Michele Bachmann: I’m ‘Proud’ that ‘We Have People Working Two Jobs’ and ‘Longer Hours’
from ThinkProgress
Today, Rep. Eric Cantor (VA), the chief deputy Republican whip in the House, unveiled his proposal to stimulate the economy. His legislation — the so-called Middle Class Job Protection Act — does nothing for the middle class. Instead, it reduces the corporate tax rate by 28 percent.
At a press conference today unveiling the stimulus proposal, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) justified the conservative plan to give tax breaks to corporations — instead of working Americans — by arguing that people actually like working long hours:
(Continued here.)
Today, Rep. Eric Cantor (VA), the chief deputy Republican whip in the House, unveiled his proposal to stimulate the economy. His legislation — the so-called Middle Class Job Protection Act — does nothing for the middle class. Instead, it reduces the corporate tax rate by 28 percent.
At a press conference today unveiling the stimulus proposal, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) justified the conservative plan to give tax breaks to corporations — instead of working Americans — by arguing that people actually like working long hours:
I am so proud to be from the state of Minnesota. We’re the workingest state in the country, and the reason why we are, we have more people that are working longer hours, we have people that are working two jobs.Bachmann’s version of the American Dream is apparently working two full-time jobs and struggling to get by.
(Continued here.)
Powered by Blogger
2 Comments:
Bachmann is still following the old talking points … remember Bush pronounced the economy “safe and sound” on December 18 because "People are working; productivity is high". Further Bush told business and community leaders at a gathering of Rotary Club members on December 17, 2007, “the underpinning is good".
Contrast Bachmann with someone who travels his district … talking to folks at Hy-Vee … Walz gave this speech the day after Bush gave such glowing review of the economy and now less than 30 days later, the White House is talking stimulus.
Bachmann’s comments need to be looked at in what she is advocating … lower corporate taxes.
So, let’s talk about corporate taxes.
One of the common statements made when people defend the deficit is that it needs to be evaluated in terms of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
In 1965, U.S. corporate income taxes were 4.0% of our GDP, compared to 2.4% of GDP in the other Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. But by 2004 (the last year for which there is complete OECD data), U.S. corporate taxes had fallen to only 1.9% of our GDP, compared to 3.2% of other OECD countries.
In fact, America is number #27 out of 29 countries.
But maybe you get what you pay for.
Look at how America stacks up against other countries in Math, Reading and Science on this chart. Oh, wait … America didn’t crack the top 25. Overall, Finland would be number 1 … and on the corporate tax chart, Finland is #4. OK, so you say that Finland is a small country. Well, consider our neighbor to the north, Canada … # 4 in Reading, #7 in Math, and # 3 in Science … for corporate taxes, they are #11. Canada is now the largest foreign supplier of oil to the US to the tune of some 2.25 million barrels of oil a day … so I suppose that when we buy Canadian oil, the oil company pays corporate income tax to Canada, and the Canadian government educates their children … who in time, with their more educated workforce will take our jobs. There is something wrong with this picture.
But Bachmann is not only focused on corporate taxes, but also income taxes … if you read my commentary on her plan, you will quickly know who wins and who loses.
My comment compared corporate taxes to GDP. The chart listing America at number 2 with a tax rate of 39.3% is based on Statutory Corporate Income Tax Rate. It doesn’t matter what the rate is, it matters how much is paid. As this report documents, American corporations have a variety of subsidies and tax breaks that allow them to pay no income taxes. The Study was of the 2001-2003 taxation of 275 of the Fortune 500 companies. The Study reports, for example, that "Eighty-two of the 275 companies, almost a third of the total, paid zero or less in federal income taxes in at least one year from 2001 to 2003."; and that "Twenty-eight corporations enjoyed negative federal income tax rates over the entire 2001-2003 period." That’s why it is comical that anyone even suggest cutting the corporate tax rate.
In Robert Carroll’s Fiscal Stimulus: Missing the Big Picture? article that you cited, made some good observations :
Disagreement over the "best" approach usually translates into an actual stimulus package that is enacted long after it might have been useful. Moreover, stimulus packages often become bloated with profligate spending and tax provisions, which may be needed to move a package through the political process but do little to address the economic weakness.
Monetary policy is typically viewed by economists as the better approach for providing short-run stimulus.
I view Carroll’s recommendation as doing just that … using the cover of a recession to enact lower corporate tax rates. The Fed could accomplish quicker action by cutting interest rates by a full point … the lower rates would ease the stock market while cutting mortgage rates … and wasn’t the problem really started with the sub-prime mortgage crisis.
Soon to be President McCain needs to beat Giuliani in Florida. Rudy’s message has been tax cuts. I believe that Fred Thompson was first out of the gate in November advocating cutting the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to no more than 27 percent. Then in December Rudy announced his plan to cut it to 25% … so what else was McCain supposed to do but follow the leader.
Who will keep em honest ? Maybe Grover Norquist. Americans for Tax Reform put out this chart and they are not buying McCain. ATR also offers these examples of his voting record.
Let’s face it, McCain is known more addressing government waste, not cutting taxes. In fact, he has spoken favorably on the Flat Tax but acknowledges “given the way our taxes are structured” it ain’t gonna happen.
IF McCain does become President, I don’t think that he would push for a corporate tax cut without a spending cut … and with the impending Medicare and Social Security funding requirement, I do not see that happening.
Post a Comment
<< Home