Posts

Maybe Republicans Should Heed Harry Reid

Photo Credit: APHarry Reid said we all want to pay more taxes, so the GOP should help make it happen, beginning with Reid’s own “rich people.”

In a recent interview with Nevada Public Radio, Reid said, “The only people who feel there shouldn’t be more coming in to the federal government from the rich people are the Republicans in the Congress. Everybody else, including the rich people, are willing to pay more. They want to pay more.” 

This is, by the way, the same Harry Reid who once claimed that paying income taxes in America is “voluntary.” In any regard, because he’s one of the “rich people,” and he receives contributions from many “rich people,” Reid should know what they want. Why not give it to them?

A recent article at the American Thinker proposed that “Republicans should forget the tax policies of Grover Norquist and embrace Bill Maher’s California model for fiscal success.”  Three revenue enhancement suggestions were offered.

1.  Remove state income taxes as a deductible item from the federal tax code for those making over $500,000.

2. Remove city income taxes as a deductible expense from the federal tax code for those making over $200,000.

3. Remove real estate taxes as a deductible item for all those paying over $15,000 in property taxes.
Reid has challenged Republicans to stop opposing “more coming in to” the federal coffers. It’s time the GOP accept his challenge. To that end, here are seven more federal revenue enhancement suggestions — making the total 10 — that, if proposed by Republicans, would show they’re serious about enabling “rich people” pay a fairer share into the U.S. Treasury.

4. Impose new limits on charitable tax deductions for wealthy people making more than $500,000. President Obama first proposed this — at an income level of $250,000 — back in 2009.  His intent was to “rebalance the tax code so that the wealthiest pay more.” This aligns with Reid’s notion that everyone, including the wealthy, want to pay more taxes.

Obama proposed that it not take effect until 2011 when the economy would be well on the way to recovery. It’s now 2013, and the regime is heralding an economy on the uptick. So, it’s time to enact the President’s 2009 proposal, but at a higher income level — to start with, anyway. 

5.  Remove the municipal bond tax-exemption provision. Munies compete with an advantage against treasury bonds. Recent 10-year AAA munies yielded 2.70% (AA – 3.30; A – 3.80). Meanwhile, US treasuries were at 2.50%.

Also, their sale of tax-exempt muni bonds encourages cities to undertake more debt. Many don’t need more debt, given their unfunded pension liabilities.

6.  Eliminate the tax deduction for interest paid on home equity loans. It encourages homeowners to undertake more debt. And, according to the Washington Post, “A majority of Americans with 401(k)-type savings accounts are accumulating debt faster than they are setting aside money for retirement.”  So the WaPo should seemingly endorse any suggestion for federal revenue enhancement that discourages additional personal debt.

7.  Tax private universities on interest earned from their endowments. The top five university endowments held by private institutions total about $72,000,000,000. Their tuitions are high; their professors and executives are well paid. Tax their endowments. That’s fair. After all, they are by-and-large institutions of, by and for “rich people,” with a relatively few noteworthy exceptions, of course.

The 2012-2013 annual average salary for full professors at the universities of Columbia, Stanford, Chicago, Harvard and Princeton ranged from $212,000 to $200,000.

Columbia University’s President was paid nearly $2 million in 2012. And, Yale’s and the University of Chicago’s Presidents each received $1.6 million. Why should the profits on university endowments escape taxation?

Plus, why should private university land endowments escape paying property taxes?

For example, Stanford University sits on 8,180 acres “of foothills and plains…in the center of the San Francisco Peninsula.” That’s prime real estate. Subject it to property taxes.

Stanford’s 700 buildings are linked by “46 miles of roads, a 49-megawatt power plant, two separate water systems, three dams, three open water reservoirs, 88 miles of water mains, a central heating and cooling plant, a high-voltage distribution system and a post office. Stanford provides or contracts for its own fire, police and other services.”

Rich universities are big businesses. They receive big government welfare checks in the form of federal grants. For example, Johns Hopkins University received $1,900,000,000 in federal grants in 2011. In total, the federal government gave almost $40,000,000,000 in R&D grants to colleges and universities in 2011.
 
The pedagogical staffs of most universities generally promote big government. So, tax them appropriately to help pay for the big government they advocate. That’s only fair.

8.  Reduce the level of tax-exemption on contributions made to foundations with assets over $100 million, and…

9.  …tax the interest gained by those foundations from their assets.
Here’s a list of foundations with assets well over $100 million.

• Rockefeller Foundation (Standard Oil)
• Ford Foundation (Ford Motor Co.)
• Duke Endowment (Duke family fortune)
• John A. Hartford Foundation (Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea)
• W.K. Kellog Foundation (Kellogg Cereals)
• Carnegie Corporation (Carnegie Steel)
• Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (General Motors)
• Moody Foundation (W. L. Moody’s oil, realty, newspapers, and bank holdings)
• Lilly Endowment (Eli Lilly Pharmaceuticals)
• Pew Memorial Trust (Sun Oil Co. or Sunoco)
• Danforth Foundation (Purina Cereals)

It’s time rich foundations pay a fairer share of the tax burden. After all, as Senator Elizabeth Warren might argue, they didn’t build their foundations — tax-exempt donations did.

The total endowment fund of just the top 25 U.S. foundations is approximately $150,000,000,000. That represents a substantial taxable opportunity for the federal government.

10. Cease crony-political tax breaks and industry welfare payments. It’s a bipartisan disease that infects the federal budget. For example:

(R) The American Taxpayer Relief Act, signed by President Obama on January 2, 2013, delighted the National Thoroughbred Racing Association. It allowed a “bonus depreciation” on the purchase of race horses. According to Forbes, “Estimating the value of all aspects of the Thoroughbred racing industry to be worth about $4 billion dollars to his home state of Kentucky, [Joel] Turner [a Louisville attorney specializing in equine legal services] approved of the renewal of the provisions. ‘Buying horses and writing them off was included in the law because of the ripple effect to the economy,’ he said. ‘This encourages investment in assets.'”

This tax break for thoroughbred constituents must have pleased Senator Mitch McConnell.

On the flip side of the bipartisan coin there’s this:

(D) The Travel Promotion Act, signed by President Obama on March 4, 2010, was heralded by Senator Harry Reid as a great boon to the travel business in Nevada (AKA: “the gaming industry”).  Reid’s website reads:  “Senator Reid fought so hard to pass this bull because he knew it would mean thousands of jobs for Nevada as foreign tourists flood to Las Vegas and Lake Tahoe.”

Several hotels on the Las Vegas Strip displayed their appreciation for Reid’s effort by posting accolades to the Senator on their arcades.

No tax money is used in this scheme, but fees collected by government aid the tourism industry. So, money is extracted from the U.S. Treasury to support, in part, the Vegas Strip. That income has to be made up from somewhere.

Horse racing and gambling – are they the backbone of America’s economic prowess?

The Heritage Foundation opposes this scheme as representing “waste and abuse”: “Rather than continue government-led travel promotion measures, Congress should leave the promotion of tourism to the private sector. Instead, Congress and the Administration should focus on making it easier, safer, and more efficient for travelers to come to the U.S by improving U.S. visa services and expanding the Visa Waiver Program, the very program that is helping to fund Brand USA’s misguided efforts.”

In a bipartisan spirit of modeling behavior for their colleagues, and to alleviate crony arrangements in federal taxing and spending policies, the two Senate leaders – Reid and McConnell – should delete favored treatment to the horse racing and tourism industries. Take some of the tax burden off the middle class, guys. Come on, that’s only fair.

Meanwhile, we wonder: How long are the boys and girls in D.C. going to make us watch repeat replays of the debt ceiling puppet show where the only thing that changes, invariably upward, is the debt level?

Enough already. It’s time the GOP change tactics. What it’s doing isn’t working, and We the People can see that it’s not.

Originally published at AmericanThinker.com

Those “Evil, Rich People,” are mostly Democrats

From the, “you never hear about that from the media” file – Those “Evil, Rich People” that Democrats are always wailing about are actually – Democrats.

In fact, the Top 3 on the list: Bill Gates, Warren Buffett & Larry Ellison are all Democrats. Together, they are worth $126 Billion Dollars.

An analysis of the Top 20 Richest People in America (from Forbes Top 100) reveals that a full 60% are actually Democrats. Furthermore, if you look at it from a “family” point of view and not as indivisuals, thereby eliminating duplication caused by people from the same family being included in that Top 20 list (Wal-Mart & Koch) that ratio widens even further to: 25% Republican / 75% Democrat.

Analyzing the data takes us even further. Not only are there more Democrats in the Top 20 list, but those Democrats are a lot more stingy with their money when it comes to campaign contributions. Republicans coughed up $5.2 million while Democrats squirted out only $2.1 Million. These statistics would indicate that the more you have, the less you give.

Contributions paid to special interest groups are a little harder to track. But we have no reason not to assume that the money these Top 1% of the population contribute to Special Interest groups wouldn’t match (or closely match) those of their chosen political affiliation. So when you add in the money contributed to these groups, you end up with Republican Contributions at $10 million while Democrats contributed only $6 million. Again, it appears that the Democrats are a bit more stingy with their money.

Read more from this story HERE.

Obama’s Failures Mount: Ranks of US poor highest in 50 years

The ranks of America’s poor are on track to climb to levels unseen in nearly half a century, erasing gains from the war on poverty in the 1960s amid a weak economy and fraying government safety net.

Census figures for 2011 will be released this fall in the critical weeks ahead of the November elections.

The Associated Press surveyed more than a dozen economists, think tanks and academics, both nonpartisan and those with known liberal or conservative leanings, and found a broad consensus: The official poverty rate will rise from 15.1 percent in 2010, climbing as high as 15.7 percent. Several predicted a more modest gain, but even a 0.1 percentage point increase would put poverty at the highest level since 1965.

Poverty is spreading at record levels across many groups, from underemployed workers and suburban families to the poorest poor. More discouraged workers are giving up on the job market, leaving them vulnerable as unemployment aid begins to run out. Suburbs are seeing increases in poverty, including in such political battlegrounds as Colorado, Florida and Nevada, where voters are coping with a new norm of living hand to mouth.

“I grew up going to Hawaii every summer. Now I’m here, applying for assistance because it’s hard to make ends meet. It’s very hard to adjust,” said Laura Fritz, 27, of Wheat Ridge, Colo., describing her slide from rich to poor as she filled out aid forms at a county center. Since 2000, large swaths of Jefferson County just outside Denver have seen poverty nearly double.

Read more from this story HERE.

Related to the increasing US poverty rate, Paul Wiseman of the Associated Press also reported today that the world is suffering the worst economic slowdown since “the dark days of 2009”:

Six of the 17 countries that use the euro currency are in recession. The U.S. economy is struggling again. And the economic superstars of the developing world – China, India and Brazil – are in no position to come to the rescue. They’re slowing, too.

The lengthening shadow over the world’s economy illustrates one of the consequences of globalization: There’s nowhere to hide.

Economies around the world have never been so tightly linked – which means that as one region weakens, others do, too. That’s why Europe’s slowdown is hurting factories in China. And why those Chinese factories are buying less iron ore from Brazil.

As a result of this global economic slowdown, the International Monetary Fund has reduced its forecast for world growth this year to 3.5 percent, the slowest since a 0.6 percent drop in 2009. Some economists predict the global economy will grow a full percentage point less.

For now, few foresee another global recession. Central banks in China, Britain, Brazil, South Korea and Europe have cut interest rates in the past month to try to jolt growth. European leaders have begun to focus more on promoting growth, not just shrinking debt and cutting budgets.

Read more from this story HERE.