More Deception from The Neocon Echo Chamber on Tax Cuts

By Robert Abston | March 20, 2011
Crosspost:  http://twincities.indymedia.org

Financial oligarchs: Paulson, Bernanke, Geithner, both rich and shills for the rich.

Demand creates jobs, not taxcuts. Look at the evidence. During the Eisenhower administration the tax rate on incomes over $300,000 was 91%.  The nation was prospering. Middle class families were able to find jobs and buy new homes. Workers were protected by unions. Incomes and the standard of living were rising.  Kennedy cut taxes on the wealthiest Americans in 1963 to 77%.  Reagan cut taxes on the wealthiest Americans to 50% in 1982 and to 38.5% in 1987.  Bush cut taxes on the wealthiest Americans in 2003 to 35%.  If tax cuts created jobs, the Bush administration would have ended with the fullest American employment in history. Instead, by 2008, America experienced the most severe economic crisis since the Great Depression.

FIX America! by PLAN AmericaIn an upcoming book from the Progressive Leadership Action Network (PLAN) entitled FIX America!How Each of Us Can Help All of Us., I explain how speculation, not the Community Rehabilitation Act of 1977, caused the Republican Depression of 2008. When government gives tax cuts to wealthy people, they look for ways to maximize profits. The wealthy already have plenty of material possessions. There are only so many cars and homes a wealthy family can use. Even John McCain needs only 9 houses. Giving him a tax cut does not mean that he will buy house number 10. Wealthy people want more return on investment, not more material possessions.

Neocons want you to believe that the wealthy will plow this new-found cash from tax cuts into creating jobs. There is a major problem with this theory. Creating jobs when there is no demand will reduce profits, not maximize them. Creating jobs when there is no demand creates excess inventory. Excess inventory leads to lower prices and higher costs from additional warehousing expenses. Lower prices and higher costs means lower profits. This is not rocket science.

Wealthy Americans need the rest of to work harder for less money so they will have more money to gamble with.  That is why the Koch Brothers, David and Charles, and their friends are spending millions of our dollars  to help people like Scott Walker in Wisconsin and John Kasich in Ohio get elected. Scott Walker and John Kasich promised to make the rest of us work harder to that the Koch Brothers could get more tax breaks. The Koch Brothers and their friends need more money to gamble with. Unfortunately, the less money we earn, the less money we have to go shopping or spend on repairing our homes. Less shopping and spending means less demand. Less demand means less production and less production means less jobs. It may start to become apparent that tax cuts do not create jobs. In fact, tax cuts cost jobs.

If it is apparent that tax cuts cost jobs, why do so many people believe that tax cuts create jobs? This is work of the neocon echo chamber. It is often referred to as the rightwing echo chamber, but that is a misnomer. It is a misnomer because neocons are doing the wrong things, not the right ones.

That is why it is called an echo chamber. Now you  the whole story about deception from the neocon echo chamber on tax cuts. Now you also know why over a hundred thousand workers are marching in Wisconsin.

is a software/Web Developer with a passion for political activism and social justice. After a successful 28 year career in the computer field and a 10 year career as a carptenter, he has dedicated his continued efforts to leaving the world a better place for his children and grandchildren.Back

Libya presents a dilemma to many on the left

Bertil Videt

Is the military action against Libya necessary and helpful in order to stop Gaddafi’s regime’s onslaught on its opponents or is it an imperialist aggression driven by strategical self-interest, which only will make things worse for the Libyan people? The international left is split on this question. And the question is truly complex and cannot be answered by ready made slogans about always being opposed to imperialist aggressions or unconditional support to the rebels. A serious response must be based on a concrete assessment of the situation in Libya, and not on abstract principles or revolutionary rhetoric.

This weekend the bombs started falling over Libya, after the UN Security Council gave green light for imposing a no-fly zone.

The double standards of the West are conspicuous. How can we trust leaders who defended Mubarak till the last and who still even refuse to condemn the Bahraini kingdoms’ use of lethal force against peaceful protesters in being genuinely moved by the human rights situation in Libya?

Equally, the responsibility of the West in creating the monster of Gaddafi is obvious. There have certainly been ups and downs in the relations between Tripoli and Western capitals reflected by the global power balance. But on the bottom line, it is true that Gaddafi has been supported and armed by the Western powers for decades.

Both these points make it clear that we should be extremely sceptical about the former colonial powers sudden manifestation of goodwill towards the Libyan people. But none of these points are, by themselves, arguments for opposing the no-fly zone over Libya.

Rejecting Western military intervention in Libya requires a better analysis of the risks and possible scenarios on the ground. And we do need to address some rather difficult objections – namely the fact that the leaders of the opposition forces have been calling for a no-fly zone and that we have to come with better alternatives than posting blogs of solidarity and anti-imperialism.

It is true that opposing military intervention puts the left in a difficult position, where we seem to be unwilling to deal with real life problems, and where our principles thus prevent us from saving lives. We have to come up with better answers than vague statements and long articles about solidarity with Libya and continued anti-imperialist struggle.

The risks of only making matters worse by a Western military intervention are high. Already on the first day of the attack, international media outlets report that citizens of Tripoli turned themselves against the attacks – and that more people rallied behind Gaddafi. There is no doubt that the colonel himself is using the attacks to represent himself as the defender of the nation against foreign ’barbaric crusaders’ and thus alienating the opposition forces. This will be further strengthened the moment that Western bombs hit the wrong target and cause substantial ’collateral damage’ – something that is bound to happen in the event of prolonged military actions.

Jim Hightower (2008)

JIM HIGHTOWER (born January 11, 1943) is an American syndicated columnist, populist activist and author. Born in Denison, Texas, Hightower came from a working class background. He worked his way through college as assistant general manager of the Denton Chamber of Commerce and later landed a spot as a management trainee for the State Department. He received a bachelor of arts in government from the University of North Texas and later did graduate work at Columbia University in New York City in international affairs.   In 1976, he returned to Texas to become the editor of the magazine The Texas Observer.

FILED UNDER: CORPORATE GREED, POLITICAL CORRUPTION, SUPREME COURT