weaselzippers
Great news just in time for the SOTU.
Via Daily Wire:
On Tuesday, ExxonMobil announced it would invest a
whopping $10 billion in America’s infrastructure as it develops the
Golden Pass liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility in Sabine Pass.
According to Exxon Mobil, “Construction will begin in the first quarter
of 2019 and the facility is expected to start up in 2024.”
Darren Woods, chairman and chief executive officer of Exxon Mobil
Corporation, stated, “Golden Pass will provide an increased, reliable,
long-term supply of liquefied natural gas to global gas markets,
stimulate local growth and create thousands of jobs. The extensive
experience of ExxonMobil and Qatar Petroleum provides the expertise,
resources and financial strength needed to construct and operate an
integrated liquefaction and export facility in the United States.”
The statement from Exxon Mobil read:
The $10+ billion liquefaction project will have capacity to produce
around 16 million tons of LNG per year. It is expected to create about
9,000 jobs over the five-year construction period and more than 200
permanent jobs during operations. Preliminary estimates by an
independent study indicate the project could generate up to $31 billion
in U.S. economic gains and more than $4.6 billion in direct federal,
state and local tax revenues over the life of the project.
Keep reading…
Thank You WZ, Daily Wire and Nick.
It's not rocket science. Never was. One more sterling reason to cut taxes further by taking 'Mental Health' OFF the tax serfs backs. They're less likely to become depressed when it's easier for them to provide for their own needs and desires.
CNSNews
Romina Boccia | August 24, 2018 | 9:19 AM EDT
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is continuing to produce tangible benefits for Americans, growing the U.S. economy and making it more competitive for business investment and job creation.
Wages are rising, unemployment rates are declining, and there is more money in taxpayers’ pockets.
The larger economy materializes as significantly higher take-home pay for the typical American. According to a recent Heritage Foundation report, the average American will be $26,000 richer over the next 10 years, thanks to tax cuts and a larger economy.
There is even more good news: Tax reform has not only encouraged investment domestically, but has fostered a more attractive investment climate on an international scale.
The corporate tax rate cut (from 35 percent to 21 percent) significantly improves America’s position in global financial markets. Businesses are more inclined to conduct and expand their operations within U.S. borders and employ American workers.
Yet some have condemned the tax cuts on this very basis, arguing that they contribute to “unhealthy” international tax competition. These critics fear countries will attempt to undercut each other with lower and lower tax rates.
A New York Times op-ed called international tax competition a “collective action problem,” suggesting that countries would benefit more from higher corporate tax rates, and that they fail to cooperate in imposing higher rates because of incentives to compete for businesses and high-skilled labor.
The article claimed that the U.S. business tax cuts contribute to this problem by reducing tax revenue, thereby harming America.
That argument is flawed both in economic theory and in practice.
A recent paper authored by Assaf Razin and Efraim Sadka, published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, examines the implications of financial globalization, where mobile capital can easily respond to tax and regulatory conditions by moving across borders.
The paper uses a simple model to demonstrate that there are benefits from tax competition, and it shows that countries are better off when their corporate taxes are lower.
The model assumes that as financial globalization increases, businesses can relocate to more competitive economic environments at a lower cost.
When tax rates in one country are consistently elevated, mobile capital moves to other jurisdictions. New investments in factories and research are made in countries with lower taxes.
Because the capital can move to other countries, workers are left with the tab through lower wages and fewer jobs. The “corporate tax burden” is shifted to labor or consumption in places with high capital taxes.
The high capital tax rate results in a less productive economy and smaller tax base. This combination causes revenue to decrease as there is overall less economic wealth generated and, therefore, less to be taxed.
In contrast, a lower corporate tax burden attracts businesses, creating an environment of greater innovation and prosperity, with benefits for all residents.
The model finds that workers at all skill and income levels are better off with lower business taxes. A bigger economy provides opportunities for greater financial security and income mobility, decreasing the need for government-provided assistance.
A new job or a higher wage help people in need more than a welfare check ever could. Less government intervention and a lower corporate tax rate helps residents, providing them with valuable earnings opportunity to become wealthier and more financially independent.
Tax burden is one of the 12 factors in The Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom affecting the level of economic freedom that citizens can enjoy. Without accounting for the new tax law, the U.S. had a tax burden score of 65.1 in the index. The U.S. was nearly 12 points below the world average score of 76.6, and ranked as 153rd out of the 180 countries whose economic freedom the index assesses.
While the U.S. previously had the highest corporate tax rate, at 35 percent, among the 36 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries, the new 21 percent rate is below that of 19 OECD countries.
The U.S.’ index score is likely to improve with the next iteration and demonstrates that the U.S. was in need of tax reform to be more globally competitive.
In addition to the corporate tax rate, the base of what’s taxed matters as well.
The tax law’s changes to expensing rules have important economic effects. Full expensing allows businesses to deduct all investment expenses from taxable income at the time the investments are made. This change encourages more investment in productive capital.
These expensing provisions, which begin to phase out after 2022, should be extended permanently for even greater economic growth.
According to sound economic theory, the tax cuts are benefiting our economy through encouraging investment by domestic and international businesses, and there is ample evidence this theory holds true in practice.
There has been rapid growth in capital spending, with many examples of both small and large businesses investing in expanded operations. This is increasing worker productivity and wages.
Everyday Americans are enjoying greater wealth and freedom, thanks to the tax cuts. It’s time to make them permanent.
Romina Boccia focuses on federal spending and the national debt as the deputy director of Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies and the Grover M. Hermann fellow in federal budgetary affairs at The Heritage Foundation.
Julia Howe is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.
Editor's Note: This piece was originally published by The Daily Signal.
Thank You Ms Boccia and CNS.
townhall
Julio Gonzalez
Posted: Aug 17, 2018 12:01 AM
Thanks to President Trump, Christmas will come twice for Floridians this year— if “Tax Cuts 2.0” can make it through Congress by December.
Floridians are already enjoying the benefits of President Trump’s first tax plan enacted at the beginning of this year, but Congressional Republicans are currently drafting new legislation to make those changes to our tax code permanent, along with some additional improvements.
Florida is perhaps the number one showcase of how President Trump’s tax plan is benefiting Americans. Dozens of businesses in our state have either increased salaries, raised hourly wages, or awarded employees one-time bonuses of $1,000 or more.
For cities in Florida like Jacksonville, the tax plan has resulted in an unemployment rate of a near all-time low of 3.1 percent. Despite the destruction of Hurricane Irma, Florida added nearly 200,000 jobs in 2017 alone, and our state’s overall unemployment rate is at the lowest level in over a decade.
Nearly four million American jobs have been created nationwide since November 2016, with one million created since the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act became law earlier this year. In addition to unemployment being at the lowest point in decades, job openings are at a record high. More than 213,000 new jobs were added in June, adding to the 6.5 million job openings for the month — marking the first time that there have been more job openings than job seekers since 2000.
And thanks to a doubling of the standard deduction and lower tax rates, 90 percent of Americans saw bigger paychecks this year.
But President Trump believes the progress shouldn’t stop there.
That’s why Republicans in Washington are pushing for “Tax Cuts 2.0” this fall. While the first tax package reduced the individual tax rates, some of those provisions are set to expire in the coming years. The new tax package could make some of those cuts permanent.
To provide the economy another boost, President Trump recently said, “One of the things I'm thinking about is bringing the 21% [corporate tax rate] down to 20%,” adding it would provide a “great stimulus.”
Finally, the 2.0 legislation would encourage Americans to save more. A new reportfound that 65 percent of Americans save little to nothing at all, causing problems in their retirement.
However, none of this will happen if obstructionist politicians like Senator Bill Nelson stay in office. He will undoubtedly resist any efforts to put more money in the pockets of Floridians.
Nelson voted against the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, saying, "It's going to give a few nuggets to the middle class…” Yet, we just learned that our economy grew at a pace of 4.1 percent for the first time in years, on track for an annual growth rate of over 3 percent. In the wake of tremendous economic news, tax cuts opponents like Senator Nelson will have a tough time arguing they were right about the historic Trump tax plan that is producing epic results.
But wait, it gets worse. During his tenure in the Senate, Nelson proposed a job killing energy tax hike, voted against the Bush tax cuts, and voted over 300 times in favor of raising taxes and fees.
At nearly every turn, Senator Bill Nelson betrays Floridians by voting to increase their taxes — stifling business growth and job creation in the process. But what can you expect from someone who voted with President Obama 98 percent of the time?
Tax cuts are one of the best ways government can get out of the way of job producers and job seekers. They’re predicated on the simple notion that you spend your money better than Washington does.
This will undoubtedly help reverse the poverty and inequities that have plagued our country over the past decade and allow everyone to participate in the American dream.
Let’s do tax cuts and secure new leadership for Florida to lock in this extraordinary progress for good.
Thank You Mr Gonzolez and Townhall
Inconvenient facts for the "Tax Cuts For The Rich Hurt The Poor" crowd.
dailycaller
Tim Pearce Energy Reporter
9:13 AM 05/04/2018
Unemployment dropped to 3.9 percent in April, the lowest unemployment rate since 2000, after remaining unchanged at 4.1 percent for several months, the Department of Labor reported Friday.
The latest Bureau of Labor Statistics report revealed roughly 164,000 jobs were added last month, about 30,000 fewer than some experts predicted but continuing the longest streak of consecutive monthly job growth at 91 months. The average wage also rose 4 cents an hour, and it’s up 2.6 percent since the start of the year.
“We’ve continued to add jobs routinely every month for so long, and the unemployment rate we have reached is amazing,” ZipRecruiter Chief Economist Catherine Barrera told The New York Times. “This is the economy doing well.”
March jobs numbers were revised up from 103,000 up to 135,000 while February’s were revised down slightly from 326,000 to 324,000.
Labor force participation has remained low, however, falling for the second straight month to 62.8 percent, near the lowest level recorded in the past half century, according to WSJ.
Thank You Mr Pearce and President Trump.
dailycaller
Henry RodgersPolitical Reporter
11:39 AM 02/07/2018
Ed; Video @ link.
Following the footsteps of many major corporations and small business in the U.S., Chipotle announced it will give bonuses to all of its employees Wednesday due to the passing of the GOP tax reform bill.
The company will give bonuses ranging from $250- $1,000 to its 71,000 employees across the U.S., according to an announcement which cited the companies savings due to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act signed by President Donald Trump on Dec. 22. Chipotle will also offer its employees new benefits such as cash and stock bonuses and improved paid parental leave.
“In celebration of its dedicated employees, Chipotle Mexican Grill (NYSE: CMG) announced enhancements to benefits that will reach all of its 71,000 employees. These enhancements, which include special cash and stock bonuses and enhanced paid parental leave, are part of the company’s ongoing commitment to advancing both the professional and personal lives of its employees,” Chipotle said in a statement. “Resulting from savings due to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the new benefits have already begun rolling out to Chipotle employees.”
Chipotle joins dozens of companies across the U.S. that have given their employees benefits the GOP tax bill passed, which dropped the top corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent. (RELATED: America First: Check Out How 11 Of The Country’s Biggest Companies Are Helping Workers After Trump’s Tax Cuts)
House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi has called the worker bonuses “crumbs” multiple times since the bill passed.
Thank You Mr Rodgers, the DC, and President Trump.
gateway pundit
Lucian Wintrich
Since the Senate approved Trump’s tax bill 51-48 in a midnight showdown, we have already seen major economic wins in this country:
TRUMP EFFECT: AT&T Announces it Will Pay 200,000 US Employees ‘Special $1,000 Bonus’ Due to GOP Tax Reform Bill
TRUMP EFFECT: Boeing Announces $300 Million Investment Initiative Thanks To GOP Tax Reform
TRUMP EFFECT: Fifth Third Bancorp Raises Minimum Hourly Wage, Issues Bonuses To Employees Due To GOP Tax Reform
TRUMPMAS: Comcast Announces $50 BILLION INVESTMENT Due To Historic GOP Tax Reform
Well, here’s another one.
For all the scowling that Apple’s Tim Cook did during those Tech council meetings, he might not be able to feign outrage over the Republican president any longer. It has now become affordable for Apple to fulfill a longtime goal and repatriate $252B in cash that currently sits overseas. Via 9to5Mac:
Apple would be able to take advantage of a one-time tax break, paying just 15.5% tax on the cash, rather than the 35% it would have had to pay previously.
If Apple chose to bring all of the cash back to the US, it would pay $39.1B in tax. And this would be practical because the company has already set aside $36.3B – almost the entire amount – for exactly that eventuality. But there’s one catch …
Reuters notes that Apple could be caught out by one provision in the bill. The bill introduces a minimum tax of around 13% on income from patents held overseas, and this could put an end to one method Apple has used to reduce its tax bill.
The treatment of foreign patent profits is important to Apple because shifting those profits overseas was a cornerstone of its tax practices for decades.
In effect, the company attributes a large portion of the value of its products to patents and other intellectual property such as trademarks. Apple then assigns some of that IP, proportional to overseas sales, to subsidiaries in countries with low tax rates and assesses substantial patent royalties on sales. Those royalties then flow back to those low-tax locations, like Ireland.
This means that it no longer matters where the patents are held – Apple still has to pay US tax on the revenue assigned to them.
To further discourage companies from assigning patents to overseas subsidiaries, the tax bill also reduces the tax on patent income within the USA. This falls to 13.1%, meaning that Apple Inc might as well hold onto ownership of future patents, as there’s little to no benefit in shipping them off to tax havens.
Thank You Lucian Wintrich and Gateway Pundit
townhall
Matt Vespa
Posted: Dec 22, 2017 4:04 PM
We all know the left wing lurch the Democratic Party has taken over the past for years. You saw that with the energized progressive cohorts that flocked to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) in the 2016 Democratic primaries. Now, with tax reform done, Democrats are licking their lips. They think they can use this as the ICBM to nuke the Republicans in the midterms, and that could happen, but this is all based on the bill’s bad poll numbers. Analysis and even some publications, like The Washington Post, admit that this bill will cut taxes for 80 percent of Americans over the next eight years. It’s a gamble on both sides. Yet, for Democrats, that also includes explaining why they voted against middle class tax relief, betted against the American worker, and want business in general to fail in order to screw Trump. If this bill becomes more popular, and it’s bound to, and people start seeing more money in their pockets—the defense of this will be, well—less than stellar. You’re already seeing some acknowledgement, like with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), who admitted in a radio interview that there are provisions of this tax reform package that will help the people of his state. Manchin voted against the bill.
continue reading
Thank You Mr Vespa, Townhall, and WSJ.
Has to be said again.
Corporations Do Not pay taxes out of their own bottom line.
If they did, it would Reduce what they have left to pay their stockholders who would pull their money Out and the corporation would be Out of Business.
Corporations tack their Corp Income Tax bill onto the final retail price of their goods and services and Pass Them Through to the end consumer.
People who support the myth of Making The Rich Pay their Fair Share are actually supporting paying that 'Fair Share' out of their own pockets on everything they buy from a Corporation.
Everything.
Let's say you buy something for $100.
Does it make you feel good to know that even with a Corp Income Tax of 20%, you're only paying $80 for the product and the last $20 more - over and above the sales taxes (it's actually Double taxation) - is to cover the Corporate Income Tax Racket?
freebeacon
Ali Meyer
December 12, 2017 5:00 am
State and local taxes make a 20 percent corporate tax rate increase to nearly 25 percent
Pete Sepp, president of the National Taxpayers Union, is arguing for a 20 percent corporate tax rate, saying that going any higher, even by one or two percent, will make the United States less competitive.
The National Taxpayers Union along with Americans For Prosperity, Americans for Tax Reform, Club for Growth, and Freedom Partners, joined 26 organizations to urge Congress to keep the corporate tax rate at 20 percent.
Speaking on a conference call today, Sepp explained that state and local taxes make the corporate tax rate even higher, so a 20 percent rate is essentially a 25 percent rate.
"Even if we are reducing this rate to 20 percent there is still effective state and local corporate tax rates to consider," he said. "Our combined tax rate even with a 20 percent federal rate will still approach close to 25 percent when you factor in the state and local issue."
"When you do that you then come to realize that at the end of the day a 20 percent corporate tax rate makes us just barely competitive with the average OECD rate, which is a little under 24 percent," he said.
Grover Norquist, president of Americans For Tax Reform, echoed this statement and said a corporate rate of 20 percent was already a compromise.
"Twenty was a compromise, we wanted to be at 15," Norquist said. "As Pete Sepp points out if we really want to be competitive we need to be at 15 because a lot of state and local governments have income taxes. Fifteen is 20 and 20 is 25."
Norquist argued against the argument that moving down the rate to 21 or 22 from 35 is progress.
"Twenty is a number you can stand behind," he said. "Twenty-one, 22—those are positions on the way back to 25."
Pete Sepp also says that a 20 percent rate is a unifying factor for wage growth since it helps both families and businesses.
"If we want to see wage growth to help America's families, a rate reduction on employers has to be part of the picture," Sepp said. "Even the congressional budget office, which is a known skeptic of the effects of tax reform, has acknowledged that at least one dollar out of every four in corporate rate reduction is passed through to wage earners. Other economists, more in the mainstream, put that at 50 percent or higher in terms of the amount passed through to wage earners."
"Reduce rates, broaden the base," Sepp said. "When you broaden the base, you also simplify the system. Again, the reduction of the corporate tax rate to 20 percent is vitally important for all of these reasons."
"To them, they see the House passed 20 percent, the Senate passed 20 percent, they see that Trump is demanding 20 percent, so they should be frustrated and cynical as to why there is this discussion," said Andy Roth, vice president at Club for Growth. "The sad fact is that politicians are trying to save their little carveout or their little exemption that they want to keep in that unfortunately costs money in Washington that would otherwise go to pro growth tax cuts like the corporate tax cut."
Thank You Ms Meyer and freebeacon.
dailycaller
Robert Donachie Capitol Hill and Health Care Reporter
2:58 PM 12/11/2017
Republicans’ proposals to reform the U.S. tax code have revealed the exorbitant tax rates Democratic-controlled states have saddled on their citizens, and the Democrats’ response is making them look clueless.
House and Senate Republicans bills, respectively, slash the corporate tax rates, reduce the number of tax brackets and individual tax rates, lower tax rates on the majority of American small businesses, incentivize capital investment through short-term expensing, increase tax credits for having children (which Democratic senators voted against) and include a number of other arguably positive features.
Democrats in elected office and the media are doing everything within their power to sow disdain for the Republican reform effort in the hearts of American voters, arguing that GOP lawmakers are giving concessions to the wealthy at the expense of middle-class taxpayers and are working to increase the federal deficit–a complete diversion from conservative orthodoxy.
The New York Times editorial board openly lobbied its readers and the public days before the Senate voted to contact their senators and rail against Senate Republicans’ bill. The Times opinion page specifically called out the Senate’s bill “$1.4 trillion” increase to the federal deficit — the amount the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicts the deficit to rise in ten years.
The newfound concern among Democrats for the fiscal state of the nation is interesting, given that Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, one of the party’s leading candidates for the White House in 2016, proposed a budget that would have added $21 trillion to the nation’s debt over the next decade. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s proposed plans for tax reform and the federal budget were expected to shrink long-run GDP roughly 1 percent and marginally increase the federal deficit.
The lamentations of Democrats is also not all that surprising when one examines the states deemed to be “winners” and “losers” from the GOP bills. Democratic-controlled states are the ones most likely to get hit the hardest from the bill, but not because of the changes to the tax code but because of high tax rates and regulations the states’ legislators have imposed over the course of decades.
California and New York are the shining examples Democrats are using to point out the ills that would befall states if Congress approves the respective bills in conference, which is expected to occur as early as this week.
The New York Times wrote a piece in late November detailing the various tax credits, tax-exempt bonds and deductions Californian citizens and small businesses would lose if Congress passed the Senate’s tax reform bill as it stands. These credits and deductions are indeed vital for many families and small businesses. Without the assistance, many individuals and business owners could not afford to stay in California.
The state’s two most prominent Democratic political figures — House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Kamala Harris — came out swinging against the tax bill. Pelosi likened the tax bill to “Armageddon,” while Harris called her colleagues bill “a victory for corporations and the top 1% of Americans, not teachers, not seniors, and certainly not the middle class.”
California Gov. Jerry Brown called the bill “evil in the extreme.”
What the Times, Pelosi, Harris and Brown fail to address in their criticisms are the underlying reasons that Californians need the government’s financial assistance to live and run a business within the state. The state and local community legislators have instilled stringent, often prohibitory, zoning and environmental regulations that have retarded the building of low-income housing, caused hundreds of thousands to flee the state and housing prices to skyrocket.
California-state lawmakers ultimately have control over a number of their state taxes, like personal income, sales, property and other state-specific taxes. Taxpayers pay the majority of their tax burdens not to the federal government, but to their own state and local governments. In California, roughly 11 percent of the income generated in the state goes towards paying taxes, adding up to roughly $5,230 per capita.
California lost 109,000 more people than it gained in 2016, while comparatively low-tax and cost of living states, like Texas and Florida, saw a 126,000 and 207,000 net uptick in population.
The Times wrote another story only days after the Senate’s tax bill passed that launched into a surprising defense against raising taxes on wealthy New Yorkers.
The primary complaint the Times raised was that Republicans are stripping local and state income tax deductions, which would cause rich New Yorkers to pay the full brunt of local taxes on the residents of New York City. Many of those wealthy earners have lavish jobs on Wall Street or within the borders of Manhattan and were the targets of Democratic candidates only one year ago on the presidential campaign trail.
New York, like California, is a state run by Democrats and one that taxes its citizens at a higher rate than any other state in the nation. The state’s combined state and local income tax burden tops California’s at 12.7 percent. That amounts to roughly $6,993.42 per New York taxpayer.
Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer of New York called his colleagues’ bill the “heights of hypocrisy,” while the mayor of his hometown of New York City is trying to levy a 14 percent tax increase to pay for improvements to the city’s subway system.
New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio also faces between a $65 and $142 billion shortfall on the its pension obligations, which the city does not expect to pay off for at least another 15 years.
If the goal of Democrats is to ensure their constituents are getting a fair shake from the Republicans tax reform push, it would seem that state and local tax and regulatory reform could help them achieve those ends.
Follow Robert on Twitter
Thank You Mr Donachie and the DC.
townhall
Michael Barone
Posted: Dec 08, 2017 12:01 AM
Are the current Republican tax bills, passed by the House and Senate and being reconciled in conference committee, an attack on "feds, eds and meds"? That's a reference to the government, health care and education jobs that local Democrats in Dayton, Ohio, told Sen. Sherrod Brown have been fueling the area's comeback.
The Dayton area's reliance on government is in tension with its history as an incubator of private-sector inventiveness, which more than a century ago produced the first cash register, the first airplane and the first automotive electronic ignition.
That's a melancholy reflection. But the implied complaints about the tax bills have more basis than the apocalyptic rhetoric coming from journalists (Kurt Eichenwald: "America died tonight") and Democratic politicians (Nancy Pelosi: "the end of the world").
The Republican tax bills would indeed reduce revenues to the "feds," with surprisingly small rate cuts for high earners and by cutting the corporate rate from 35 to 20 percent. The current rate, the highest in the world, has to be lowered sooner or later, as most liberal economists (and Barack Obama) have long admitted.
And it is hard to take seriously those moaning about increased budget deficits from those unwilling to reform entitlements, which includes all Democrats and many Republicans, notably Donald Trump.
The critics have more of an argument when it comes to "eds" and "meds." But there's a counterargument there, as well -- that the tax bills push against the counterproductive government policies that have been pushing up education and health care costs, to the detriment of the consumers thereof.
The tax bills would impose a new 1.4 percent tax on the investment income of endowments of very wealthy colleges and universities. They would eliminate deductions for student loans and tax tuition waivers for graduate students.
These institutions have been coasting on their reputation for excellence and as havens of free thought, even as they impose speech codes, conduct kangaroo courts on sexual assault charges and allow humanities and social science departments to be dominated by postmodern agitprop and gibberish.
Student loans impoverish many students, especially dropouts, while the money they pump into universities produces administrative bloat, to the point that there are more administrators than teachers in higher education today. Government subsidies produce an oversupply of people with doctorates, causing their theses to go unread and their job prospects to be dismal.
Polls show that many voters have become aware of the intolerance and unaccountability of these institutions and that the economic rewards of a degree are diminishing. The tax bills send a signal to the people running higher education that they'd better change their ways.
On health care, the Republicans have sent a similar signal by repealing the Obamacare mandate to buy insurance. It turns out that this "tax" -- as Chief Justice John Roberts insisted it is -- falls most heavily on those with modest incomes, leading many of them to conclude that Obamacare policies are a bad deal.
Or consider the yelps about the Republicans' planned repeal of the deductibility of state and local taxes (except for some property taxes). This would be progressive in its incidence because most of the increased federal revenue would come from high earners in high-tax states, especially New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and California, whose residents tend to vote Democratic.
Americans in lower-tax states have been effectively subsidizing bloated public payrolls and astonishingly generous pension plans. Removing the deduction would put pressure on politicians in high-tax states and on the public employee unions to hold taxes and spending down.
This change, plus a possible Supreme Court ruling that public employees cannot be forced to pay union dues, should reduce the largesse that public employee unions have been contributing to Democratic candidates in these states and nationally. Seeing as public employee union dues come from taxpayers, this amounts to public financing of the campaigns of one political party. It shouldn't be surprising that the other party wants to stop it.
An Agriculture Department report on the expenses of raising a child showed that over the past several decades, the costs of health care and education -- despite or because of government subsidies and regulation -- had increased much faster than inflation. The costs of food and clothing, mostly provided by the private sector, have actually decreased in real dollars.
The Republican tax plans can be seen as a pushback against "feds, eds and meds" inflation and a push toward something more like what private-sector innovators (like those in long-ago Dayton) have been able to deliver.
Thank You Mr Barone and Townhall.
