Forgive my use of the double dative, but as I was reading the GOP platform, Cicero's "Cassius maxim" kept coming back. Cui bono? To whose benefit are these provisions? The banner headlines promises that this is for everyone, for the "American Dream." And yet, the fine print points elsewhere. Cicero suggested we look past the rhetoric, asking who benefits from the proposals. This wisdom seemed poignant today.
Since nobody seems committed to the truth, we should look at what is actually proposed, and simply ask, "Cui bono?" Put bluntly, if the benefit is ours, we should join. If not, we should run like the wind, regardless how beautifully worded is the promise.
Cui bono? The first few pages make the promise clear.
The best jobs program is economic growth. . . . Republicans will pursue free market policies that are the surest to pursue employment and create job growth and economic prosperity for all.
But all evidence is to the contrary.
Consider the GOP's utter failure in managing unemployment. Eisenhower inherited 2.9%, doubling it to 6.6%. JFK/LBJ took it on, reducing it back to 3.4%. Nixon and Ford blew it once more, up to 7.5%. Ironically, Reagan blamed for not reducing it again, though it ended up unchanged at 7.5% Republicans now lionize the twelve years of Reagan and Bush, although they didn't do much better, leaving the Clinton administration with unemployment at 7.3%.
Bill Clinton heroically reduced unemployment to the best it has been in decades, at 4.2%, so that George W. Bush could "free-market" us all the way back to 7.8%. It is completely true that President Obama hasn't improved on that number, but in comparison, the present 8.3% could arguably be downright respectful in view of the economy he inherited from his predecessor.
In other words, all evidence for the GOP promise is to the contrary. GOP "free-market" solutions have historically proved to be job-killers. So we ask again, Cui Bono?
The answer, below the fold..
The answer is plain to see.
To that end, we propose to:
- Extend the 2001 and 2003 tax relief packages -- commonly known as the Bush tax cuts-- pending reform of the tax code, to keep tax rates from rising on income, interest, dividends, and capital gains;
- Reform the tax code by reducing marginal tax rates by 20 percent across-the-board in a revenue-neutral manner
- Eliminate the taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains altogether for lower and middle-income taxpayers;
- End the Death Tax; and
- Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax
Cui Bono? That's easy. You want to benefit, you need to be benefitting from the Bush tax cuts (more generous to the very rich), paying taxes primarily on interest, dividends and capital gains, passing estates that are in excess of the $2M exemption, or enjoying deductions sufficient that your net income would lead you to pay less than the Alternative Minimum Tax.
Experts have analyzed the consequences of a "revenue-neutral" 20% across-the-board tax and concluded that this mostly benefits the most wealth and will increase taxes on the middle class.
Cui bono? Ask yourself if you are one of those blessed by the plan. If you are not, ask yourself if you believe the promises, when "our day will come," based upon fifty years of history proving it never will.
Cui bono? Surely not we ordinary Americans. That is, the electoral majority of Americans.
Just saying.