Showing posts with label Reagan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Reagan. Show all posts

Monday, August 08, 2016

Living in the past, Trump reincarnates Reagan trickle down plan as most forward looking policy for America



Trump speaking in Detroit
Today, Donald Trump gave some specifics about his Tax plan, among other subjects, if he were elected President.  I review here what the major features of his plan includes.

Trump believes that taxes are the biggest differentiation between him and Hillary.  He repeated his campaign's rhetoric and false claim that Hillary says she will increase taxes on the middle class.

Overall, his approach to taxes is to reduce them for most people, but especially for the wealthy and Corporate America.  Although he stated that he is the future thinking of American taxes, his tax plan is to reactivate the 1980's Reagan trickle down economic policy, which many argue does not increase the number of jobs, or give wage increases to workers.  What it does do is pad the bank accounts of the extremely rich.  He spoke nothing about minimum wage increases.

The "trickle down" policy is cited as one of the major reasons for the redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the rich which caused today's income inequality.  Most of his recommendations would reduce revenue to run the Federal government and likely increase the deficit unless severe cuts are made to the social safety net or other programs thought unworthy by a Republican Congress.

For example,  Donald Trump admits that the tax code is extremely complicated but does not mention how the tax code would change, other than by reducing the number of tax brackets from seven down to three.  The three brackets would be 12%, 25% and 33%.

Donald believes that taxes and regulation on Corporate America have had the most adverse impact on reducing the GDP.  Further, he believes that reducing the already highest business tax rate of all western countries from 35% to 15% will improve the economy and spur on business investments and job growth.  The problem with that statement is that 2/3 of all businesses pay no taxes and those that do, have their taxes reduced through exemptions, deductions and off-shore tax havens to about 12.6%.  If reduction in Corporate taxes had any long term impact on increasing jobs or increasing wages, we should have already seen it.  We have not.

Not stopping there to improve the lives of the wealthy, Mr. Trump also advocates elimination of estate taxes.  This was received by a large round of applause from the audience, who apparently either are very rich themselves or do not understand that estate taxes are not paid by any family having less than a $10.8 million estate.

Mr. Trump indicates that the rich will pay their fair share of taxes, but this is very subjective.  Mr. Trump did not get into details on what constitutes a fair share.  For example, if a Corporate CEO who enjoys a $15 million annual income shelters $14 million of it in offshore tax shelters, does he pay tax on the $15 million or $1 million?  Even if he finds legal ways to protect most of that income, what constitutes a fair share?

One tax advantage offered that could favor working women is elimination of all child care expenses from taxes.  Again no specifics but on the surface, it appears that provided you have a job and a child in day care, your child care costs might be deductible from your gross income and not be subject to a tax.  The average cost of child care for working women is about $200 per week, so this has the potential to save over $10,000 from being taxed.  We'll have to see how a Republican Congress would find this proposal, but if history is any indicator, Republicans are not very generous appropriating money for such social reasons.

For example, on the subject of equal pay, if Republicans in Congress passed equal pay legislation, women's wages would be increased by about 30%, potentially increasing the take home pay by much more than $10,000.  That has been rejected by Republicans more than once.  My guess is that Trump's child care deduction will be solidly rejected if Republicans stay in control of Congress.

Donald indicates that more about his tax policies can be found on his website.

Saturday, March 01, 2014

Why GOP means Genuinely Odd Person and Georgia governor Deal turns from Dr. Jekyll into Mr. Hyde

Since President Obama was elected, the nature of the Republican party has been changing.  Some would say the change is not for the better.  Like Dr. Jekyll of the 1931 novella, the GOP is taking on more of a Mr. Hyde persona.  This change is occurring more and more frequently in many of our Republican leaders as we see Republican governors of many states with their "Mr. Hyde" showing.

Take for example scandals or questionable activities involving current or former Republican  governors McDonnell, Christie, Walker, McCrory, Corker, Scott, Snyder, and LaPaige.

We also see some Republican led state congressmen acting in unison to create legislation that causes voting restrictions while some go as far as to pass legislation that allows business to discriminate against certain classes of citizens.  Governors and legislators in many Republican run states have refused to allow medical care to the poorest people by denying medicaid expansion.

Now perhaps these actions were always part of the GOP psyche or policies, but for many governors, it is the first time the public is seeing this side of their character.  Now it seems clear that these apparently repressed behaviors in Republican politicians can no longer be hidden.  The dam of GOP malevolence is bursting.

One of the most malevolent actions that has ever been proposed by a Republican governor has
Gov Deal (R-GA)
occurred this past week.  That governor is Georgia governor Deal, whose "Mr Hyde" is starting to show.

Many Georgia hospitals located in the poorer parts of the state have been forced to close their doors because of financial losses.  Much of these losses come from lack of revenue by uninsured people who cannot afford to pay for their health care.  Governor Deal has a solution.

Governor Deal still refuses to extend medicaid to the poorest in his state.  That is not his solution.  He fails to realize that rejecting medicaid expansion is a big part of the problem for Georgia hospitals.   In fact, if he expanded medicaid, the root cause of the problem, uninsured poor people who cannot pay for hospital services, would be resolved.  Instead governor Deal wants to repeal the 1986 law signed by Republican President Reagan called the "Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act."

This law is designed to prevent uninsured people from being turned away by hospital emergency rooms when they have an emergency medical condition that requires immediate treatment they cannot afford to pay for.  Prior to 1986, hospitals had the right to refuse patients if they could not afford to pay for medical care or if they did not have insurance.  The Reagan GOP had empathy for people in such dire need of care and readily realized that the law was necessary.  But not Governor Deal.  His "Mr. Hyde" is gaining more control over his personality.

By calling for a repeal of the law, governor Deal is effectively asking to eliminate poor people from health services altogether.  He's made sure that they can't get health insurance from expanded medicaid in his state and now he wants to eliminate them from any hospital care at all.  "Heartless" is a kind word to explain governor Deal's thinking.

When a person has no empathy for others, we usually think that they have a psychological problem.  Depending on the degree, this lack of empathy can range from narcissistic personality disorder to psychopathic personality disorder.  More and more, I am seeing these disorders appearing within  GOP leadership.  Perhaps you may agree.

As a voter, I would like to know that the choices I have in politicians, present me with psychologically healthy people.  I believe we are beginning to see that the GOP does not offer this kind of choice.

Perhaps we can make psychological testing a mandatory requirement in order to allow a politician to run for office.

Or maybe we should just not vote for Republicans.