Tuesday, October 19, 2010

'Robin Hood Tax' -- A Brilliant Idea

So the super-rich don't want to pay their fair share of taxes, huh? Must be true as evidenced by all the backroom shuffling and keep-your friggin'-hands-off-MY-money attitudes they exhibit when the topic comes up.

The fact that it isn't a tax increase (as they continue to whine) but a reimposition of a tax they skated out from under during the years of the Baby Doc Maladminstration and his lackeys in a Rethug-controlled congress -- these guys are the ones who put the sunset provision in the law to begin with -- doesn't matter, apparently. But the capitilast meat puppets of the right in congress did this, so now you ought to go into the boardrooms and onto the golf courses and badger them: "What the fuck did you think you were doing?!!!"

Okay, so here we are with a situation that, sadly, seems to have grown some legs with "low-information voters" (i.e., the Moron-American Voting Bloc") that it's somehow "not fair" that these fuckers have to pay their fair share all of a sudden (as if no one saw it coming).

Robert Naiman over at Truthout, has the story of US Rep Bob Filner (D-Naturally, from CA) who has come up with a terrific solution: Earmark all of the income from the super-rich tax "increase" to into a Veterans' Trust Fund to pay only for the care of veterans wounded in the Republican wars.

After all, they wanted them, they started them, they profited from them, but precious few of the children of the rich have actually had to pay any price in blood for it:

The logic of this proposal is straightforward. The wars create a long-term liability for the government, because the government is obligated to pay for the medical care of veterans for the rest of their lives. The same logic that says that we ought to worry about the long-term liability of the government to pay Social Security benefits says that we ought to worry about the long-term liability of the government to pay veterans' benefits. But in the case of Social Security, there is a dedicated tax and a dedicated trust fund. In the case of veterans' benefits, there is no dedicated tax and no dedicated trust fund. So, we ought to feel more urgency about veterans' benefits than about Social Security benefits, because no provision has been made for veterans' benefits at all.
Any bets on whether this proposal, elegant in its simplicity, is going to get any traction? Right now the chance is zero, and if the Rethugs take over in January, it will be less than zero.