House Opposition to Obama Tax Cut Plan Is Insufficient

Here's my latest letter to my Congressional representatives, in the House and the Senate:

I am encouraged to hear that you reject the Republican proposal to reduce the estate tax and increase its threshold to $5 million. That's great, do it, but it will only save, if I recall correctly, about $68 billion over two years.

Still, it is a grave error to pass a bill that will include tax cuts for those "earning" more than $250K. That is where the greater cost is, $700 billion over ten years, and the greater injustice. The estate tax reduction is morally corrupt, but so are income, capital gains, and dividend-earnings tax cuts for rich people.

Please stand firm against a bill that includes cuts for those over $250K. They won’t help the economy now, and they will do a lot of damage in the future. While you are at it, why not bump capital gain tax back up to 20%, or so? And treat dividend payments as ordinary income again. That will do a bit to reduce income inequality. And do not accept a cut to the payroll tax. It won’t do much to grow the economy, but it will undermine Social Security.

BTW, Robert Reich was quoted the other day as saying: “If we put a 2% surcharge on millionaires and 5% on billionaires, instead of cutting their taxes, the long-term deficit would disappear.” How about it?

Courage! Unemployment benefits, and all of the positive provisions of the President’s agreement are worthwhile, important, and urgent. But, Republicans need to be shamed into doing the right thing. Nothing else will get them there. And fixing one provision of the President’s tax plan, the estate tax, seems to be an act of political triangulation. You are doing something, so you can tell progressives you did something, but it is not enough. You need to lead, and take the risks that come with leadership. Or, get out of the way, and let someone else lead.

Here's my sources:
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/t/taxation/bush_tax_cuts/index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/11/us/politics/11tax.html
http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/07/news/economy/tax_cut_deal_obama/index.htm
http://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=3715
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=11874
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12020/sa4753.pdf

America Needs a Jobs Race to the Top, Jennifer Granholm, Huffington Post

A reply to Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm's, December 9, 2010 article in the Huffington Post:

Great idea, Governor!

Here's some happy numbers related to renewable energy: aggressive deployment of renewable energy and efficiency will yield 4.5 million new, well-paid jobs, that can't be off-shored­, by 2030. And we generate $4.3 trillion in domestic revenue. more: http://com­pletelybak­ed.blogspo­t.com/2010­/08/keep-d­oing-what-­we-been-do­ing-destro­y.html

I would discourage citing nuclear power as a viable clean energy option. It is not a least cost solution, and every dollar spent on nuclear is like ten dollars diverted from renewables because of the cost and delays inherent in nuclear power. And it will do nothing to avert catastroph­ic global warming -- it takes to long to build the plants. more: http://com­pletelybak­ed.blogspo­t.com/2009­/12/nukes-­will-do-no­thing-to-p­revent.htm­l

Thanks for devoting so much of your energy to renewable energy. Peace out.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Welfare for Rich People

 

 Senator Sanders On Bush Tax Cut Extension -- Sign the petition here => No Extension

Wow, the hits keep coming. The Obama Administration seems to get nothing right. Who is President Obama taking advice from, Mitch McConnell? Their decision to extend the Bush tax cuts is nuts. Nuts! We’re gonna take on more debt in order to save rich people, millionaires, like $70,000 a year. And then, working schmucks will be paying for years -- diverting money from better uses -- to finance that debt. This is insane.

President Obama should have been out in front of this before the midterms and said no, no extension of any tax cuts, for anyone. And yes, we will extend unemployment benefits. And yes, we will have additional stimulus spending, as nearly every marginally sane economic guru suggests. Not that I trust economic gurus at all -- remember, they gave us “free trade,” which pretty much destroyed our economy. But stimulus spending worked in the past, and it just makes common sense: put poor, unemployed people to work so they, and they’re kids, don’t starve to death. And the rich people who made a pile in the safe harbor this country provides them? Safe harbor at the expense of the middle class? Let the rich pay. Let the rich pay for once. What the hell is so difficult to understand about that?

Why couldn’t our President and the feckless Democrats in Congress stand up for what’s right, just once, and let Republicans struggle and strain to explain why they don’t support extending unemployment benefits, and why they don’t support putting the unemployed to work via more stimulus spending. The President should have let them explain their hostility toward working people right before the elections. Democrats too, for that matter.

But no. President Obama buys into this nonsense that tax cuts for rich people -- so rich people can stock up on more oil and gold futures -- will improve the lives of everyone. Republicans don’t even believe that nonsense. And they don’t care. The avowed and enduring Republican goal is to bankrupt the government so that every non-defense program can be cut from the ledger, and their rich puppeteers can keep more money in their pockets. Starve the beast. Of course, defense-spending stays  ---- the Republicans’ rich puppeteers need the Pentagon to protect their overseas investments.

Shame on President Obama, shame on Congress, shame on the Democratic Party.

Sign Bernie Sander's petition: http://www.democracyforamerica.com/activities/419?t=e1

Shell Oil Corporation Wants To Help

I clicked on a banner ad at the top of the Washington Post today. I do that just to earn some money for the paper I'm reading. I especially enjoy doing it when the ad is from a company I despise. This one was for Shell Oil, and they devoted their page to ideas for better fuel mileage when we drive.

"Getting more mileage out of your tank makes sense not only for your pocket; it also puts less strain on the earth’s natural oil reserves."

There's something eerily inane about the idea that oil company would offer advice to its customers about how to save money, and conserve oil. But I read their helpful tips, and here's one that stands out:

"Drive smoothly: Avoid heavy acceleration or braking. Speeding, rapid acceleration and braking can lower your gasoline mileage by 5% at lower speeds around town and by 33% at highway speeds."

I think that's really good advice, so I'll say it, "Thanks, Shell!"

Drivers can really do themselves and their vehicles and the planet a favor by not stomping on the gas pedal like flamenco dancers when a light turns green, or the car in front of them in a long line of creeping traffic moves a few feet. And don't tailgate, or tap the brakes every ten seconds on the freeway.

That's all, peace out.

No Rogers City Power Plant

My recent letter to the editors of local papers, prompted by a Sierra Club request, Send a Letter to the Editor About the Wolverine Coal Plant:

The Rogers City coal-fired power plant is unnecessary -- projected electricity demand is flat in Michigan for the foreseeable future. For that reason, its permit was denied by the state. So what if demand increases? We can easily meet that demand with efficiency improvements for existing consumers, which are at least ten times cheaper than building new generating capacity, and it will cut existing consumers' bills instead of increasing them. California has used this approach since the 1980's. And efficiency is clean and safe. It doesn't generate mountains of toxic coal ash that will threaten groundwater for generations and require clean up at taxpayers' expense. Efficiency improvements will create a lot of long-term, well-paid jobs for evaluators and installers. Building a coal plant will not. So why build it? Wolverine management want to build it because that's their only means of increasing revenue, and boosting executive salaries. Full stop. Learn more: http://completelybaked.blogspot.com/search/label/Energy

Now, Send a Letter to the Editor About the Wolverine Coal yourself. Thanks!