A Democratic Litmus Test

A disturbing story in The Washington Post yesterday suggested that Congress is losing its cojones when it comes to closing some of the most obscene tax loopholes benefiting the richest of the rich--hedge funders and private equity managers.

According to The Post, proposals to increase tax rates on private equity partnerships like Blackstone from a 15 percent capital gains rate to a 35 percent corporate rate led to "private-equity funds dispens[ing] at least $5.5 million for lobbying assistance" in the first six months of this year.

That kind of pay-to-play politics may be one reason the Senate seems to be balking at raising the tax rates on the profit paid to fund managers--called "carried interest"--which as the New York Times pointed out is a "euphemism for the hefty performance fees that fund managers haul in." That particular loophole allows managers to pay lower tax rates on their income than the average American worker, as I posted previously. The Senate is also considering limiting the rate increase only to private partnerships that trade publicly as corporations--even though most of the private equity and hedge fund firms are private. And those publicly traded firms would be allowed a 5-year grace period before seeing the increased rate--this at a time when the war is draining our nation's treasury to the tune of $12 billion per month and a serious public investment agenda is desperately needed.

We already know where Republicans stand when it comes to protecting Big Business at the expense of helping ordinary Americans. But if the Democrats can't move on this very basic issue of tax fairness then they will have failed this critical litmus test: does the party stand for working people or doesn't it?

Comments (67)

1. Posted by LVLIBERTY1 09/05/2007 @ 2:13pm

   Have to say, when the liberals lose ICELAND on corporate tax cuts....

   that's serious!

   heheh

   Posted by Mask at 09/05/2007 @ 2:17pm

2. Or maybe the dems figured out that raising taxes is not a good election campaign strategy...

   Posted by john maasch at 09/05/2007 @ 2:20pm

3. I love hearing Wingnuts whine and whine about paying their fair fucking share of taxes.

   What a bunch of disloyal anti-American pukes.

   You love war so much, PAY FOR IT, punks.

   Posted by Dr Decibels at 09/05/2007 @ 2:24pm

4. Just because Europe jumps off a cliff, it doesn't mean we have to follow. Our traditional economics are American and nationalist. Alexander Hamilton's protectionist policies made us a major industrial power. Progressive economics controlled and regulated capitalism with such measures as the Sherman Anti-Trust, along with Public Health, and consumer protection legislation. For the benefit of ordinary people, You either regulate capitalism or turn to Socialism. Only national governments can control their own economy. Free Trade is economic anarchy!

   Posted by P. J. Casey at 09/05/2007 @ 2:47pm

5. KVH: ...if the Democrats can't move on this very basic issue of tax fairness then they will have failed this critical litmus test: does the party stand for working people or doesn't it?

   I, HAPPY, happily "stand for working people" on the fairness of taxing "carried interest" as ordinary income (as I had commented initially) and even more happily, I am NOT a Democrat!

   Democrats of today, stand for staying or gaining power by whatever means possible and saying whatever sounds good & Populist! Ask FRANKGRIT!

   Looking at this `issue' from another angle, maybe I should NOT be overly alarmed at a total Dem takeover....they are more `Buyable' than ever....good to know, in a realistic but cynical way, Money still Talks!

   Posted by Happy at 09/05/2007 @ 2:47pm

6. Repugnants of today, stand for staying or gaining power by whatever means possible (legal or illegal, doesn't matter) and saying whatever sounds good & Populist!

   Posted by HAPPY 09/05/2007 @ 2:47pm

   You finally made some sense, nimrod.

   Posted by Dr Decibels at 09/05/2007 @ 2:50pm

7. Just because Europe jumps off a cliff, it doesn't mean we have to follow. Our traditional economics are American and nationalist. -----Posted by P. J. CASEY 09/05/2007 @ 2:47pm

   I'm sorry, you realize you just posted OPPOSITION to Euro-social democratism, as well, don't you???

   Posted by Mask at 09/05/2007 @ 3:02pm

8. Boo hoo...taxes! If a business wants to enjoy the efficient market made possible by the regulations of the U.S. government, they should help pay for it. If they don't, they shouldn't do business here. End of story.

   Posted by BlueTexan at 09/05/2007 @ 3:47pm

9. Posted by RIO BRAVO 09/05/2007 @ 3:59pm

   RB, if you belive taxes are why companies leave the U.S., you are as dumb as...wait a minute, we already knew you were an ass hat.

   Posted by BlueTexan at 09/05/2007 @ 4:01pm

10. "A disturbing story in The Washington Post yesterday suggested that Congress is losing its cojones when it comes to closing some of the most obscene tax loopholes..."

    Since when did Congress have cojones? Not in this Congress, nor in the previous one, nor the one before it...

    It is impossible to lose what one never had.

    Posted by noparty at 09/05/2007 @ 4:01pm

11. Seriously, now....lotta ad homs and "boo hoo, pay yer taxes", but...

    where's the Left/liberal response to LVLIB's post on Iceland?

    That's ICELAND, for crap's sakes, you can't get anymore hippie-dippie, Euro-socialist Scandanavian (really more Danish, but six of one) than that.

    So where's the explanation for why they (along with others) have lowered corporate taxes? And why on THIS issue, we should NOT be emulating the Europeans, as is often the case whenever the topics of...oh....universal health care, unemployment insurance, "free college", etc. come up???

    Posted by Mask at 09/05/2007 @ 4:09pm

12. "But if the Democrats can't move on this very basic issue of tax fairness then they will have failed this critical litmus test: does the party stand for working people or doesn't it?"

    Duh! Are you just now figuring that out? ("Republican Lite" is not all that inaccurate.)

    Posted by mtspence05 at 09/05/2007 @ 4:26pm

13. Posted by FRANKGRITS 09/05/2007 @ 4:22pm

    Curious FRANK...when Hillary becomes President, and Keith Olberman takes her to task for something....

    going to cut and paste it for us all to read?

    heheh

    Posted by Mask at 09/05/2007 @ 4:29pm

14. Posted by RIO BRAVO 09/05/2007 @ 4:29pm

    Curious RIO...when the GOP nominee takes some questionable campaign donations (which is BOUND to happen)....

    going to cut and paste it for us all to read?

    heheh

    (good for FRANK, sauce for the BRAVO, I always say!)

    Posted by Mask at 09/05/2007 @ 4:31pm

15. Posted by RIO BRAVO 09/05/2007 @ 3:54pm

    It's called "ridicule" you fucking jackass.

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 09/05/2007 @ 4:44pm

16. Posted by DR DECIBELS 09/05/2007 @ 2:50pm

    ----------------------------

    Excellent demonstration of the INABILITY to even copy and paste a post of another accurately!...

    Posted by RIO BRAVO 09/05/2007 @ 3:54pm

    Thanks for an "Excellent demonstration" yet again, of why Dr. Loud is Dr. Invisible.....LOL!!!

    Posted by Happy at 09/05/2007 @ 4:47pm

17. Won't have to. It will be the main story for the national ConservaCUNT-owned corporate media for a month with interviews with all the congressional Repugnant candidates and their reactions!

    Posted by RIO BRAVO 09/05/2007 @ 4:36pm

    See how that works?

    Somebody needs to slap your mother for raising such a jackass.

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 09/05/2007 @ 4:49pm

18. Somebody needs to slap your mother for raising such a jackass.

    Posted by DR DECIBELS

    He doesn't know who his mother is. Something as hideous as Rio Bozo is deserted at birth.

    Posted by mtspence05 at 09/05/2007 @ 4:51pm

19. Posted by MTSPENCE05 09/05/2007 @ 4:51pm

    Found under a rock perhaps, with the other fungi and detritus?

    Rio, feel free to use "the google" to look up "detritus".

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 09/05/2007 @ 4:52pm

20. Posted by HAPPY 09/05/2007 @ 4:47pm

    And yet you still comment. You idiots STILL don't see the irony.

    What a sad waste of sperm you are.

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 09/05/2007 @ 4:53pm

21. And we have a winner, but alas one only adept in profanity obviously. Is Norman Hsu hiding in your basement from Hillary and the DNC?

    Posted by RIO BRAVO 09/05/2007 @ 4:52pm

    No, we have your "mother" down there, and I'm selling tickets.

    Want in? I'm offering groups rates.....

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 09/05/2007 @ 4:54pm

22. I'll tell you what, Piss River, I'll buy your ticket. Then you can fuck your mother for free.

    I'm not nearly so nice in person...... I have a low threshold for fuckwads like yourself.

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 09/05/2007 @ 4:58pm

23. Posted by RIO BRAVO 09/05/2007 @ 4:36pm

    But "not as bad" as Hillary, right?

    Oh, wait a minute...I get it. You're building your Limbaugh/Hannity portfolio for "Reasons Why She Won" for November 2008, right?

    "#13---The liberal MSM failed to explore the Norman Hsu matter!"...followed closely by "#14---There were still lingering questions about the 'suicide' of Vince Foster!"

    (BTW, NONE of the reasons will be "Bush screwed up"...heheh)

    Posted by Mask at 09/05/2007 @ 5:00pm

24. Well, that is enough plumbing the depths of Rightwingnut intellectualism and "extraneous" thought for now! They just reminded me I still need to clean the scum and debris from the P-trap in the 1/2 bath lavoratory!

    Posted by RIO BRAVO 09/05/2007 @ 5:04pm

    Run away chickenshit. Run away.

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 09/05/2007 @ 5:05pm

25. Posted by FRANKGRITS 09/05/2007 @ 4:22pm

    Another yawner cut and paste proaganda from Frank. I thought h was under Hillarys skirt, not Obermanns...someone tell him(Frank) Bush isn't running for anything...

    Posted by john maasch at 09/05/2007 @ 6:24pm

26. Both "LVLiberty" and "P. J. Casey" have it wrong. When Europeans cut their tax rates, they merely bring them a little closer to ours, which are lower across the board. The Europeans are not dashing toward a cliff, and we are still much closer to the cliff's edge than they are. In order to make our taxes match the Europeans' cut rates -- we would have to raise them.

    Posted by JakobFabian at 09/05/2007 @ 6:30pm

27. That sounds like wishful thinking for you.

    Posted by FRANKGRITS 09/05/2007 @ 5:57pm

    Sorry, I disagree with LVLIB and ask....you think EVERYTHING that Hillary does will be "Olberman-approved"?!?!?

    Posted by Mask at 09/05/2007 @ 7:25pm

28. whine about paying their fair fucking share of taxes.

    OK...fine. What is considered fair or necessary to operate the government? Has it ever been explained? Does it stop at some point? No...the more you make, the more they take.

    Is it EVER enough, or does your envy/inferiority complex override your ability to reason? When you hate those who might have what you want more than you appreciate what you do have, it must be a pathetic existence.

    Posted by Sliver at 09/05/2007 @ 7:37pm

29. pretty heated today folks, ¡vaya!

    not much talk of taxes--i guess we all pay 'em, but not too many of us understand them.

    which is the way lawyers and accountants want them to be. the more complicated they are, the less likely idiots like us will get in their way.

    here you go. i made a table of the best countries to live in (U.N.) and their respective corporate, income and sales tax rates.

    have fun.

    "Most Livable" Countries, UN Human Development Index, 2006

    ---------- corp. tax ------------income tax --------- vat (sales tax)

    1. Norway ---- 28% ---- 28-54.3% ---- 13%(foodstuffs)/25%

    2. Iceland ---- 18% ---- 0%/35% ---- 7%/24.5%

    3. Australia ---- 30% ---- 0-45% ---- 10% (GST)

    4. Ireland ---- 12.50% ---- 20-41% ---- 21%

    5. Sweden ---- 28% ---- 0-55% ---- 12% food 25% other

    6. Canada ---- 36.10% ---- 15-29% ---- 6% GST, Provincial Sales Tax

    7. Japan ---- 30% ---- 15-50% ---- 5%

    8. United States ---- 15-35% ---- 0-35% ---- typically around 8.5%,

    9. Switzerland ----13-25% ---- 0-45.5% ---- 7.6%

    10. Netherlands ---- 20-25.5% ---- 34.15-52% ---- 19%

    11. Finland ---- 26% ---- 25-53% ---- 22%

    12. Luxembourg ---- 29.63% ---- 6-38.95% ---- 15%

    13. Belgium ---- 33.99% ---- 25-50% ---- 21%

    14. Austria ---- 25% ---- 21-50% ---- 20% GST

    15. Denmark ---- 28% ---- 38-59% ---- 25%

    FZ

    BTW hsubfools deserves a medal for formatting his tables. it's impossible with this little rectangle they give us.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/05/2007 @ 9:59pm

30. It pre-supposes that the Democratic party is not a party serving the corporate interests...that assumption would be wrong. Both parties are beholden to the same interests. This essentially is one party system with two factions needed for political stability. The Democratic party serves as political valve when things get bad but without altering the balance of power.

    Posted by kevin99999 at 09/05/2007 @ 10:02pm

31. check out these great s euss [thetalentshow.org] cartoons.

    very, very appropriate.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/05/2007 @ 10:07pm

32. Posted by KEVIN99999 09/05/2007 @ 10:02pm

    you mean "tweedle-dum and tweedle-dummer"

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/05/2007 @ 10:10pm

33. I don't see why we should vote for another empty suit. One is too many. Obama said he's experienced, with lower offices. Does no one to tell him there are thousands and thousands people in this country who toil in public services and never get rewarded as needed. Of course he's afraid he could fade like McCain if he loses this time. But if you know that wait for 4 or 8 years more before jump in. Read this. -----------

    For Obama, It's Now or Never

    ABC News' Jonathan Greenberger Reports: Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said Wednesday that this may be his last chance at running for president.

    Asked if his '08 bid was just a strategic move to position himself for a run in 2012, Obama said he didn't think his wife would allow him to run again if it doesn't work out this time.

    "Well, I'm not sure- I don't think my wife's going to let me do this twice. So let me be clear about that," Obama said while campaigning in Iowa.

    Obama also sought to answer charges from his Democratic rivals that he is too inexperienced to be president, by pointing to his experience in the Illinois state legislature.

    "I've been in elected office longer than John Edwards or Hillary Clinton," said Obama. "I've passed more bills I'm sure than either of them --certainly in the state legislative level."

    Posted by Helen DAO at 09/05/2007 @ 10:26pm

34. Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 09/05/2007 @ 9:59pm

    Nice work......wonder where the US's wonderful Social Security and Medicare taxes disappeared to? I generally don't pay these but I think combined is 7.65% w/employers paying same % of salary up to some cap of $90~$95k. For those Compassionate Totalitarian countries, my guess is their generally higher Income Tax rates include what would be our SSI rates while the US Income Tax rate clearly does NOT reflect these taxes!

    One can argue both the US employee-paid & employer-paid total of ~15%, should also be part of Income Tax rate since they are, duh, based on INCOME...though capped out.

    Posted by Happy at 09/05/2007 @ 10:26pm

35. here's an idea to end u.s. poverty.

    instead of entitlement programs, medithis, medithat, foodhelp, welphair etc.

    why not put all that money into one lobbying group!?!?!?!

    just imagine, the poor will be the stars of k-streetville

    pretty soon they would be richer than ol' bill gates. they'd out-AIPAC aipac!!!

    you could call it Folks for United Care and Kindness, Unlimited or F.U.C.K.U.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/05/2007 @ 10:27pm

36. "12 billion" a month going down into the bloody oil emitting grave which is Iraq!?! And for the fifth consecutive year beginning in March of '08. Un-fucking-believable!! Forget overall corporate rates which seem reasonable from the provided list (thanks), it's oil company corporate windfall taxes I'd like to see assessed. But that would mean the dems would have to grow spines to oppose our corrupt campaign finance system which insures continued oligarchy/plutocracy. No one's holding their breaths, obviously.

    Posted by lewwelge at 09/05/2007 @ 10:28pm

37. Posted by HAPPY 09/05/2007 @ 10:26pm

    thanks hap.

    i think anybody with a conscience pays their taxes.

    if they're makin' oodles and then payin' some fancy lawyer so as to escape the taxman while still enjoying the benefits of the system others pay for (hedge fudge dudes, for example), THEN THE WRATH OF KARMA will catch up with them.

    it's the only hope i have left.

    ¿isn't that how they finally got capone?, for not paying taxes.

    why is it legal now? oh i know. y'all got booze back and the super-rich stopped paying taxes in return.

    BTW my dad (pbuh) lives in ireland. still pays canadian tax on his pension (thanks, pops) but no tax in ireland. but he pays 21% on a pair of socks.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/05/2007 @ 10:41pm

38. No one's holding their breaths, obviously.

    Posted by LEWWELGE 09/05/2007 @ 10:28pm

    thanks for the tip LEWD, i was turning blue!

    friggin' "oilgarchy" bass-turds makin' landfills of coin thanks to the poor u.s. grunt in iraq (or wherever their buddies at the "pentagram" decide to send them.)

    a tiny fraction of exxon's 39.5 billion profit would pay for a lot a prosthetic limbs for u.s. soldiers and iraq civilians alike.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/05/2007 @ 10:48pm

39. I think if she shot Bill tomorrow he'd make an excuse for it.

    Posted by LVLIBERTY1 09/05/2007 @ 10:36pm

    he wouldn't have to. if hillary shot bill, everybody'd understand

    ;o]

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/05/2007 @ 10:50pm

40. Until the rules are changed, democrats would be foolish to Until the rules are changed, democrats would be foolish to ignore the lobbyists and fatcats. Why allow republicans to benefit from the largesse? Get power first, real power, and then change the rules.

    Posted by FRANKGRITS 09/05/2007 @ 7:31pm

    I unabashedly agree w/your first statement! The Dems "would be foolish to ignore the lobbyists and fatcats" under current setup!

    However, the Repubs respect the money these "lobbyists and fatcats" provide which overwhelmingly benefit the corporate/business sectors which in turn, are the underpinnings of our economic system. Simply, the Repubs don't hypocritically attack corporate interests while your Dems DO go around attacking these same corp. interests in order to sound Populists & liberal....all the while, taking money from them!

    As you say w/honesty: "Get Power, real power".......that's all Dems care about, like Rush has been saying for decades! I don't know about you, I couldn't take money from somebody and verbally bash them for the world to see....even knowing I won't actually `bash them' after I'm elected....quid pro quo of business-as-usual!

    Many closeted GOP gays maybe hypocrites, but your entire party and its staunchest supporters (that's you, FRANK), are the BIGGEST HYPOCRITES! Excuses after excuses.......to "Get Power, real power"!

    Posted by Happy at 09/05/2007 @ 11:12pm

41. Poor Katherine is coming to grips with the reality of American politics. The Democrats may say one thing to get elected, but when elected they are faced with the responsibility of actually governing. And that is a lot different from campaigning.

    For instance, when W was elected, he was faced with the recession that Clinton left him, Clinton's plunging stock market and Clinton's corporate scandals . So he cut taxes for the rich and the upper middle class cause those are the people who pay the taxes. Voila! We aren't in a recession in spite of 9/11 and the corporate scandals Clinton left him, the stock market is now higher then when W took office, and unemployment is at a level that Carter and Reagan would have killed for. Now the Dems have control of the house and senate, and they know what reversing those tax cuts would do to the present economy. Attacking those tax cuts is for campaigns, not for governing.

    It's the same with the War in Iraq. When you're campaigning you can call for immediate pullouts, and "bring the boys home". But when you get elected you have to deal with reality. We should never have gone into Iraq, but we did. Now you have to deal with that reality. And no matter who follows W, his or her choices will range from terrible to complete disaster.

    That's why the Dems love Obama. No matter what's gone wrong the last 50 years, he never would have made that mistake, he is going to fix it, get rid of it, or change it for the better. Doesn't have to say how, nor how he'll pay for it. Voters love that kind of shit. The only problem is they don't realize how shitty it is until it gets elected.

    Posted by bean22 at 09/05/2007 @ 11:27pm

42. it's oil company corporate windfall taxes I'd like to see assessed.

    While it might make you feel good to gouge the oil companies with punitive taxation, the end result would be higher gas prices.

    Since current taxes on gasoline now run about 15-20% per gallon, (although well hidden and not itemized on any gas receipt...which I surmise that if all Americans actually realized how much they pay in taxes, they'd be pissed)how would you explain to the proverbial "little guy" that you're working in their best interests by raising their immediate costs for a natural resource that gets them to work?

    Might be a tough sell, and even tougher to campaign on. Which leads me to believe that if something like this were enacted, would most likely be a stealthy mandate.

    Posted by Sliver at 09/05/2007 @ 11:43pm

43. .......like Rush has been saying for decades!

    Posted by HAPPY 09/05/2007 @ 11:12pm

    HAPPY HOUR--you listen to RUSH LAMEBOY?!?!?!?!?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/06/2007 @ 12:08am

44. It needs to be fixed if we are going to survive into the next century as a superpower.

    Posted by FRANKGRITS 09/05/2007 @ 11:40pm

    well, the best thing to ever happen to britain was the crumbling of their empire.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/06/2007 @ 12:12am

45. We've let them down because we've become lazy and apathetic to learning. We've let our government become corrupt because we haven't been paying attention. That system has become corrupted by greed and special interests.

    Posted by FRANKGRITS 09/05/2007 @ 11:40pm

    in spanish they say "the lazy one works twice as hard"

    north americans have been way too lazy for way too long.

    if we don't get off our collective duffs......................

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/06/2007 @ 12:14am

46. because most of us don't even no what the hell we're voting for.

    Posted by FRANKGRITS 09/05/2007 @ 11:48pm

    actually most of you don't even vote.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/06/2007 @ 12:17am

47. Listen, get over your Hillary hate for a moment....

    Posted by FRANKGRITS 09/05/2007 @ 11:28pm

    I can't speak for my fellow Righties but I don't hate HRC at all....she is by far, the most acceptable Democrat because SHE IS Mrs. STATUS QUO....I'm more sure of that than even Rudy G.

    Giuliani could single-handedly moderate the GOP's overly uptight social issues and can actually bridge some of the divide in our society! HRC as POTUS, will be the MOST divisive of all....and not in a refreshing NEW way that someone like Obama or Giuliani could bring!

    You can't see it since you're under her pants but if HRC is the POTUS, Bill will always BE THERE and add to whatever divisiveness Hillary can claim on her own! The two Clintons will be fresh meat for a lot of Presidential jokes!

    Posted by Happy at 09/06/2007 @ 12:51am

48. LVLIBERTY1 and MASK - Perhaps no one took the bait on Iceland because the absurdity of the comparison was obvious, but I can't let your contentions go unanswered. Iceland is a country of 300,000 people, 1/1000 the population of the US. In contrast to the US, Iceland's government typically operates with a budget surplus. The 2007 budget calls for a 15 billion krónur surplus, approximately $250 million. I will support a reduction in corporate tax rates when we have a surplus comparable to (that means, adjusted to reflect our nation's substantially greater size) Iceland's surplus. In the 2007 Budget Summary, the Ministry of Finance writes fiscal restraint (in our case, that would mean not spending $500 billion+ on an unnecessary war) is a "prerequisite" for the "implementation of the planned tax cuts." Iceland did not achieve the surplus by slashing all social programs: In the same report, the Ministry of Finance attributes the dramatic increase in economic diversity in part to "sharply increased [Government] spending on education and research."

    In addition, the suggestion that lower corporate rates would increase tax collection is absurd; the data offered ("only 18 of the 30 OECD countries match high corporate rates with high corporate revenue or low corporate rates with low corporate collections") suggest it is more likely than not returns are correlated with rates. Lax enforcement of the code against corporations is the problem.

    (You failed to mention some of the other nations who have joined the "flat tax" revolution - for the benefit of those who don't follow links, the other nations listed as "flat tax" nations include Russia, Hong Kong, Estonia, Latvia, Georgia, Ukraine, Lithuania, Macedonia, Slovakia and yes, Kyrgyzstan. Only Russia is of comparable size and economic diversity to the US; I'd suggest Russia's gangster economy is hardly something to emulate)

    Posted by KevinM at 09/06/2007 @ 03:13am

49. Many of they new/younger politicians that hit the federal hill with grand ideas to change the world for today's American, gets slammed in the face with being on the bottom of the the doggy pile for one (thus, their campaign promises don't even get heard) and by the time they start to get into position of power, the lobbyists have them. I believe, can't say i know for sure because I'm not there, but Republicans grab the "assistance" with open arms and don't see anything wrong with a tit for tat. Dems...Some I've seen openly reject money, some lobbyists ignore, others take it.

    Until the corporations are paying their fair share in this country we are going to continue spiraling out of control. Face it, this wonderful and "to be modeled" democracy, is going down the crapper because people with wealth continue to steal (YES, STEAL) it. (Tell me Paris Hilton lifted one manicured and drunken finger to inherit her wealth). People who proudly worked their way through college, graduate school, trade school, even med and law...they will struggle with the poorer class that we should all be helping. For what we spend on this damn war, we could have rebuilt New Orleans, built brand new schools to face today's problems (instead of having a test on worthless information that can be easily looked up on the internet. We are raising a generation of people that can spit factoids. Use this money!!

    Posted by solfish39 at 09/06/2007 @ 03:27am

50. Sadly, the concept of "cojones" cannot be associated with the Democrats in Congress these days--of course the use of the term is a bit vulgar and quite sexist, but the point is all too perfectly clear. I live in Chicago and have watched our Dems cave on many things recently--public transit funding, gay marriage, school funding, clean government, etc., etc.

    Posted by feinfein at 09/06/2007 @ 03:30am

51. AS A MEMBER CFR IS HOW THINK, OR IS IT WHAT YOU TOLD TO WRITE BY GLOBAL ELITE. THE CAT IS OUT OF THE BAG.

    Posted by RAS1142 at 09/06/2007 @ 07:36am

52. Posted by KEVINM 09/06/2007 @ 03:13am

    excellent

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/06/2007 @ 09:32am

53. Posted by KEVINM 09/06/2007 @ 03:13am

    Sorry, KEVIN, but my question is....WHY did they cut corporate taxes?

    Even if the reason "they're running a deficit"? Why not PERSONAL or sales taxes? Why do corporations get a tax cut in Iceland?

    Posted by Mask at 09/06/2007 @ 10:09am

54. Posted by MASK 09/06/2007 @ 10:09am

    correction "surplus" for "deficit"

    Posted by Mask at 09/06/2007 @ 10:10am

55. Posted by MASK 09/06/2007 @ 10:09am

    2. Iceland ---- 18% ---- 0%/35% ---- 7%/24.5%

    seems like income tax is pretty fair (no i'm not going to research this).

    found this, though:

    Tue Oct 10 2006,

    The government has decided to cancel excise taxes of groceries and reduce tariffs and the value-added tax (VAT) to lower food prices in Iceland.

    According to http://www.icelandreview.com, Prime Minister Geir H. Haarde said these operations would make Icelandic food prices comparable to that of the other Nordic countries.

    The changes, which take effect on 1 March next year, include the cancellation of excise taxes of Icelandic and imported food products, reduction of the VAT from 14 to 7 per cent and the overall tariffs of common meat products will be reduced by up to 40 per cent.

    In practice, that means that the average family will now spend ISK 120,000 (EUR 1,387, USD 1,739) less on groceries each year, based on information from Statistics Iceland.

    Fréttabladid reports that Minister of Industry and Trade, Jón Sigurdsson, believes the nation as a whole will benefit from these operations and that the Icelandic agriculture will not have to suffer in the process.

    But Haraldur Benediktsson, chairman of the federation of Icelandic farmers, disagrees. He told Morgunbladid that the price cuts will almost certainly cause wage reduction among farmers.

    Additionally to food price cuts, the VAT will be reduced to 7 per cent on other products and services as well, such as books, magazines, accommodation and heating

    wow! i learn so much here. i'm becoming an expert on icelandic tax structure!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/06/2007 @ 10:49am

56. Some political humor, by The Tonight Show's William Katz (via Powerline blog):

    "The Presidential Oath – Mark II, January 20, 2009":

    It is the U.S. Capitol, outdoors. Chief Justice John Roberts rises from his seat and takes his place. The president-elect then stands and faces the chief justice. The presidential spouse places a Bible between them.

    CHIEF JUSTICE: Please raise your right hand and repeat after me. I, Hillary Rodham Clinton...

    HILLARY: I, Hillary Rodham, and, when I need it, Clinton...

    CHIEF JUSTICE: do solemnly swear...

    HILLARY: do vaguely commit...

    CHIEF JUSTICE: that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States...

    HILLARY: that I will be President of the United States, and execute whom I please...

    CHIEF JUSTICE: and will, to the best of my ability...

    HILLARY: and will, with my charm and cash...

    CHIEF JUSTICE: preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States...

    HILLARY: get Scalia's butt off the Supreme Court, followed by yours, pal...

    CHIEF JUSTICE: so help me God.

    HILLARY: So help me me.

    CHIEF JUSTICE: Congratulations.

    HILLARY: Now take off the black dress and sit down.

    Cannons fire their salute. The Marine band plays "Hail to the Chief." Bill Clinton cabs to the White House to check the fridge.

    You know, that's downright scary. We could actually see that picture.

    In the next year we'll be deluged with political humor, satire, and new impersonations. If Hillary is nominated, female impressionists will break out as never before. So, a few words, if I may, about political comedy......(by HAPPY: BTW, worth reading)

    Posted by Happy at 09/06/2007 @ 11:33am

57. While the income tax is the most oppresive institution saddled on Americans since slavery, it is currently the least of our problems. Our government, controlled by the CFR elites and Israel, is back on its one-world government agenda of the 1930's and is sacrificing our sons and daughters in endless wars. Make no mistake about the perpetrators of 9/11. The enemy is...us...

    Posted by Greekphilos at 09/06/2007 @ 12:00pm

58. Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 09/06/2007 @ 10:49am

    That's great, FROSTY...but still doesn't answer my question.

    Why didn't the Icelanders lower the VAT tax EVEN MORE...and keep the corporate tax rate where it was???

    Why are they giving a break to "Big Business"?

    Posted by Mask at 09/06/2007 @ 12:19pm

59. Posted by HAPPY 09/06/2007 @ 11:33am

    LOL

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/06/2007 @ 12:23pm

60. Why are they giving a break to "Big Business"?

    Posted by MASK 09/06/2007 @ 12:19pm

    you provide me with a list of icelandic big businesses and maybe i'll look it up.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/06/2007 @ 12:24pm

61. Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 09/06/2007 @ 12:24pm

    No, no, FROSTY....NOW you want to claim that there are few corporations in Iceland, so the tax cut doesn't matter???

    NO, doesn't matter if there is ONE "Icelandic Ice Inc."....why did the Icelandic Gov't cut taxes for corporations, and not just cut the VAT or personal taxes MORE if they had a surplus?

    Why did they cut corporate taxes?

    Posted by Mask at 09/06/2007 @ 2:20pm

62. Posted by MASK 09/06/2007 @ 2:20pm

    no that's not it

    i have made no assumptions about icelandic industry. it's just that if you want to know, find the names and i'll check it out.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/06/2007 @ 2:41pm

63. Mask - If you're curious, look it up. If you want to make an argument, make an argument. I'll start it for you. Iceland cut corporate tax rates because...

    Posted by KevinM at 09/06/2007 @ 3:05pm

64. Posted by KEVINM 09/06/2007 @ 3:05pm

    We come from the land of the ice and snow,

    from the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.

    The hammer of the gods

    Will drive our ships to new lands,

    To fight the horde, singing and crying:

    Valhalla, I am coming!

    On we sweep with threshing oar,

    Our only goal will be the western shore.

    look out, here they come. crazed tax-cutting vikings!!!!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 09/06/2007 @ 3:11pm

65. BTW, I misinterpreted Frosty Zoom's comment almost the same way, and that is, Iceland isn't the home of huge multinational corporations. If one uses or changes the tax code to accomplish some social goal, or some economic goal other than revenue generation, then the nature of the businesses and the relationship of businesses to the society where they operate matters.

    Even though you haven't explicitly argued it, I will concede that money spent for "compliance" with unnecessarily complex tax regs is money wasted. I put compliance in quotes because much of the money is spent trying to figure out how not to pay taxes; the tax regs would be far less complex if taxpayers hadn't spent so much effort trying to figure out how not to pay taxes.

    Posted by KevinM at 09/06/2007 @ 3:26pm

66. Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 09/06/2007 @ 3:11pm

    I always loved that song, but it appears I completely misunderstood its meaning. Thank you!

    Posted by KevinM at 09/06/2007 @ 3:31pm

67. Mr. Ackins & Mr. Hodge reprinted an interest piece of tax rate and tax returns comparisons. The problem with this data is: 1. The issue is not tax rates per se, but having Corp.tax rates apply to the earnings of hedge and privatde funds and their managers. 2. The comparison between OECD tax collection totals was very, very informative. Lower taxes in OCED but better collections does not represent a causal condition. It may very well be that U.S. Corps are less honest in dealing with their taxes (documentable) and have perfected use of accounting firms, off-shore manufactioning not taxes when returned for U.S. sales, island headquaters etc. etc. The U.S.A. has not obtained the title of "The Cheating Culture" by not trying.

    Posted by ErikT at 09/07/2007 @ 11:03pm