“If any man tells you he loves America, yet hates labor, he is a liar. If any man tells you he trusts America, yet fears labor, he is a fool. All that harms labor is treason to America.”
Abraham Lincoln.
I am a democratic socialist, not a liberal. And I for one am delighted that a combination of labor activists, immigration advocates and the Occupy movement are planning a massive day of action and protest tomorrow across the US, in solidarity with those who constitute the 99% around the globe. It’s high time that “we, the people” in the U.S. reclaimed the date of the people’s holiday: May Day. Moving Labor Day was always about disassociating the left in the US from the international community, and thus weakening both. The Occupy movement in all its forms is about giving that 99% a great deal of its voice back. Thus Michael Kazin, a Georgetown professor, tells MoJo:
the closest historical precedent to Occupy is the anti-monopoly movement of the late 19th century, when socialists, anarchists, and populist reformers united to bust the trusts. Much as Occupy has embraced social media and live-streaming, the anti-monopolists published hundreds of independent newspapers. But, Kazin adds, they also worked to elect sympathetic politicians. “I think history teaches that when people to the left of liberals are able to advance is when you have people who at least talk about reform in power,” he says.
I think that’s exactly right. The Democratic party has taken the center-right position of the true conservative party in U.S. politics following the Republican pursuit of Le Pen style fringedom, leaving a yawning representation gap on the Left which a party built around the 99% movement might yet fill. Although I’d caution that this is not a short-term project: it is liable to take a couple of decades to put together an infrastructure in the U.S. capable of transforming a movement into a party capable of taking power in national elections and then governing effectively. But still, the movement has shown it has power to change the political narrative by “refocusing the national discussion on rising income inequality, exploding student debt, and fraudulent banking practices”. It has the Gordon Gekko, “greed is good”, elite attempting a PR about-face and trying to paint themselves as the prey instead of the predators. The movement is using the language of class war and it is working. Chris Hedges:
Hope in this age of bankrupt capitalism will come with the return of the language of class conflict. It does not mean we have to agree with Karl Marx, who advocated violence and whose worship of the state as a utopian mechanism led to another form of enslavement of the working class, but we have to speak in the vocabulary Marx employed. We have to grasp, as Marx did, that corporations are not concerned with the common good. They exploit, pollute, impoverish, repress, kill and lie to make money. They throw poor families out of homes, let the uninsured die, wage useless wars to make profits, poison and pollute the ecosystem, slash social assistance programs, gut public education, trash the global economy, loot the U.S. Treasury and crush all popular movements that seek justice for working men and women. They worship only money and power. And, as Marx knew, unfettered capitalism is a revolutionary force that consumes greater and greater numbers of human lives until it finally consumes itself. The nightmare in the Gulf of Mexico is the perfect metaphor for the corporate state. It is the same nightmare seen in postindustrial pockets from the old mill towns in New England to the abandoned steel mills in Ohio. It is a nightmare that Iraqis, Pakistanis and Afghans, mourning their dead, live each day.
Capitalism was once viewed in America as a system that had to be fought. But capitalism is no longer challenged. And so, even as Wall Street steals billions of taxpayer dollars and the Gulf of Mexico is turned into a toxic swamp, we do not know what to do or say. We decry the excesses of capitalism without demanding a dismantling of the corporate state. The liberal class has a misguided loyalty, illustrated by environmental groups that have refused to excoriate the Obama White House over the ecological catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico. Liberals bow before a Democratic Party that ignores them and does the bidding of corporations. The reflexive deference to the Democrats by the liberal class is the result of cowardice and fear. It is also the result of an infantile understanding of the mechanisms of power. The divide is not between Republican and Democrat. It is a divide between the corporate state and the citizen. It is a divide between capitalists and workers. And, for all the failings of the communists, they got it.
…The liberal class prefers comfort to confrontation. It will not challenge the decaying structures of the corporate state. It is intolerant within its ranks of those who do. It clings pathetically to the carcass of the Obama presidency. It has been exposed as a dead force in American politics. We must find our way back to the old radicals, to the discredited Marxists, socialists and anarchists, including Dwight Macdonald and Dorothy Day. Language is our first step toward salvation. We cannot fight what we cannot describe.
Remember, the rich have eaten all the pie – there’s none left for you poor schmucks who want to believe being Middle Class makes you speshul, not just another dying breed. If that’s not class war, I don’t know what is.
I’ll end with a clarion call and a warning from Stephen King (H/t Suzie):
I guess some of this mad right-wing love comes from the idea that in America, anyone can become a Rich Guy if he just works hard and saves his pennies. Mitt Romney has said, in effect, ”œI’m rich and I don’t apologize for it.” Nobody wants you to, Mitt. What some of us want””those who aren’t blinded by a lot of bullshit persiflage thrown up to mask the idea that rich folks want to keep their damn money””is for you to acknowledge that you couldn’t have made it in America without America. That you were fortunate enough to be born in a country where upward mobility is possible (a subject upon which Barack Obama can speak with the authority of experience), but where the channels making such upward mobility possible are being increasingly clogged. That it’s not fair to ask the middle class to assume a disproportionate amount of the tax burden. Not fair? It’s un-f”“king-American, is what it is. I don’t want you to apologize for being rich; I want you to acknowledge that in America, we all should have to pay our fair share. That our civics classes never taught us that being American means that””sorry, kiddies””you’re on your own. That those who have received much must be obligated to pay””not to give, not to ”œcut a check and shut up,” in Gov. Christie’s words, but to pay””in the same proportion. That’s called stepping up and not whining about it. That’s called patriotism, a word the Tea Partiers love to throw around as long as it doesn’t cost their beloved rich folks any money.
This has to happen if America is to remain strong and true to its ideals. It’s a practical necessity and a moral imperative. Last year, during the Occupy movement, the conservatives who oppose tax equality saw the first real ripples of discontent. Their response was either Marie Antoinette (”œLet them eat cake”) or Ebeneezer Scrooge (”œAre there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?”). Short-sighted, gentlemen. Very short-sighted. If this situation isn’t fairly addressed, last year’s protests will just be the beginning. Scrooge changed his tune after the ghosts visited him. Marie Antoinette, on the other hand, lost her head.
Think about it.
Solidarinosc!
…real history, don’t think (much less critically), and have no idea of what principles, ideas, economics, or ideals the U.S. was really founded upon.
I’m not sure the present spawn even understand what they actually believe in; so used to following the latest garbage of their resident demigods.
America today reminds me of a helium balloon cut loose from it’s moorings and I fear the same end.
Oh, as hopeless as it is I’ll never shut up; fool that I am to the end.
Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them,and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows,or with both~FDouglas
Stephen King is a long time favorite (no matter what he writes.)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/01/may-day-history-international-workers-day
Mayday was indeed a pagan celebraton. When I was a kid (pre Cold War) we celebrated it with a maypole and various festivities.
Ages 6-10 learned some foreign folk dance in costume; the 11-year-olds got the maypole.
Then it became associated with communism, which was frowned on at the time. I suspect the local churches also disliked the pagan origins.
One year my class did a particularly good Highland Fling and was invited to perform at half-time during the High School homecoming football game.
There on the 50-yard line, with the whole county (and half the next county) watching, my kilt came unpinned.
No wonder I turned out like I did.
It is worth remembering that the Founding Fathers were all traitors.
must be fun lol I remember dancing around the maypole wearing flower crowns, my mind thinks of that first before celebrating labor.
Always keep an open mind and a compassionate heart. ~ Phil Jackson
I’m from Maine and I grew up reading every book the man published. I love his books, but he says “pay in the same proportion”. Um, half of this country pays no taxes. The upper crust pay more than everybody else below them. How is this model not having people pay in the same proportion? After the very rich get dragged through to coals I can’t help but think I’m next.
I know the argument will be capitol gains taxes being low, but the middle and lower class can invest too. I make shit, but I’m trying to make my money grow. It’s not limited to the ultra rich. When I hear somebody wants to take away money I earned through risking my own savings that was already taxed it makes me kinda pissed. When I’m in a project and some dude comes to the door with a mouth full of gold teeth I have a real hard time accepting that my taxes are being spent on worthwhile causes.
By Paul Buchheit, May 3
We hear these claims often, even though they’re entirely false. An analysis of the facts should make that clear.
The Rich Pay Almost All the Taxes
That’s simply not true. The percentage of total taxes paid by the very rich (the top 1%) is approximately the same as the percentage paid by middle class Americans (the 4th quintile, average income $68,700). Here are the details:
Internal Revenue Service figures show that the very rich paid 23% of their incomes in federal income taxes in 2006. The middle class paid about 8% [!!!!!] of their incomes in federal income taxes. Based on U.S. Congressional Budget Office figures, the very rich pay just under 2% of their incomes toward social security, while the middle class pays just under 10%. According to a study by The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, the very rich pay about 7% of their incomes in state and sales and property and excise taxes, while the middle class pays approximately 10%. Another year of Bush tax cuts will reduce the taxes of the very rich by at least 3% more than the middle class.
So total taxes for the very rich are 29% of their incomes (23% + 2% + 7% – 3%). Total taxes for the middle class are 28% of their incomes (8% + 10% + 10%). These figures agree with CTJ’s 2011 estimate of total taxes paid.
[...Not counting what the rich can hide, which can be substantial...]
At very high income levels, beginning at about the million dollar range, federal income tax actually becomes regressive. Effective tax rates level off at about 25%, and then go down from there. This is because all incomes over $388,000 are subject to the same 35% maximum. The $4 billion hedge fund manager pays no more, percentagewise, than the $400,000 doctor. In fact, even less. At the highest levels most of the income comes from capital gains, which are taxed at 15%.
How about corporations? Even worse. They paid only 12.1% in 2011, dramatically lower than the 25% average since 1987. According to U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) figures, they’re paying about a THIRD of the inflation-adjusted share of GDP paid by corporations in the 1960s.
What is wrong with 15% taxes on money that has already been taxed once? At what point is it too much?
If taxes increase on my investments it hurts me directly.
The NY Times figure our debt http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/02/04/business/20090205-bailout-totals-graphic.html from the bailouts. 1.6 trillion dollars.
If we use US census data then it would mean that every person living in poverty could have a check of $34,000 and change. It means a family of 2 living in poverty could get 68K in US dollars if the money went directly to those in need. That’s 20K more than my wife and I make combined. If the government was efficient in handing our money then there would be nobody living in poverty. The can’t do it efficiently so the money we pay to the government gets taxed one more time before it goes toward helping anybody.
That money hasn’t been taxed already. It’s the gain on the sale of assets held for one year or more that is taxed at 15%.
The national debt is nearly 16 trillion dollars, which translates to a bit more than $ 50,000 / citizen and about $140,000/taxpayer. I don’t like it any more than you do.
I agree that the bailout money could have been much better spent – but that’s the price of having the best government money can buy. For the people who’ve bought it, anyway. Too bad it’s not a goal of the government to eradicate poverty – it’d be a better place all around.
…that it’s the impact on oneself that everyone finds so upsetting about their taxes. Well, I find that not taxing my investments at a sufficient rate hurts everyone else and frankly, that hurts me – it just isn’t so visible.
I’m not much of an economist, but it does seem to me that a decent proportion of the capital gains increase that one nets in ones investments these days is not due to inherent increase in productivity or anything that we would view as particularly good, but is instead a result of the cheap money out there, due to international monetary policy. I find it difficult to believe that 15% should be a sacred cow when what we’re really talking about here is that people are finding it easier to find a bigger sucker (i.e., someone willing and able to pay an inflated price for a given asset). That rather strikes me as seeking to defend extraction that is being paid for by others.
“Everything around you that you call life was made up by people that were no smarter than you and you can change it, you can influence it, you can build your own things that other people can use.” ~ Steve Jobs
there is no reason why tax impacts should not be viewed on a personal level. Tax credits to people who pay nothing are considered that way as well. You don’t think that somebody that gets earned income tax credit, resulting in a net gain on what they paid in, isn’t motivated by that free money they are able to get through the work of others? I doubt it.
Not taxing your investments at a sufficient rate hurts others? How? Taxing you at a higher rate certainly helps them, but I fail to see how not taxing them at a sufficient rate hurts them. It sounds like you believe they are entitled to some of that money.
You need to expand on the whole idea of your second paragraph before I can even respond. I don’t really know what you’re getting at. I don’t understand what you’re saying when you say international monetary policy is impacting my investments in a way that is somehow morally wrong.
As I’ve said before I love giving money to people that need it. I love volunteering. I just don’t see how the government taking my money, absorbing most of it, then handing it out to others is anything other than a feel-good hoax being perpetuated by our elected officials.
the best government money can buy is spending us into the hole. Guess the best government money can buy is too expensive for us.
I think we’d be better off buying the best government we can afford.
…this in terms of entitlement (i.e., who deserves what) – it’s pretty much guaranteed not to lead to clear thinking. Bottom line, what do I want from paying taxes? I want a well-functioning society that makes efficient and effective use of its material and human resources while providing a base for expression. Why do I want this? Well, partly I’ve been culturally conditioned to want it, partly I think it’s intrinsically the right thing to do and partly in past parts of my life I’ve spent a lot of time in societies that didn’t work that way and I found them unpleasant in many, many ways. In any case, I’ve seen enough of the world to know that that the sort of stuff I want for the society I live in doesn’t just happen – it requires some degree of resourced hierarchy to produce it.
It’s good that you mention charitable giving and volunteering. I’m very big on them (in fact, my professional work centres on helping organizations get better at encouraging, stewarding and making effective use of these contributions). The challenge with giving and volunteering is that there are areas where they do not tend to be sufficient (or particularly effective) in supporting the goal expressed above. We don’t run our physical infrastructure – sewers, roads, transit – on donated money and contributed time. It just doesn’t work. Even when we get to social infrastructure – medical care, education, social services – although free contributions are key inputs, they don’t tend to be enough to entirely support the endeavour. In order for that stuff to happen, we have to be able to draw on resources from other sources. Up here in Canada, that source is overwhelmingly government – down in the States, government still plays a central role but is significantly augmented by the market (i.e., fee for service). When I compare the effectiveness of the two systems in delivering on the goal set forth, I tend to think that our model significantly outperforms yours, but the bottom line is that revenues from taxation play central roles in both systems.
As to my second paragraph, look at it this way: what is my house worth? Simple answer: it’s worth whatever someone else is willing to pay for it. What determines what someone else is willing to pay for it? Tougher question, but one of the few things that I know is that what they are willing to pay for it is bounded by what they can afford to pay. If money is cheap (i.e., if the costs of servicing debt are low), then they can obtain more money (i.e., they can take out a larger mortgage) and pay a higher price.
Debt costs are low right now because of international monetary policy, meaning that prices for real estate in my market are quite high. In the ten years I have held my house, its value has more than doubled – was it because I made it more inherently productive? because I engaged in some productive economic activity? To some extent, but not really. In large part I was just the dumb SOB holding the thing at the right time. Do I think that I should be entitled to the same economic benefit from any sale as was applicable at other times in other circumstances? Not when it comes at the expense of my foundational goal in paying taxes.
No matter how much money I save from lower taxation, I won’t be able to buy the type of society I want just for myself. I have to help “buy” it for everyone – with others sharing in the costs and benefits. The only trade off that we have to make is that there can’t be much in the way of free riding if things are to function effectively.
“Everything around you that you call life was made up by people that were no smarter than you and you can change it, you can influence it, you can build your own things that other people can use.” ~ Steve Jobs
was very well said.
I also think you’re right that I need to stop framing it terms of entitlement. I should actually frame it in terms of efficiency. I think our government has more than enough money to do what it needs to do, but it’s so inefficient that it always needs more.
How I wish you’d go back to diary writing…