I believe that individuals earning the most can afford to pay more, and I have no problem paying higher taxes to address some of the fundamental challenges and inequities in our society[.]
I’ll leave aside the illogic of Dimon’s implied obligation resultant from mere affordabity. What are Dimon’s fundamental challenges and inequities that want government intervention?
ensur[ing] that tax dollars are being put to the “most effective” use, like expanding the earned income tax credit, alongside other programs that support the people and communities who need it the most.
That’s what the Progressive-Democrats say we should do, especially when it comes to taxes. Here’s what the Swedish tax structure, that we’re supposed to emulate, looks like, pretty much straight from the horse’s mouth: Catherine Edwards, Europe Editor, for The Local, headquartered in Stockholm.
Property tax: virtually eliminated 10 years ago. Nationwide, property owners pay an annual tax of 0.75% of the property’s taxable value, capped at 7,412 kronor ($820).
Inheritance tax: abolished (not reduced to zero; this tax no longer exists) in 2005
Gift tax: abolished (not reduced to zero; this tax no longer exists) in 2005
Senator Bernie Sanders (I, VT), who caucuses with the Progressive-Democrats, has joined the Progressive-Democratic Party’s race to the bottom. The President wannabe has proposed his cynically named For the 99.8% Act, which is targeted explicitly against the 588 Americans he hates the most: the 588 most successful of us. His bill would deny these few Americans their ability to pass on the outcome of their success to their heirs, their families; his bill would overtly punish these most successful—and their families—for their success.
It’s a bill that’s borne of personal animosity and rank envy. It’s a bill that would
Americans seem to favor that, according to a Fox News poll released last Thursday and discussed onFox Business Online.
[T]here is broad support for increasing taxes on the wealthiest families. Voters support tax increases on families making over $10 million annually by a 46-point margin (70% favor-24% oppose), and support a hike on those making over $1 million by 36 points (65-29%).
There is less support for a broader tax increase: 44% favor raising rates on those with income over $250,000, and a small minority, 13%, approves of an increase on all Americans.
This is made blatantly, nakedly clear by New York City’s mayor, Bill de Blasio. In his State of the City speech last week, he laid bare the premier goal of the Progressive-Democratic Party, even above doing away with ICE and with our borders generally. He said—and he meant every word of it:
Here’s the truth. Brothers and sisters, there’s plenty of money in the world. There’s plenty of money in this city. It’s just in the wrong hands.
That’s what we can see made plain in the incoming Congress’ House of Representatives. Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman (D, NJ) had this on her Progressive-Democratic Party’s plans:
There are dozens of measures…that have been languishing with Republicans at the helm for years, and I expect to see many of them finally come to the floor under Democratic leadership[.]
Plans like rolling back the just enacted tax cuts and preventing the individual income tax cuts from becoming permanent. Because the Progressive-Democrats know more about how to spend our money than we do.
That’s the claim of ex-President Barack Obama’s (D) Council of Economic Advisers Chairman Jason Furman in a recent Wall Street Journalop-ed. It’s an accurate claim, too, when tax cuts are taken in isolation, as Furman took them throughout his piece. That loneliness was emphasized by his closing remarks.
Going forward, policy makers should aim for a reformed tax system that is more stable, economically efficient, simple, and directly supportive of the middle class. Do this right, and the results could be higher economic growth and higher wages without the higher deficits. That’s a combination that’s proved elusive to date.