This coming November the Republicans may have a real opportunity to have what they haven’t had since the early 2000’s, all three branches. Even though the Senate appears unlikely, we have seen from prior elections, most notably 2010, voter angst can be very significant and can quickly change the dynamics of politics.
Conversely, the same could be said for the Democrats, that’s how crazy this election cycle may be. Is there a chance the Democrats could overturn the House and Obama be reelected? Maybe, but with such a poor economy it’s hard to believe the American people would be willing to put the entire cart back in the hands of one party. My sense is that when you want to try and change what’s happening to the team, i.e. the country, you fire the head coach, and right now that’s Barack Obama.
With that said, let’s return to the purpose for which this letter is being written. Again, I always try to do my research not just toss out opinions based on the ideas of my own desires or realities, but here are some numbers the Republicans need reminding of.
From 1995-2006 the Republicans held the majority in Congress. True Bill Clinton was President until 2000, and with that arrangement things went pretty well, but when W took over the Republicans were in full control once again until 2006. The only exception was the Senate from 2001-2003 where it was 50-50. Also, in 2010 the Republicans reclaimed the House with an impressive election season for the ages, but it really wasn’t so much about the Republicans as it was about the Democrats.
What do these numbers say? To me, as a voter I look at the party in power and the Republicans did not perform to their platform under George W. Bush. Pardon the inference on my fellow sailors, but Republicans opened up the check book and spent like drunken sailors. You deserve what you got in 2006, and it wasn’t all about BUSH. I have looked at length at his record and I see a man who foresaw the Fannie Mae crisis, but even his own party (and plenty of Democrats like Schumer, Dodd, and Frank) made serius miscalculations. Bush's biggest problem was that he trusted Congress too much, a major mistake. Yet despite that the Republicans stand on the verge of controlling all three branches once again. Don’t blow it if that opportunity presents itself! If the idea of Republicans controlling all three branches holds true, the American public may not be so forgiving if the Republicans, who are basically begging for full control, do not turn a lot of what ails us around. Here are a few suggestions for the Republicans should this happen.
1. If the Republicans are fortunate enough to win all three branches, and even if they do not recapture the Senate, please do not gloat. Do not engage in rhetoric like the President used when he told John McCain, “We won, you lost.” It should have been, America won, let’s get to work. There is no need to puff out your chest, shake your plume and prance around like the proud rooster. If the American people provide you with an opportunity to do what’s right, get us back on track, and fulfill promises, then do all you can to get that done.
2. Don’t be so intransigent about raising taxes on the top 10%. I have submitted an article called the 5% Solution. You can go to my article archive section. A modest increase of their taxes is not going to have the extreme wealthy suddenly no longer providing campaign funds, or threatening to not hire people. The information bears out. The gap between the top 10% and the bottom 50% is rather stark. I applaud wealth, but there is no denying there are two America’s.
3. Do not be afraid to engage the Democrats on a variety of economic issues. The Republicans have to be willing to say they want to do what’s in the best interest of the United States, rather than adhere to party ideals. They have to be willing to show bipartisanship. Both parties have good ideas and should be given due credit for our sustained prosperity at this point. For one party to claim otherwise is foolhardy and untrue.
4. Have a counter plan, a real and tangible plan to the Obama Health Care. You cannot simply say that you are going to repeal every piece of it. I am sure there are some good things in there. Be open minded and not so adversarial. If you are going to offer the Patient’s Choice Act, then it needs more media coverage and CBO scrutiny.
5. Like a household budget, sometimes the couple has to get creative. The Republicans cannot simply say they are going to cut every entitlement program out there. There are lots of cuts that need to be made no doubt, but get creative. If small businesses can be provided with incentives to hire then revenue will begin to increase and people will be able to find more job opportunities. If corporate tax rates are reduced, let there be an explicit understanding those tax breaks should be parlayed into (better or introduced) worker dividends, or bringing jobs back to the U.S.
6. Energy: Republicans cannot just be the party of fossil fuels. Yes, Republicans have had an all of the above position, but it’s not resonating. We can’t laugh at Obama’s attempt with Solyndra. Regardless of how that unfolds, people see that as, at least he’s trying. If the Republicans are beholden to fossil fuels, then the reputation they bear will simply continue.
7. Examine the environmental record. There are inroads to be made there as well. Republicans cannot just shrug off “whacko” environmentalists. Republicans have to show they support our National Parks, are sensitive to environmental issues, that man has some responsibility and role for what’s going on with regard to climate.
Finally, it’s all hands on deck. The Republican Party must be willing to sacrifice some of its platform in order to help us out of a mess created by both you and the Democrats. Again, to not accept any responsibility is dishonest. You can repair the damage that is associated with all the spending done since 2002. Get your House in order, think of America first and you can’t go wrong there. We’re not as dumb as some politicians may think. Scott Walker is living proof that you can challenge the system and the voters will figure it out.
Washington cannot continue to be gridlock central. America is hurting and quite frankly, pissed off. There is no denying there are two paths we (citizens) must consider for our future come this November and both parties are in hot pursuit. My guess is that if the Republicans put forth a practical-common sense agenda that works for most Americans, rather than being perceived as the party that caters to the wealthy and “white man,” then perhaps, just perhaps more people will listen. Good luck.
Monday, July 23, 2012
Sunday, July 15, 2012
The Five Percent Solution: How the Top 10 Percent Can Do More
There is no doubt that the Democrats have the emotional issue of taxes on their side. They trumpet phrases like “moral obligation,” and “fair share” when it comes to discussing taxes. I am sure most Americans would say it’s okay to tax the wealthiest more than they are already taxed in this country, because after all, they have more than everybody else. But it’s not their money, so it’s easy to say, “Yeah, take more of that guy’s money.” I am not here to argue the moral component of taxes. I can say without a doubt this discussion is very, very complex and has many moving parts, dynamics, and aspects to it. What I don’t like is how the Democrats have ginned up the middle and lower class folks and have now created the “One Percent versus the 99 Percent.” Heck, you would think the one percent is in a war with the rest of us. Again, I am not here to go tit for tat when it comes to who should pay what. The system is what it is and until the system is changed, all of this is pure blather.
Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of issues this country has to deal with, but I am not here to go bullet by bullet to talk about the many issues plaguing our country, and the amazing thing is, if you ask a liberal what plagues us they will have a completely different view than a conservative, and so I say, can there be a middle road? To liberals conservatives are stone age thinkers that cling to guns and religion, and to a conservative, liberals live in a fantasyland that is somewhat far-fetched or detached from reality, hence never the twain shall meet, or can we?
I have done a lot of research on this topic and before I continue let me say, I am not an economist, lawyer, tax expert, etc, but what I am is a common man who tries to stay in tune with all things social and political. I am certainly open to both sides, which is to say I seek the truth. My first concern is for America not a particular party. Do I agree with one more than the other, certainly, but I try to come at it from an independent viewpoint.
Taxes are always good political theater because taxes can be tremendously complex and confusing, and in some ways seems designed that way in order to create wedge issues for voters. One thing I cannot understand is that many politicians will talk about simplifying the tax code but nothing really gets done about it. Besides, a simpler tax code would put many lawyers, accountants, and much of the IRS out of business, and we can’t have that now can we?
Facts first, politicians love to use statistics or data, and oftentimes skew the statistics or data to fit their agenda; we know both sides do this. If you Google, Yahoo, or whatever, you can find a lot of material related to taxes and articles that lean left and right. There are so many different types of taxes it gets confusing if you are not a tax expert or accountant. That is why politicians play with those figures, percentages, etc. Again, I try to research the information that is more objective and draw conclusions from there. From my research, I discovered that both the Democrats and Republicans are right.
Below are a few articles that may help you better understand who pays what when it comes to taxes. I encourage you to read these articles. Some of them are long and that is why I can’t put all of them on here, but it will certainly be worth your time. I have several issues with some of the articles, but for the most part understand the data.
Here is a link:
Another:
Here is another link:
Hang in there:
And one final one: that basically reinforces this information because as one great English teacher told his students, don’t rely on just one source. I can’t recall who that English teacher was.
So, welcome back after reading all that material. After reading all the information I cannot say whether I understand more, or am further confused. What I take from that is the whole tax, income equality, widening gap, etc is part data part perception. Someone making $100,000 in California is not the same as someone making $100,000 in Mississippi. There certainly is a lot to absorb.
I was going to include a lot of my own interpretation, opinion, and insight as to the merits of the articles, but three or four pages later you would be clicking on to another site, but I did want to say that some of the data you looked at was not about comparing apples to apples. For instance, in the Who Rules America article, you should have seen a chart that indicated the U.S. was 93rd out of 134 countries in terms of income equality; however, if you look at the top tier, countries like Sweden with its population around 9.4 million, Norway with 4.9 million can be much more easily managed, and the gap reduced moreso than a country with 300 million plus such as America. If you notice, Brazil was 125th with 200 million people. Only Germany with 81 million and placing 10th is a good example, and they are doing well (I looked over several sites relative to the German tax system. It’s rough, but like Germans, very efficient), perhaps we should look at them more closely and not Sweden or even Australia with just over 22 million. Anyhow, as I said, sometimes the data is slanted to fit the agenda of that researcher. I think a true measure must be examined on a more local basis. Again, income equality is very localized. Three states considered to have the worst income equality are: New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, and three with the least income inequality are: Utah, Alaska, and Wyoming. Source: Be that as it may, we need to address our problems here, so let’s get to it.
To reiterate, the Democrats feel that the richest should pay more in taxes with good reason, and the Republicans say that increasing taxes on the wealthy would affect small businesses and could possibly damage an already fragile economy. Therefore, the Democrats claim the Republicans are intransigent to higher taxes on the wealthy, meanwhile conservatives claim Democrats have never seen a tax they didn’t like. America is torn. They seem to be okay with taxing “millionaires” more, but they are tired of tax dollars being squandered, a dichotomy no doubt.
To me, both sides are right, so here is a proposal for something that might appeal to all sides, it’s what I call the 5% Solution.
The 5% Solution is an opportunity for the top 10% of the nation’s wealthiest to give back to America. The Supreme Court recently weighed in on the health care debate and made their decision, but now the question looms as to whether the individual mandate is a penalty or a tax, the 5% solution could be construed the same. I’m not sure if I just cornered myself there but just go with it.
Rather than raising taxes on the top 10%, the offer would be that they can take 5% of their total earned income, not just their adjusted gross income (AGI) and contribute that 5% to various non-profit entities with the caveat they have no ties to the non-profit organization other than to say they support its mission.
As an example, let’s say Joe America has a total earned income of five million dollars for 2011. He would take $250,000 and donate/contribute as part of the 5% Solution to whatever organizations he wants to. When he files his taxes, on a separate form we’ll conveniently call the 5% Form, he delineates all the names of the organizations he donated to. In turn, all those organizations who received money will, in accordance with federal guidelines on contribution reporting, report all financial and any other “gift” support.
Now, there may be certain laws for states, but regardless, if a non-profit organization has applied for and received tax-exempt status from the IRS, they will be required to file annual information returns with the IRS (IRS Form 990) just like for profit organizations. Any organization not reporting full disclosure, or that pays too much for “administrative costs” will be severely fined or have their exempt status revoked. I call this –excuse my language – the no bullshit solution. It has to be on the up and up.
This would be a simple law, in fact, most likely a one page law, how about that?
The other caveat would be the 5% Solution would not be tax deductible; the contribution is good will. If those wealthy individuals have their charities or organizations that they contribute to, they may do so, but separate of this 5%. With emphasis, the 5% Solution is all about giving back to a country that paved the way for their wealth. They would be seen as noble, charitable, and kind-hearted.
Now, there are those who will say, you can’t force the wealthy to dole out 5% of their income if it’s not a tax. So, call it a tax, call it whatever you want. Congress has the authority to levy taxes. If they don’t like the term 5% Solution, then call it the 5% American Investment Tax, whatever works.
Then each year after submitting their taxes, and with all the various businesses/charities/organizations and so on filing their paperwork, the IRS would simply go through a cross checking process to verify the contributions and the
receiver(s) of those contributions. I truly believe this is a win/win for America.
Some may argue, Scott just add 5% to their taxes for they can afford it. So they can’t buy a new yacht this year, boo hoo. I understand, but tell the yacht builder who employs many people. Again, we’re trying to win both sides of the aisle. You raise their taxes by 5% and suddenly federal programs begin to expand, or new programs are created. That is the distrust of the American people with government, squandering their dollars. This 5% Solution cuts out the middle man, the government. Also, if the wealthy see this as an opportunity to be viewed as more philanthropic everybody wins. They, in effect, are giving back, and wouldn’t everybody feel good about that? An incredible amount of money (possibly 10’s of millions) would go to worthy organizations each year, and perhaps the federal government would be able to reduce certain programs because of private funding taking over where federal spending existed.
Final point, I see the disparity of income in America, it’s fairly dramatic, but I do not believe in punishing prosperity. Any average Joe who suddenly becomes a 10% earner would certainly understand a new dynamic. Also, I believe that you cannot manufacture or create prosperity. As bad as this may sound someone has to be the janitor, the bus driver, the cook, and in my case, the teacher. I knew when I got into teaching that I wasn’t going to make that top 10% bracket, not for lack of trying, I’m still spinning the grindstone, but I chose my profession and understand my station in life. I have no qualms about people getting wealthy, that is the American way. The 5% Solution simply offers the wealthy an alternative to being taxed by government that is often seen as irresponsible with the taxpayer’s money. Let’s put the responsibility of distribution on those wealthy individuals who will look at the 5% Solution as a win/win situation for America. The idea of goodwill has always been a hallmark of America’s reputation, something that our founding faith instilled in us. The 5% Solution is a bridge, one that is certainly attainable and most likely bipartisan, and God knows, we could use some of that right now. God bless folks!
Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of issues this country has to deal with, but I am not here to go bullet by bullet to talk about the many issues plaguing our country, and the amazing thing is, if you ask a liberal what plagues us they will have a completely different view than a conservative, and so I say, can there be a middle road? To liberals conservatives are stone age thinkers that cling to guns and religion, and to a conservative, liberals live in a fantasyland that is somewhat far-fetched or detached from reality, hence never the twain shall meet, or can we?
I have done a lot of research on this topic and before I continue let me say, I am not an economist, lawyer, tax expert, etc, but what I am is a common man who tries to stay in tune with all things social and political. I am certainly open to both sides, which is to say I seek the truth. My first concern is for America not a particular party. Do I agree with one more than the other, certainly, but I try to come at it from an independent viewpoint.
Taxes are always good political theater because taxes can be tremendously complex and confusing, and in some ways seems designed that way in order to create wedge issues for voters. One thing I cannot understand is that many politicians will talk about simplifying the tax code but nothing really gets done about it. Besides, a simpler tax code would put many lawyers, accountants, and much of the IRS out of business, and we can’t have that now can we?
Facts first, politicians love to use statistics or data, and oftentimes skew the statistics or data to fit their agenda; we know both sides do this. If you Google, Yahoo, or whatever, you can find a lot of material related to taxes and articles that lean left and right. There are so many different types of taxes it gets confusing if you are not a tax expert or accountant. That is why politicians play with those figures, percentages, etc. Again, I try to research the information that is more objective and draw conclusions from there. From my research, I discovered that both the Democrats and Republicans are right.
Below are a few articles that may help you better understand who pays what when it comes to taxes. I encourage you to read these articles. Some of them are long and that is why I can’t put all of them on here, but it will certainly be worth your time. I have several issues with some of the articles, but for the most part understand the data.
Here is a link:
Another:
Here is another link:
Hang in there:
And one final one: that basically reinforces this information because as one great English teacher told his students, don’t rely on just one source. I can’t recall who that English teacher was.
So, welcome back after reading all that material. After reading all the information I cannot say whether I understand more, or am further confused. What I take from that is the whole tax, income equality, widening gap, etc is part data part perception. Someone making $100,000 in California is not the same as someone making $100,000 in Mississippi. There certainly is a lot to absorb.
I was going to include a lot of my own interpretation, opinion, and insight as to the merits of the articles, but three or four pages later you would be clicking on to another site, but I did want to say that some of the data you looked at was not about comparing apples to apples. For instance, in the Who Rules America article, you should have seen a chart that indicated the U.S. was 93rd out of 134 countries in terms of income equality; however, if you look at the top tier, countries like Sweden with its population around 9.4 million, Norway with 4.9 million can be much more easily managed, and the gap reduced moreso than a country with 300 million plus such as America. If you notice, Brazil was 125th with 200 million people. Only Germany with 81 million and placing 10th is a good example, and they are doing well (I looked over several sites relative to the German tax system. It’s rough, but like Germans, very efficient), perhaps we should look at them more closely and not Sweden or even Australia with just over 22 million. Anyhow, as I said, sometimes the data is slanted to fit the agenda of that researcher. I think a true measure must be examined on a more local basis. Again, income equality is very localized. Three states considered to have the worst income equality are: New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts, and three with the least income inequality are: Utah, Alaska, and Wyoming. Source: Be that as it may, we need to address our problems here, so let’s get to it.
To reiterate, the Democrats feel that the richest should pay more in taxes with good reason, and the Republicans say that increasing taxes on the wealthy would affect small businesses and could possibly damage an already fragile economy. Therefore, the Democrats claim the Republicans are intransigent to higher taxes on the wealthy, meanwhile conservatives claim Democrats have never seen a tax they didn’t like. America is torn. They seem to be okay with taxing “millionaires” more, but they are tired of tax dollars being squandered, a dichotomy no doubt.
To me, both sides are right, so here is a proposal for something that might appeal to all sides, it’s what I call the 5% Solution.
The 5% Solution is an opportunity for the top 10% of the nation’s wealthiest to give back to America. The Supreme Court recently weighed in on the health care debate and made their decision, but now the question looms as to whether the individual mandate is a penalty or a tax, the 5% solution could be construed the same. I’m not sure if I just cornered myself there but just go with it.
Rather than raising taxes on the top 10%, the offer would be that they can take 5% of their total earned income, not just their adjusted gross income (AGI) and contribute that 5% to various non-profit entities with the caveat they have no ties to the non-profit organization other than to say they support its mission.
As an example, let’s say Joe America has a total earned income of five million dollars for 2011. He would take $250,000 and donate/contribute as part of the 5% Solution to whatever organizations he wants to. When he files his taxes, on a separate form we’ll conveniently call the 5% Form, he delineates all the names of the organizations he donated to. In turn, all those organizations who received money will, in accordance with federal guidelines on contribution reporting, report all financial and any other “gift” support.
Now, there may be certain laws for states, but regardless, if a non-profit organization has applied for and received tax-exempt status from the IRS, they will be required to file annual information returns with the IRS (IRS Form 990) just like for profit organizations. Any organization not reporting full disclosure, or that pays too much for “administrative costs” will be severely fined or have their exempt status revoked. I call this –excuse my language – the no bullshit solution. It has to be on the up and up.
This would be a simple law, in fact, most likely a one page law, how about that?
The other caveat would be the 5% Solution would not be tax deductible; the contribution is good will. If those wealthy individuals have their charities or organizations that they contribute to, they may do so, but separate of this 5%. With emphasis, the 5% Solution is all about giving back to a country that paved the way for their wealth. They would be seen as noble, charitable, and kind-hearted.
Now, there are those who will say, you can’t force the wealthy to dole out 5% of their income if it’s not a tax. So, call it a tax, call it whatever you want. Congress has the authority to levy taxes. If they don’t like the term 5% Solution, then call it the 5% American Investment Tax, whatever works.
Then each year after submitting their taxes, and with all the various businesses/charities/organizations and so on filing their paperwork, the IRS would simply go through a cross checking process to verify the contributions and the
receiver(s) of those contributions. I truly believe this is a win/win for America.
Some may argue, Scott just add 5% to their taxes for they can afford it. So they can’t buy a new yacht this year, boo hoo. I understand, but tell the yacht builder who employs many people. Again, we’re trying to win both sides of the aisle. You raise their taxes by 5% and suddenly federal programs begin to expand, or new programs are created. That is the distrust of the American people with government, squandering their dollars. This 5% Solution cuts out the middle man, the government. Also, if the wealthy see this as an opportunity to be viewed as more philanthropic everybody wins. They, in effect, are giving back, and wouldn’t everybody feel good about that? An incredible amount of money (possibly 10’s of millions) would go to worthy organizations each year, and perhaps the federal government would be able to reduce certain programs because of private funding taking over where federal spending existed.
Final point, I see the disparity of income in America, it’s fairly dramatic, but I do not believe in punishing prosperity. Any average Joe who suddenly becomes a 10% earner would certainly understand a new dynamic. Also, I believe that you cannot manufacture or create prosperity. As bad as this may sound someone has to be the janitor, the bus driver, the cook, and in my case, the teacher. I knew when I got into teaching that I wasn’t going to make that top 10% bracket, not for lack of trying, I’m still spinning the grindstone, but I chose my profession and understand my station in life. I have no qualms about people getting wealthy, that is the American way. The 5% Solution simply offers the wealthy an alternative to being taxed by government that is often seen as irresponsible with the taxpayer’s money. Let’s put the responsibility of distribution on those wealthy individuals who will look at the 5% Solution as a win/win situation for America. The idea of goodwill has always been a hallmark of America’s reputation, something that our founding faith instilled in us. The 5% Solution is a bridge, one that is certainly attainable and most likely bipartisan, and God knows, we could use some of that right now. God bless folks!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)