The AFL-CIO, in concert with some Congressional leaders, has proposed yet another tax hike to fund Washington’s ongoing explosion of spending. This latest collaboration between Big Labor and Big Government would be a 0.25 percent tax on all stock trades. Given the budding deficit pressures another tax hike proposal is hardly surprising, but, curiously enough, this new tax would target the pensions of the AFL-CIO’s own members.
Congressional leaders have decided to divide their attention for the rest of the year between a hostile (to patients) takeover of the health care system and feigning concern over rising unemployment. Their new focus on reversing job losses is a tacit admission that the stimulus plan passed in February has failed and that high unemployment rates are likely to persist well into 2011 and beyond.
But any potential job creation bills will likely cost billions of dollars. And Congressional leaders recognize the public is tired of over-spending and growing deficits. To pacify these concerns they plan to pay for their latest dubious effort to spur job creation with the new financial transactions tax.
Supporters of higher taxes and larger government have often suggested taxes on financial transactions in various forms as a way to pay for any number of government spending programs, and as a cure for persistent deficits. Just recently, United Kingdom Prime Minister Gordon Brown proposed such a tax on a global scale. The idea, immediately shot down at home, was quickly deflated internationally when U.S. Treasury Timothy Geithner rightly and quickly gave it two thumbs down.
Taxes on financial transactions if levied globally would diminish the efficiency of financial markets, destroying jobs on a global scale. If such taxes were enacted in the United States, it would sound the death knell for much of the domestic financial industry. Given their penchant for proposing job destroying tax hikes, the AFL-CIO’s financial transaction tax proposal should not be entirely surprising. What is odd in this case is that the proposal would reduce the value of investments in union pension funds which are among the most frequent traders of stocks, making one wonder who the unions think they’re helping.
No more special favors; no special "exemptions".
We've played enough Robin Hood with non-union taxpayers money (the majority of the population)to union bosses and the "organizations" that we have all come to love and admire!
What's going on gives a new meaning to "fleece".
“Disillusioned” is the word that best describes how many Americans feel after eight years of George Bush and the election of Barack Obama a year ago. Republicans had a majority in congress and the presidency, yet achieved little for Middle America. They betrayed voters by inflating the deficit and growing government, sending men and women into nation-building wars whose purposes are still unknown, and created a culture of moral and ethical corruption in Washington D.C. It was under lax and pathetic regulatory oversight that a Republican president and Republican congress allowed corporations to betray shareholders with questionable and highly leveraged credit default swaps, only to be followed by a $700 billion taxpayer bailout created by the Bush administration—so much for limited government. Republicans are a party without a message and without a messenger.
Last week’s election results in Virginia and New Jersey, where Republican candidates for governor triumphed over their Democrat opponents, say more about the public’s rejection of Obama’s big government solutions and less about Republicans articulating a message to help Middle America. If Republicans think the public is embracing the party again, they are simply whistling past the graveyard, drunk on their own greed, and completely out of touch with the needs of Middle America.
Not that Democrats are offering any worthwhile solutions to address the most pressing needs of Middle America—job creation—but at least Democrats are intellectually honest about their desire for big government, universal healthcare, taxpayer-funded abortions, labor union power, and a litigious society for plaintiff lawyers to fleece the public. There is something, dare I say “refreshing and frank” about knowing where Democrats are on issues that impact Middle America, whereas Republicans pretend to be something they are not.
It is time for the Republican party to stop blindly whoring for the business community and begin addressing the issues that impact Middle America—job creation, affordable healthcare for all, and quality public education for our children. Republicans are a one-trick-pony, where “tax cuts” are their solution for all of Middle America’s problems. It’s because the party cannot articulate rational policy solutions to the real problems we face.
Take healthcare for instance; the Republican solution has been health savings accounts (HSAs). Are you kidding me? We can’t get people to save money in IRAs, never mind HSAs. That’s the best Republicans have got? Why don’t Republicans push to allow consumers to shop for healthcare across state lines, require everyone to have healthcare, and deny insurers from rejecting consumers with pre-existing conditions?
If Democrats have any hope of maintaining power, they too need to put viable solutions on the table for Middle America, where people care a hell of a lot more about jobs and the economy than government-run healthcare, union card check, the protection of gays from hate crimes, and cap and trade. Both parties have failed miserably to address the needs of Middle America, which I suppose is why I feel so disillusioned with both parties.
A. Muser
http://americanmuser.wordpress.com/
This just shows how "clueless" these people are when it comes to how a real capitalist system works. Those that succeed are ones that help create wealth (and jobs), but those who don't (or harm) will tax the system to death.
In reply to American Muser, Washington D.C.
I would say Americans are angry and disgusted not "disillusioned".
I will not defend Bush except state some things you left out which are pertinent to your statements.
Upon coming into office:
1) The DOTCOM bubble burst, remember? The Republican Congress tax cuts and the "DOTCOM wealth generator" enabled Clinton's vaunted economic surplus at the end of the 1990s. The bubble burst and Bush inherited a recession – however small.
2) 9-11. The rise of Al Queda took place throughout the 1990s. We all know about the 1st twin tower bombing, the USS Cole, embassy bombings, and others. Our security services were NOT improved and more thoroughly integrated. Simply put, this was not a priority. So, Bush is 9 months into office and 9-11 occurs. I ask you, what administration was REALLY responsible for America not being prepared? No one on the left wants to talk about that. I did not see Bush continue to Whine about what the prior admin left him. At least he had some dignity.
3) 9-11 (2). In the aftermath, look at the shocks which took place to our economy. Remember what happened to the airline industry and others? Talk about the markets being nervous. Whatever Bush's planned domestic agenda, so much for that. He did what EVERY president should do. His priority is defend America first.
4) 9-11 (3). We went after the Taliban and Al Queda. You make one point that has hampered the American military for decades (a leftist and UN approach at that). The military is NOT a nation-building force. That is the purview of the UN. What a joke that is, right? We pay for most of it AND get criticized by nations abroad and left wingers at home, while they sit on the sidelines. What a world.
5) IRAQ. Bush listened to intelligence reports, as did many others, and made a decision. There was every reason to believe Saddam could have WMDs. Forget the fact that he was terrorizing, murdering, and torturing (not waterboarding) untold millions. Typically, the UN wants more sanctions and TIME. This hamstrings the element of surprise by insisting we wait. Thousands of trucks crossed Iraq's border into Syria while we were "dithering". I wonder what was on those trucks and why SO MANY of them over months were leaving? Sound familiar? It should. We are playing the same game with Iran.
The invasion of Iraq provided a golden historical opportunity that would have benefited millions. We could have brought down Iran down AND their support for Hezbollah, Hamas, and any other nutjob terrorist receiving Iran's support. We missed that historical opportunity, mostly because the world and the left in this country would never support it. As a result, look what Iranian terrorist support has caused in blood and treasure? Look where Iran is NOW. Bush had it right when he labeled the Axis of Evil but that was not politically correct. Thanks UN for helping out.
6) You forget that billions of Bush's spending went to education (no child left behind) and the medicare prescription coverage, which the left and Kennedy enthusiastically embraced. Now, that is what I call bi-partisian! They both love to spend. However, I guess those billions of expenditures only count against Bush. This is what happens. The liberals are going to attack you anyway.
7) Bush's tax cuts. I guess THAT did not help the middle class. Wait until they expire, the health care bill gets passed with its hidden taxes/fees/surcharges, Pelosi pushes through higher taxation (on top of the largest tax increase in history, resulting from expiration of Bush tax cuts). More "rich" small business owners collapse resulting in more jobs lost, and FINALLY inflation kicks in, further weakening the dollar. Yet we keep spending, borrowing, and printing. Bush is NOT doing this. What he did pales in comparison to what is happening.
BUT my point is this. Don't be so quick to hang all that on Bush. He met with Obama and both agreed to SAVE some for the NEW president's discretion, remember? All the money in TARP was not spent when Obama took office. Obama certainly did not mind having a "credit card" advance. Obama never mentions THAT fact when complaining about inheriting a deficit!
The fact that the leftist leaders are, as you say, "intellectually honest", is really important, isn't it? Those of us who listened to Obama knew this stuff would follow. You can't consolidate total power without these actions. Bush certainly did not attempt what amounts to a government takeover.absurd. Then again, Bush was an evil capitalist (you know, the system that all Americans love when it makes THEM money).
There is much more to it than what your summary suggests. No one would disagree that all of them are fat porksters. The problem is that THIS president and administration will not leave the buffet. Our national wealth in the form of debt, taxes, and printed federal reserve note (worthless paper without any confidence in it) is being "re-distributed" at an unsustainable rate and will push us over the edge.
This is change the masses will be FORCED to believe in it; they will have no economic power to do otherwise. Your comparison of the PAST to what is happening NOW to our country is incredulous.
Pingback: Congress and Big Labor Collaborate to Raise Taxes » The Foundry | Money Blog : 10 Dollars : Money Articles.
Say what??????
"Republicans had a majority in congress and the presidency, yet achieved little for Middle America."
It was after the Democrats took control of the Senate and Congress that things started going south. The Republicans NEVER had a filibuster proof majority like some seem to THINK.
"only to be followed by a $700 billion taxpayer bailout created by the Bush administration"
The bailout bill that was written by Chris Dodd(D) and voted into being with a majority vote by DEMOCRATS right? All Bush did was sign what the Democrats gave him nothing more.
The day that more people wake up and hold THEIR party responsible for their complicity in what ails this country right now will be the day that things start to turn around. But to continue giving the Democrats in Washington a pass and acting like they weren't even in Washington when it all started going to hell in a handbasket is ludacris. Sure, Clinton left office with a BUDGET surplus. You do know what a Budget is don't you? It's a PLAN….NOT an actuality. We were in a recession when Clinton left office. It wasn't all champagne and roses like so many try to claim all the time. The housing crisis got it's start under Clinton's watch when he asked, nay demanded, that lenders lower their standards and requirements for home loans. When they were TOLD to make more loans to minorities regardless of their ability to repay the snowball started it's journey downhill. NOW we have a President and Administration that is trying to convince people that the way to get out of debt is to spend like a drunken sailor. In the meantime, unemployment is growing by leaps and bounds, people are STILL losing their homes, banks are NOT lending again even with all the money thrown their way, the Bush policies that everyone screamed and whined about so loudly are not only being continued but many are being expanded on. Yet, NOW they're a good thing! Not only that, instead of honoring promises made to bring our military HOME and end these two wars there is a push to send more troops into Afganistan by July than were sent in the prior 8 years. It all boils down to one thing with so many in this country right now….
Bush did it = BAD BAD BAD
Obama does it(tenfold) = GOOD GOOD GOOD
Thank Goodness more and more people are starting to wake up and actually smell the coffee. People are starting to realize that the ONLY thing that changed was the name on the mailbox at the White House. They didn't elect anyone new….they are responsible for electing Bush on steroids. The only differences are he wears a nicer designer suit and has just a bit better grasp of the English language. Well that is as long as his teleprompter is working like it's supposed to.
Pingback: Stock Transaction Tax: Yet another Tax Increase | Conservative Principles Now