Schussman.com: Observations

I thought I’d make a few observations about the tax cut, but the only coherent thought I can come up with is “fucked fucked fucked.” Kevin Drum has had a series of discussions that basically say the same thing, but in words more acceptable for one’s extended family. What underscores the ridiculousness of the tax cut is the fact that plenty of low-income families will receive zero increase in their child tax credit. The working poor who constitute 19% of the U.S. population were essentially excluded from elegibility for the popular tax-cut talking point in order to save 1% of the tax bill’s cost, or $3.5 billion dollars. The cut in the dividend tax rate does those people not a damn bit of good. This is hollow and incompetent fiscal policy at its very worst. Slacktivist refers today to a Harper’s piece that says the tax cuts read like a “poorly written and, well, evil book.”

I painted my living room last weekend, to the tune of around $300 in material from my local big box hardware store. Because Heather and I itemize our deductions like good consuming homeowners, we gain nothing from the tax plan’s removal of the “marriage penalty.” That’s good. I imagine the middle class doesn’t have too many married homeowners who would benefit from such a cut.

“Class warfare” gets invoked whenever people suggest that these tax cuts are unfair. Well shit. Bush’s personal tax windfall is nearly $27,000! The cuts are unfair. RubberNun asks, where is the outrage. I say, let’s have some class warfare, and pronto!

I’ll make some unrelated observations. A strong thunderstorm just blew through town. In May? We’re slated to be hot and dry until July, at which point we’re slated to be hot and humid until late August. Crazy.

Also, a flyer seen on the sidewalk on the way to my office from class today: “Career opportunities in criminal justice are limitless!” I guess I’m not quite prepared to concede that that’s a positive development.

You missed the most important point CZ. Bush just got himself re-elected. The tax cuts sunset in 2006. In order to get the Democratic party nomination next year, a candidate will have to support not making the cuts permanent. Bush will turn this into his primary campaign message. That whoever opposes him, essentially wants to raise taxes by not making the cuts permanent. The last candidate who ran for President on a raise taxes campaign was Walter Mondale.
— -bp- May 31, 07:08 AM #

I don't know if it necessarily got him re-elected, because I think the Dems recognize the political reality of the cuts -- that is, that they really are permanent. They'll nonetheless have a fine line to walk, in that they have to call the cuts irresponsible to use them against Bush. Hey, nice to see you lurking about again. UH is pretty quiet these days.
— Alan Jun 1, 12:48 AM #

Aw ... c'mon Al. The game's over. Mr. Bush just won himself four more years. Look at what his challengers are saying. Graham and Kerry want to repeal the new cuts and retain the ones that were in place before. Edwards wants to repeal some parts, he just doesn't know which ones yet. Dean and Gephardt want to repeal all the tax cuts. Gephardt wants to use the windfall to develop a National Healthcare system. Finally, Lieberman, wants to leave the tax cuts in place, and shift government spending towards R&D, free trade, and math and science education. Here's the messed up part. Only Lieberman's position is going to be appealing towards the moderates. Everybody else is just going after primary votes, but they are costing themselves votes in the general election. I wish I knew which advisor of the President said this, but he nails it on the head, "We always urge the Democrats to skate out on the thin ice of tax increases." The funny part is, they had their chance to play the game correctly. Take a page out of Bill Clinton's playbook. One of them should have come out and said that he would repeal the tax cuts that benefit the richest 1-2%, and would raise taxes on them to benefit the remaining 130 million Americans who are affected by this tax cut.
— -bp- Jun 1, 07:26 AM #

I sure won't disagree that the potential challengers have lost a lot of opportunities -- and their infighting hurts them a lot. You've got to hand it to the Bush political machine, which is masterfully manipulative while claiming to be non-political. It's just too depressing for me to concede a Bush victory quite yet.
— Alan Jun 1, 11:58 PM #

You forget, Alan, that the poor generally DON'T pay taxes, so why give them the refunds? Greg and I sure liked getting mega-returns when our gross income was waaaay below ten grand, but we need it more, now!
— Miranda Young Jun 2, 12:51 PM #

They don't necessarily pay income tax, but they pay other taxes (like FICA), and those payroll taxes disproportionately affect the relatively poor, who don't have income from other sources. Why should they get money back? Because unlike the already-wealthy, they're far more likely to actually spend it -- creating the economic demand Bush wants to stimulate. It actually makes a difference in their lives. (As it does in the lives of the middle class, as well, but it's a false dilemma to imagine the cut splitting the poor and middle class.)
— Alan Jun 2, 04:30 PM #

Actually, the most important parts of this tax cut had nothing to do with getting spending money into the hands of the people. By reducing the tax burden on money earned from investments, the clear goal of the tax cut is to get money into the markets. Giving money to the "relatively poor" will get them to spend it, but not invest it. "Giving" is the proper term, since it isn't a refund for them.
— -bp- Jun 3, 11:19 PM #

Ok, so money in the stock market DOESN'T stimulate the economy? Or even $ in the bank - it all helps. To say the rich won't spend it is, I believe, false - to them it just might be money to blow. And you claim that the relatively poor don't have income from other sources . . . well how do you think WE lived for several years: Medicaid, pell grants, student loans, food stamps (ok, so maybe not ALL of those things, but we certainly took advantage when we could). My 500 character limit is up!
— Miranda Young Jun 4, 12:27 AM #

Name		Remember
E-mail		(will be spam-armored)
http://
Message
	Textile Help