 |
| Source:The Young Turks- Cenk Uygur, talking about the so-called Congressional Progressive Caucus's budget (Democratic Socialists of America in hiding, in actuality) proposed budget in the House. |
From The Young Turks
Tax and spend more of the same from the so-called Progressive Caucus, what else is new from them, nothing. They even raise taxes on middle income people right now when they are struggling just to pay their bills and are worried about losing their jobs. Their income isn't growing, but their taxes will be under the so-called Progressive Caucus budget.
Tax and spend more of the same from the so-called Progressive Caucus, what else is new from them, nothing. They even raise taxes on middle income people right now when they are struggling just to pay their bills and are worried about losing their jobs. Their income isn't growing, but their taxes will be under the so-called Progressive Caucus budget.
How can they call themselves Progressives, when they support taking more money from people who can't afford it: what's progressive about that? Progressivism is supposed to be about progress, moving forward, making things better. Taxing more money away from people who can't afford to pay it, is regressive. It would be just as bad as having a tax system thats based on your ability to pay the least.
So if you're making a good living, let's say 100K$ a year or more, you would be paying less in taxes, than someone making 30K$ a year, perhaps has a couple of jobs just to get by. Its just as bad, increasing taxes on people who can't afford tax increases is just as regressive, not progressive, than having a tax system where people who make more money by law, not talking about loopholes, just the actual tax rates, where people who make more pay less in taxes than people who make a moderate income or a low income.
One of the arguments of the so-called Progressive Caucus (Democratic Socialist Caucus, in actuality) is accurate about increasing taxes on everyone is that these are what the tax rates were with the Clinton Administration with the booming economy.
So if you're making a good living, let's say 100K$ a year or more, you would be paying less in taxes, than someone making 30K$ a year, perhaps has a couple of jobs just to get by. Its just as bad, increasing taxes on people who can't afford tax increases is just as regressive, not progressive, than having a tax system where people who make more money by law, not talking about loopholes, just the actual tax rates, where people who make more pay less in taxes than people who make a moderate income or a low income.
One of the arguments of the so-called Progressive Caucus (Democratic Socialist Caucus, in actuality) is accurate about increasing taxes on everyone is that these are what the tax rates were with the Clinton Administration with the booming economy.
What the CPC fails to mention is we don't have a booming economy ten years later. We are just getting out of the Great Recession with a lot more people struggling and in poverty. Taking more money away from the people who work hard for a living and don't have multiple homes and only work half the year at 170K$ a year (like Members of Congress) makes their lives more difficult.
Also the budget cuts thats in the so-called Progressive Caucus's budget comes from, guess where? If you said national security, you're correct. What else is new! Because according to Socialists the only waste in the Federal Government is in defense, law enforcement and the tax code. The rest of the Federal Government according to Socialists, runs very smoothly. Apparently they don't read or understand GAO reports and reports from inspector generals. Government employees by the way, who are like God's to Socialists, who are responsible and get paid to point out waste in each Federal department and agency.
And when Socialists finally do acknowledge waste, their solution is always to give those programs more money. Because of course in their mind the program is wasteful because it's underfunded. Not because its managed or designed badly. Even though it was designed and run by human beings, who of course never make mistakes.
Also the budget cuts thats in the so-called Progressive Caucus's budget comes from, guess where? If you said national security, you're correct. What else is new! Because according to Socialists the only waste in the Federal Government is in defense, law enforcement and the tax code. The rest of the Federal Government according to Socialists, runs very smoothly. Apparently they don't read or understand GAO reports and reports from inspector generals. Government employees by the way, who are like God's to Socialists, who are responsible and get paid to point out waste in each Federal department and agency.
And when Socialists finally do acknowledge waste, their solution is always to give those programs more money. Because of course in their mind the program is wasteful because it's underfunded. Not because its managed or designed badly. Even though it was designed and run by human beings, who of course never make mistakes.
Look, I would like to cut the overall defense budget as well. But not just to cut it but to eliminate things we shouldn't be spending money on. By being smart about it, like getting rid of fighter planes and weapons we don't need. And stop defending developed nations oversees that can afford to defend themselves and closing bases oversees. Not cutting blind just to cut something.
The reason why the so-called Progressive Caucus isn't taken seriously except when the Democratic Leadership is trying to pass something and they need Socialist votes to accomplish that, is because the so-called Progressive Caucus is essentially another party. A democratic socialist party inside the Democratic Party. And the two parties are just very different ideologically on most economic and foreign policy issues.
The reason why the so-called Progressive Caucus isn't taken seriously except when the Democratic Leadership is trying to pass something and they need Socialist votes to accomplish that, is because the so-called Progressive Caucus is essentially another party. A democratic socialist party inside the Democratic Party. And the two parties are just very different ideologically on most economic and foreign policy issues.
