« Wesley Clark: “N.Y. Money People” Pushing War with Iran | Blog Index | Bush Readies Climate Change Announcement »
McCain Doesn't Want To Burden the Wealthy With Cost Of War
Bush's new Iraq jobs program is going to cost a billion dollars. As Marty Kaplan points out in The Huffington Post, Congress could "repeal one zillionth of one percent of the cut in capital gains tax that Bush gave the wealthiest Americans. That would raise a billion in a heartbeat."
This idea, though more than sensible, does not appeal to Sen. John McCain, who told Al Hunt: "I'm not sure what the point would be. I would certainly ask Americans to serve. I would ask them to make other sacrifices, but I’m not sure I would want to raise their taxes just because we’re in a war."
E.J. Dionne Jr. points out that, since 2001, we have offered two dollars in tax cuts for every dollar we have spent on war.
Posted by Diane E. Dees on 01/17/07 at 9:12 AM | E-mail | Print | Digg | de.licio.us | Reddit | Newsvine | Yahoo! MyWeb | StumbleUpon | Netscape | Google |
Comments
Keep the faith Ken, it's an uphill battle, to get people in this country to get off their butts and make the politicians do something right for a change. Like get a flat tax, so everyone pays their fair share! Maybe even charge a little more on the easy wealth. Let corporations finance all elections, money going to the ones who need it most, so the little guys can play the game too. I've noticed a lack of comments lately, maybe everyone is busy doing taxes?
Posted by: Ranselar VanDerpoel on 01/17/07 at 11:12 AM
It is obscene, just obscene to ask struggling young adults to lay their lives on the line but not ask for those whose wealth is not even earned to give up a small portion of a recent tax cut on the income from that wealth. It is class warfare when the powerful become so comfortable, even former prisoner of war John McCain, that they believe that simply the assurance of their comfort is more important than young people's lives. It is difficult to argue for the most equitable sacrifice (if we believe we can't abolish war) that of reinstating the draft, but that the wealthy can not sacrifice a small amount of unearned treasure--when it's the value of their oil stocks and shares in haliburton and caci that we're fighting for--what else can you call it?
Posted by: John Paul McCarty on 01/17/07 at 5:39 PM
Any persons who or organizations that support this war, or any war, without requiring our citizens to sacrifice something to pay for it...those people and organizations are morally bankrupt and deserve to be sent to the front lines with a rifle and any body armor that might be left over after the people who volunteered for duty are all armored up. People with brains and proper human values should be revolted by the likes of McCain the hypocrite.
Posted by: Moon Watcher on 01/17/07 at 6:34 PM
Any persons who or organizations that support this war, or any war, without requiring our citizens to sacrifice something to pay for it...those people and organizations are morally bankrupt and deserve to be sent to the front lines with a rifle and any body armor that might be left over after the people who volunteered for duty are all armored up. People with brains and proper human values should be revolted by the likes of McCain the hypocrite.
Posted by: Moon Watcher on 01/17/07 at 6:35 PM
McCain is an extremely dangerous and disturbing man. Of course, not a single penny more should be spent on this insane and illegal murderous occupation of Iraq. The only money the US should be sending to Iraq is the massive reparations it owes (for the sanctions and the invasion and occupation) after it leaves and ceases the occupation. But someone should tell McCain that during World War II, taxes were up in the 90% rate range on the superrich. McCain and the whining plutocrats that pull his strings take us all for fools. It would be a laugh if they weren't sending us off to kill and die in foreign lands for their class and their empire.
Posted by: Tim on 01/18/07 at 12:21 AM
ARCHIVE
September 9, 2007 - September 15, 2007
September 2, 2007 - September 8, 2007
August 26, 2007 - September 1, 2007
August 19, 2007 - August 25, 2007
August 12, 2007 - August 18, 2007
August 5, 2007 - August 11, 2007
July 29, 2007 - August 4, 2007
April 22, 2007 - April 28, 2007
April 15, 2007 - April 21, 2007
April 8, 2007 - April 14, 2007
March 25, 2007 - March 31, 2007
March 18, 2007 - March 24, 2007
March 11, 2007 - March 17, 2007
March 4, 2007 - March 10, 2007
February 25, 2007 - March 3, 2007
February 18, 2007 - February 24, 2007
February 11, 2007 - February 17, 2007
February 4, 2007 - February 10, 2007
January 28, 2007 - February 3, 2007
January 21, 2007 - January 27, 2007
January 14, 2007 - January 20, 2007
RECENT COMMENTS
The Petraeus/Crocker Report: It's Crocker Time! (Part Three) (1)
Ames Tideman wrote:
The testimony was a complete mess. ...
[more]
Scientific Proof That Liberals Are Smarter (4)
MoonDragon wrote:
Can we bias any study to show a tendency for desired resul...
[more]
Protesters in Berkeley: Up a Tree and Fenced In (13)
Brian K wrote:
Kirilovslogic,
Wow. Im not talking about sucking up to th...
[more]
NRA Offers Free Memberships to Soldiers (Step Up, Costco) (17)
Brian K wrote:
Sneezer,
First of all it is NOT his "topic sentance" it is...
[more]
MoveOn, Anbar, and Lantos: Final Thoughts on the Petraeus and Crocker Hearing (1)
Eric Ferguson wrote:
You're not too deep in the weeds on that point about Irani...
[more]
Chuck Hagel, Next SecDef? (4)
bob t wrote:
Wes Clark(Catholic) would be my first choice, but Hagel co...
[more]
Scientific Proof That Liberals Are Not Smarter (4)
Eric Ferguson wrote:
The message intended was a good one, because Petraeus has ...
[more]
Happy Anniversary, Katrina Victims! You Could Celebrate With Cash if You Weren't So Unscrupulous (5)
jah wrote:
I was annoyed by your title, but i understand and relate t...
[more]
White House Advisor Appears to Taunt Bin Laden (10)
Jaime Galarza wrote:
It reminds me of the now infamous "Bring them on" comment....
[more]
Donald Rumsfeld: Not Done Lying! (3)
Jonathan Stein wrote:
Yes, Dan....
[more]
Movable Type 3.33
The American public has been trained so well to cry outrage anytime a tax increase is mentioned that raising taxes (even on the super rich only) is political suicide.
I remember when bush first took over and rammed through the tax cuts that anyone who brought up the fact that most of the savings would go to the super rich was charged with "engaging in class warfare". The funny thing is that those same tax cuts were a form of class warfare--on the middle and lower class.
Of course the media reports everything in the context of "he said, she said" and even though the numbers are there to support the "tax cuts are for the rich" view point, most people didn't give much thought to how these tax cuts would affect the overall economy (esp the one passed AFTER the war started). As long as they got their check for 300$ they were happy.
What I don't understand is why I'm posting this on a site with no commenters to a reading audience who already (possibly) agrees (at least in sentiment). I must be loopy.
Posted by: ken on 01/17/07 at 9:56 AM