I don't know why I was watching MTP today. I guess it's because occasionally a good question slips out. That almost happened today.
I guess the remote was hidden beneath the cushions. Anyway, I listed to some of the interview with Rick Santorum. I generally try to avoid those who pander to those who hate, but I watched today. Usual right wing stuff, Obama is taking away our freedom by giving us healthcare. But, then he said it. David Greogory asked Rick Santorum why American businesses need more tax breaks when they are sitting on one TRILLION dollars offshore. In his taste to get to the Republican mantra about how we need to cut corporate taxes so that businesses can "return on investment," he actually acknowledged it. AMERICAN COMPANIES ARE SITTING ON ONE TRILLION DOLLARS IN CASH.
I know...we've known this for a while. All of those record profits from the last two years have to be somewhere. But, I've never seen a Republican acknowledge it. So, what I suddenly found myself hoping was that David Gregory would go one step further. Something like "So, Senator, you mean that American companies would rather sit on their cash while Americans are suffering rather than risk having to pay a few more percent in taxes?" They will hold back investing in their country, employing their countryman who will then be able to buy more of their stuff, they won't pay taxes so that the government can hire some more Americans, who will then be able to buy more of their stuff, all so they can say President Obama's policies have failed? Are they really waiting for the Republicans to get back in control so that their tax rates can go down a few percent? That sounds downright UN-American to me.
And as long as I'm ranting...the media has to stop personifying government. They talk about government as if is a king who wants to "keep more of your money." I know that's how it works in some middle eastern countries today. I'm sure that Khadaffi didn't earn his money. In colonial times, monarchs would tax to build wealth, but that's not how we do things. Our government is "us". We hire "us" to provide services to "us". When the media blindly passes on the talking points about how we have to cut entitlements and cut spending, they support the incorrect notion that there is a finitie pot of money that either the "taxpayers" have or that the "others" have.
I'm tired of that meme. They say that "you should get to keep more of your money," as if any of us is unrelated to the rest of us. We all have jobs becauase somebody wants, and can afford, what we do. To the extent that this is true, we can afford our mortgages and to buy pizza at the local pizzeria, patronize the local grocer, attend a movie or other entertainment, and go to the doctor if we need to. ALL OF THESE BUSINESSES ARE US! (emphasis, not shouting :)) If we, the middle class, collectively don't have jobs, we spend less and fewer businesses will add jobs. Why isn't this obvious? Why can't we come up with an easily passed talking point that illustrates this?
Healthcare is the most obvious. What the heck do we think happens to all of those medicare, medicaid, and insurance dollars? They go to hire doctors and nurses and orderlies in hospitals and food service workers in nursing homes. If you ask me, the only dollars that are wasted are those paid to insurance companies who base bonuses on denied coverage. Healthcare is all one big system where we (through taxes and insurance) pay us to take care of us. We should only be talking about how to do so more efficiently, not whether or who gets to be covered. For those who hate the poor, remember, it is the middle class that is getting the medicaid dollars, not the poor person. Everyone who has a relative who works in a medical field benefits. If that industry is decimated, where are THEY going to find more jobs?
So, back to David Gregory. Please, please...if you ever get such a clean opportunity to hit it out of the park, ask the Republican of the day why it is better to sit on cash and wait for a few percent less in taxes than it is to contribute to the strength of the working class? I read an article recently hypothesizing that the rich doesn't need the American working class anymore. They can sell all they need in the fast growing economies in Indian and China. The Republicans are slaves to those masters. Again, this is Un-American. I don't know what consititutes "their fair share" but I do know that under the Clinton tax rates, a larger percentage of the population had jobs and their were plenty of profits to go around. Plus, the "too bit to fail" crowd was less significant. Sooner or later, I hope that some of the right wing mouthpieces grow a conscience.