundit explains why Republicans are screwed on taxes (137 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I see Stenny Hoyer without his shoes on (7+ / 0-)

    Some cold feet brewing.

    •  Give R's the "lowered rates" (3+ / 0-)

      but "pay" for them and then some by treating (as they should be) cap gains and dividends as ordinary income.  That is effectively the biggest tax preference in the code and any reform deal that doesn't include them shouldn't make it out of the starting gate.  If they are really concerned for small businesses, this would be the test.

      •  I respectfully disagree completely (4+ / 0-)

        The tax rate fight is highly symbolic and more.

        If we cave on that, even if more revenue from the rich is expected to be raised, most people will think we got taken again.  Rates are easy to understand, the other stuff is complicated.  And many people don't really understand what cap gains are and don't get them or dividends.

        Another reason for letting the higher bracket rate rise is that this will break the hold that Norquist has on the Repubs, which long term is as important as any other aspect of this issue.

        And even after the rates go back up for the rich, we might still be able to get cap gains and dividends as ordinary income.  In fact, expiration of the Bush tax cuts will already raise those rates back up to over 25%.  That should also be allowed to expire.

        So DO NOT AGREE TO LOWER RATES FOR THE RICH !!!!

      •  That was one of the options in Simpson-Bowles (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        phonegery, Womantrust, jm214

        But I think we can get hung up too much on tax simplification. Simplification is a good thing - we have a wackily complex federal tax system and the complexity allows creative ways to game the system via tax shelters.

        However, if you are actually concerned about the deficit, simplifying the tax code while holding revenues neutral is just a distraction. It is not moving the needle on the deficit, necessarily. It is also not clear you are coming out with a more progressive tax system, although that is possible.

        I think we should concentrate on having a tax system that comes close to actually paying for our government, or at least narrows the budget deficit over time, and that reverses some of the huge shift towards income inequality we have had recently, by putting more of the tax burden on those who can afford to pay.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site