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
- The Twitter corporate welfare - July 29, 2014
- How to survive as an artist in SF's 'new economy' - July 29, 2014
- I wanna be like Marcos - July 29, 2014
- You are right - July 29, 2014
- xxKxwFjpUza - July 29, 2014
- When did Anthony Weiner grow - July 29, 2014
- Bill Swift and John Burkett both together in 1993 or so. - July 29, 2014
- Wired measures tech bus trips in a day - July 29, 2014
- Uber’s secret, “proprietary” insurance policy leaked - July 29, 2014
- KDiBURdoDkhFqTUPtd - July 29, 2014