It’s time to again tax the rich, be they individuals or giant corporations, to restore the American middle class and return our nation to the vitality that, before the Reagan Revolution, was normal...
As long as it remains legal for corporations (and other morbidly rich sociopaths) to bribe and otherwise coerce our elected officials, who is going to re-democratize our tax code?
Regardless of how daunting the task might appear to be, we need to replace the trough-sloppers with a supermajority of competent elected representatives who will serve to fulfill their Constitutional purpose.
It might seem to be an impossible task, but failure, like despair, is not an option. (Want to know how? Check out my Substack posts and let me know what you think.)
I have never been able to insert a link in a comment box, but I think if I reference the link found next to my name (above) in the comment box it might help.
Biden wasn't able to get the 2021 version, The American Rescue Plan Act expands the child tax credit for tax year 2021. The maximum credit amount has increased to $3,000 per qualifying child between ages 6 and 17 and $3,600 per qualifying child under age 6.
*$250 per month for each qualifying child age 6 to 17 at the end of 2021.
*$300 per month for each qualifying child under age 6 at the end of 2021.
It was fully refundable, meaning a taxpayer could have claimed the credit even if you don't have earned income or don't owe any income taxes.
Would renewal of the 2021 version increase corporate tax revenue? Individual tax?
Would a renewal of the 2021 version attract swing voters and MAGATs. Can't find any data.
4. Does elimination of legalized bribery have any effect on voting?
5. What is more efficient: increasing the rate to 52% or elimination of capital gains?
6. Biden wins if he outs price fixers and price gougers.
the last 50 years the politicians have been asleep at the wheel. More and more it looks like the ultra wealthiest plan to deal with the poor is to let the poor exterminate all the useless eaters.
Who can afford $2,000 a month rents? Is section 8 paying slumlords, especially in California that much money per poor family? The rich keep getting welfare from the taxpayers without having to pay a living wage. I was reading where A California lawmaker wants to raise the minimum wage to $50 an hour, which I thought was ridiculous, then when figuring in the cost of housing, it still wasn't enough to support a family of four. The system is severely broken and an idiot like Trump and the new GOP will just grab all they can while they can.
Your explanation is spot on. But after almost 45 years post Reagan - the “media” is saturated with misguided bs. Whole generation(s) don’t understand anything else. I understand because I went to business school while Reagan was in office. The difficulty is how to get this message to the 18, 25, and 35 year olds? They have the most to lose and gain by the changes in the laws. They can’t afford homes. Food is too high. Rent is fixed. They are having kids with questionable futures. They communicate through different modalities than we do - but they need to understand what you just explained - past your “52% - Headline”. You are correct. What Trump was just hit for in NY was the kind of real estate chicanery that on a massive scale caused the Savings and Loan crisis and later the “too big to fail” banking crisis of 2008. White collar profiteering has cost this country our middle class. It’s time to get it back. Time for the lying to stop. But as in Russia - those in charge of the mainstream media - are controlling the information. You know that. But we aren’t Russia yet. There are still other channels. I’m not involved in media. But you know people who are.
I discourage the term main stream media or MSM, it is corporate media, all of it, including MSNBC, these are corporations and corporations are managed by a board of directors. The board chooses CEO's, CFO,s, COO's that will do their bidding, which is primarily to produce the most profits that they can.
The members of the boards are often CEO's of other corporations, or professionals who sit on other boards, and they don't just sit on one board.
There are what are called interlocking boards of directors.
The CEO's are basically hitmen, sicario's in Spanish. If they don't produce they are replaced.
MSNBC is owned NBCUniversal, which is a subsidiary of Comcast, which owns Xfinity and Frontier, and google Who owns Comcast, then once you get answers, google who owns the companies that own the companies that own Comcast. It is eye opening.
Who owns Whom is a reference book last printed in 1992, that is an eye opener, but the world has so moved past the 1992 edition.
Koch Foundation owns the various Koch industries and products like Georgia Pacific, which makes Angel Soft and Brawny, and has a three member Board, including Charles Koch.
Fox has a board of directors, but the board is dominated and controlled by Rupert and his son Lachland.
I recall when Fox first started operating, in October 1996, Murdoch self financed the channel for five years, until it turned a profit. He claimed that he was neither Red nor Blue but Green (money) but that is a lie, if money was his motive he would not have self financed Fox for five years.
Anway I calls it as I sees it, and it is all corporate media, from NYT and WAPO down to over the air and cable/satellite.
An excellent explanation of how the share of corporate profits that once went to increased wages and innovation switched to corporate buybacks of executive shares.
The perverse incentive is that executives take most of their salary in shares. So, if we see a salary of $20 million, it’s 1 million in cash and 19 million in shares. The executives have piles of shares they want to convert to cash. These corporate buybacks are not done on the open market. They first buyback executive shares and if there’s anything left over then to general shareholders.
Corporations were once absolutely prohibited from purchasing executive shares. It’s the ultimate form of insider trading. The executors are able to manipulate corporate results to goose up the price of the stock at the time of the buyback of their shares. Even a Trump supporter, SEC commissioner Robert J Jackson Jr., became alarmed at what he saw. He directed a study that showed that the stock prices were manipulated before a buyback of the executive shares. https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/speech-jackson-061118
It was under the Reagan administration that an SEC rule 10b – 18 permitted corporations to buy back executive shares if they met four very complicated provisions. When she was SEC commissioner, Mary Jo White said that the provisions were impossible to enforce so they were not. Executives were free to have their corporations buyback their shares without any restrictions. https://theintercept.com/2015/08/13/sec-admits-monitoring-stock-buybacks-prevent-market-manipulation/
Representatives García, Khanna, and Hoyle have introduced the Reward Work Act, which would ban the practice of stock buybacks completely. But this undertakes an unnecessary burden of banning all stock buybacks. The harm is not in the buyback, but in the insider trading.
So, the solution is not to seek probation of buy backs, but to eliminate the perverse incentive, the exemption (R 10b-18) and prohibit the executors from being able to cause the corporation to buy back their own shares. It would seem to be a better tactic to focus on exposing the insider trading aspect. Shareholders may defend the buybacks believing that they will benefit, but they rarely do.
The incentives exist and Dem party leadership has to push these reforms as FDR did to create the vibrant economy we all need. Standing against lies is the office of the honest man. These are simple and just what has to be done as part of loving our people and country. We need to expect this behavior from our representatives and political leadership. Campaign on!
Who do you suppose put the idea in Reagan's head to lower corporate taxes? Reagan wasn't all that smart. He was just a B grade actor reading words. The current Republicans have no interest in helping struggling families, and their forced birth laws make things even worse for low income families.
As long as it remains legal for corporations (and other morbidly rich sociopaths) to bribe and otherwise coerce our elected officials, who is going to re-democratize our tax code?
And there is the rub Dave. who is going to democratize our tax code, when all parties slop at the trough.?
Regardless of how daunting the task might appear to be, we need to replace the trough-sloppers with a supermajority of competent elected representatives who will serve to fulfill their Constitutional purpose.
It might seem to be an impossible task, but failure, like despair, is not an option. (Want to know how? Check out my Substack posts and let me know what you think.)
Agreed, recommend that you link your substack with your comments.
I have never been able to insert a link in a comment box, but I think if I reference the link found next to my name (above) in the comment box it might help.
I have no problem with copy and paste. I don't understand why you are having a problem.
One way to insert a link is to ctrl V
1. In order to make any changes, we need to win.
2. In order to win, we need to concentrate on avoiding a "tax and spend" label.
3. If the goal is to end poverty, the Biden Child Tax Credit is feasible. https://www.whitehouse.gov/child-tax-credit/
Biden wasn't able to get the 2021 version, The American Rescue Plan Act expands the child tax credit for tax year 2021. The maximum credit amount has increased to $3,000 per qualifying child between ages 6 and 17 and $3,600 per qualifying child under age 6.
*$250 per month for each qualifying child age 6 to 17 at the end of 2021.
*$300 per month for each qualifying child under age 6 at the end of 2021.
It was fully refundable, meaning a taxpayer could have claimed the credit even if you don't have earned income or don't owe any income taxes.
Would renewal of the 2021 version increase corporate tax revenue? Individual tax?
Would a renewal of the 2021 version attract swing voters and MAGATs. Can't find any data.
4. Does elimination of legalized bribery have any effect on voting?
5. What is more efficient: increasing the rate to 52% or elimination of capital gains?
6. Biden wins if he outs price fixers and price gougers.
Vote Blue!!
Tony Robbins runs a cult
He may fool you. This could be intentionally on purpose to throw the election?
the last 50 years the politicians have been asleep at the wheel. More and more it looks like the ultra wealthiest plan to deal with the poor is to let the poor exterminate all the useless eaters.
Who can afford $2,000 a month rents? Is section 8 paying slumlords, especially in California that much money per poor family? The rich keep getting welfare from the taxpayers without having to pay a living wage. I was reading where A California lawmaker wants to raise the minimum wage to $50 an hour, which I thought was ridiculous, then when figuring in the cost of housing, it still wasn't enough to support a family of four. The system is severely broken and an idiot like Trump and the new GOP will just grab all they can while they can.
Campaign finance reform. Without that nothing will change.
Your explanation is spot on. But after almost 45 years post Reagan - the “media” is saturated with misguided bs. Whole generation(s) don’t understand anything else. I understand because I went to business school while Reagan was in office. The difficulty is how to get this message to the 18, 25, and 35 year olds? They have the most to lose and gain by the changes in the laws. They can’t afford homes. Food is too high. Rent is fixed. They are having kids with questionable futures. They communicate through different modalities than we do - but they need to understand what you just explained - past your “52% - Headline”. You are correct. What Trump was just hit for in NY was the kind of real estate chicanery that on a massive scale caused the Savings and Loan crisis and later the “too big to fail” banking crisis of 2008. White collar profiteering has cost this country our middle class. It’s time to get it back. Time for the lying to stop. But as in Russia - those in charge of the mainstream media - are controlling the information. You know that. But we aren’t Russia yet. There are still other channels. I’m not involved in media. But you know people who are.
I discourage the term main stream media or MSM, it is corporate media, all of it, including MSNBC, these are corporations and corporations are managed by a board of directors. The board chooses CEO's, CFO,s, COO's that will do their bidding, which is primarily to produce the most profits that they can.
The members of the boards are often CEO's of other corporations, or professionals who sit on other boards, and they don't just sit on one board.
There are what are called interlocking boards of directors.
The CEO's are basically hitmen, sicario's in Spanish. If they don't produce they are replaced.
MSNBC is owned NBCUniversal, which is a subsidiary of Comcast, which owns Xfinity and Frontier, and google Who owns Comcast, then once you get answers, google who owns the companies that own the companies that own Comcast. It is eye opening.
Who owns Whom is a reference book last printed in 1992, that is an eye opener, but the world has so moved past the 1992 edition.
Koch Foundation owns the various Koch industries and products like Georgia Pacific, which makes Angel Soft and Brawny, and has a three member Board, including Charles Koch.
Fox has a board of directors, but the board is dominated and controlled by Rupert and his son Lachland.
I recall when Fox first started operating, in October 1996, Murdoch self financed the channel for five years, until it turned a profit. He claimed that he was neither Red nor Blue but Green (money) but that is a lie, if money was his motive he would not have self financed Fox for five years.
Anway I calls it as I sees it, and it is all corporate media, from NYT and WAPO down to over the air and cable/satellite.
An excellent explanation of how the share of corporate profits that once went to increased wages and innovation switched to corporate buybacks of executive shares.
The perverse incentive is that executives take most of their salary in shares. So, if we see a salary of $20 million, it’s 1 million in cash and 19 million in shares. The executives have piles of shares they want to convert to cash. These corporate buybacks are not done on the open market. They first buyback executive shares and if there’s anything left over then to general shareholders.
Corporations were once absolutely prohibited from purchasing executive shares. It’s the ultimate form of insider trading. The executors are able to manipulate corporate results to goose up the price of the stock at the time of the buyback of their shares. Even a Trump supporter, SEC commissioner Robert J Jackson Jr., became alarmed at what he saw. He directed a study that showed that the stock prices were manipulated before a buyback of the executive shares. https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/speech-jackson-061118
It was under the Reagan administration that an SEC rule 10b – 18 permitted corporations to buy back executive shares if they met four very complicated provisions. When she was SEC commissioner, Mary Jo White said that the provisions were impossible to enforce so they were not. Executives were free to have their corporations buyback their shares without any restrictions. https://theintercept.com/2015/08/13/sec-admits-monitoring-stock-buybacks-prevent-market-manipulation/
Representatives García, Khanna, and Hoyle have introduced the Reward Work Act, which would ban the practice of stock buybacks completely. But this undertakes an unnecessary burden of banning all stock buybacks. The harm is not in the buyback, but in the insider trading.
So, the solution is not to seek probation of buy backs, but to eliminate the perverse incentive, the exemption (R 10b-18) and prohibit the executors from being able to cause the corporation to buy back their own shares. It would seem to be a better tactic to focus on exposing the insider trading aspect. Shareholders may defend the buybacks believing that they will benefit, but they rarely do.
Will raising the corporate tax rate make much of a difference if it is still legal to pass on profits to owners. 52% of zero is zero.
Yes, by writing in the tax code, taxation before distribution of profits.
The incentives exist and Dem party leadership has to push these reforms as FDR did to create the vibrant economy we all need. Standing against lies is the office of the honest man. These are simple and just what has to be done as part of loving our people and country. We need to expect this behavior from our representatives and political leadership. Campaign on!
Who do you suppose put the idea in Reagan's head to lower corporate taxes? Reagan wasn't all that smart. He was just a B grade actor reading words. The current Republicans have no interest in helping struggling families, and their forced birth laws make things even worse for low income families.
Great article it needs to get to the masses.
Let’s not forget the trillions spent on the MIC. Let’s also get rid of corporate financing for elections.
I can copy the url text but not the actual html link
And isn’t the real problem with the Dems that old farts don’t want to give up power?