“Bentsen: Look Bob. We shouldn’t be social engineering through the tax code.”
Seriously? We do that with text codes all the time.
Deductions for charitable contributions. Exemptions for churches. Different rates for filing as married versus single. Credits for child care. All of which, and thousands of others, are in there to try to encourage certain forms of behavior.
Nearly every tax rule is an attempt at some kind of social engineering.
The neoliberal paradigm so securely in place as the only lens through which to approach issues. Those folks couldn't see their way out of it. A Republican in-law asked me back then if I was happy to have a liberal, Clinton, in the White House, and I explained that Clinton wasn't at all liberal. The oligarchy empowered by Reagan hasn't budged. At least now there are progressives in Congress to stand for the true principles of the Democratic Party, but can they prevail and make a difference? I'm skeptical.
That is why progressives need to fight back against claims that we desire "wealth redistribution" when it's really "wealth recapture." CEOs didn't just suddenly find this money. And most progressives are not against someone being rich, even really rich. We're against UNEARNED wealth. We're against wealth that is taken from the improved productivity of employees, who were not organized enough to fight for what they deserved. We're against wealth that the rich and corporations have from purchasing favorable tax policies. We're against the wealth that now flows to the very top because the greatest Return On Investment one can gain is from buying an American politician.
Great story of how on relatively quick decision with very little thought or consideration of the impact of that decision can ripple out and affect us all for decades. And when you add the wealth gap to the unfortunate decision to allow money into politics virtually unchecked by the supreme court, you get greed and Trump. How do some people look themselves in the mirror each morning and not throw up?
Clinton was another grifter, just smarter than trump. We have him to thank for the unholy alliance called The Third Way, which is still pushing Banks/Wall St/corporate agenda and bills to this day, with the misguided idea that there is a center way and that is only possible if you have more than 2 parties. Not to mention The Telecommunications bill of 95 which enabled the likes of Fox News to exist. My theory is that every type of government is eventually overtaken by the greedy and corrupt no matter the original good intentions. We need to cap what one man can earn at a reasonable sum, otherwise they will surely try to own us all. We used to use the Anti Trust laws to protect citizens from these predators, just a joke now.
Why does this sound like an episode of West Wing? Because it is - in real life. It's too bad we didn't realize the harm Bill Clinton did until it was too late.
Bob, apropos of this discussion, did you see Marco Rubio's op-ed in The American Conservative, in which he called America's corporate elite Marxist cultural revolutionaries? Marco Rubio has gone completely off the rails. When he equates U.S. corporations with Marxists, I feel like I am traveling with Alice through Wonderland.
As long as money is considered to be "speech" and not "bribery", we will have politicians who care about us only on election day. The rest of their term will be spent licking the boots of the donor class.
Let Companies give their Execs what they want. But let's tax corporations and high earners, like during Eisenhower's time, at up to 90% at the top brackets. That's how ALL boats will rise with the tide.
What a great story, a window into how policies are manipulated to protect everyone but the masses. Must have been extraordinarily difficult to be Labor Secretary fighting for the American people when everyone else were doing back flips to protect corporations. The fight continues today but now we're seeing workers fight back.
Thank you belatedly for standing up for sensible policy, even if you didn't prevail. The decision you describe seems to be part of our culture of treating large corporations and their CEOs like gods who can do no wrong, and must always be catered to. And that corporations have some "fiduciary duty" to maximize their shareholders' wealth, including that of foreign shareholders, at the expense of every other consideration.
I have seen some evidence that another motivator for outrageously high executive compensation may have been the abolition of the highest marginal tax rates. The thought is that if increased compensation will push the executive into a higher tax bracket, then most of the extra pay would go to taxes, thereby disincentivizing CEOs from negotiating higher pay.
I started as a driver with UPS in 1976. At that time the CEO made about 25 times what a driver made. He was a wealthy man. Today if a driver worked 100 years he or she wouldn't come close to what the current CEO makes in a single year. The compensation of todays top executives is just crazy money. After a certain point it's just becomes numbers in a portfolio and doesn't enhance their living conditions. They already have more money then they could ever spend. It just creates mini dynasty's. Or maybe not so mini. It just takes vast sums of money out of the corporation and tax rolls that maybe their great grandkids might be able to spend. Back when I started at my company everyone made great money. Of course the higher you went the more you made but even low level management could retire multi millionaires with the stock (I knew a few of them) and drivers were the upper middle class. Not so today. This trend was even more apparent in other companies. The pie was still there but larger and larger slices were going to the top executives rather than being distributed down through the ranks. When you mention this there are shouts of socialism, usually from the people at the top, but if that's so were we a socialist nation back when things were divided more evenly? The foxes were guarding the henhouse, greed took over, and we are where we are today.
Good story Robert. The tax codes Are class warfare. The “Budget” IS social engineering. We Are a military warfare country. Endless wars = Endless profits. Today the military budget is more than anytime in US his-story. We are in a perfect storm. How can / do we raise consciousness and create healthier outcomes?
As a person that was downsized right out of a job after 22 years - I agree that Exec pay must not be controlled by stock prices - must be based on performance -not how many employer benefits can be cut or how many jobs can be shifted overseas
“Bentsen: Look Bob. We shouldn’t be social engineering through the tax code.”
Seriously? We do that with text codes all the time.
Deductions for charitable contributions. Exemptions for churches. Different rates for filing as married versus single. Credits for child care. All of which, and thousands of others, are in there to try to encourage certain forms of behavior.
Nearly every tax rule is an attempt at some kind of social engineering.
The neoliberal paradigm so securely in place as the only lens through which to approach issues. Those folks couldn't see their way out of it. A Republican in-law asked me back then if I was happy to have a liberal, Clinton, in the White House, and I explained that Clinton wasn't at all liberal. The oligarchy empowered by Reagan hasn't budged. At least now there are progressives in Congress to stand for the true principles of the Democratic Party, but can they prevail and make a difference? I'm skeptical.
That is why progressives need to fight back against claims that we desire "wealth redistribution" when it's really "wealth recapture." CEOs didn't just suddenly find this money. And most progressives are not against someone being rich, even really rich. We're against UNEARNED wealth. We're against wealth that is taken from the improved productivity of employees, who were not organized enough to fight for what they deserved. We're against wealth that the rich and corporations have from purchasing favorable tax policies. We're against the wealth that now flows to the very top because the greatest Return On Investment one can gain is from buying an American politician.
Great story of how on relatively quick decision with very little thought or consideration of the impact of that decision can ripple out and affect us all for decades. And when you add the wealth gap to the unfortunate decision to allow money into politics virtually unchecked by the supreme court, you get greed and Trump. How do some people look themselves in the mirror each morning and not throw up?
Clinton was another grifter, just smarter than trump. We have him to thank for the unholy alliance called The Third Way, which is still pushing Banks/Wall St/corporate agenda and bills to this day, with the misguided idea that there is a center way and that is only possible if you have more than 2 parties. Not to mention The Telecommunications bill of 95 which enabled the likes of Fox News to exist. My theory is that every type of government is eventually overtaken by the greedy and corrupt no matter the original good intentions. We need to cap what one man can earn at a reasonable sum, otherwise they will surely try to own us all. We used to use the Anti Trust laws to protect citizens from these predators, just a joke now.
Why does this sound like an episode of West Wing? Because it is - in real life. It's too bad we didn't realize the harm Bill Clinton did until it was too late.
Bob, apropos of this discussion, did you see Marco Rubio's op-ed in The American Conservative, in which he called America's corporate elite Marxist cultural revolutionaries? Marco Rubio has gone completely off the rails. When he equates U.S. corporations with Marxists, I feel like I am traveling with Alice through Wonderland.
As long as money is considered to be "speech" and not "bribery", we will have politicians who care about us only on election day. The rest of their term will be spent licking the boots of the donor class.
Let Companies give their Execs what they want. But let's tax corporations and high earners, like during Eisenhower's time, at up to 90% at the top brackets. That's how ALL boats will rise with the tide.
What a great story, a window into how policies are manipulated to protect everyone but the masses. Must have been extraordinarily difficult to be Labor Secretary fighting for the American people when everyone else were doing back flips to protect corporations. The fight continues today but now we're seeing workers fight back.
Thank you belatedly for standing up for sensible policy, even if you didn't prevail. The decision you describe seems to be part of our culture of treating large corporations and their CEOs like gods who can do no wrong, and must always be catered to. And that corporations have some "fiduciary duty" to maximize their shareholders' wealth, including that of foreign shareholders, at the expense of every other consideration.
I have seen some evidence that another motivator for outrageously high executive compensation may have been the abolition of the highest marginal tax rates. The thought is that if increased compensation will push the executive into a higher tax bracket, then most of the extra pay would go to taxes, thereby disincentivizing CEOs from negotiating higher pay.
I started as a driver with UPS in 1976. At that time the CEO made about 25 times what a driver made. He was a wealthy man. Today if a driver worked 100 years he or she wouldn't come close to what the current CEO makes in a single year. The compensation of todays top executives is just crazy money. After a certain point it's just becomes numbers in a portfolio and doesn't enhance their living conditions. They already have more money then they could ever spend. It just creates mini dynasty's. Or maybe not so mini. It just takes vast sums of money out of the corporation and tax rolls that maybe their great grandkids might be able to spend. Back when I started at my company everyone made great money. Of course the higher you went the more you made but even low level management could retire multi millionaires with the stock (I knew a few of them) and drivers were the upper middle class. Not so today. This trend was even more apparent in other companies. The pie was still there but larger and larger slices were going to the top executives rather than being distributed down through the ranks. When you mention this there are shouts of socialism, usually from the people at the top, but if that's so were we a socialist nation back when things were divided more evenly? The foxes were guarding the henhouse, greed took over, and we are where we are today.
The gap between workers and owners is unreasonable and not even close to being fair
Good story Robert. The tax codes Are class warfare. The “Budget” IS social engineering. We Are a military warfare country. Endless wars = Endless profits. Today the military budget is more than anytime in US his-story. We are in a perfect storm. How can / do we raise consciousness and create healthier outcomes?
As a person that was downsized right out of a job after 22 years - I agree that Exec pay must not be controlled by stock prices - must be based on performance -not how many employer benefits can be cut or how many jobs can be shifted overseas
So that’s how a shitty plan goes into affect!