McCain On Economy-- a Corporate Special Pleader's Dream

In a speech billed as the most comprehensive summary of his economic vision to date, John McCain may have played to what the MSM likes to call his "maverick image" -- calling out by name the chief exec of imploding mortgage behemoth Countrywide. But the Washington Post's news story got it about right in writing that "much of what he detailed was a corporate special pleader's dream.

There's not only McCain's support for making Bush's tax cuts permanent. Most outrageous is McCain's plan to cut the corporate income tax rate, from 35 percent to 25 percent. What you won't read in today's coverage of McCain's proposal is that, according to a 2004 Government Accountability Office study, 61% of American corporations, including 39% of large companies, paid no corporate income taxes between 1996 and 2000. Last year, corporations shouldered just 14.4% of the total US tax burden, compared with about 50% in 1940. And McCain wants to give these corporations a break?

It gets even worse. A study from the nonprofit group Citizens for Tax Justice found that, because of loopholes, the corporate tax burden in the US is actually the world's third lowest when measured as a percentage of gross domestic product. McCain did promise to remove the tax loopholes that he described as "inconsistent with a free-market economy," but he offered absolutely no specifics.

John McCain is no maverick. He's just another Republican using that ol' bait and switch of pledging allegiance to the struggling middle and working class at election time, and then shafting them in favor of tax breaks for corporate fat cats.

Comments (42)

1. Well, unfortunately, Ms vanden Heuvel....SOMEBODY might have a plan to let ol' "Maverick John" get the White House, and hope to pick up an easy nomination and Presidency in 2012....but weakening Obama so much that even "more of the same" will seem "safe" to a lot of Americans and cost the Democrats 2008.

   Our only hope in that case, would be that McCain gets stopped by the Democratic Congress and perhaps his own penchant (a la his opposition to the 2002 tax cuts) for "maverick'ness".

   Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 11:18am

2. No surprise that McCain is owned.

   But what is surprising is that he may win, thanks in no small measure to the damage currently being inflicted on the Dems by TheClintons.

   Posted by sloper at 04/16/2008 @ 11:28am

3. Jomamma

   Maybe a dose of reality is in order?

   Posted by leftofcenter at 04/16/2008 @ 12:01pm

4. The more the corporate sycophants, the media, the McCains and the Clintons hammer on senator Obama the more I know he is on to something. He really is "scrappy" as he puts it. I don't think that they will be able to destroy this guy as easily as they did John and Elizabeth Edwards. There can be no argument about his cerebral cubes. Hey, we have tried good ol boy for sixteen years, why not intelligent for a change?

   Posted by julien38 at 04/16/2008 @ 12:06pm

5. Oh, by the way, 'lest anybody think anything different...

   neither Hillary NOR Obama is going to push a massive (or probably even small-to-moderate) corporate tax hike.

   Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 12:08pm

6. Oh, by the way, 'lest anybody think anything different...

   neither Hillary NOR Obama is going to push a massive (or probably even small-to-moderate) corporate tax hike.

   Posted by MASK 04/16/2008 @ 12:08pm

   but who will pay the interest on the interest on the interest?

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 12:22pm

7. But they will increase income taxes..for health care, of course..and all the Bush "draconian cuts".

   Posted by JOMAMMA 04/16/2008 @ 12:12pm

   i command you to build your own roads!

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 12:23pm

8. Posted by JOMAMMA 04/16/2008 @ 12:12pm

   They'll let the Bush tax cuts expire....the ones McCain once opposed. "But that IS a tax hike!"....fine, but unless you're willing to stop spending $12 Billion a month on Iraq, we HAVE to start paying for it.

   As disappointed as the Left would be with Obama or Hillary...the Right is going to be disappointed with McCain if he wins it. His people will start seeing the dollar tanking and Euro rising and say "Uh, boss. Maybe we should go back to your 2002 speeches" and his "Read My Lips" speech at the Convention this September will be quietly shelved.

   Either that or he pulls a "Nixon January '73", declares "victory", and pulls out of Iraq to try to stop the bleeding of both troops AND treasury.

   Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 12:25pm

9. Posted by JOMAMMA 04/16/2008 @ 12:28pm

   And if they don't want to pay?

   BTW, maybe a re-hash, but you're essentially on the "Get out of Iraq ASAP" side same as most of the rest of us...right?

   Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 12:33pm

10. Not the Canadians.

    Posted by JOMAMMA 04/16/2008 @ 12:26pm

    no john, that's wrong.

    i'm paying for your government's ridiculous behaviour, both domestically and internationally, every time i purchase fuel for the pollution machine or buy food.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 12:51pm

11. Economists praise Canada's debt reduction record

    Last Updated: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 | 4:08 PM ET

    CBC News

    Many economists say Canadians should congratulate themselves for the steady progress in reducing the country's national debt.

    At a time when many industrialized countries are still running deficits, the federal government announced this week that Canada's national debt will drop by another $13.2 billion when last year's fiscal surplus is applied to debt repayment.

    Canada is the only G-7 country with a budget surplus.

    The move will reduce Canada's debt, as a proportion of the country's gross domestic product, to 35.1 per cent -- its lowest level in 24 years

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 12:54pm

12. ATTENTION WEB DUDE! MS. VANDEN NOODLE HAS ASKED ME TO ASK YOU TO TAKE CARE OF THAT BLASTED TIME WARPAGE

    Economists praise Canada's debt reduction record

    Last Updated: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 | 4:08 PM ET

    CBC News

    Many economists say Canadians should congratulate themselves for the steady progress in reducing the country's national debt.

    At a time when many industrialized countries are still running deficits, the federal government announced this week that Canada's national debt will drop by another $13.2 billion when last year's fiscal surplus is applied to debt repayment.

    Canada is the only G-7 country with a budget surplus.

    The move will reduce Canada's debt, as a proportion of the country's gross domestic product, to 35.1 per cent -- its lowest level in 24 years

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 12:55pm

13. Posted by JOMAMMA 04/16/2008 @ 12:28pm

    we broke it, you fix it?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 12:56pm

14. we broke it, you fix it?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 12:56pm

15. above directed at mr. maasch.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 12:57pm

16. hey JM!

    last night you inquired as to some of mr. canyon's "work".

    answers found here:

    http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/allcomments?pid=310669&rp g=2

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 1:00pm

17. Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 04/16/2008 @ 12:55pm

    Well, if McCain gets elected and doesn't wise up, and keeps listening the HAPPY deficit doves....

    you guys looking to buy a country, real cheap?

    Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 1:12pm

18. you guys looking to buy a country, real cheap?

    Posted by MASK 04/16/2008 @ 1:12pm

    we'll call it moneyfist destiny.....

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 1:21pm

19. There are those who wish to blame Senator Edwards for loosing. Wow, that's like blaming someone for getting shot in the face because they jumped in front of the bullet. John Edwards lost because we were too stupid to see that he was telling the truth. We trusted the corporate sycophants to tell us that John Edwards was wrong about two Americas and the globalists were going to take care of us. I beg to differ Kerry and Edwards didn't loose they just were not as scrappy as Senator Obama. And we fell for the good ol' boy routine and we elected a pathological liar.

    Posted by julien38 at 04/16/2008 @ 1:26pm

20. Posted by JULIEN38 04/16/2008 @ 1:26pm

    Oh, give it a rest. Huh?

    John Edwards lost the DEMOCRATIC primaries...made up of DEMOCRATIC Party voters.

    He MIGHT have stood a chance if Obama wasn't in it, and he offered the ONLY change from Hillary and the DLC...but he wasn't. And given he had LOST (along with John Kerry) by some 3 million votes to a "faux cowboy silver-spooner with a quaqmire war on his hands"....the DEMOCRATIC voters didn't want to risk him taking on whoever the Repubs would put up.

    Geez, has anybody ever admitted that "their guy (or gal)" just plain wasn't as popular as the candidate(s) who beat them in an election?!?!?

    Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 1:34pm

21. BTW, off-topic....

    to play McCain the TV movie....Kevin Tighe...of "Emergency" and "Road House" fame [imdb.com]

    Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 1:36pm

22. Naw, if Billary continue damaging the dems via their Obama bashing, Al Gore will make an appearance and McCave as a viable pres goes down the toilet, just like our economy/military/constitution/health care/etc. ala the hsuB/cHeney admin.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 04/16/2008 @ 1:44pm

23. Posted by JOMAMMA 04/16/2008 @ 1:47pm

    Well, glad to see you're out of the neo-con camp....which REALLY makes for strange bedfellows given FRANKGRITS' conversion over to it!....heheh

    As for "sending them a bill"....never happen and I think you know that. Marshall Plan didn't exactly work that way.

    Best case scenario (which of course isn't "best"), the Iraqis probably get a few billion a year after we leave in aid...most of which they spend on their military and paying off various tribal leaders. But...the oil would flow again.

    Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 1:58pm

24. Those ok with voting for McCave, ironically, must really like being tortured: think they, like McCave in a previous life, are staying behind to save the rest of us. But in the 'here and now' world, they're only deluded with their own fear, hate, ignorance and greed-- to the point that more of the McSame must look a lot like a personal stimulation device. Can't ever talk reason to those in their private safe space... or barring their fanatasical climax, they get extremely BITTER for the interruption.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 04/16/2008 @ 2:09pm

25. Posted by JOMAMMA 04/16/2008 @ 2:02pm

    Like "war reparations"...to us???

    If we want to keep a "pro-American" government propped up...maybe. But as you said, once we're out, the Iraqis can run their country anyway they want...including electing some Iraqi "Chavez" or even an "Ahmadinejad"!

    Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 2:10pm

26. Most high schoolers know most of corporate taxes is passed onto the consumers...it is pointless to tax them..it stifles growth, R&D just to name a few..and if taxes get too high, the corporations move to a lower taxed atmosphere.

    this is nonsense, Maasch. if all they do is pass the tax increase along why should they care how high those taxes go? you have heard of logic.

    the reality is that corporations charge what the market will bear. lower their taxes, and they lower their price, right? notachance.

    you have been posting that moldy oldie for some time. consider it refuted for all time.

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/16/2008 @ 2:29pm

27. watch what happened to our economy when we had a top rate of 90%. let's see now, 1940s and 1950s, I recall the country being quite prosperous.

    one more thing, unlike you, who works FOR someone, I own MY business.

    unlike your metier, my job is a high tech one, one that has changed constantly, and I have been at the forefront of that change for over 30 years.

    why should business die from high taxes if ll they do is pass it along to the consumer? don' make no sense.

    and stop whining about your taxes, it's undignified.

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/16/2008 @ 3:07pm

28. let's take gasoline, shall we? prices and taxes too going to the roof. consumption decreasing? notachance.

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/16/2008 @ 3:14pm

29. to Frosty Zoom what the hell is the colour of the sky in your reality. That we got to where we are now was done at the expense of people who could not afford it and still can't afford it the sick,old,unemployed and the poor.It was started by a liberal goverment that was probably the most corrupt and cynical in living memory.Which has allowed a even more base and shallow conservative goverment to get elected. Which has used gimmicky tax cuts and slight of hand and doublespeak to futher along policies which just happens to be One which you speak highly of. It might look good but the reality is that as percentage most of the decline came from economic growth and not a budget surplus.So before you become too impressed may i suggest that you surf the net canadian sites and see what really is happening north of the 49th .

    Posted by figtree at 04/16/2008 @ 3:15pm

30. My experience has been taxes, especially punitive taxes, kill business, opportunity, freedoms and incentive..

    there is no such thing as punitive taxes. why not show an example of taxes killing a business.

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/16/2008 @ 3:15pm

31. it's quite clear that you have not been to any business schools, you are strictly a wannabe.

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/16/2008 @ 3:17pm

32. Posted by EMILE DUBOIS 04/16/2008 @ 3:17pm

    Actually he is pretty much right. Businesses have to pass the taxes to consumers in order to sustain profit. If they have to pass to much onto the costumer people stop wanting buy the product. Look at oil cost. Part of the reason oil cost when up in LA is because they just put a tax on oil which got passed on to the consumer. Now people are scrambling to find alternative fuels to remove oil dependency. Even with the oil companies kicking and screaming they can't stop the move to non-fossil fuels that is coming due to skyrocketing oil prices. If it hits 7 dollars everywhere in the US I guarantee you there will be an alternative fuel source that's cheap and good for the environment. The oil companies will die if they keep upping their prices because of various taxes and wars in oil rich areas. Which I'm not really opposed to for oil companies. I don't mind if they all go bankrupt and we get a new fuel source.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 3:31pm

33. Er, example?

    Posted by hsuBfools at 04/16/2008 @ 3:41pm

34. USA economy is sinking not because of the underground diamond trade or per not enough yachts. It's the billions of profits to big oil/MIC while their taxes went down and our costs went up; with a vacuum to show for it-- as someone once stated-- "Mission accomplished"

    Posted by hsuBfools at 04/16/2008 @ 3:47pm

35. Posted by JOMAMMA 04/16/2008 @ 3:45pm

    I disagree with you on the fact that it will take the running out of crude oil. But we will see in time. I think so many people are buying hybrids now that people are getting the message that folks want efficiency and a cheap alternative fuel will be that efficiency.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 4:01pm

36. The move will reduce Canada's debt, as a proportion of the country's gross domestic product, to 35.1 per cent -- its lowest level in 24 years

    Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 04/16/2008 @ 12:54pm

    My that's amazing could it be due to Canada's reduced personal and corporate tax rates? Maybe McCain for all his economic incompetence has cracked it for a winner again sort of bye bye high taxing, economy stifling, Democrats, Obama and Hillary.

    Oh here's the sort of stuff that must have inspired the Maverick's economic policies:

    http://www.fin.gc.ca/toce/2003/taxratered_e.html

    "In Budget 2003 the Government of Canada announced measures to strengthen the Canadian tax advantage. These measures build on the Five-Year Tax Reduction Plan introduced in 2000--the largest tax cut in the country's history. The plan reduced personal income tax rates at all income levels and introduced a number of tax measures to promote investment and entrepreneurship in Canada."

    TAX REDUCTIONS FOR LARGER CORPORATIONS

    "In 2000 the Government of Canada announced that the general corporate tax rate would be reduced from 28 to 21 per cent by 2004. As of January 2003 the rate has been reduced to 23 per cent. As the table below illustrates, the rate reduction is being phased in over four years."

    Posted by harvey 79 at 04/16/2008 @ 4:01pm

37. Has anyone Googled Jomamma. Talk about hateraid.

    Posted by julien38 at 04/16/2008 @ 4:02pm

38. Posted by JOMAMMA 04/16/2008 @ 12:28p

    So lemme get this straight. It goes somthing like:

    "OK Mr Iraq, we came in under our own invented premise; bombed you back into the bronze age, tried to train your cowardly military, knocked out virtually all the nation's infrastructure, hung around for 5 years and shot semi-random groups of insurgents, promulgated a civil war and again sat in the middle and shot people (our actual enemies on occasion.) We also set aside long standing UN agreements by absconding ourselves from the responsibility of protecting hospitals, museums, and libraries (we did however protect selected palaces and the oil ministry) and by kidnapping and torturing citizens of your and various nations including our own under the guise of war. (But as we torture people in a nicer way than most folks do, its perfectly fine - our lawyers said so.)We further circumvented our own laws by installing electronic surveillance equipment for monitoring our own citizenry. All totaled that comes to just over a trillion dollars US. Will that be cash, check, or credit card?"

    Posted by leftofcenter at 04/16/2008 @ 4:12pm

39. and you well know JM, that it is not the tax rates that are the real problem. It is the shell game they play with their money (as my article clearly stated.

    Posted by leftofcenter at 04/16/2008 @ 4:14pm

40. Hey Julien, I did google jomamma and found this on Youtube

    Posted by leftofcenter at 04/16/2008 @ 4:23pm

41. Maasch, you cannot address my points, you cannot give an example. why do you bother here?

    Posted by emile duBois at 04/16/2008 @ 5:19pm

42. Frank

    Here ya go buddy: Chat

    Posted by leftofcenter at 04/16/2008 @ 10:17pm