Let’s Just Call the Bush Tax Rates a Subsidy

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Wehrwolfen, Dec 12, 2012.

  1. Wehrwolfen
    Offline

    Wehrwolfen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    2,752
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +339
    Let’s Just Call the Bush Tax Rates a Subsidy​



    12/11/2012 | Daniel Horowitz


    Listening to the self-righteous protestations of the class warriors, one would come away with the impression that the rich don’t pay any taxes. In fact, the top 1% of tax filers paid 37.4% of all federal income taxes in 2010; the top 2% paid almost 50%.

    Unfortunately, when it comes to real handouts for the rich, liberals are silent. In their dyslexic worldview, a tax cut is a handout and a handout is a tax cut. That is why both Democrats and Republicans are plotting to surreptitiously slip in a farm bill to the final negotiations over the tax rates.

    At present, more than 3/4 of farmers who earn upwards of $250,000 a year receive subsidies from at least one farm program. Farm subsidies and crop insurance programs help promote income inequality in farming by offering larger subsidies to those who already have larger farms. These farmers can enjoy multimillion dollar insurance policies that are subsidized in order to guarantee their multimillion dollar investments that would otherwise not be supported by the free market. Also, federal guarantees of bankers’ loans to rich farmers have further increased their borrowing capacity, thereby driving up the cost of land acquisition. This, in turn, has shut out small farmers from the business, making it nearly impossible for them to compete.

    While liberal politicians like to talk about income inequality, they fail to mention the corporate welfare inequality. Here is what AEI scholar Vince Smith observes over at “American Boondoggle” regarding inequality in farm subsidies:

    Since 1995, the top 10 percent of farm subsidy recipients have cashed 74 percent of all subsidy checks. In 2011, for instance, 26 individual holders of crop insurance policies collected more than $1 million each in subsidies to help pay their insurance premiums. ​

    Ironically, in the same deal where both parties plan to raise taxes on those who pay the most taxes, they want to renew and augment farm subsidies to rich farmers. Democrats in the Senate are pushing for a new shallow loss program, which extends the coverage of crop insurance from catastrophic benefits to a guarantee of 90% of the farmer’s annual revenue. The idea that the government could guarantee members of a specific profession 90% of their income, especially when food prices are so high, is an anathema to our system of free enterprise. It will also line the pockets of the very people they desire to tax.

    Last June, Senator Rand Paul illustrated this liberal hypocrisy by introducing an amendment to the Farm Bill, S. 3240, which would have eliminated farm programs for those with annual income above $250,000. Only 1 Democrat (Herb Kohl) in the entire Senate voted for this amendment.

    So what gives? Extending current tax rates for those earning more than $250,000 is bad; subsidies for those same rich people are good? Maybe we should just call the tax rates a subsidy, and Democrats will support full extension.


    [excerpt]

    Read more:
    Let
     
  2. Mr. Peepers
    Offline

    Mr. Peepers Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,206
    Thanks Received:
    394
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +394
    Oh don't you worry, the Organic farmer's assn. is absolutely fighting that filthy rider. I've signed the petition and e-mailed my rep.
     
  3. grunt11b
    Offline

    grunt11b VIP Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2011
    Messages:
    4,649
    Thanks Received:
    500
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    In Reality
    Ratings:
    +501
    I dont understand why they are still being called the Bush tax cuts anyways. I mean, it has been the same tax rate for the last ten years almost, which makes it current tax rates. They wanna pin the name Bush on it to try to make it unpopular with the base.
     
  4. KissMy
    Offline

    KissMy Free Breast Exam

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    12,064
    Thanks Received:
    2,144
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    In your head
    Ratings:
    +2,923
    Lets get a few things straight. First off the Bush tax cuts forced the Middle Class to subsidize the Rich Monopolies.

    Also I am a farmer & subsidizing farmers who make over $100k is foolish. The rich wallstreet people have bought up much of the farm land to protect their wealth from inflation. They also plan to cash in on farm subsidies & the increased food consumption of the rising middle class in India & China.
     
  5. Soggy in NOLA
    Offline

    Soggy in NOLA Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    32,792
    Thanks Received:
    4,320
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +11,510
    The only way that works is if you assume the gubmint is entitled to 100% of everything.
     
  6. Mr. Peepers
    Offline

    Mr. Peepers Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,206
    Thanks Received:
    394
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +394
    Yep. The mega-wealthy are special, and so get to keep every dime of their ill-gotten gains - even though they use the majority of the resources, infrastructure and energy in this country. The middle class? Not so much. They are the unwashed peons, the vile "laborers", and will thusly be punished and put in their "place" so that the wealthy can get even more... er wealthy. Welcome to 'Murka
     
  7. waltky
    Online

    waltky Wise ol' monkey Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    20,866
    Thanks Received:
    1,791
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Okolona, KY
    Ratings:
    +3,881
    Granny says, "Dat's right - dem rich folks can afford to pay more taxes `cause dey's companies been makin' lotsa money outsourcin' American jobs...

    Taxing the rich: why $250,000 became the benchmark
    December 14, 2012 - Some Democrats had sought an income threshold well above $250,000. But since the election campaign and in 'fiscal cliff' talks, that's the number President Obama has settled on. Here's what's behind it.
     

Share This Page