@ipso You wrote: “Liberals are committed to the fantasy of absolute egalitarianism, Federalism, a welfare state, and general angst and anger at the unfairness of extreme wealth, seemingly blind to the notion of the ‘creation of wealth’ .” That would certainly apply to a few liberals, but not many. I would say that George Soros is liberal, wouldn’t you? Do you think he feels wealth is unfair, or is blind to the notion of the “creation of wealth”? How about Bill Gates and Warren Buffet? They are liberals too.
On many issues, I count myself liberal. But I own a small business. I lobby for a cut in the corporate tax rate. The US corporate tax rate is currently one of the highest in the developed world, and that helps push jobs and corporate tax base offshore. At the same time, I would push to close the loopholes that let lots of huge corporations make billions in profiuts but pay no US taxes whatsoever. Only huge corporations can take advantage of globalization and do that. This makes it nearly impossible for small and mid-sized businesses to compete in areas big corporations chose to enter.
Regarding raising individual tax rates, I would agree that having the lowest rate is good. I don’t think anyone seriously petitions the government to raise their taxes. But we are currently not raising enough tax revenues to cover the cost of what our government does. We could shot down the entire US government outside of Defense and Entitlements and we would STILL not be raising enough in tax revenues to make ends meet. When Reagan slashed the top rate from 70% to 28%, he went way too far. Till that moment, we had been slowly retiring the debt of WWII and the Great Depression. From that mo0ment on, we have hemorrhaged money, till now the debt is nearing 100% of our GDP. We have to turn that debt curve back down, and pulling the rug out from under the poor and seniors is NOT the right way to do it.
The right has used confusion about progressive taxes in its quest to transfer all wealth to a handful of wealthy families and create a banana republic that it’s leaders expect to benefit from. We were creating plenty of millionaires back in the 50s and 60s with top income tax rates far higher than they are today. I would make the top rate only apply to taxable, after deductions income beyond $500,000. But I’d set that top rate at 50% while leaving all other individual rates where they are right now. Progressive taxes are NOT unfair to the rich. Even Bill Gates pays the same rate as everyone else dollar for dollar. The top rate doesn’t apply to anything you earn before you hit the bracket. I’d be just pleased as punch to pay 50% on the next $5 million if I only had to pay 28% on my first $500,000. I’d be able to scrap by somehow—maybe only have fillet-mignon and 1995 Moët & Chandon, Cuvée Dom Pérignon Brut every other night, and restrict myself to just one Ferrari. It’d be tough, but I could do it.
Finally, regarding AIDS, your attitude would almost certainly do a 180 degree turn if you or a loved one suddenly contracted it. The problem is, it would probably then be too late to decide that, indeed, the government should try to find a cure.
We fundamentally agree on Jefferson’s quote about small government. I would just remind you that in Jefferson’s day, they didn’t have acid rain. Rivers didn’t have a nasty habit of catching on fire. The Gulf of Mexico wasn’t full of crude oil killing off one of the most productive fisheries on the planet. Wall Street hadn’t bet so much on ridiculously leveraged junk securities that the US taxpayers had to step in a bail them out to the tune of $1.5 trillion dollars to prevent a second Great Depression. If Jefferson had looked at all that, I suspect he might have seen a valid role for government in dealing with it.
I think @Iclamae got a good take on the small government issue. Government is rather like medicine. I don’t want to pay for any more than I need, but I sure don’t want to save money by not taking medicine I need to stay healthy.