By Tim Redmond
The NY Times today has it about right on tax policy: The Democrats are ducking for cover while Bush continues to demand that his insane tax cuts be made permanent. Lyndon Johnson was forced to recognize in the 1960s that he couldn't have both a Great Society and the Vietnam War at the same time without figuring out how to pay for it all, but back then, it wasn't considered political suicide to raise taxes on the rich. (Let's remember: Even under RIchard Nixon, the top tax rate for the very very rich reached 80 percent. Today it's 34 percent.)
At some point, Nancy Pelosi, as the speaker, is going to have to make a choice: Start to cut spending on the war -- by a lot -- or talk about at the very least repealing the Bush tax cuts.
Of course, the third choice (and perhaps the most likely) is to continue to duck, continue to go into debt, continue to screw up the economy and continue to burden our kids with the results of our greed, fear and stupidity. Nancy?
Most Commented On
- "San Francisco and its - December 4, 2013
- 20 by 20 is a meaningless slogan, so of course the supes voted - December 4, 2013
- You confuse equality of opportunity with equality of outcome. - December 4, 2013
- The amount of car travel is far more than 100 times that of - December 4, 2013
- The Car Lobby - December 4, 2013
- The fantasy world - December 4, 2013
- Can you quit when you have already been fired? - December 4, 2013
- Cars Kill 100 Times As Many Pedestrians As Bicycles - December 4, 2013
- Not to mention free pensions and healthcare. - December 4, 2013
- Since I do not support conscription, it follows that my view is - December 4, 2013