Feb 2, 2011

Republicans want only the middle class and the working poor to sacrifice


The “shared sacrifice” new Gov. Rick “Chief Executive Outsourcer” Snyder talks about and budget cuts national Republicans want will only come from the middle class and the working poor.

National Republicans will continue the polices that are making the U.S. a banana republic and ushering in a new “Gilded Age,” and Snyder wants to kill the Michigan Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), the most effective anti-poverty tool ever invented.

The richest 1 percent of Americans now take home almost 24 percent of income, up from almost 9 percent in 1976. In 1965 the average CEO was earning 24 times what the average worker was making. But by 2001 the C.E.O.’s of the largest American companies earned an average of 531 times as much as the average worker.

Despite that huge gap that continues to grow, Republicans forced an extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for the richest 2 percent in exchange for a 13-month extension of unemployment insurance benefits for people just trying to survive. That move will add more than $36 billon to the federal budget deficit.

In Michigan, while giving his cabinet large raises, Snyder proposed killing Michigan’s Earned Income Tax Credit for working people.

The Michigan EITC is a refundable tax credit given to working families. People apply for it when they fill out their state income tax forms. All families who are eligible for the federal credit are eligible for the state credit. The tax credit puts money into the pockets of hundreds of thousands of Michigan working families. The EITC brought $338 million into local communities throughout Michigan last year. That’s money spent directly into the local community on goods and services, not invested in offshore ventures.

“The Michigan Earned Income Tax Credit is a successful anti-poverty tool that helps low- and moderate-income families and small businesses in Michigan,” said Gilda Z. Jacobs, the President and CEO of the Michigan League for Human Services. “Eliminating this credit amounts to a tax increase on our most vulnerable families and will tax working people into poverty.”

The Michigan EITC is based on the federal EITC created by Republicans President Gerald Ford and expanded by Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George HW Bush. In fact, patron saint Reagan called the EITC “the best anti-poverty, the best pro-family, the best job creation measure to come out of Congress.”

In Michigan, the EITC went into effect for Tax Year 2008, and, ironically, the bill creating it was sponsored by one of the most rightwing lawmakers, former Sen. Nancy Cassis, R-Novi.

“As this debate continues, let’s remember the faces of those in our economy who are helped by this tool: janitors, housekeepers, restaurant workers, daycare and home health aides, cashiers and retail clerks,” Jacobs said. “These are the very people who often are in charge of our loved ones, or who make our days easier.”

14 comments:

Not Anonymous said...

So let me get this straight. The EITC is money refunded (or given) to lower income families that put the money back into the economy. "The tax credit puts money into the pockets of hundreds of thousands of Michigan working families. The EITC brought $338 million into local communities throughout Michigan last year. That’s money spent directly into the local community on goods and services, not invested in offshore ventures."

But you don't apply the same principle to tax cuts? Yet, tax cuts, are money that is left with the taxpayer and not turned over to the government and you don't think that money goes back into the economy?

I guess people that have money don't buy food (probably more of it and fancier food to boot), don't buy clothes (again, more expensive clothes, or designer clothes), cars (more expensive cars and more than one), houses, pay more for heat, electricity (because their houses are usually bigger) and so on. Yet, each of those items and more are putting more money into the economy.

Since you're in favor of the EITC and the money going back to the people, it follows that you think the ones that don't earn as much can do better with their money than the governement can, yet you don't think those that earn more money can do better with their money than the government. Yet, the rich have taken their money, and turned it into more money, while the government only has programs that operate in the red.

And you still probably don't see the flaw in your postion.

I don't begrudge anyone for earning money and if they earn more than someone else, I don't consider them evil. I consider them prosperous where those that don't try to add to their income are not trying to turn their cash into larger amounts of cash.

The facts are that lower taxes creates more revenue for the wage earner as well as the government. President Kennedy realized this as has President Reagan, and President Geo. W. Bush.

There are two ways to look at the "deal". Democrats gave the Republicans the tax cut extension in exchange for an extension on unemployment or the Republicans gave the Democrats the unemployment extension in exchange for the tax cut extension. One way it's the Republicans fault the other way it's the Democrats.

But if you forget about playing the blame game, what actually happened is that the American people did not a huge tax increase, and those that have suffered through this recession the past two years and still don't have a job still are able to collect unemployment while we try to get jobs back and running.

Everyone agreed that raising taxes would only expand the recession, which means less revenue (because of less earnings and less personal expenditures).

There is nothing wrong with investing. Investing creates more tax revenue through capital gains taxes.

Imagine if we'd have gotten that tax increase. Investors would have pulled their money out of investments to take their profits and they wouldn't have put as much back in which would further hinder job growth.

Sorry, I know this stuff is way over your head.

Communications guru said...

So let me get this straight; you don’t know what the EITC is or does, but you’re going to comment anyway? That’s typical of you.

Who said I didn’t support tax cuts? Like I said many times, I support middle class tax cuts because that money is actually injected into the local economy; tax cuts for the rich are not. Perhaps you missed the point about the gap between the middle class, what’s left of it, and the rich?

Funny; with all this snow falling; I wonder how they are paying for all of the snow plows and road salt?

“The government only has programs that operate in the red?” Bullshit. Medicare is the most popular and efficient of any health care insurance program in the U.S., and to quote the Trustees of the SS and Medicare Trust Fund, “The outlook for Medicare has improved substantially because of program changes made in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.”

As for SS, if Congress makes no changes at all, SS is projected to deliver full guaranteed benefits until at least 2037. Even after 2037, again without any changes, the trust funds will continue to pay 78 percent of benefits for decades into the future. But the fact is the fixes are pretty simple, but that’s beside the point.

“The facts are that lower taxes creates (sic) more revenue for the wage earner as well as the government. President Kennedy realized this as has President Reagan, and President Geo. W. Bush.” Then why is it that tax rates were higher under them when we had a thriving middle class?

Once again, anonymous coward, I am still waiting for you to back up your outrageous lie that we were “nearly shoulder to shoulder once.”

brad said...

KevHead you have a lot of statements back, but no official websites stating your quotes to back them up. Medicare is in the red, Medicaid is in the red, SS is in the red (that means they are spending more than they take in just to let you know).

So you dont like supply side economics unless it relates to the middle class only? This is why your priorities and logic is messed up. Again, you start taxing the heck out of the wealthy and corps, who is going to pay for the increase in their taxes? Us the working man because their profits go down so they increase prices to make up for the losses. That is irrefutable. It happens everytime.

Communications guru said...

Hey BrHead, ever heard of Google? Right, I forgot. There is The National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (http://www.ncpssm.org and then there is the Trustees of the SS and Medicare Trust Fund, http://www.ssa.gov/

“Taxing the heck out of the wealthy and corps?” Please. Companies are sitting on huge profits. You need to actually read the post, or have some read it to you. Let me say it again,

The richest 1 percent of Americans now take home almost 24 percent of income, up from almost 9 percent in 1976. In 1965 the average CEO was earning 24 times what the average worker was making. But by 2001 the C.E.O.’s of the largest American companies earned an average of 531 times as much as the average worker.

The rich don’t need any more breaks; they continue to do much, much better than anyone else. It’s the middle class that is disappearing, and the working poor that are seeing their paychecks shrink. Nothing is tricking down.

brad said...

So tell me then, how is the left going to save the middle class? Because everything the right does you think destroys it. So enlighten me, and if its good I will agree with it.

Also, side note: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3ctO7fdrcc&feature=player_embedded here are your violent liberals. Watch it all, this just happened at a code pink rally. calling for the lynching of Clarence Thomas and Fox News and Glenn Beck? Seriously your side is way worse, you do not EVER EVER EVER see that type of hate at any Tea Party rally or anything like that ever.

Communications guru said...

Really, have they been lynched, shot in the head, murdered in their church or blown up in a federal building?

Keep the EITC, for starters, which is what thisw post is actually about.

Johnny C said...

Right wingers commenting on things they don't know a thing about I'm shocked.

Again Brad if you're going to cite something use non-right wing sources.

brad said...

Words have consequences, thats a KevHead quote. People might take what they say literally and do it, even though it seems those people mean it.

Youtube is owned by Google a multi-billion dollar company that is very sympathetic to the liberals. Its on youtube and its Code Pink both yellow liberals, there you go Johnny C. What does that C stand for? Again with your put downs, that means you know you lost the argument.

Kevin, now focus here. I repeat: So tell me then, how is the left going to save the middle class? Because everything the right does you think destroys it. So enlighten me, and if its good I will agree with it. Because this article makes you seem hypocritical again, just clarify it for me as I know you superior intellect can do for us small minded people.

Communications guru said...

First, there is no such person as “KevHead,” BrHead. But that is correct; words have consequences, even though Palin still refuses to accept responsibility. That’s why I never put out violent rhetoric like teabaggers constantly do.

Like I said before, I know of no right-wingers that have been lynched, shot in the head, murdered in their church or blown up in a federal building because of violent rhetoric by a liberal?

I repeat: Keep the EITC, for starters, which is what this post is actually about. Glad to see you have access to a dictionary, and that you can spell hypocritical. Next time, look up the meaning because it doesn’t fit me or the post. As for “superior intellect.” Being smarter than the likes of you is no great shakes.

brad said...

If you have a head and your name is Kevin, you are KevHead.

Palin does not have to accept responsiblity for anything. Now you have changed your tune, you are completely blaming her. Thats really great news, you found someone to go after because she probably could out debate the "Great One" and has more experience still at running something than he.

There is no link to Palin or any other person to why that guy shot GG. Even level headed liberals on your side concur with that statement, you are just going off the deep end for deependedness sakes.

As for your other statements " Like I said before, I know of no right-wingers that have been lynched, shot in the head, murdered in their church or blown up in a federal building because of violent rhetoric by a liberal?" Here you go, whats curious about the lefts current obsession with Timothy McVeigh is that it proves that -- despite a frantic search for 15 years -- liberals have come across no better evidence of burgeoning "right-wing extremist" violence than a drug-taking, self-described "agnostic" who was thrown out of the Michigan Militia and who proclaimed, "Science is my religion." That sounds more like Bill Maher than Rush Limbaugh. Brilliant, thanks KevHead. One more Federal Building note, the guy flying his plane into the IRS buidling, Democrat. The Professor shooting up the school down in Alabama, liberal.

So please Kevin KevHead you preach hypocrisy but dont condone your own. On that note, keep on blogging your hate filled spew, because all it does is rile up your guys and doesnt do anything to help anyone out.

Communications guru said...

That, fine, but don’t expect a response in the future if you stick to that crap.

Of course “Palin does not have to accept responsibility for anything,” but she’s nothing but a talking head, not a leader. I’m not “changing my tune.” Her irresponsible, violent rhetoric may have led to the deaths of six people. Even Congresswoman Giffords expressed concern over Barbie’s hateful rhetoric before she was shot.

I don’t know who the "Great One" is but if you are referring to President Obama that is just ridiculous. This woman must have flunked Americans history; no wonder she went to multiple colleges before she got a degree.

“The lefts (sic) current obsession with Timothy McVeigh?” Like I said when the teabaggers first reared their ugly head in 2009, I heard the same anti-government bullshit I heard in 1994-95. The militia disappeared after McVeigh, but they have become mainstream again thanks to the teabaggers.

“One more Federal Building note,” the guy flying his plane into the IRS building, listened to anti-government bullshit and how paying taxes is stealing.

Again, there is no hypocrisy on my part, BrHead. I will keep on blogging, but there is no spewing or hateful rants. I will continue to point out the lies and hypocrisy of the teabaggers and Republicans. I hope it does “rile up my guys,” but the difference is Democrats are not violent cowards like tea baggers.

Johnny C said...

Brad,
It doesn't matter who owns Youtube because the videos on Youtube are user created, so excuse me if I refuse to watch a video created by another right wing ass hat.

And if you're trying to claim Tim McVeigh was a liberal then Brad you are truly misinform right wing turd. The only times you hear this anti-government bullshit is when Democrats are in charge.

The right wing has created this violent environment since President Obama became president. Death threats to the president has jumped up and threats to elected officials mostly Democrats have also jumped up. You wanted examples I got a couple: The guy that got busted on his way to kill people at the ACLU and the Tides Foundation was Glenn Beck fanboy. The guy that killed those two cops in Pennsylvania was also a Glenn Beck fanboy, the Holocaust Museum shooter is a Glenn Beck fanboy and he went to the right wing website Free Republic and the guy that killed two people in a church claimed he wanted to kill people that was Bernie Goldberg's book but since he couldn't he picked a church he felt was liberal. And when the cops went to his house they found nothing but books written by Hannity, O'Reilly and Savage.

It's you guys on the right Brad that resort to violence when you encounter people that disagree with you.

brad said...

Wow this blog and some of the followers are getting more and more loco (that means crazy you might want to start learning spanish now as it will soon become our official language).

As has been pointed out to Kevin, the fearless blogger on here, there are a whole lot more violent liberals than conservatives. There are some on both sides, but he and now Johnny it seems refuse to believe that which I find laughable.

So every time there is a murder from now on, the murderer did it because of a certain political persuasion. Every time.

FYI the guy flying his plane into that IRS building voted for BHO and was a registered Democrat. And Johnny Utah, did I say McVeigh was a liberal? Man you must have learned to read in Michigan. Go reread that statment.

Kevski tries to make his case but has no proof on anything he has ever said about the violent right, all he has is assumption, acceptance, accepting, assuming, belief, conjecture, expectation, fancy, guess, hunch, hypothesis, inference, posit, postulate, postulation, premise, presumption, presupposition, shot in the dark, shot*, sneaking suspicion, stab, supposal, supposition, surmise, suspicion, theorization, theory.

Johnny C said...

Brad,

Because you read it on a right wing blog doesn't make it true.