This almost has to be a joke.
In lieu of a “war tax” to pay for a troop increase in Afghanistan, Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson (NE) is proposing war bonds.
“We didn’t have a war tax in the second World War,” Nelson said, and instead the government sold Americans bonds.”People invested in their country, in that fashion [and] made a lot of sense back then. I don’t know why it might not make sense today, certainly in lieu of jumping to tax.”
First of all, taxes did rise during the second World War. Also, the top tax rate back then was already at 94% for the bracket over $200,000 ($2.5 million in today’s dollars).
Second of all, whether you’re borrowing from China or from Americans, you’re, um, still BORROWING. War bonds are just bonds, borrowed funds that have to be paid back with interest. The point of a war tax is to finance an escalation up front, instead of paying more in the long run and hiding the true cost.
The entire “war surtax” debate has shown the complete hypocrisy of the Washington establishment. They spend untold hours of speechifying and all kinds of printer’s ink bemoaning the budget deficit and how we’re putting unsustainable costs onto our children and grandchildren. When one Congressman calls their bluff – when he merely asks that Americans share the sacrifice of the troops and cover the costs of one war for one year – 6% of total war costs – the same fiscal scolds demur, if they speak at all – most of them haven’t said a damn word about this, being too busy screaming about how providing meager benefits in Social Security will bankrupt the nation.
In fact, even the Congressman who offered the bill, David Obey, is seemingly admitting that it’s not a serious effort and was simply done to “send a message.” If the message is that members of Congress think spending that helps people at home is dangerous and wrong, but any spending that projects hegemonic power abroad is magical and just, then message received. I mean, we’re begging for a piddling amount of infrastructure spending to put America back to work while we construct all kinds of public works projects in colonial outposts.
Incidentally, the White House isn’t even pretending that they’ll keep the war on budget – they expect a supplemental funding bill in the spring. And remember, the “budget” for troops in Afghanistan doesn’t even count all the shadow army money for contractors.
It would be hard for me to respond to any of these guardians of fiscal rectitude without laughing in their face.



34 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
“It would be hard for me to respond to any of these guardians of fiscal rectitude without laughing in their face”
SPITTING
Bunning’s reading skills leave much to be desired.
Well, then, issuing Health Bonds must be just the ticket, Senator Ben Nelson doubtless would agree, to allow us to implement the most-important health care reform provisions ASAP, instead of artificially waiting 5 years or so, just to meet an arbitrary, misleading and politicized deficit target.
How about it, Ben?
It sounds like Ol’ Ben is confusing War Bonds with Barry Bonds or something.
Hmmm, we won’t be able to buy them because we don’t have jobs, are being financially crippled by the health care industry, and our economy tanked? But, hey, good luck with that suggestion, Senator Nelson.
Off budget for war, in-budget for society. Way beyond mere sausage making at this point.
Actually David, it would be hard for me to respond to any of these guardians of fiscal rectitude without punching them in the face! It would be nice if Progressives and Liberals used this as leverage and play some real hardball. Since Congress has to approve this, Progressives should inform Reid that they will go along with this request for troops in exchange for a strong public option or maybe even Medicaid for all.
And he can say this shit with a straight face.
Jeezus, they really do think we’re stupid.
Do damned bad so many of us are.
This is beyond infuriating. I like the commenter above (powwow), and I wish some reporter would ask Mr. Nelson if he would support health bonds to pay for better health care. I’d pay to see that. That’s my idea of pay tv.
Going back to the 1943 tax code would be very helpful for a number of reasons not only related to financing the war. Can we do it?
I don’t think the lathe cuts between spending money “here” vs spending it “there.”
Rather, Our Leaders think money is spent well on themselves and their concerns and spent poorly on us and our concerns.
Well, the teabaggers sure seem to want to go back to the “good old days”!
O/T
By the way, I see Dick Cheney is touting his bullshit again over the air, calling Obama “weak” etc. etc. etc.
Off topic question for thought.
Close your eyes and imagine the former Vice President (Gore) in 2003 speaking out publicly against W & the Dick and their war in Iraq.
Got that visual?? You seeing what I’m seeing?
Fucking total fucking hypocrites.
The guy who invented the unicameral legislature is rolling over in his grave.
Or Gary US Bonds.
That would be the “good old days” that existed only in their fevered little minds? The idealized ’50s personified by Donna Reed or Jane Wyatt vacuuming the house wearing pearls and high heels? That never actually existed anywhere but on the TV screen? Those “good old days?”
I had a shop teacher in hs that I helped build a trailer in his garage. Young dude with a young attractive wife. She vacuumed in pedal pushers and bra. Hot stuff for a 16yo. Or a 66yo. LOL
Kinda makes you look at vacuuming in a whole new light, huh?
Sure they existed. I remember buying war stamps and filling my books and when you got enough books, you bought a bond. Of course, we didn’t have polio vaccine, iPods, and tv but what the heck. s/
I can’t believe all these Rethugs are touting increasing funding for Medicare. Fuckin’ world is comin’ to an end. Too bad Sessions is so nauseating to listen to.
I remember those. Bought ‘em at school.
nope.
fed gov budget is not analogous to household budget.
usa current account deficit funds china’s dollar savings, not the other way around. same story domestically, fed deficit spending funds private sector savings. and taxes do not fund fed spending.
Jon Walker is upstairs!
To Congressional Staffers: Hire Yourselves Some Help And Give Yourselves A Raise
“The entire “war surtax” debate has shown the complete hypocrisy of the Washington establishment. They spend untold hours of speechifying and all kinds of printer’s ink bemoaning the budget deficit and how we’re putting unsustainable costs onto our children and grandchildren.”
And yet you still advocate spending trillions on new entitlements and a second sti… I mean job creation program. Who is the hypocrite here? The most pathetic thing here is how the Democrats (and liberal moron bloggers), after the record deficits they have run up this year are actually trying to act like they are the party of fiscal discipline. And what issue do they use to try and draw the line? Why the elimination of those who murdered 3000 Americans and those that harbored those mass-murderers. What a fucking shock. All we need to keep the US safe is love, right?
And even more fucking pathetic is all the talk of shared sacrifice, even though the House bill would only tax those making over $200,000. So only those who make a certain amount need participate in this shared sacrifice evidently. And if this is supposed to be all about “shared sacrifice”, why are you people not advocating a surtax be added to the Senate Health care bill that all Americans have to pay. I would love to see someone call your fucking bluff on that one.
Everyone with a fucking brain knows this “war surtax” has absolutely nothing, at all, with “shared sacrifice” and everything to do with making the war too politically costly to fight, thus speeding the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. So please, drop the fucking charade about this being about deficits and shared sacrifice. If that were the case, you would be calling for surtaxes on every other government service, and wow, what a surprise, you aren’t.
Hypocrisy indeed.
Let’s talk about paying for things we ‘want’…
And while we do, you better get cracking on more grandchildren, because they are already leveraged up to their necks – how much is left?
Nice mouth.
So, you were complaining when BushCo doubled the national debt after saying it would never make things more difficult and pass the debt to future generations?
And since it is mostly people from families making far less than $250K per year that are serving in the military and doing the actual fighting, what more sacrifice do you wish to see them make?
Can you calculate your odds of being victim of a foreign Islamic terrorist attack on U.S. soil? How about your odds of getting colon cancer?
I realize math isn’t everyone’s strong suit, so feel free to ask for assistance if necessary.
I don’t know why everyone is getting their shorts in a bunch over money. This is a non issue! We have Obama in the White House and free Obamoney floating everywhere like in a ticker tape parade.
Free money for all, and war bonds for Ben.
So lets look at a rational tax structure and the effect that would have.
I’ll just look at the top three catagories:
Super rich > $87M/year income
Very rich > $ 5/year income
Rich > $250K/year
The current effective federal income tax rate for these groups is about 16%.
This yields about $1T in revenue, about %65 of FIT collections.
Change the rates as follows:
Super rich: %90
Very rich %75
Rich %30
Every one elses taxes can go down.
This would yield $2.15T in revenue. Deficit problem solved. Income disparity problem solved. No need to mandate salary levels, not problem with health care. Infrastructure deficits solved.
The current tax structure is THE fundamental problem in this country. Solve that and the rest of the pieces fall into line.
HOPE BONDS is another way to fix America’s financial difficulties!
Derrick Crowe is liveblogging Obama’s speech, upstairs!
Liveblogging the President’s Afghanistan Speech
War bonds are used to engage the population, of course, but their REAL purpose is to put a lid on inflation, what with all the extraordinary gov’t spending. We don’t need a lid on inflation right now. What we need is extraordinary gov’t spending on something much more useful than chasing Arabs across the sand. OH! OH! OH! The military complex has dozens of reasons why I’m nuts and they aren’t. I’ve heard them all.
I have no respect for commentators who lie about what their opponent said in order to make a cute point. Dayen reports Nelson as saying, “instead of borrowing, sell bonds,” which would be pretty dumb because of course, selling bonds is a form of borrowing. In fact, however, it turns out that what Nelson actually said was “instead of taxing, sell bonds,” which, however advisable or inadvisable it may be, is not obviously stupid in the way Dayen’s lying attribution to Nelson is. In particular, taxing is not a form of borrowing.
As for Dayen’s account of the difference between a bond issue and a tax, it’s wrong, as selise explains above.
Does anyone have a source to verify the assertion that the 1943 tax code was at 94% for anyone over $200,000?
Apparently that was 1944-1945 tax years, with an effective 90% limit kicking in somewhere along the way:
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/02inpetr.pdf