SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
A Good Fight
So the really big fight -- perhaps the defining battle of 2012 -- won't be over Medicare. It won't even be over Obama's jobs program.
It will be over whether the rich should pay more taxes.
The President has vowed to veto any plan to tame the debt that doesn't increase taxes on the rich. The Republicans have vowed to oppose any tax increases on the rich.
It's a good fight to have.
Sep 20, 2011
So the really big fight -- perhaps the defining battle of 2012 -- won't be over Medicare. It won't even be over Obama's jobs program.
It will be over whether the rich should pay more taxes.
The President has vowed to veto any plan to tame the debt that doesn't increase taxes on the rich. The Republicans have vowed to oppose any tax increases on the rich.
It's a good fight to have.
In a Rose Garden ceremony yesterday, Obama proposed new taxes on the wealthy -- including a special new tax for millionaires, the closing of loopholes and deductions for people making more than $250,000 a year, and an end to the portion of the Bush tax cut going to higher incomes.
Republicans accuse the President of instigating "class warfare." But it's not warfare to demand the rich pay their fair share of taxes to bring down America's long-term debt.
After all, the richest 1 percent of Americans now takes home more than 20 percent of total income. That's the highest share going to the top 1 percent in almost 90 years.
And they now pay at the lowest tax rates in half a century -- half the rate they paid on ordinary income prior to 1981.
(Unfortunately, the President isn't proposing to raise the capital-gains tax -- which, now at 15 percent, creates a loophole large enough for the super-rich to drive their Ferrari's through. About 80 percent of the income of America's richest 400 comes in the form of capital gains. Here's where billionaire hedge-fund and private-equity fund managers make out like bandits. As I've noted, I also wish he aimed higher -- for more brackets and higher rates at the very top. But at least he's drawn a line in the sand. The veto message is clear.)
Anyone who says the American economy suffers when the rich pay more in taxes doesn't know history. We grew faster the first three decades after World War II than we have since.
Trickle-down economics has been a cruel joke.
On the other hand -- given projected budget deficits -- if the rich don't pay their fair share, the rest of us will have to bear more of a burden. And that burden inevitably will come in the form of either higher taxes or fewer public services.
If anyone's declared class warfare it's the people who inhabit the top rungs of big corporations and Wall Street (and who comprise a disproportionate number of America's super rich). They've declared it on average workers.
The ratio of corporate profits to wages is higher than it's been since before the Great Depression. And even as corporate salaries and perks keep rising, the median wage keeping dropping, and jobs continue to be shed.
You've got the chairman of Merck taking home $17.9 million last year. This year Merck announces plans to boot 13,000 workers. The CEO of Bank of America takes in $10 million, and the bank announces it's firing 30,000 workers.
Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but the way I see it we've got a huge budget deficit and a giant jobs problem. And under these circumstances it seems to me people at the top who have never had it so good should sacrifice a bit more, so the rest of us don't have to sacrifice quite as much.
According to the polls, most Americans agree.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
Robert Reich
Robert Reich is professor emeritus of public policy at Berkeley and former US secretary of labor. His latest book is the No. 1 New York Times best-seller, "Coming Up Short."
So the really big fight -- perhaps the defining battle of 2012 -- won't be over Medicare. It won't even be over Obama's jobs program.
It will be over whether the rich should pay more taxes.
The President has vowed to veto any plan to tame the debt that doesn't increase taxes on the rich. The Republicans have vowed to oppose any tax increases on the rich.
It's a good fight to have.
In a Rose Garden ceremony yesterday, Obama proposed new taxes on the wealthy -- including a special new tax for millionaires, the closing of loopholes and deductions for people making more than $250,000 a year, and an end to the portion of the Bush tax cut going to higher incomes.
Republicans accuse the President of instigating "class warfare." But it's not warfare to demand the rich pay their fair share of taxes to bring down America's long-term debt.
After all, the richest 1 percent of Americans now takes home more than 20 percent of total income. That's the highest share going to the top 1 percent in almost 90 years.
And they now pay at the lowest tax rates in half a century -- half the rate they paid on ordinary income prior to 1981.
(Unfortunately, the President isn't proposing to raise the capital-gains tax -- which, now at 15 percent, creates a loophole large enough for the super-rich to drive their Ferrari's through. About 80 percent of the income of America's richest 400 comes in the form of capital gains. Here's where billionaire hedge-fund and private-equity fund managers make out like bandits. As I've noted, I also wish he aimed higher -- for more brackets and higher rates at the very top. But at least he's drawn a line in the sand. The veto message is clear.)
Anyone who says the American economy suffers when the rich pay more in taxes doesn't know history. We grew faster the first three decades after World War II than we have since.
Trickle-down economics has been a cruel joke.
On the other hand -- given projected budget deficits -- if the rich don't pay their fair share, the rest of us will have to bear more of a burden. And that burden inevitably will come in the form of either higher taxes or fewer public services.
If anyone's declared class warfare it's the people who inhabit the top rungs of big corporations and Wall Street (and who comprise a disproportionate number of America's super rich). They've declared it on average workers.
The ratio of corporate profits to wages is higher than it's been since before the Great Depression. And even as corporate salaries and perks keep rising, the median wage keeping dropping, and jobs continue to be shed.
You've got the chairman of Merck taking home $17.9 million last year. This year Merck announces plans to boot 13,000 workers. The CEO of Bank of America takes in $10 million, and the bank announces it's firing 30,000 workers.
Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but the way I see it we've got a huge budget deficit and a giant jobs problem. And under these circumstances it seems to me people at the top who have never had it so good should sacrifice a bit more, so the rest of us don't have to sacrifice quite as much.
According to the polls, most Americans agree.
Robert Reich
Robert Reich is professor emeritus of public policy at Berkeley and former US secretary of labor. His latest book is the No. 1 New York Times best-seller, "Coming Up Short."
So the really big fight -- perhaps the defining battle of 2012 -- won't be over Medicare. It won't even be over Obama's jobs program.
It will be over whether the rich should pay more taxes.
The President has vowed to veto any plan to tame the debt that doesn't increase taxes on the rich. The Republicans have vowed to oppose any tax increases on the rich.
It's a good fight to have.
In a Rose Garden ceremony yesterday, Obama proposed new taxes on the wealthy -- including a special new tax for millionaires, the closing of loopholes and deductions for people making more than $250,000 a year, and an end to the portion of the Bush tax cut going to higher incomes.
Republicans accuse the President of instigating "class warfare." But it's not warfare to demand the rich pay their fair share of taxes to bring down America's long-term debt.
After all, the richest 1 percent of Americans now takes home more than 20 percent of total income. That's the highest share going to the top 1 percent in almost 90 years.
And they now pay at the lowest tax rates in half a century -- half the rate they paid on ordinary income prior to 1981.
(Unfortunately, the President isn't proposing to raise the capital-gains tax -- which, now at 15 percent, creates a loophole large enough for the super-rich to drive their Ferrari's through. About 80 percent of the income of America's richest 400 comes in the form of capital gains. Here's where billionaire hedge-fund and private-equity fund managers make out like bandits. As I've noted, I also wish he aimed higher -- for more brackets and higher rates at the very top. But at least he's drawn a line in the sand. The veto message is clear.)
Anyone who says the American economy suffers when the rich pay more in taxes doesn't know history. We grew faster the first three decades after World War II than we have since.
Trickle-down economics has been a cruel joke.
On the other hand -- given projected budget deficits -- if the rich don't pay their fair share, the rest of us will have to bear more of a burden. And that burden inevitably will come in the form of either higher taxes or fewer public services.
If anyone's declared class warfare it's the people who inhabit the top rungs of big corporations and Wall Street (and who comprise a disproportionate number of America's super rich). They've declared it on average workers.
The ratio of corporate profits to wages is higher than it's been since before the Great Depression. And even as corporate salaries and perks keep rising, the median wage keeping dropping, and jobs continue to be shed.
You've got the chairman of Merck taking home $17.9 million last year. This year Merck announces plans to boot 13,000 workers. The CEO of Bank of America takes in $10 million, and the bank announces it's firing 30,000 workers.
Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but the way I see it we've got a huge budget deficit and a giant jobs problem. And under these circumstances it seems to me people at the top who have never had it so good should sacrifice a bit more, so the rest of us don't have to sacrifice quite as much.
According to the polls, most Americans agree.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.