An Experiment in Progressivism

This one has the advantage of being live and current. The Progressive-Democratic Party has extended its control over the State of California.  The results accumulating from the several years of Progressive-Democratic dominance (now outright control) are these.  California has

  • the highest welfare numbers (a third of all Americans on welfare live in California)
  • the largest contingent of illegal immigrants
  • a burgeoning homeless population
  • onerous regulations on business and private property
  • mediocre public schools
  • high income taxes (the highest marginal rate is 13.3%) and sales taxes
  • a yawning gap between rich and poor
  • its own summer blend of expensive gasoline
  • bedraggled and crowded roads
  • a widely mocked high-speed rail boondoggle

Sadly, it doesn’t get any better than that for California.  Or for our United States if the Progressive-Democratic Party makes further gains in 2020 or beyond.

French Tax, Tax, Tax

Now the French have decided to add another tax on American multinationals—a 3% “digital-services” tax on companies that do “targeted advertising or run[] a digital marketplace,” a tax aimed in particularly at Alphabet’s Google and Amazon.com.

Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire:

These giants use your personal data and make a significant profit from it, without paying their fair share of tax[.]

This, though, is a conflation of two separate issues, cynically done in order to obfuscate the French government’s drive for ever higher taxes and never lower spending.  It may well be that “these giants” take advantage of personal data for the sake of profit.  Whether that particular profit should be taxed especially, though, is a tax matter, not a data use/abuse matter.  Especially coming, as it does, against the backdrop of the government’s men continuing to decline to say how much is companies’ (or rich folks’, come to that) fair share.

Tax the Rich

Of course, tax the rich, but tax everyone else, too.  The latest get (the) rich quick scheme, this one offered by Alan Davis, The Leonard and Sophie Davis Fund President and ex-founder and CEO of Conservatree Paper Company, though, falls into the same trap that all the other Progressive-Democrat schemes—Senator Elizabeth Warren’s (D, MA) wealth tax, Senator Bernie Sanders’ (I, VT) estate tax expansion, and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ (D, NY) 70% marginal tax—do.  What Davis is proposing is

a 10% surtax on the earnings (including both income and capital gains) of the top 0.1% of taxpayers

That’s the sucker trap.  Not singling out the rich for extra taxing, but maintaining the special treatment of capital gains, other than within his surtax.

Why should capital gains—or debt interest or any other form of income, or expense—get special treatment?  That’s just the social engineering distortion of our tax code that’s so badly counterproductive for our economy.

In 2007, the last year before the Panic of 2008, from which we’ve only begun a serious recovery over the last couple of years, we Americans earned $17.8 trillion dollars from all sources: wages and salaries, interest payments, dividends and capital gains, gambling earnings, pass-throughs from small businesses, and so on, and we paid, in aggregate, $1.15 trillion dollars in taxes on that income.

Of those taxes, the top 10% of us paid 70% while the bottom 50% of us paid little to nothing.

Take the social engineering out of our tax code.  Charge a flat 10% tax on all income regardless of source, and charge it to all who have income.  Americans will spend their money where they deem fit, not where Government dictates, and businesses will allocate their money according to sound business decision, not according to Government “desires.”

That will suitably tax the rich, as well as all of us.

Set our economy free.

Tax, Tax, Tax

The Progressive-Democrats want more.  It’s almost like an OPM addiction.

Now they’ve proposed the Wall Street Tax Act of 2019, which is intended to charge traders and investors a price for the privilege (apparently) of investing in economic products.  Their bill would

impose a tax on the purchase of most securities—including stocks and bonds—and on transactions involving derivatives. The tax would be about 0.1% of the value of the security or 0.1% of all payments made under the terms of a derivative contract.

Because Progressive-Democrats just can’t get enough of our money.

And this from Senator Brian Schatz (D, HI) who intends to introduce a similar bill in the Senate, citing the need to discourage “risky, volume-based trading.”

Because Progressive-Democrats Know Better than us petty citizens how to invest or trade.

Cutting spending, on the other hand, is utterly inconceivable to Progressive-Democrats.  After all, they also know how to spend our money better than we do.

“Goosed” Paychecks

Senator Ron Wyden (D, OR), Finance Committee Ranking Member, had this bit:

It looks like the Trump Treasury Department spent 2018, an election year, goosing people’s paychecks by under-withholding, and it should have been obvious that the bill would come due eventually[.]

Never mind that the IRS also warned taxpayers—and their employers—to carefully check their existing withholding arrangements, especially in this period of large changes to the tax code.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D, NY) was just as disingenuous:

Many Americans depend on their tax refund to pay bills and make ends meet….

Never mind that large tax refunds, far from being a savings account (that pays even less interest than a bank savings account), is an interest free loan to the government.  Leave it to a Progressive-Democrat, with his constant demands for OPM, to insist that this interest free loan to Government of a citizen’s money is entirely appropriate.

Keep in mind, too, that these are the same politicians who will work to prevent the tax reform’s current personal income tax cuts from becoming permanent.  Because the money in those paychecks isn’t the citizen’s; it belongs to Government.

Goosed paychecks?  Those could be permanently increased paychecks—because of the so far lowered income tax rates—but for those Progressive-Democrats.