And it's a Democratic congress, with a Democratic Senate that could be (if Al Franken is seated) one vote short of being able to cut off a filibuster.

Don't Senate rules prohibit a filibuster on the budget?

It's true, and good news, that the tax rate on capital gains will revert to 20% from the current 15% under Obama's budget. What's equally true, and almost never remarked, is that this is still well under the 28% capital gains rate enacted *under Ronald Reagan* in the Tax Reform Act of 1986.

That legislation, Reagan's last fiscal legacy, also achieved a goal which liberals had sought for years: it equalized taxes on income from wages and income from wealth (capital gains and dividends).

Obama may be moving in that direction, but it's a long way from happening as of now.

It's amazing even after hearing it for decades how liberals (now called progressives) feel entitled to other people's (ie the rich) money.

Progressives are practically orgasmic at the thought of taking more money from those who earn it and giving it to those who leech off America. All under the shrill claim of fairness and the absurd claim the rich don't pay their fair share to the rest of us.

The only way to afford such spending as B.O. proposes is to hope the rich keep producing a revenue stream which the government can confiscate. But, amazingly at the same time, progressives want to take and take and take until the rich are rich no longer. And then what?

Liberals have yet to learn that you can't keep robbing Peter to pay Paul without Paul simply quitting his taxable job and bartering his services.

It's amazing even after hearing it for decades how liberals (now called progressives) feel entitled to other people's (ie the rich) money.

Progressives are practically orgasmic at the thought of taking more money from those who earn it and giving it to those who leech off America. All under the shrill claim of fairness and the absurd claim the rich don't pay their fair share to the rest of us.

The only way to afford such spending as B.O. proposes is to hope the rich keep producing a revenue stream which the government can confiscate. But, amazingly at the same time, progressives want to take and take and take until the rich are rich no longer. And then what?

Liberals have yet to learn that you can't keep robbing Peter to pay Paul without Paul simply quitting his taxable job and bartering his services.

This columnist's last name is very befitting.

"Progressive" as a philosphic/political dogma is the branding used by the far left in America as a mirror image of what Mussolini eventually defined as fascism.

The National Socialist party in Germany refined Mussolini's ideals to include only certain races in its version.

So when the author promotes and supports a "progressive" agenda, he is essentially drudging up the collossal failures - and related genocides, enslavements, and persecutions - of the Axis, Woodrow Wilson, and FDR and placing them on a pedastal.

Is he blind, stupid, or just evil and cruel?

Why work when you can have the government steal from your neighbor's money to pay for your healthcare, mortgage, new GM car made by subsidized union labor and eventually your new carbon taxes.

BTW what will liberals do (ok, they'll lie about it) when it is conclusively proven there is no such thing as global warming and carbon taxes are a sham?

I have to laugh at these conservative posters most of whom I'm willing to stake a $1000 are nowhere near the top 5% percentile screaming about how these folks are going be taxed to death. Deloitte has a table out showing a typical family of four earning around $500,000, with two homes, usual deductions...and you know what....their tax bill goes from around $120k to $132k. Not exactly expropriation. The supreme irony of all this of course is that most of these comments are actually being placed by minimum wage workers in Republican boiler rooms that are constantly dumping this nonsense onto blogs.

It is increasingly clear that the Republican model for the United States is the banana republic: A place where the top few percent own everything and everyone else lives in fear. Is that what the above article's critics want for the U.S. or isn't it? If it isn't, then SOMETHING MUST BE DONE to stop that trend. As for the rich paying more taxes, what do you think? That the poor should pay more taxes? That government should do nothing while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer? I wish you critics would stop your sniping and your selfishness and propose a real program for our real problems.

I may not be in the 5% bracket - but those I depend on for my lifestyle are.

Oh, and so is the federal government.

Without those that have created prosperity, and subsequently wealth, there would be no budget to bicker.

Biting the hand that feeds you is a monumental understatement.

If you agree with the philosophy of anti-capitalism, you are either uninformed, stupid, or cruel and evil.

There is no valid argument against capitalism outside of those three.

By the way, when the rich get richer so do the poor and everybody else.

When the rich get poorer the rest get poorer at an even higher rate.

I really don't believe there is a poor person in the US. If there is one or a few, you can directly relate their plight to government interference in their lives.

For God's sake will you stop calling it redistribution of wealth?

All that the budget does is that ask the wealthy to pay more of the government's bill than they did before - which is he way it should be. It does not take the money from them and give it to anyone.

Dave,

I must put you in the uninformed category.

If after reading the following you still fail to understand your error, you will then fall under the stupid category.

When the government forces an individual to give them money and then spends that money as those in power see fit, it is by definition redistribution.

The inventor of the libertarian philosophy succinctly stated it in this way: "Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Almost every American is libertarian at heart, they are just too ignorant or stupid to realize it. The remainder are evil and cruel.

Here are three simple forms of the US Federal government's redistribution:

Medicare/Medicaid
Social Security
Public Schooling

I find it shocking that the author notes that the top 1% of earners still pay at least 31% of taxes and finds that number to be too small. One percent of this country pays for a THIRD of the government! If you go to a baseball game with 9,999 other people, is it really fair for 100 people to pay one third of the total cost of tickets?

There must be a Height to Brain correlation. This Idiot still thinks that the SOVIET WAY, was the RIGHT WAY. They just didn't SPEND ENOUGH. What's that, about doing the same thing over and over again. all the while, hoping for a different result? I think it's called Liberalism. I know it's the definition of insanity. But then, so is Liberalism.

There must be a Height to Brain correlation. This Idiot still thinks that the SOVIET WAY, was the RIGHT WAY. They just didn't SPEND ENOUGH. What's that, about doing the same thing over and over again, all the while, hoping for a different result? I think it's called Liberalism. I know it's the definition of insanity. But then, so is Liberalism.

I really think that America has it wrong, we should be taxing those who make less at a much higher rate then those who currently pay the largest portion of taxes in the country. Maybe it would be an incentive for those who are less educated and less motivated to get off their rear and work harder if they new they would be taxed for being ignorant. Maybe our country wouldn't have less than 60% of high school students actually graduate. If they new the dumber they were the more the government would take maybe they would actually learn something. Our country is now comprised of people who know nothing more than what they see on TV. It's sad when third world countries produce more intelligent scholars than a country like ours that affords everyone the opportunity to learn.

The comment that says 'when the rich get richer, so does everybody else' has been proven wrong. It's called 'trickle down' economics and it doesn't work.

http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=19

Thats a link to a historical tax brackets table, easy to read and follow. From 1933-1981 taxes were over 60% for the upper earners. Reagan lowered it to 50%, Clinton to 39.6, Bush back to about his fathers rate of 33%, Obama is going back to 39.6%. Historically Obama tax rate for upper earners is still exceptionally low. No one is being robbed...done and done!

Progressivism is just another name for unaffordable leftist social engineering schemes that have always failed.

No wonder leftist politicians avoid paying taxes, they only like it when other peoples' wealth is stolen by the government.

^

Bush merely lessened the amount of money robbed. It's still robbery. There's only one thing worse than the government keeping your money, and that's when your money is given to a freeloader.

Mark, you might want to avoid the compound sentence at the beginning of your post and the misspelling of "knew" in your second sentence before ridiculing the less educated.

Who is John Galt?

Trickle down economics doesn't work says the useful idiot with the car, home, cell phone, computer, tv, gaming system, air conditioning in the summer, heat in the winter, interior plumbing, electricity, health care, clothing, the ability to read and write, and a full belly.

How desitute will we let these people get? Some don't have cell phone data plans!

Barack Obama hates poor people: Why not take the top income tax rate to 75% - we could then give a lot more to the poor. Or maybe 80%. By only reversing what was done by Bush he is declaring war on the poor.

For those complaining about the term "redistribution of wealth", from the first paragraph of the column: "it represents the biggest redistribution of income from the wealthy to the middle class and poor this nation has seen in more than forty years."

So why is that bad, even if you're not in the top bracket? As someone pointed out, your employer may be and that can't help. Or you may be dependent on those people to support your business. But the real problem is once you start taxing only a small percentage of the population, it makes it awfully easy to get future tax increases on those same people, since they'd be a minority. Class warfare is bad. Success through hard work is good. We seem to be forgetting that.

I like the comment on equalizing income from work to income from property. Its ironic that Ronald Reagon's tax plan (described then as audacious), include that.

I consider that discrepancy between income from work and income from property (idle or active), to be the biggest flaw in the current tax code. It functionally encourages those with money to put that money into speculation over actual production of goods and services.

I like the redistributive effort as increasing the potential for an ECONOMY that emphasizes informed human needs over primarily business to business.

What are dollar votes spent on? What enterprises come to exist?

I also VERY MUCH like the effort to improve actual public assets, like libraries, parks, etc.

The carbon cap is essential, but doesn't go far enough. From both global warming and the likely reduction in oil supply, we need to move FAR MORE intently away from reliance on concentrated fossil fuels (oil, natural gas and refined petroleum) and diffuse and dirty fossil fuels (coal and wood).

By not taking the top income tax rate to 75% Barack Obama is giving special treatment to the most wealthy Americans. Those in the highest tax bracket get 100% of the tax break by not going to 75%. Barabk Obama has declared war on the poor.

This is immoral. I am not in the top 5% and I don't want other people's money. I want what I work for and earn. What they get is theirs. I cannot believer this article. Progressive is the wrong term for this, it's regressive.

fuck you communist cock suckers

Reich is either a socialist or a communist. Whatever you call it, he thinks it is the role of government to decide who should earn money and keep it, and who should get free money. All from the government.
I want to be able to work more and keep the extra, not give it to my neighbor who chooses to sit by the pool. I want to decide where to spend it, not have Obama or bureaucrats decide.
America as a whole out produced the world by far, per capita, for decades. This is because our government is the least intrusive. Thanks to Obama and "progressives," these days may be behind us.
As taxes reach a rate that is too confiscatory, we will just decide to stay home and produce less. And everyone will be harmed.

By only REDUCING the deduction for charitable contibutions that the wealthy can take and not eliminating them, Barack Obama is allowing the wealthiest Americans to keep 100% of those reduced deductions. He is basically declaring war on the poor.

By waiting until he was President to have the leaders of the auto industry determine a strategy for being profitable, Barack Obama is waging war on the poor who need rides to work. He could have suggested to the auto industry as a Senator, "Hey, you guys should strategize on how to be profitable". I can't believe they didn't think about that on their own.

I always thought that one reason that so many people went along with Republican policies that bent things in favor of the rich was that they hoped to be rich themselves one day, and if the field sloped their way that day, so much the better.

How many people today are giving up on that (always improbable) dream and therefore becoming more inclined to favor safety nets, a narrower distribution of wealth, "fairness" generally and other liberal ideals?

* The huge demographic bulge that is the Baby Boomer generation is already moving into retirement -- they are beginning to realize that they are not going to hit it big.
* Anyone with stock or real estate investments got ice in their hot coffee in the past two years -- they are beginning to realize that it will take years just to get back to where they once were.
* Younger people now see that getting a job will be a challenge -- getting rich seems much further off than ever.

Not only is this "finally a progressive budget," it may be the right time for it, politically.

John (from a several posts up) taxes were up to 90 %during WWII and during Carter up to 71% (for upper earners)... I agree let's try that for a while. The wealth distribution has been the deregualtion that has allowed the greedy few to bankrupt the country through speculations and sending money on foreign stocks. Lower and middle class spend there money here. Taxes breaks to the rich drains money from US. Wake Up

Stoneman, you might want to think first before invoking Jimmy Carter era tax policy in an argument on what's best for this country...

Why be surprised that the Dems propose higher taxes and lower deductions for those who worksfor a living. The only way you can get Dems to pay their taxes is to give them a job in the Obama administration.

Stoneman is happy with a 90% marginal tax rate when, in fact, we could go to 100%. Stoneman is waging war on the poor.

The way President Obama is redistributing wealth is even simpler than Social Security, Medicare and Schooling. The Obama "tax cuts for 95% of working families" is a redistribution. It's called the earned income tax credit. 40% of those families do not pay taxes. Their "tax cut" will be a check in the mail resulting from the earned income tax credit. Taxpayers mail in money and it mailed right back out to other people who pay no taxes at all. That is redistribution of wealth and can be called nothing else.

Obviously we have more than one "John" posting today. Don't let the contradictions cause your heads to explode

As Stoneman will tell you, poor people do pay taxes - payroll taxes. And they - oh, hold it, payroll taxes are actually supposed to go towards social security. So if they don't pay those payroll taxes I guess they don't get social security. Stoneman wants to take poor people off of social security!!

"The mini depression"? Is that the type of depression where the malls are still full and there is still a line at the Starbucks drive-through?

No income tax, payroll tax or any other tax on welfare benefits.

Further descent into madness.

And no limits on how long you can be on welfare. And it should be enough to not just get basic cable, but digital cable.

My country is in grave peril. I would never have believed it possible that a public figure could crow and preen in this fashion over the transformation of America into a socialist nation. Does no one else get offended by the naked glee and frank openness with which Mr. Reich speaks of redistribution of income from the wealthy to the middle class and poor? My God, my heart breaks.

Reich writes: "President Obama's new budget is, well, audacious.."

Oh, the "audacity" of depending on government. Not the cowardice of saying no to increasing dependency, but the "boldness" of spending taxpayer money.

I feel in tingle going up my leg.

OK so you don't like Carters rates then let's just go to Reagan rates of 50%. Reagan that jackball, not only was he a communist solcialist! he doubled our national debt too!

The comment that says 'when the rich get richer, so does everybody else' has been proven wrong. It's called 'trickle down' economics and it doesn't work.

It would have worked except liberals refused to tell the poor that they had to "work" for the trickle down!

Rgosche..

I've noticed that you love to make your opinion known and then pre-emptively claim that anyone who believes differently "are just too ignorant or stupid to realize it. The remainder are evil and cruel." You've dropped that at the end of multiple, different, and most-definately controvertible subject matters.

You are one truly insecure person.

You're the cowardly debate equivalent of a succer-punch artist... you get in your swing and then dive behind your lame, canned, probably stolen from another person catchphrase before anyone even gets a chance to counter.

And if you don't understand that about yourself than you are just to stupid or ignorant to realize it. Either that or you realize it and are just evil and cruel.

If Obama was really interested in raising money he would quit taxing the rich and just have the IRS audit the Democrats in Congress. I think each Democratic cabinet choice has been worth about $50,000 or more in taxes to the treasury. At that rate the rest of Congress would be a gold mine! I think Chris Dodd & Charlie Rangle would be easy pickings.

The fact that tax money winds up in the hands of government is more distressing to me that that it is taken from the hard-working and given to those "more deserving".

Ok, two things -

$318 billion over 10 years? Against how much deficit? Really? That is going to pay for the spending? Really?

Second thing - I have worked hard for 35 years to achieve a high standard of living. I give to charities that have overheads of 10-12%. WHY should I give my money to the government who has an overhead that is so high that we can't even figure it? In other words, an organization that is terribly inefficient.

Absolute hogwash, all of it! I'm disgusted.

I'll never, ever understand the Conservative viewpoint. The way I see it, the average Conservative wants this country to be what it was during the 1950's and early 60's.. right? Isn't that the golden, white-bread innocent era of perfection within the Conservative story?

But during that era, taxes were more progressive than during any time in American history, the average citizen LOVED the government and thought of Social Security as quite possibly one've the greatest collective accomplishments of mankind, the middle class was THE class (they would've looked at you like you had three heads if you tried to propose "trickle-down" economics back then), unions were strong, capital was weak, etc. etc. etc...

It seems that, subjectively the 50's were the Conservative heydey, but objectively it appears it was a period of Conservative armageddon.

It just doesn't reconcile.. would some conservative please explain?

To the wealthy Rebulicants ..." No man is an island!"

You use more of of the tax serices then the poor. You use the roads more, planes more, have a large house so you are better protected by police and other services. And you didn't get rich just by your own brillance, it was on the backs of hardwarking people too, without them you won't have the luxuries, that they don't have. We are a nation of republican whiners...Linsey Grahm (The Deregualor - bankrupter of our nation) was almost right for once, but he left out the word Republicans.

If the Delloitte analysis as mentioned by John Greenwich is correct, President Obama and the Democrats better figure out another way to pay for all this government expansion. If the wealthy will not have to ante up a significant amount of their earnings, maybe the tax increase on the wealthy to pay for all this is just an illusion, like the Wall Street Journal pointed out yesterday.

Libertarianism is stupid, uninformed AND cruel. If you don't want the government in your life, then leave the country. Go live on some uncharted island, where you'll be completely on your own. Don't use the plethora of services the government provides - schooling, mail, police protection, etc. - and then complain about how much it sucks that you have to pay for these things. Every society on earth functions under a government; good luck finding a hypothetical State of Nature to live out your fantasies. You'll realize how quickly what a load of BS this whole "no taxes, no government!" mentality is.

90 % Republicans of the guys have a ignorance unmatched across the globe other 10 percent are actually making over 250,000 a year and benefit from the Republican platform these days, The rest of 90 percent of the republicans are there worst enemies

"The rich, after all, already have most of what they want."

Memo to Herr Reich: Who the hell gave you and your fellow liberal fascists the right to determine how much of anything any American citizen is allowed to have?

Herr Reich, what if I came into your life and told you that you had enough elevator shoes in your closet? "Short people like you with inferiority complexes really only need a couple pair of shoes to make them look taller. So, no more for you! After all, the short already have most of the elevator shoes they want."

Wonder what Reich would say to me?

I tell you what I say to him: Get out of my life, out of my wallet, and while you're at it, out of this country, which you so obviously hate.

Tax on my brother dem's...keep taking from the rich and give to yourselves...let's change America into France..their food is good..and let's bring on some muslim terrorist's to live beside aunt Maggie too...let's save the mouse in Pelosi's field, let's give to ACORN to support the democrat agenda in the next decade with morons running around the neighborhood...and while you're at it, let's tax the air we inhale and the carbon we exhale...yeah, that'll give the economic giants, Frank & Dodd, a helluva lot more money to spend on their cottages & prositute rings out of their apartment...and let's even tax being white..that'll make the Rev Jackson & Sharpton even more viable race-mongoring theives than they already are.....let's keep it up....America needs this...
IF we get to vote in 2010...it'll be the elimination of most dems in congress....let's go Dem's...let's Go Go Go !!

Alexander Tytler allegedly said it best:

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage."

Where on this wheel do you think America these days? The answer is not encouraging, and the Democrats seem eager to push us further down toward bondage.

I'm unclear what the wealthy have done that makes them subject to being penalized and villified. They (I am not one of them) pay the higher taxes rates and fund the bulk of teh tax revenues. They also give the most to charity and generate the most jobs. What is it about being successful that makes them scoundrels?

I can't believe people are giving this racist a forum. It's appalling.

Being in the rich category I can tell you that I already receive way more benefits than I pay for when it comes to government run programs.

I take advantage of significant tax loopholes to reduce my tax liability. I direct my charitable dollars to causes that personally interest me and allow me to reduce my payments tax payments. I can deduct interest on my large house, I can deduct the large property real estate tax payments I pay that support a superior local school in my community. Honest to God, I'm gaming the system because I can and do - completely legally. I won't invest a dime less of my money if my tax rate goes up. I'll work just as hard. Which, by the way, is not nearly as hard as the hard working people who work for me for basic wages.

For those of you so concerned with protecting me and my other wealthy friends from a modest increase in my tax rate.

No thank you.

Nothing would make me happier than seeing the rest of my less well off fellow citizens do a little better! In the end, I know I'll make way more if they make just a bit more.

After my extreme frustration over the past eight years, I finally found peace in the basic revelation that for better or worse our country is a democracy. None of the whining in this Comments section matters. The voters of this country selected President Obama, a Democratic Senate and a Democratic House. Argue political and economic philosophy among yourselves all you want, but it's a moot point. This is how things are going to be.

the republicants only position is cut taxes for the rich so they can boost the economy through trickle down. The problem with that theory is playing out now... the powerful get too greedy. A benevolent leader is our best bet, large economic disparities causes problems for everyone.

$1,750,000,000,000.00 Obama is digging us deeper in debt faster and further than any person or country in the history of the Universe! And Robert Reich calls that a Progressive Budget? Is unimaginable massive debt that could leave us printing billion dollar notes to buy a cup of coffee all it takes to be Progressive? At least Mr. Reich is correct about one things. If Global warming exists, and if mankind is responsible for it, cap and trade won't make a dent, but we will all pay for it. You see the rich don't have enough money if you tax them at 100% for what Obama has in mind. You won't get a cap and trade tax, but your electric bill will triple, your food bill will double, your clothing bill will double/triple, your gas bill will quadruple. When we reach Obama's progressive paradise the only people not shivering in the cold will be Government employees, and of course Congressmen and Senators.

David the rich, I am glad for your sucess, i'm sure you've worked very hard for it. I am friends with a couple people that are CEOs of large companies and they would reiterate what you said. A little social responbility is all that is happening, nothing as dire is happening as many are fearing.

We are approaching what Thomas Jefferson was referring to in the following quote:

"A government that is big enough to give you everything is also big enough to take everything away."

Those of you who clammor on about how rediculous it is for modern Republicans to speak about fiscal responsibility are dead on. However, you miss the point. Conservatism, not "Republicanism", is what we should be after. Bush spent WAY to much on liberal programs like the medicare bill. The Republican House went along for the ride. Extremely dissapointing. Nevertheless, trying to correct that by spending MORE, as if to say "it's my turn to pass rediculous spending bills and support MY special interest programs" is NOT THE ANSWER. Socialism does not and cannot work. The government and it's employees do not know how to run a business, yet they are trying to tell American business how to run. Can you imagine Ted Kennedy, John McCain, Joe Biden, or even the glorious "O" trying to establish and maintain a prosperous business in the free market? No way - they only know how to tax money from people; they have no experience generating revenue on their own.

The entire political system has gone amuck. Arguing over which party is MORE irresponsible is like arguing over whether you would rather be hung or drowned. There are some true conservatives out there. I tend to think Sanford is actually one of them. Jindal too. They may not have the polish of a Snake Oil salesman like "O" or the orignal slickster, Clinton, but they have fundamental principles that do not center around an all powerful government.

Todd

The end-of-the-world whining in these comments is incredible. So the difference between freedom and communist tyranny is a 4.9 percent increase in marginal tax rates for the wealthy? That's the line between Adam Smith and Karl Marx? Who knew - really?

sean its not hard to see you educated in public school."Don't use the plethora of services the government provides - schooling, mail, police protection, etc" you do understand schools and ploice ae local goverment and that we have an alternative to USPS that delivers fater for cheaper. Libertarians beleive in less envolvement by federal goverment as set up by the constitution. the founders of our country beleived states and cities should have all the power and the federal government should have the responsiblity of defense.

The real deal is that there will be politically connected wealthy that will still be protected.

We are subsidizing the auto industry to protect wealthy unions, we'll likely invest in newspapers, we have purchased Citigroup, and perhaps at some point Hollywood. Oh, and if you doubt the wealth of unions, look at how much money they spent on Democrats.

There will be rich people getting a break, it will just be the correct right people. Earmarks aren't going away and those appropriations tend to help a few rich people.

unions help workers your losing jobs because of free trade agreements and capitalism spread throughout the global community. Capitalist hates to protect worker because the business can make more profit if they don't. The American citizen that is not educated and demands to much money for their production will no longer have a job period. Time to Go back to school my friends and bring in Green jobs to give the education less a temporary chance to produce in this country. Its called competing in a global society their is no more American privilege. Get over it, make the proper adjustments and you will be ahead

"The incomes of the top one percent have soared for 30 years while median wages have slowed or declined in real terms."

And why do we suppose this would be? Couldn't possibly be that the top one percent of earners in this country have actually been the ones taking the risks, investing their capital and growing their enterprises (and creating the bulk of the new, strongest and best jobs in the process), could it? Of course not. In Reich's alternative universe those who actually create, build and whose entrepreneurial spirit delivers sustainable growth are greedy wealth mongers who, despite already being disproportionately tapped by Uncle Sam by our steeply progressive tax structure, are still grossly overearning. Yep, we must take from the best and the brightest and give to those who have and do the least. Straight out of comrade Karl's playbook Robert.. "from each according to his means to each according to his needs." Congratulations on championing the least effective and worst growth-inducing economic philosophy in the history of the planet.

Dear wealth haters,

I admit that letting the Bush cuts expire is necessary to help cover the budget deficit. This would have been true even without Obambi's stimulus plan.

But now to the main point.Wealthy people in a capitalist society are pollinators; they finance many of the technological developments we now take for granted. For example, when the Titanic set sail for NY in 1912 it had on board a very primitive radio-telephone setup. It cost like $2000 dollars to use it, so it was definitely only for the use of the first-class passengers to check up on the NY stock mkt and for vanity purposes. But that primitive, very expensive piece of equipt was probably the beginning of our modern communications. You can shave the sheep, and they're a renewable resource. Kill them for lamb chops and they're a one-time asset only.

Do this many right wingers really read the american prospect??

Clinton did exactly what Obama is doing - and guess what? The economy went through an incredible period of growth for all Americans, rich, middle class and poor. Everyone prospered.

Incredible reading some of the comments above, absolutely incredible. So if America is socialist/communist now, with the top tax bracket paying 39% (one of the lowest in the western world still), what was it in the past when the rate was 60%!

Finally. We've got the government, we've got the law, and we've got the guns. We can just take money from the filthy pigs that have it and give it to the poor folk who need it.

This is the change that is coming.Treasury Auction Failure due to massive amount of money the US is attempting to borrow. Next, inflation - starting out late this year and progressing into hyperinflation over the next two years. Your taxes go out the roof on electricity. Your fees go out the roof at the banks. Your food prices will be so expensive you will not be able to buy it. Thanks Obama. You are even worse than Bush.

I am all for helping the poor, but I want to choose who my dollars help. In Los Angeles many of the "poor" drive nicer cars than I do. Have better Ipods and cell phones than me. And goes to college "free" while i bust my but to pay "white" tuition rates.

Actually, the President's approval rating is below 60%, according to Gallup. Lower than any President after 30 days since they started taking such polls. Even lower than W, the devil himself.

The American dream isn't a welfare state where people are taken care of. It is a place where hard work and intuition pay off and there is extreme mobility between income brackets.

Stop hating 'the rich' and try to become rich, work harder, get a better education, and make sure that your children do even better than you do. Don't hope that the government or Obama will solve your problems by giving you another person's money.

So, when the rich get poorer, everyone else gets richer? That only works in a zero sum economy.

Unfortunatly, this is not a zero sum economy, and it is quite possible for everyone to get poorer all at once. When you burn your neighbor's house, expect sparks in your eaves.

Bout tyme us poor peeps got our fair share. We poor folk iz exploited an' Obama iz going ta he`p pay fo' muh ma Escalade an' fro weave. just like mammy.

He describes the 1970s (and actually chooses 1980 as the glorious year!) as some kind of paradise when the "super rich earned 9% of income". is he suggesting that we've been going backwards for the last 30 years?

while the share of income for the rich has increased, i suspect a large majority of people have seen an increase in their standard of living. or have i imagined the last 30 years?

this guy is old enough to know better.

"I'm unclear what the wealthy have done that makes them subject to being penalized and villified. They (I am not one of them) pay the higher taxes rates and fund the bulk of teh tax revenues. They also give the most to charity and generate the most jobs. What is it about being successful that makes them scoundrels?"

That is an easy question to answer, Mike. What makes the wealthy 'scoundrels' is that they have what these others want. Since the others 'want' it, obviously, they deserve it. That they don't have it can only be the result of the nefarious of the wealthy, thus making the wealthy 'scoundrels'.

hey robert-

why dont you look at Krugman's oped today. Even he understands that the spending in this budget cannot be paid for, long term, by simply taxing the 'rich'. He expects a value-added tax on everybody will be required.

and in case it wasn't already obvious, raising the debt to 100% of GDP in 4 years is the equivalent of taxing everybody's kids who have to pay this back. so i hope the children we are prospectively taxing are happy with that wind farm you are buying them.

For decades the working poor have been unfairly taxed by massive immigration that kept their wages down and displaced them from their communities and jobs. Now Obama removes E Verify from the stimulus bill so all the new jobs will go to low wage immigrants like always-and none of you makes a peep. Foot is still on working American poors red neck- who cares,.... but when Obama dares tax the rich unjustly he is suddenly evil.
Take a number you open border ethnic advocacy anti American pro illegal phony Visa program immigration lawyer WEASELS, the wind is just starting to blow and I smell a class war on the horizon- sure,I know it's wrong but what do I have to lose- it's Jose and Akbars country now anyway. I am just a lower working class Nativist bigot that can't seem to love Multiculturalism and Diversity enough! I hope he bleeds you dry. See if I care when they come for you.

What intellectual slop from the right wingers posting on this site. They doubled our national debt during the 8 year Bush New Year's Eve bash, and are now complaining the the bill has finally arrived.

Surprise, surprise!

Obama should have reversed those tax breaks for the wealthy the first day he got in office.

What a travesty.

If the rich don't want to live her, they are welcome to move en masse to Brazil, or the Barbados. Oh, and don't forget write.

Why don't you just move to Sweden Mr. Reich?

Reich- why don't you just leave this country you hate so much? You are a neo-racist/class warfare instigating, narrow minded elitist pseudo-intellect. I know why.. there is no other country in the world where you can earn union scale (how ironic) to be on TV and spout economic double speak- except perhaps North Korea, Venezuela, and Cuba.

How come you don't even qualify to have a cabinet position amongst your fellow travelers ? What gives? Some unpaid tax liability? Or worse?

Will Congress kill the goose who laid the golden egg? I have lived in Sweden and Finland. Everyone there has healthcare. And live in the same tiny apartments, with the same tiny appliances, and no bathtubs and no dryers and all receive the same tiny little blue or pink pajamas and food basket when their babies are born. And have $10 a gallon tax on gas, and cannot hire a sandwich maker without giving them a 'living and life-time wage'. I have also worked for the Human Services Dept (Welfare) for 15 years in Texas, and a nonprofit (SER - Jobs for Progress) that services Hispanic immigrants. I can tell you now that the poorest of my American clients would not stand to live like the middle class in Scandinavia. (Unless, as in Sweden, the gov't saps their freedoms too gradually to notice).

Why don't the Bush Tax Cut ranters go look at the data and see that the much-hated Bush Tax Cuts actually had the rich paying more TOTAL tax $$$.

Is it about total revenue?- OR- is about some good feeling buzz that the rich/wealthy are getting some karma judgement indictment for being successful?

Yeah Bush 2 spent too many $$$, But the Dems in congress never saw an entitlement spend they didn't like. Even Krugman, long ago, (when he was attacking McCain) defended Bush budgets about entitlement spending ... Medicare prescription benefits for example.

My sister is now 38 years old and for the past 20 years has done nothing but smoke crack, shoot crystal meth and pop out babies with men she doesn't know.

Her behavior has caused tremendous strain on the government system... her frequent trips to the emergency room, the constant family court dates, occassional jail time and, finally, the removal and placement of her many children.

Thanks to Obama and his left wing friends in the media, academia and unions, my sister will now be getting a raise the in the check she receives from various government agencies.

My sister is ecstatic with the "raise" she is getting... She feels she deserves it.

I started a business 20 years ago and I am still not rich. I struggle every day to sell something so I can pay the bills of the business.

But, now I am told that I have to pay more because it's moral and I don't deserve what I have managed to make (and believe me, it isn't much).

So... you know what? Screw it. Take it all. I don't want it anymore.

I'm just going to quit trying.

Because if this is what is going to happen to me and my family... after so many years of working incredibly hard... screw it.

I would rather sit on my ass and get a check once a month. It's a lot easier and it's how were going to end up anyway.

Is this horrid little man trying to blame someone for his own shortcomings? Being a midget gives this repugnant communist a big advantage over his fellow regressive liberals - he doesn't have to bend down to kiss B.O.'s behind.

stoneman,
You must be stoned out of your mind or dumber then a fence post. Your comment was assinine.

John (the stupid one),

says Obama is waging war on the poor by not stealing everying from the "rich" down to their socks and handing it over to them.

If this guy isn't joking he's insane.

Kevin,

In other words, you're a thief and a serial killer. Precious.

I hope all the limousine liberals choke when they see their new tax brackets.

what infuriates me is how these bastards see professionals whio have graduate degrees and earn in the 300 - 500 k range as 'wealthy'. These folks are not necess. wealthy, they are high earners b/c they offer services (law, medicine, engineering, biotech, small buis) etc) that the majority needs and desires. sadly the LIbds forget that many of these professionals have 6 figure debt they complied in grad school and many of them spent over a decade in school.

so tell me why the F should a dedicated high earner have even more of her income confiscated by the feds so that a lazy, uninspired college dropout get a 'refund check' for taxes he didnt even pay.

so sad...for the first time, the future of America looks dim.

it was a good run while it lasted. and I mostly blame the whorish RINOS like grahhm and mccain who sold us out.

I made $130,000 last year. And I say, please tax me more. I don't want to go to war and get shot at. I don't want to put out a fire. I don't want to teach sniffling kids. I don't want to take a homeless person into my house. However, I do recognize that I am part of this great country and I must make sacrifices. I think paying taxes is an easy, convenient way out. I'm more than happy to pay more taxes to help this country pay for the men and women who do great things for our community. I hope I will some day make millions and pay my fair share to make this country great.

Lil' Sean,

You're obviously a phony. Did you really think you were going to fool anyone with that absurd post?
"Men and women who do great things for the community"

You and the socialist liberals have the guns? You're anti gun-ownership weenies!! Don't you know that? Just what kind of guns; water pistols, cap guns? Is your envy so extreme that you fantasize being a Brownshirt thug or a Hitler Youth type?

Atlas must shrug.

Reich demonstrates the problem with liberals: The budget is about fairness!?!??!

The budget is not about fairness.
It is SUPPOSED to fund the legitimate concerns of the Federal Government, within the Constitution.

Reich thinks its the governments job to alter outcomes and transfer wealth in the name of fairness.
It is the root of Fascism and Socialism but certainly isn't American!

The idea that this is socialism or fascism is absurd. First off fascism is not socialism and is not the root of all evil. Second, if one were to discuss the american ideology and role of government with the adherence to fascism or socialism, one would not point to the raising of taxes, but to the role of the government in promotion/ownership of certain business' and programs. One might consider the Eisenhower administration as a Fascist government with its handling of United Fruit, or his handling with oil in Iran. ONe could look to Reagan as being fascist in thought, for his promotion of nationalism, his adherence to war/defense, and his funding/subsidizing of several american business'.
The notion that America has been a completely capitalist society is a farce. It has always had certain socialist and fascist policies, but mostly it has been socialism for the rich and quasi-capitalism for the rest. To illustrate this point all one has to do is look at the current economic crisis and where most of the money has been spent. It has been spent on banks assuring that the rich do not fail. It has also been spent on big business, i.e. car manufacturers, despite these companies cutting much of their american workforce. Is this socialism or fascism? Maybe, and its immediate benefactors are the rich, not the poor. If america was purely and truly capitalist it would also forbid any regulation within the economy. It would be against bank insurance, managing interest rates, and attempting to regulate inflation. But America has never been a purely capitalist country. Calling Obama socialist or fascist and calling these two ideologies the root of all evil is extremely ridiculous. There are more elements to socialism and fascism than taxes. If we were to measure it simply on taxes, Obama would be one of the most pro-capitalist presidents in the history of the united states, right behind the ideologue "saviors": Reagan and GW.

All this ridiculous claim and defense about the Obama/Pelosi/Reid budget is inane. First of all, it is not total socialism...but let's see if the govt decides to own a bank or two. Second of all, to all my liberal/socialist fellow countrymen and women out there defending Obama's budget - please answer me this. What are we going to do when inflation hits us like a train? He is cranking up the printing presses, which is going to create MASSIVE inflation when the economy turns around? Also, you and I both know - deep down - that the stimulus plan isn't going to stimulate much but the Democrat party. Listen - I didn't vote for McCain or Bush, but I didn't vote for Obama, either. I smelled him coming a mile away. Bottom line is that he associated or aligned himself with every important socialist and socialist organization in the country. I, unlike most of you out there - especially you Obama-drunk liberals - I put my country before any party I may be affiliate with. Try it. It does wonders for the soul and the country. Wake up and look what is happening, please.

I just sent a link to this page to a Democrat friend of mine.

He said the same thing I said. From reading each post, one thing is for sure. Democrats are smart, but DO NOT understand basic economics or the proven facts of history. There is NO defending and left-leaning economic model. They only assure one thing. 100% failure.
All of Europe is gently sliding to the right in their economic models, because after 60+ years of getting their asses handed to them and having little or no invention or innovation. They also had to create insane laws like a 32 hour work week and mandatory 2+ months vacation just to hide their double digit unemployment. China has been doing the same thing to great results, as well. The ones stuck on stupid, with their left wing/socialist gov'ts...hmmm... Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela. One thing in common with all those Socialist countries. It's easy to go on a diet, since starvation is the "in thing."

Come on liberals. Bush was an idiot is nearly all regards. Just because he was an idiot, doesn't mean you have to destroy the country! Why can't you elect JFK Democrats instead of someone who votes to the left of the Socialist Bernie Sanders?

"By 2007, the top one percent took home over 22 percent. Meanwhile, even as their incomes dramatically increased, the total federal tax rates paid by the top one percent dropped."

Statements like this is why liberal dolts are so easily fooled, the truth is the top 1% payed 39% of all income taxes in 2005, that is up 2% from 2000 when the top 1% paid 37%. Of course Mr. Reich knows this, he just conveintly forgot to mention it.
source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119786208643933077.html

The problem with socialism is you quickly run out of other people's money.

the three guys i work for are all north of the evil $250K earnings. they employ me and about 280 other people.

there ain't a single min wage job at the company, and some people (myself included) make a really good living for the area we live in.

in november, they told us to freeze staff and not replace anyone who leaves the company.

last night i was sitting in the local tavern with one of the owners and the guy that does his taxes/books.

they both agreed that if this budget passes in anything close to it's present form, me and the other people should start looking for another way to make a living.

there is to much risk and to little reward for them right now. they will liquidate and sit on their capital. they are gonna ride this current lunacy out on the sidelines.

this is probably being repeated in hundreds if not thousands of small businesses around this country right now.

i don't envy the guys i work for because they make money. they work hard, take all the risks and provide me a good living.

you 'Progressives' are gonna throw me outta a good job. i despise you and the class and race based strife you foment and thrive on in our country.

i thought we settled these arguments back when jimmy carter made a mess of things with his far less 'progressive' ideas and policies.

people like myself, who have been to busy making a living and providing for our families, will soon have lots of spare time on our hands thanks to these new progressive policies. with that spare time we will hash out this argument once and for all in the streets.

It is surprising to me when people do not see the end game for these types of policies. The rich guy and the guy making 130,000 seem to think that a few more thousand will actually do it, or that "no other taxpayers will be harmed in the making of this deficit;" they simply ignore the incremental and creeping nature of what the progressives truly see as the end game of progressivism: everyone gives their paycheck to the government, and the government evens things out (with a slight administration fee), shaping the world into their image of what is right. And if you think that's going to be a fair world, try to get a job as a professor after telling them you are a conservative, or try to apply for a grant from a non profit if you are a for profit business. Then you will encounter their idea of fairness.

I hate the get “them” politics. The left blames the rich & business. The right blames the poor, immigrants and people that don’t share their religion. I believe that a flat tax rate with everyone paying the same rate and getting the first $X dollars tax free would eliminate much of this and simplify our current crazy tax system.

How about the first $20,000 tax free and then a 30% tax rate? The only other deduction would be for pretax dollars saved for education or retirement.

BTW I also believe that business should not pay federal taxes. They should pay fees for services including the right to emit carbon.

I hate the get “them” politics. The left blames the rich & business. The right blames the poor, immigrants and people that don’t share their religion. I believe that a flat tax rate with everyone paying the same rate and getting the first $X dollars tax free would eliminate much of this and simplify our current crazy tax system.

How about the first $20,000 tax free and then a 30% tax rate? The only other deduction would be for pretax dollars saved for education or retirement.

BTW I also believe that business should not pay federal taxes. They should pay fees for services including the right to emit carbon.

Laptop Batteries
Laptop Batteries discount laptop battery

Laptop Batteries
Laptop Batteries discount laptop battery

If you don't know about jewelry knowledge, but want to action you can see jewelry fashion review,then maybe you can save your money!

Good post! Thank for your information! China Wholesale China Wholesale Wholesale Wholesale China Wholesalers China Wholesalers Wholesale Game Accessories Wholesale Game Accessories Wholesale Iphone Accessories Wholesale Iphone Accessories Video Game Accessories Wholesale Video Game Accessories Wholesale Wholesale Wii Accessories Wholesale Wii Accessories Wholesale Xbox 360 Accessories Wholesale Xbox 360 Accessories Wholesale Xbox 360 Games Wholesale Xbox 360 Games Wholesale Video Games Wholesale Video Games Cheap Video Games Cheap Video Games Cheap Ps3 Games Cheap Ps3 Games Cheap Xbox 360 Games Cheap Xbox 360 Games Wholesale Computers Wholesale Computers Wholesale Laptop Computers Wholesale Laptop Computers Wholesale Laptops Wholesale Laptops Discount Computers Discount Computers Cheap Computers Cheap Computers Wholesale Iphones Wholesale Iphones Wholesale Iphone Wholesale Iphone Wholesale Iphones 3g Wholesale Iphones 3g Hiphones Hiphones Wholesale Hiphone Wholesale Hiphone Wholesale Hiphones Wholesale Hiphones Wholesale Nokia Wholesale Nokia Wholesale Nokia 8800 Wholesale Nokia 8800 Wholesale Nokia n97 Wholesale Nokia n97 wholesale blackberry wholesale blackberry wholesale blackberry phones wholesale blackberry phones wholesale blackberry 9700 wholesale blackberry 9700 wholesale blackberry 9600 wholesale blackberry 9600 wholesale blackberry 9500 wholesale blackberry 9500 China Wholesale

Cheap links london Charms are supplied at our online store.

We’re sure that you are unable to find such enjoyable collection of links of london Charms anyplace else