Paul Ryan’s Alternative Budget: $1.5 Million in Tax Bonuses for CEOs
Representative Paul Ryan (R-WI), the Ranking Member of the House Budget Committee, has thoughtfully gone beyond mere whining about the Obama administration’s budget for fellow Obama critics to consider embracing. What’s in it? Well, in a striking break from standard-fare Republican recipes, he’s decided that maybe what the country needs is tax cuts for the rich. I, for one, say it’s about time we gave that a try. My colleague Ben Furnas has some more detailed analysis:
Like the Bush tax cuts, Congressman Ryan and his allies in Congress would cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans and reject public investment or a fairer tax code that would ensure broadly shared prosperity.
The Center for American Progress Action Fund finds that Congressman Ryan’s proposals would cut taxes for the average CEO by $1.5 million per year and do nothing at all for a minimum wage worker.
Ryan calls for lowering the 35%, 33% and 28% income tax brackets to 25%, eliminating the capital gains tax, and cutting the top corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%. These hugely regressive tax cuts would extend the Bush economic strategy of massive tax cuts for the wealthy and gutted government revenue.
It’s strange that the Republicans railing about long-term deficits seem to love long-term deficits when the point of the deficits is to further enrich the rich.
23 Responses to “Paul Ryan’s Alternative Budget: $1.5 Million in Tax Bonuses for CEOs”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
March 24th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
It’s strange that supposedly liberal or “progressive” journalists make fun of Republicans when they hand out hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to the financial industry, but praise a Democratic administration when it does the exact same thing.
March 24th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
This is pure posturing. Just last week Ryan voted to impose a 90% tax on AIG bonuses.
March 24th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Matt is far too ignorant to realize it, but such a measure, if coupled with a stable dollar, would do far more to spur economic growth than any number of government “stimulus” expenditures. Cutting income and corporate taxes increases the marginal returns to investment. That’s not to say government revenues would increase, but it would get businesses and individuals investing again. Liberals like to talk about the 80s boom as if it magically just happened, but Reagan’s cutting of high personal income taxes was the direct spur to growth. And again, that mystical bugaboo of liberal nightmares, the CEO, is not the only person who would benefit.
March 24th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
The first sentence of this post makes no sense.
March 24th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Although it doesn’t really affect the larger point of the post, the bold section should clarify that this number is based on the averge compensation of the CEOs of the 500 largest US companies. Most CEOs in the US don’t even earn $1.5M.
March 24th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
“Liberals like to talk about the 80s boom as if it magically just happened, but Reagan’s cutting of high personal income taxes was the direct spur to growth.”
Hmm. And by the same logic, then, Clinton’s increasing the top marginal income tax rate was a direct spur to growth that resulted in the 90’s boom. And the 85% top marginal income tax rate in the ’50s was a direct spur to growth then, too.
Amazing what a little dose of post hoc ergo propter hoc can do.
March 24th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Bizarro Brad:
“And if we cut taxes to zero, we’ll have INFINITE GROWTH!”
Man, I really hope all Republicans run on *this* tax structure in 2010 and 2012.
March 24th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Brad,
Gee that sounds good and all, but what the Reaganites like to leave out when extolling St. Ron is that by exponentially expanding defense spending while ignoring domestic concerns like the infrastructure, Reagan’s tax cuts led to gigantic deficits that further eroded the long term health of the US economy.
Think I’m wrong? Statistics will show that while GDP has increased over the last three decades, REAL WAGES have actually DROPPED. So, in order to convince people that making the wealthy richer helps the middle class, you have to convince middle class people that they have more wealth than they actually do. The beauty of Reagan was he was able to distract people from his trickle down shell game through the judicious use of wedge issues, and Rambo style military adventures like the Contras and Grenada to keep the low information types excited.
Bush II’s fundamental mistake about supply side economics was believing that military spending apparently is paid for by magic pixies. He financed two major wars completely on a credit card for god’s sake. In comparison, FDR sold war bonds and rationed many goods in order to keep our troops supplied.
So, the obvious pivot should be, “fine, GOP, massive tax cuts for the wealthy. But that means when you want to invade Iran, you damn well better have a detailed plan to pay for it that doesn’t incur one red cent of additional debt”
March 24th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
Why do Republicans continually try to cut taxes for corporations that don’t, you know, actually pay taxes?
Or is this clown just concerned with the 20% of American businesses that have yet to find their way around contributing, and wants to give them a break?
March 24th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
I’m completely confused, if low taxes = wealth for all, then how exactly was the US Economy the biggest in the whole wide world in the 1950’s, when the top marginal rate was 90%? Hell, the US gave soldiers a free college education then, would today’s GOP have objected to that?
March 24th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
Pete says: Bush II’s fundamental mistake about supply side economics was believing that military spending apparently is paid for by magic pixies. He financed two major wars completely on a credit card for god’s sake.
What, no magic budget pixies? No wonder my car was repossed! And I’ll bet George & Dick got lots of frequent flyer miles for that war financing.
March 24th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
Well, CParis, W flew into Iraq to cut that fake turkey that one time. And I’m sure Cheney got some Gitmo-torture reward bucks from the Discover people.
March 24th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Yeah, we need to give the rich more money so that they’ll build more factories and strip malls–alongside the empty factories and empty strip malls.
Wake up, Republican children. We have a huge overcapacity problem. Your stupid little fantasies about how tax cuts are the answer to every question ever asked are just fucking stupid. Assholes.
March 24th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
I think the Republican interest in tax cuts for the rich is understandable if looked at in a historical context. I believe that 30 years ago, marginal tax rates were extremely high, around 70% or more if you combine state and federal taxes. In this context, decades ago, the supply-side gospel made sense: reducing these very high tax rates would tend to encourage more productive activity, and actually raise tax revenues. Now, of course, it’s 30 years later, and we just don’t have those kinds of marginal tax rates any longer. Reducing marginal tax rates from 40% to 30% (again, counting state plus federal) is in theory one way to stimulate economic activity, but it’s just plain silly to say that this is the best way to RAISE tax revenues, and close the deficit gap. In the current economic times, high marginal tax rates is simply not the urgent problem that it was decades ago. Republican really need a way to contribute constructively to the discussion of how we can reduce our long-term deficits. This is an important issue, and screaming “just cut taxes on the wealthy” is not helping.
March 24th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
That’s not to say government revenues would increase, but it would get businesses and individuals investing again.
The problem is not that people don’t have money to invest. It’s that they are afraid to invest it because there is a lack of demand.
March 24th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Buy Propecia Online…
http://www.folkd.com/user/buypropeciaonline Buy Propecia Online…
March 24th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
I can write the next Republican Party economic platform.
If the economy is still in the shitter:
“Cut Taxes! Eliminate capital gains tax!! Slash taxes to 20%!! Eliminate the payroll tax!! Eliminate the gas tax!! Cut/eliminate the [insert tax of your choice] tax!!”
If the economy has recovered and we’re enjoying growing GDP and all-around economic warm and fuzzies:
“Cut Taxes! Eliminate capital gains tax!! Slash taxes to 20%!! Eliminate the payroll tax!! Eliminate the gas tax!! Cut/eliminate the [insert tax of your choice] tax!!”
If the economic results are mixed:
“Cut Taxes! Eliminate capital gains tax!! Slash taxes to 20%!! Eliminate the payroll tax!! Eliminate the gas tax!! Cut/eliminate the [insert tax of your choice] tax!!”
The republicans are very predictable.
You can write their social platform just as easily: “No abortion, No birth control, No stem-cell research, No gay-marriage, No civil unions, No brown people!”**
** of course, they will never actually legislate any of this (ballot initiatives aren’t legislation)
March 24th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
Why is Yglesias sitting at the Press Conference? Shouldn’t those seats go to the older journalists? Let young Matthew stand.
March 24th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
GOPers want another tax cut for the rich. Democrats want another banker bailout for the rich. See the difference between the 2 parties? You do see the difference don’t you? Don’t you?
March 24th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
Here come the trolls and economic geniuses borne of the Reaganites to claim that lower the upper tax brackets spurs growth and increases tax revenue.
Yeah,yeah. Of course, this completely ignores interest rates and the fed fund rates.
But it does prove, again, that when someone is locked in their ideological box that they are not the proper ones to solve tough problems.
March 25th, 2009 at 2:45 am
GOPers want another tax cut for the rich. Democrats want another banker bailout for the rich.
and kafka is a posturing asshole, who doesn’t mind bank runs and empty atm machines if it would prop up some stupid economic ideology. That’s what’s really, really, important.
April 8th, 2009 at 11:33 pm
Hey, cool tips. Perhaps I’ll buy a bottle of beer to the person from that forum who told me to visit your site
April 15th, 2009 at 9:15 am
My fellow on Orkut shared this link with me and I’m not dissapointed at all that I came to your blog.