Tuesday, October 25, 2011

More tax plans to distribute the wealth-- upward.

Why are Republicans and especially those running for the presidency so determined to make the rich pay less in taxes? Is there a logic to this that I don't get?

And why are Republicans so determined to offer us idiots and trolls as their options to Obama for president? What is this about? I read that where Herman Cain is not really competent to be president many are tempted to vote for him simply because they think he's outside the Beltway-- except he was a lobbyist. How does that make him outside? And does it really not matter about competency? 

I also read that simple is supposed to be better? Seriously? As in simple minded like Perry who couldn't get higher marks in college than Cs even in PE? Are Americans really going to buy any flat tax rate that helps the rich pay less? Let's say the average American earner figures out they'd pay more and doesn't opt in as Perry says they can do. But the rich, oh hey, they are going for this in a big way-- what does that do for the deficit some claim matters so much?

They say Republican have always offered responsible options for the presidency. Okay, I buy that... but not for the Vice-presidency where they tried to palm Sarah Palin off on the country. Where McCain, whether I agreed with his political agenda or his temperament was competent to be president (as much as anybody is given the huge scope of that job), he picked someone who was not which makes you wonder about his competency.

I keep hoping we will have a real option with a different political agenda next November. It seems unlikely.


Kay Dennison said...

As always you are so very right!!!!

Ingineer66 said...

The other thing the Perry plan does is eliminates the deductions for mortgage interest and charitable contributions for people making over $500k. Who do you think gives a lot to charity? Rich people do. And rich people buy big houses that employ lots of skilled and unskilled workers to build and maintain. Maybe cut the deduction in half for the rich so that they have to give twice as much to charity, but don't eliminate it.

I like the idea of making the tax code simpler, but gimmicks and sound bites are not going to do it.

Rain said...

Good additional thoughts, ingineer. I had a thought about simple that I had written for my other blog on wolves vs. ranchers. It was-- '... the bunch out there who want simple are buying into a lot of stupid as a side dish.' I know.. not subtle of me, but I think too complex is a problem but likewise trying to simplify what isn't usually ends up with a lot of losses in potential benefits ;)

Paul said...

I agree that the rich should pay their fair share, but Wall Street and Congress are in cahoots and we all know what that means...