Kevin Drum, the alarmingly clean-cut author of CalPundit, has a damn smart post up about, of all things, tax policy. OK, where is the party leadership on this?
Oh…on the phone to their brokers…
Kevin Drum, the alarmingly clean-cut author of CalPundit, has a damn smart post up about, of all things, tax policy. OK, where is the party leadership on this?
Oh…on the phone to their brokers…
Did you say that it was a smart post?
I suppose it would be fair to say that his proposal would be a good tactical ploy for the dems, though its debatable weather the ‘soak the rich’ battlecry is enough to win elections.
But as for the merit of his arguments? *chuckle*
First, his ‘I’d rather tax the dead than tax the living’ sloganeering is catchy, but it is exactly that… sloganeering.
Logically, you cannot tax the dead, because the dead cannot make or spend money. You are taxing estate-recievers and any other characterization is pure spin.
Second, I love his ‘if we doubled the estate tax rate, we can double the revenue from the estate tax!’ That’s brilliant.
Let me introduce a radical new concept: I can claim it as my own idea, since no one has obviously ever heard it before. I call it the Law of Unintended Consequenses.
Rich people have estate managers. These managers’ job is to make sure the heirs of said rich person get the most benefit from the lifelong labor…
*** Reality-to-Liberal translator: Lifelong labor = fleecing of inner-city black children by corporate raiders.
… of their parent. Therefore, although pretty much any movement of money is taxed by SOME agency, there will always be a couple options that are lower in cost. Like buying a sole-propriatorship and tranferring ownership that to the kids to generate revenue for them.
That’s just an example that I, a rank amateur, thought of in 5 seconds. The professionals just might be able to do better, ya think?
So assuming that doubling the tax rate = double the revenues is a mistake that I am ashamed that anyone who’s been to a first-year college economics or political science class could make.
I guess it really is true what they say about California colleges.
P.S. Do you really think the estate tax is a big enough issue for a national campaign? Denial isn’t just a river in Africa, you know.
Ya know, you must be right…that why the GOP was so indifferent to the issue!!
More serious response to follow…
A.L.
It would be nice to see the source of his claims. The following link is for a paper titled “The Economics of the Estate Tax” produced in ’98 by the congressional Joint Economic Committee. While I do not assume the findings in this paper are without error, it does constitute a little more than an assertion.
http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/estattax/estattax.htm
His statement “For my money and it is my money I’d rather tax the dead than tax the living.” is perhaps the most appalling. The notion that he or anyone else has a claim on the product of someone’s labor is absurd. It is also not the dead being taxed, but rather those who are left behind.
Even if you accept his premise that it only effects the richest 2% of individuals, then his “acknowledgement” of the lopsided nature of income tax rates should be sufficient to demonstrate that the monies that made up the value of the estate have already been subjected to substantial taxation.
I am not sure what his definition of a normal married couple is, but it must certainly not include anyone who owns a small business. It doesn’t take a great deal for a small business to have assets that exceed the threshold, and if subjected to the tax, may well mean termination of the business. I have to wonder whose fault it will be if employed workers lose jobs as a result (sarcasm intended).
It is not governments that create jobs; a brief examination of the last century should bear that out. Continuing to penalize those who do create the jobs doesn’t seem like much of a solution.
For all the teeth-gnashing about inequalities, I seldom hear about the flip side of the coin: everybody’s vote ostensibly counts the same, but I know for a fact that I have had to pay much more for mine than a LOT of other people for theirs. To the extent that some folks pay more than I do, they get hit twice, often having to pay a second time to get the services they pay for, but are used by someone else. Consider that the next time you hear someone complain about the rich and their “good schools, good medical care,” and private security.
ok dokie