Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
What Millionaires Did with Their Bush Tax Cuts
WASHINGTON -- Paul Egerman isn't certain how many millions he's saved from the tax cuts enacted during the George W. Bush administration in the early 2000s and extended by President Barack Obama in December of last year.
"I do not know how much I've saved over 10 years but I'm sure it is several million dollars -- probably in excess of $10 million," said Egerman, founder of a medical transcription company called eScription.
And what, HuffPost asked, have you done with all that cash?
"I've kept it," he said. "I have not done anything with that money."
Egerman is part of a gang of self-described Patriotic Millionaires who wish the federal government would help itself to more of their money to address its big budget deficits. Nearly 200 millionaires have signed a letter asking congressional Republicans to consider healing budget gaps with increased revenue -- in particular, higher taxes on millionaires -- instead of just reduced spending.
The group is coordinated by the Agenda Project, a New York think tank, and Wealth for the Common Good, a network of business leaders and wealthy people that promotes "fair and adequate taxation" to support the economy.
Other millionaires on a conference call Monday morning said they had more fun with their extra money than Egerman did.
"I probably traveled a little bit more than I otherwise would have," said Frank Patitucci, CEO of NuCompass Mobility Services, a company that offers relocation management services.
"I got a bigger boat than I used to have," said Dennis Mehiel, the founder and chairman of cardboard box manufacturer U.S. Corrugated, Inc. He lamented that the construction of his 150-foot sloop didn't create any jobs for American workers. "The problem is, it was built in Italy."
Dal LaMagna, founder of Tweezerman, said he used his extra money to help the local economy in by adding stuff to his house in the Pacific Northwest.
"I just started creating jobs myself. I built a dance floor in my house -- which I really didn't need," LaMagna said, adding that he also put in a parking lot. "I just became a Dal LaMagna economic stimulus package in Poulsbo, Washington."
HuffPost readers: Got tons of money? More than you need? Tell us what you do with it -- email arthur@huffingtonpost.com. Please include your phone number if you're willing to do an interview.
The tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003 overwhelmingly benefited the richest 1 percent of taxpayers, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, a joint project of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute. The progressive Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated in 2009 that the tax cuts "added about $1.7 trillion to deficits between 2001 and 2008."
The tax cuts would have expired in January, but President Obama broke a campaign promise and struck a deal with congressional Republicans that reauthorized the cuts for two more years in exchange for one year of extended unemployment benefits, among other things. Tuesday, June 7, is the 10th anniversary of the tax cuts.
Extending them further would result in an extra $68,079 for the average member of the richest one percent of taxpayers in 2013, according to estimates by progressive advocacy group Citizens for Tax Justice.
"If they are fully extended, they will cost five-and-a-half trillion dollars over the coming decade," said CTJ President Bob McIntyre on the conference call.
35 Comments so far
Show AllGive me a break, he paid well for the tax breaks! http://tinyurl.com/5wgdsb5
Only public funding of campaigns will fix the system.
Jack Lohman
http://MoneyedPoliticians.net
Unfortunately, no public funding of campaigns will occur until there is revolution.
Anyone who wants to run for any office should pay out of their own funds....no candidate should spend more than oh say for arguments sake 500K,(no contributions from any business or individual) the campaign season should last no more than 3 months, media coverage of events before an election should occupy no more than 20% of total news in any 24 hour period. TV and print ads for any given candidate must talk about that specifc candidate alone and mention no other candidate running in the same election and must specify exactly what that candidate will actually do and how they plan to do that as opposed to what they claim to believe. Oh well I can dream.
Actually such a suggestion would lead to only the wealthy running for office I believe. Far better to make elections free to qualifying candidates. Thus a cross section of our population could find itself represented in our legislatures.
The airwaves remain the largest giveaway in history thus the media should do its part by providing free airtime for candidates. Further the print media could offer free ad space as well. The power of money has corrupted our politics, has enabled the wealthiest and the corporations an undue and unwelcome influence on our politicians and thus our laws.
"What Millionaires Did with Their Bush Tax Cuts"
Good follow-up on what we all knew all along: tax cuts for the rich doesn't benefit the economy as a whole.
In addition, the letter from 200 millionaires asking for increased taxes on themselves confirms there's decency among all kinds of people, including the very rich.
The polarization between "them" and "us" is a sham - we're all people here. - Though some are more deluded than others, often by their positions and wealth. And some are of c(o)urse downright mean. Nothing new there. Still, most people are ethically sound when given half a chance. - Even the very rich (though it does depend much on how they got rich...).
The main problem which makes many people seem mean in today's world, is their lack of correct info. Insulation in social bubbles.
"Good follow-up on what we all knew all along: tax cuts for the rich doesn't benefit the economy as a whole."
I wholeheartedly agree.
The Koch Brothers, Coors family, Wall Street, campaign and propaganda funding wealthy have convinced most of my fellow citizens of a few basic lies: (1) Tax cuts for the very wealthy will be used to produce jobs (Sometimes it happens that way, sometimes it doesn't. What is important to bring about more jobs is that there be a demand for the products produced by those jobs. -- Unfortunately, the decision is too often made for those new jobs to go to Chinese workers. This does nothing for American workers and very little to increase demand for American goods.) (2) Only private businesses can create jobs. (If only private business can "create" jobs, why was their such a fight in Congress to have both Pratt & Whitney AND General Electric produce engines for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter plane? Because multiple Congressmen wanted some of the production to be done in their districts TO CREATE JOBS. Right?) (3) Campaign spending is 'free speech' and a corporations are people. etc.
"All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." (Animal Farm, George Orwell)
To make the vital point that "tax cuts for millionaires" is a bogus approach to creating jobs, we're going to need a lot more than anecdotes about "patriotic" millionaires and an organization of themselves. We need information on what millionaires actually did with their Bush (now Bush/Obama) tax cuts. We need to know what that infinitely larger group of bottom line-feeding millionaire critters have done (or not done) with their tax cuts. If "creating jobs" is the way that these profit-calculators see as the way to maximize their profits, they will maximize their profits and "create jobs." But if you turn that much disposable income loose at the top end of the income structure and don't have an economy with any way to make profits out of those jobs, these calculators will of course bank their money and/or engage in even more exorbitant luxury spending. And that is exactly the state of the economy at which we have arrived after decades of "supply side" economics. There is simply not enough income at the lower end of the income structure---what with unemployment and ever-decreasing real wages--- to create the demand for goods and services that would truly "create jobs" to satisfy those demands. It shouldn't take too much data-gathering on the U.S. economy to establish the total fallacy of "job creation" by putting more money into the hands of those least likely to spend it for goods and services that more workers will provide. Demand side economists may be out of fashion today, but their understanding will need to be re-discovered if there is to be any meaningful chance of "economic recovery."
You make good observations, phoenix20, especially this one - "that is exactly the state of the economy at which we have arrived after decades of "supply side" economics. There is simply not enough income at the lower end of the income structure---what with unemployment and ever-decreasing real wages--- to create the demand for goods and services that would truly "create jobs" to satisfy those demands."
However, I think today's power elite really doesn't care. Sure, there is a small percentage of the uber-rich that do have a social conscience, but the fact is most don't care. They have their cake, they are eating it, and they want MORE!
Check out this article from the New York Times:
June 9, 2010
Legacy for One Billionaire: Death, but No Taxes
By David Kocieniewski
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07EEDD1638F93AA35755C0A9669D8B63
Not surprising that Madoff's son committed suicide when he did. I am thinking the plug was probably pulled around the same time on other wealthy people on life support. But we'll never know. No one does any investigating anymore. It's more profittable not to.
When Ken Lay of Enron died of a heart attack in prison, the judge said he could not be convicted of fraud and conspiracy because he died before his appeal could be considered. Without a conviction, the money he stole could not be recovered so his family could keep the 100 million in assets (However, the family and Lay's preacher said he had been in five years of hell and had very little money left because of the trial - boo hoo!)
Enron was the single largest corporate contributor to George W. Bush's campaign. This stuff was in the news; in the Washington Post for example.
But all this corporate government corruption is getting so thick it is hard to follow, and is never mentioned or explained clearly in the TV news, so most people don't have a clue what happened.
What did the millioniares do with our money? Made themselves billionaires.
Interesting that in the early 30's after the 1929 crash, the wealthy walked off with the money, got tax breaks, most paid none, were suppose to produce jobs for the poor. Some of the wealthy did, they hired butlers, maids, nannys, garders and such, paid low wages, No Benefits, but the hired help had to pay Taxes, out of their small wages. The elite built their mansions, bought big cars, their kids went to college and the poor went to war. History does repeat. Back then it was the American Liberty League now it's the Tea Party.
See what nice guys some millionaires are? But why don't they put their money where their mouths are and give it away to deserving people and causes instead of buying bigger yachts and dance floors? Maybe they just want us to think millionaires are nice.
A wealth cap would solve the problem without tax laws that happen to be made by millionaires.
Direct democracy
Where have you been the last ten years. The Federal Government apparently has the power to just about anything it damn well pleases, citizenry be damned. If the "unitary executive" can go to war any time and place he feels the need, then the "unitary executive" can certainly slap a cap on wealth. I suppose you were using the constitution, nothing but a goddamned scrap of paper according to GWB, as a reference. How quaint.
Obama broke a campaign promise? Imagine that!!!
We should all be happy we got a short extension in our unemployment benefits over Christmas, while the rich got to inherit millions if not billions without taxes.
Really can we have a change, here? I thought Obama was about change. Some peoples' income goes up and up and the more they make, the less they pay in taxes. I don't make enought to pay taxes and every year I make less and less. WTF?
And you will get less and less for those taxes as well. Medicare will vanish, forcing more and more people to impoverish themselves to get on Medicaid...which will then too become "too expensive" and will also vanish.
We need a "Brand New Deal".
You may not make enough to pay income tax, but you do pay taxes. On every gallon of gas, through sales tax, and indirectly through higher prices on goods and services, higher fees for permits and required registrations. Those are the areas where the multitudes compensate for the tax breaks of the minority wealthy.
As many say we need a change, but the change the Tea Partiers intend is the same one the American Liberty League intended,--to implement the Hitlerian policies, oust the then president, overthrow the government, break the unions, and stop any new programs to help the poor. The Tea Party have already tried to stop health reform, break the unions, intending to stop Medicare, mess with the educational programs. They wish to have only their ideas expressed in the school system. In other words we be another Germany of 1933.. Do Research.
It's OK to hate the rich.
Not need to hate the rich, but only respect the ones who earn the respect.
Now wait just a gosh-darned minute here...are they trying to say that trickle-down economics doesn't actually work?? That tax breaks for the rich doesn't mean the rich take all that money and invest it in American jobs??
Shocked, I am. Just....shocked.
I passed shocked a long time ago and reached disgusted and disappointed last year.
Did you ever get the urge to play whack-a-mole with a couple of rich people? With a twelve pound sledge hammer!
We need jobs! The wealthy have money they don't need. Why not create a mechanism to divert this money into new entrepreneurial ventures for the purpose of creating new jobs? I've written a proposal that describes a mechanism through which we can fund a massive number of new business ventures by tapping the financial power of Wall Street to create jobs on Main Street. This approach ramps up employment quickly and puts money directly into the hands of the people who need it now: the consumers (whose spending represents 70 percent of GDP). This enormous financial turbo-boost to the economy will reinvigorate economic activity and quickly return the eight million jobs lost during the Great Recession. The purpose of this mechanism is to take a private sector proactive approach to address the expected long-term high unemployment problem. You can read the proposal here: http://jpbulko.newsvine.com/_news/2011/04/20/6500827-a-modest-proposal-to-save-the-american-economy-entrepreneurial-blitzkrieg-as-job-creation-vehicle-
Joseph Patrick Bulko, MBA
You and your "gimmick" again.
" In effect, we are proposing the creation of an active secondary market for venture capital. By introducing the VBS to the finance industry we acknowledge and feed existing Wall Street practices for the purpose of achieving the objective of creating massive quantities of new businesses and jobs – an entrepreneurial blitzkrieg – to help jump-start the American economy and return the nation to full employment."
A new financial instrument that can be gamed is not what we need. What's wrong with the direct investment in the manufacturing of valuable services or products?
"And what, HuffPost asked, have you done with all that cash?
"I've kept it," he said. "I have not done anything with that money.""
Just about sums up how well tax breaks create jobs.
""I just started creating jobs myself. I built a dance floor in my house -- which I really didn't need," LaMagna said, adding that he also put in a parking lot. "I just became a Dal LaMagna economic stimulus package in Poulsbo, Washington.""
How many jobs was that? For how long? What percentage of the amount you saved through the tax cuts does that work account for?
"I probably traveled a little bit more than I otherwise would have," said Frank Patitucci, CEO of NuCompass Mobility Services, a company that offers relocation management services."
And probably wrote that travel off as a business expense.
"I got a bigger boat than I used to have," said Dennis Mehiel, the founder and chairman of cardboard box manufacturer U.S. Corrugated, Inc. He lamented that the construction of his 150-foot sloop didn't create any jobs for American workers. "The problem is, it was built in Italy."
I guess American built boats are substandard to Italian ones.
Outside of military and oilk production vessels Thr US marine construction is almost nonexistent especially for vessles of that class.
It has always been well-established fact that tax breaks for the rich doesn't "trickle down" to the rest of us. It is also a well-known fact that tax breaks for the poor and middle class boosts the economy - since they take that extra money in their paychecks and immediately spend it, circulating it back into the economy, buying goods and services.
Thus, the whole concept of cutting taxes on the rich - but not on poor and middle class Americans - actually produces the exact OPPOSITE of the bullshit "trickle down" theory they trumpet.
". Nearly 200 millionaires have signed a letter asking congressional Republicans to consider healing budget gaps with increased revenue -- in particular, higher taxes on millionaires"
Not sure who these people are but how about donating money to the a school to build some extra classrooms or buy equipment or donate it to some "free" health clinic. I mean for a bunch of millionaires who are supposed to be financially savvy can't they figure out the gov just wastes money?
There is a documentary out called "THE ONE PERCENT" written by Jamie Johnson. Johnson and Johnson heir. He too believes that having so much money in the hands of so few cannot be good for America. From Reagan, Clinton, Bush they have redistributed the wealth from the middle class to the elite in this country through their policies .The republicans believe in the trickle down theory that if the top does well and give them the money then they will give to us as in a job and better wages. That never happened they sold our jobs over seas, they kept our wages stagnate and it raised our national debt by $2.6 trillion dollars in 10 years. These companies did not invest in America they invested in them selves and we were left holding the bag and we still our. Not only does the government give the wealthy big tax brakes and these same companies are tax dodgers and we give the wealthy subsides these same U.S. firms stash $1.2 trillion in profits off shore. Now they are going to ask congress for a tax holiday to bring their money back to the U.S. but only want to be taxed 4% instead of 35%. Bush gave them this holiday in 2004 and it cost tax payers $255 million. They told Bush they would create jobs. Never happened they gave them selves raises.Now you know why we are running a debt. Remember Rumsfeld he stated that the government lost $2.3 trillion dollars this was before 911 wonder where that went??? Then we have the finical melt down the other side who stole the other half of our tax dollars no one going to jail. I urge everyone to watch"INSIDE JOB" tells you the players and how they did it. So they funneled the money to the rich which created this imbalance in income that has never been seen before and it could collapse our government. gave us this bill and they are asking us to make sacrifices and still giving to the rich. The inheritance tax would tax income over $10 million now they don't have to pay a dime.their trying to convince you they need to cut our Social Security because they can't afford it. Which in the one percent they tell you why they want it. If you are a true America rich or not you would do what is best for the whole not for a select few. Oh Mr. Johnson asked in the film why does money have so much influence on our senators when we are suppose to be a democracy. Milton Freeman(economist) to Bush free inter prize he says. When he asked him when they take from us he called it business and when they are to pay their share he called it socialism. I'm tired of supporting the wealthy.