GOP finally fighting for those who need help the most.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

DrDoug

Diamond Member
Jan 16, 2014
3,580
1,629
136
I had to laugh when I ran across an image of handbill for a union rally being called by some Republican party state officials in support of unions. The handbill had some slogans about strong unions being good for America and so on, calling for union people and union supporters to come support 'the party that supports them'.

It was dated 1955, back when Republicans were sane...lol! Boy have the times changed.
 

MongGrel

Lifer
Dec 3, 2013
38,466
3,067
121
New bill aimed at lessening the wealth gap. Finally these poor families can get some relief as long as Democrats don't do something stupid like filibustering this helpful bill.

Yeah right.

Like try to attempt now.

People should know better by now, but they probably don't.

Frank Zappa - Hot Plate Heaven at the Green Hotel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjF7sgwxROQ

More like "Vote for me, Vote for me!!!!"
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
I had to laugh when I ran across an image of handbill for a union rally being called by some Republican party state officials in support of unions. The handbill had some slogans about strong unions being good for America and so on, calling for union people and union supporters to come support 'the party that supports them'.

It was dated 1955, back when Republicans were sane...lol! Boy have the times changed.

Kinda-sorta-

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...re-still-crazy-after-all-these-years-20120316

Some things remain the same.
 

Brian Stirling

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2010
3,964
2
0
I've said it before and I'll say it again:
The Dems will push policies that benefit the poor and middle class unless they are paid not to do so while the GOP will push policies that buttfuck the poor and middle class whether they are paid to do so or not.

Yeah, perhaps, but neither will get elected without big money and once the hand is out they do as there told.

In the end there is little difference between them, yeah, they may sound different, they may cater to a different crowd, but in the end in order to get elected they must genuflect before Wall Street and the banking industry.

You're free to believe the dems are better, perhaps in there hearts they are but that's not what counts. Money's the game, the only game!


Brian
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,500
6
81
A good write up on this by Dana Millbank of the Washington Post:

They’ve discovered, belatedly, that income inequality is a problem, and they’re no longer proposing to give tax breaks to the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans. Now they are proposing to give tax breaks to the wealthiest two-tenths of 1 percent of Americans.

On Tuesday afternoon, the House Rules Committee took up H.R. 1105, the “Death Tax Repeal Act of 2015,” with plans to bring it to a vote on the chamber floor Wednesday — Tax Day. It is an extraordinarily candid expression of the majority’s priorities: A tax cut costing the treasury $269 billion over a decade that would exclusively benefit individuals with wealth of more than $5.4 million and couples with wealth of more than $10.9 million.

That’s a tax break for only the 5,500 wealthiest households in the country each year, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. Of those, the 318 wealthiest estates each year — those worth $50 million or more — would see an average windfall of $20 million each, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

And this at a time when the gap between rich and poor is already worse than it has been since the Great Depression? Never in the history of plutocracy has so much been given away to so few who need it so little.

This is the ultimate perversion of the tea party movement, which began as a populist revolt in 2009 but has since been hijacked by wealthy and corporate interests. The estate tax has been part of American law in some form since 1797, according to the advocacy group Americans for Tax Fairness, a shield against the sort of permanent aristocracy our founders fought to rid themselves of.

It had long been a conservative ideal, and the essence of the American Dream, to believe that everybody should have an equal shot at success. But in their current bid to end the estate tax, Republicans could create a permanent elite of trust-fund babies.

The estate tax was a meaningful check on a permanent aristocracy as recently as 2001, when there were taxes on the portion of estates above $675,000; even then there were plenty of ways for the rich to shelter money for their heirs. As the son of a schoolteacher and a cabinetmaker, I’d like to see the estate tax exemptions lowered — so that taxes encourage enterprise and entre*pre*neur*ship while keeping to a minimum the number of Americans born who will never have to work a day in their lives. The current exemption of $5.4 million (the current estate tax has an effective rate averaging under 17 percent, according to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center) does little to prevent a permanent aristocracy from growing — and abolishing it entirely turns democracy into kleptocracy.

The kleptocrats offer all sorts of bogus justifications for giving away $269 billion to a few thousand of the wealthiest Americans.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), appearing late Tuesday before the Rules Committee, claimed that the estate tax is “absolutely devastating” to family farms, and he claimed the repeal would remove “an additional layer of taxation” from assets that had already been taxed.

Double taxation? Americans for Tax Fairness, citing Federal Reserve data, notes that 55 percent of the value of estates worth more than $100 million comprises unrealized capital gains that have never been taxed.

Hurting family farmers and small businesses? In the entire country, only 120 small businesses and farms (100 of them large farms) were hit by the estate tax in 2013. And for that tiny number affected, there are all sorts of provisions already in place to soften the blow: low valuation rules, delayed tax payments and other breaks and discounts.

GOP leaders such as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and House Speaker John Boehner (Ohio) have begun to recognize that the vast gap between rich and poor is detrimental — and to blame the problem on President Obama. Their solution, so far, has been to propose cuts of hundreds of billions of dollars from food stamps, Pell grants, Medicaid and other programs for those without means — and, on Tax Day, to give $269 billion to the few who already have the most.

“It sounds to me like there’s a lot of wealth envy in this country,” Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) complained while serving as chairwoman of the Rules Committee debate Tuesday. The bill abolishing the estate tax, she said, “will draw a line in the sand.”

Yes, it will: between the wealthiest two-tenths of 1 percent — and everybody else.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,562
3
0
GOP is establishing an aristocracy in America. I guess they don't know how that turned out in other places.
Ex%C3%A9cution_de_Marie_Antoinette_le_16_octobre_1793.jpg

As I recall, ridiculously heavy taxes were a big cause of the American revolution. You're right, we need to keep those pro-tax Republicans in their place! ;)
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,517
15,399
136
As I recall, ridiculously heavy taxes were a big cause of the American revolution. You're right, we need to keep those pro-tax Republicans in their place! ;)

Uh, no, big taxes were not the cause of the American revolution, being taxed and not being represented was the main reason for the American revolution.

Perhaps you've heard of the phrase , "no taxation without representation"?

Elementary dear boy, elementary;)
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,562
3
0
Uh, no, big taxes were not the cause of the American revolution, being taxed and not being represented was the main reason for the American revolution.

Perhaps you've heard of the phrase , "no taxation without representation"?

Elementary dear boy, elementary;)

And why did they want said representation? So they could get rid of the taxes! If the taxes hadn't been there the representation would never have become an issue. ;)
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
When the GOP suddenly decided the wealth gap is a problem, I thought, "Welcome to reality. Better late than never." I didn't realize the problem they discovered is the wealth gap is too small. The stench of shameless hypocrisy is the hallmark of today's Republican party.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
36,042
30,328
136
When the GOP suddenly decided the wealth gap is a problem, I thought, "Welcome to reality. Better late than never." I didn't realize the problem they discovered is the wealth gap is too small. The stench of shameless hypocrisy is the hallmark of today's Republican party.

Typical MO for the GOP. Criticize the Dems for problems they create and maintain. It's easy to get away with this when your base is functionally retarded when it comes to evaluating policy effects.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
On top of that, he is implying he thinks the GOP is interested in cutting taxes for everyone, not just the wealthy.

Right. We all know the Bush tax cuts were only for the rich. That's why Obama and the Dems made the majority of them permanent.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Estate tax repeal will go to the top 0.2%
They also stuck a provision in there to protect American aristocrat heirs from paying capital gains as well.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
So Bill Gates earns several billion dollars by making products that people like me voluntarily purchase. When he dies, he decides where to pass along his huge fortune. He can choose to help people, pass it to his children, or set up a massive endowment to provide his cat with lifelong staff.

At what point and by what moral authority do I gain the right to seize his legally gained wealth for my own benefit?
 

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
7,667
8,021
136
So Bill Gates earns several billion dollars by making products that people like me voluntarily purchase. When he dies, he decides where to pass along his huge fortune. He can choose to help people, pass it to his children, or set up a massive endowment to provide his cat with lifelong staff.

At what point and by what moral authority do I gain the right to seize his legally gained wealth for my own benefit?
Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution.
Therefore Congress has the right to, say, tax everyone on everything, 100% of income and 100% of property, and redistribute that wealth however it sees fit, eh?
 

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
7,667
8,021
136
Therefore Congress has the right to, say, tax everyone on everything, 100% of income and 100% of property, and redistribute that wealth however it sees fit, eh?

So, therefore, after answering your question, you're going to try to get me to argue in favor of something that doesn't exist, won't exist, and that I don't want to exist.

Great tactic!
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,517
15,399
136
So, therefore, after answering your question, you're going to try to get me to argue in favor of something that doesn't exist, won't exist, and that I don't want to exist.

Great tactic!

He's a fucking troll, don't even waste your time. His posts are either contain completely fabricated "facts", horrible interpretations of the truth, straw man, or some sort of conspiracy.