|
Edited on Mon Jun-27-11 07:01 PM by Pistarkle
Last week, Republican House Majority Leader, Eric Cantor, rushed to the microphones to cop out on bi-partisan negotiations aimed at ironing out a compromise to resolve the budget deficit. The weirdest thing about Cantor’s exit is that it was all about protecting the TAX interests of the very wealthy, oil and gas industries, and big corporations. Take a look at these deficit cutting options:
$ 77.4 billion - UNTAXED profits for America’s top 5 corporations
$495 billion - UNTAXED profits for America’s 33 remaining top corporations
$4 billion - oil and gas tax welfare subsidies
$1 billion - tax havens for the very wealthy
$1 trillion - total estate tax break for the wealthy up to 20 years
50% - tax rates for the wealthy under Reagan
35% - extended Republican-led Congress Bush era tax rates for the wealthy
80% - national percentage of new income going to millionaires and billionaires
Doesn’t it stand to reason that the deficit would be significantly reduced, if Republican House representatives CUT TAX BREAKS for the wealthy oil/gas companies, and big corporations?
Republican House representatives had NO problems cutting funds affecting the middle class, the poor, the unemployed, children, and senior citizens including – but not limited to - education, health care premiums for seniors; WIC Nutritional Programs for children and infants; the Health Care Exchange program; community health centers; heating oil for impoverished seniors; JOB programs; home mortgage assistance programs; maternal and child health care programs; environmental protection programs; flood control and coastal emergency programs, and women’s cancer screenings affected by cuts to Planned Parenthood. Why not add ending tax breaks for the very wealthy, gas/oil companies and big corporations to the mix?
Seems like a no brainer to me. What do you think?
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(123 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
