Just who, exactly, believes that America needs another tax cut that will benefit the wealthy with just the slightest benefit for the middle-class and poor? Is there any other justifiable reason other that the usual Republican obedience to their wealthy owners?
Has the federal government paid down the national debt far enough to ignore its effects on the nation's available money supply? No, there is still a truly sizable amount of debt yet to be paid down. In fact, the national debt at 1300 hrs. on February 03, 2001 is $5,704,023,115,616.68 and your share of the national debt at this very moment is $21,339.36 (Respectively, those figures are five trillion, seven hundred and four billion, twenty three million, one hundred and fifteen thousand, six hundred and sixteen dollars and sixty eight cents in debt and, for every single American man, woman, and child, a personal share of that debt of twenty one thousand, three hundred and thirty nine dollars and thirty six cents!). That doesn't sound like it's something we should ignore, at least it isn't if we have the courage to pay off a debt that benefited the wealthy of this generation so greatly and do not take the coward's way out and leave it for the generations to come. Of course, that would assuredly be the Republican way to deal with it since it was that senile old fool, Reagan, who left this huge debt to the American taxpayer through his many economic gifts to his wealthy owners.
Perhaps the nation's economic guru, Alan Greenspan, has spoken out strongly for the need for even more money to be available to chase the limited number of stocks on Wall Street, thus increasing the already inflated bubble that's certain to pop in the next few years? No, even Greenspan has stated, just last week before a Congressional panel, "I have testified previously that all else being equal, a declining level of federal debt is desirable.
Now that the moron is occupying the White House and has made a tax cut the most important part of his campaign, perhaps Greenspan will allow Tumbleweed the same favor he has offered each new president, one free ride before taking control of the economy again?
That possibility has already come to pass with his recent addition to his previous stand that now states that the looming surpluses are suddenly a "critical longer-term fiscal policy issue." What, exactly, he meant by that is anyone's guess in that Greenspan is famous for his cryptic comments and off-the-cuff answers.
Nevertheless, it would appear that the debt still looms large on the fed's radar so lessening the revenue that should be going towards paying off the debt makes little, if any, sense if it's just meant to benefit the wealthy.
Will the planned tax cuts even have the hoped for effect of steering the economy away from the possible recession? Well, not according to Greenspan. In fact, he is on record as stating that tax cuts, "...historically have proved difficult to implement in the time frame in which recessions have developed and ended." This would indicate that, even if he had any desire to see the planned tax cut take effect, he believes that it will do little or nothing to ward off a recession.
Can a tax cut even have any desired effect in the short term other than putting more money into the pockets of those that need it the least? Are there some other forms of decreasing the federal revenue stream that will have the happy effect of placing more money into the pockets of those who need it the most while still putting that money into play within the economy nearly immediately?
Of course there are, and one of them isn't the idiocy of eliminating the estate tax, a tax that affects the inheritances of less than 1% of the entire population of the United States.
First, as we have shown repeatedly, there is no Social Security crisis. The program is solvent into the 2030's and possibly beyond with absolutely no intervention needed at all. In fact, if the funds that Americans pay into Social Security were just placed into an untouchable fund, it would be less than thirty years before the money within the fund would be sufficient to provide a relatively comfortable retirement allowance for every man, woman and child in America forever without the need of even another penny being deposited. Of course, creating the fund in such a way that the clowns in Congress, both now and in the future, couldn't steal it to pay for more and more unnecessary pork projects would take a level of honesty and courage that simply doesn't exist within the hallowed halls of your government.
Since the Social Security fund isn't in a current crisis situation, perhaps the federal government could decrease the FICA deductions from the paychecks of every American. Instead of deducting 7.5% from every dollar that is earned plus more for Medicare, the total could be reduced to 5% or even lower (much lower if Congress had the cojones to stop constantly raiding the fund). This would have the effect of an immediate raise in the incomes of those who truly deserve these cuts the most because, if we are to be honest with ourselves, this economy has expanded on the backs and labor of those who do the actual work that earns the profits that have fueled the growth.
Another way to repay the workers in America would be to provide and immediate cut in the payroll taxes of the bottom twenty or thirty percent of wage earners. This huge increase in availability of discretionary funds for these Americans would create a trickle up effect in that this money would be available to purchase those necessities of life and even some of the luxuries in life which would vastly increase the profits for the corporation owned by the wealthy and greatly increase the dividends that these Wall Street inhabitants can offer. In this manner, what trickles up would be green as opposed to the lie of the trickle down which was always yellow.
One method of offering the benefits of a tax cut to those who most deserve it would be to designate the surpluses towards an immediate opening of Medicare to all uninsured Americans at or below some agreed upon income level. This idea would link the continued growth in America's economy because, quite simply, families would no longer be forced to choose between rent or food or health care which would leave a huge reservoir of funds to be spent in the markets and department stores and movie theaters and automobile showrooms and on and on.
America simply does not need to make rich any richer. Whether Tumbleweed has the basic sense to recognize the fact that the economy grows due to the direct efforts of the American worker is irrelevant. It is a reality and one that Congress, or at least the Democrats, should see clearly and a reality that should be rewarded directly to those same workers. To decrease the share of their earnings that the federal government takes would be to increase tremendously the level of comfort and the health and brighten the futures of America's greatest treasure; its people, and the vast majority of its people are not rich and never will be. It should be towards them that any talk of conversations regarding a reduction in federal revenue must be focused. ( 1 & 2 )
Return To Front Page
Visit Our Unique Shops At:
The Progressive Mind
Impeach The Moron
Rosetta Stone - Your Name In Egyptian Hieroglyphs
Signs of the Zodiac Gifts