Reply #52: Raygun's firing of 16,000 air traffic controllers

[BumRushDaShow]

started the ball rolling after capitalizing on the release of Iranian embassy hostages, orchestrated to upstage Carter while being sworn in (as I remember it well, shown via split screen on inauguration day 1980).

In http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4250376"> another thread (on LBN), I said the following:

If you look at http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php">the top tax rates through to the last change in 2003, you can track that to what preceded and triggered the "great depression" and this current "great recession".

In 1988, the lowest bracket (11%) was RAISED to 15% in order to underhandedly justify taking the highest rate (at the time recently dropped from 50% to 38.5%) down to 28%. Raygun's original goal was to eventually go to 25% flat tax. This idiocy eventually forced Poppy to have to finally raise the top rate back up a bit to 31%, as the race to gouge the bottom hadn't brought in enough revenue. Spending billions and billions over the last 3 decades on folly wars meant the gutting of the domestic agencies that protected U.S. citizens from toxic toys, contaminated food and water, and crumbling infrastructure, thus justifying the rightwing lunatic fringe meme about how government "doesn't work".

In September 2006, for the first time in history, http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/54/biz_06rich400_The-400-Richest-Americans_land.html/">all 400 (and more) of the Forbes 400 were billionaires, underscoring how far askew the regressive tax policies had gone. A mere 6 months later in March 2007, there were nearly 1000. By 2008, the number http://www.forbes.com/2008/03/05/richest-billionaires-people-billionaires08-cx_lk_0305intro.html">topped 1100.

When you have the 2nd wealthiest man in the world admitting (and insisting) that he and his compatriots should be paying more taxes, then something has gone terribly wrong. Warren Buffet doesn't have to spend 30% of his http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/10/billionaires-2009-richest-people_Warren-Buffett_C0R3.html">$37 billion worth (which happens to be an http://www.forbes.com/2008/03/05/buffett-worlds-richest-cx_mm_0229buffetrichest.html">almost 40% loss from his worth the year before), or ~$11.1 billion, to satisfy he and his family's housing like most of the poor, working, and middle classes are forced to do. Even if he did, he would still have some $25 billion left for discretionary spending.

In very rough terms, taxing him at the current 35% = $18 billion (not even counting deductions, etc), leaving him with $20 billion. He certainly isn't spending 30% of the remainder on his house. Even the wealthiest in this class might barely need to spend 1% of an amount like that to maintain luxurious digs. Yet taxing the poverty level family making $37,000 at the current 10% = $3700, leaves them with $33,000, minus ~$10,000 (30%) for housing. That results in ~$23,000 to try to survive (juggling food, utilities, childcare, transportation, clothing, etc.).

That is why the push to re-institute progressive taxation and it needs to go FAR BEYOND the $39% for the highest rate.

Although Shrub's egregious abdication to Darth helped to solidify what would become a nightmarish neocon takeover to form a facist regime, it was 666 Ronald Wilson Raygun who established the mindset, both fiscally and socially, that destroyed this nation.