# The Trouble With Tea-Baggers And Progressives. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 22, 2010, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984 "2010-04-22T14:51:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/81 "2010-04-23T22:56:53Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > So what are the solutions **adhay**. A call for folks to “take back their government” in some sort of amorphous way that isn’t exactly outlined? Becasue I will be honest those kind of platitudes, whcih is rife in your OP, are not soutions, they are problems, but until you can tell me a systematic, practical way to meet the problems you are disussing, it is pissing in the wind. Thanks for your focus. Demand that Obama, the Constitutional lawyer, get behind the 28th amendment mentioned above. Call him up on it with ibarrages and ebarrages demanding him to write an executive order demanding that SCOTUS reexamine their views on the subject of corporate personhood. Maybe, just maybe, with evident public support, he might find that line of political reasoning offering him a second, and perhaps, a third term of endearment. And, while he’s at it, he can post our apology to the world which we’ve nearly destroyed with corporate ambition. No promises but we will make amends. ---
**Author:** ![jcppp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ccd318/32.png) [@jcppp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jcppp)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/82 "2010-04-23T23:03:27Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > Notice I said net worth, not income. I propose that net worth over $10M be annually taxed progressively. No federal taxes on income but share what you’ve manged to steal in tax free “unearned income” to date. unearned income is taxed, and it concerns me that you consider it stolen. I don’t see how a wealth tax can work, since it would destroy the economy and drive wealth underground. I do support the inheritance tax, in fact I think it is essential as it really is our only tax on wealth. (not income.) This is one (of many) big issues I have with the Republicans, specifically their “death tax” BS. All this tells me is that they spend a lot of time schmoozing with wealthy, old people. in that tax i sketch out, an inheritance would be considered income to whoever gets it and taxed at the same rate as wages, dividends, etc. Another point to note is that capital gains would be indexed for inflation and taxed as income. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/83 "2010-04-23T23:17:06Z")
> [@jcppp](#): > > unearned income is taxed, and it concerns me that you consider it stolen. , I missed the edit. I meant to say that unearned income is relatively lightly taxed. Simply, unearned income is theft. > [@](#): > > I don’t see how a wealth tax can work, since it would destroy the economy and drive wealth underground. I say, good riddance. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/84 "2010-04-23T23:37:29Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Even more worrying when you consider how inept state legislatures are. I feel your pain. But their ineptitude can be ameliorated locally with state, county, township referendums on corporate dethronement. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/85 "2010-04-23T23:40:52Z")
> [@jcppp](#): > > OK, now that the anarchists, Libertarians, and Liberal Democrats have explained the Tea Party Movement, let me (a TPM supporter) give it a try. > > First of all, I do not see anyone in the movement that is against a progressive tax code. The wealthy should be taxed at higher rates. When we talk about progressivism we are not talking about the tax code, but about the Fabian, progressive march toward socialism that we see. This goes to two basic approaches to achieve the Socialist utopia, the Marxist revolution, and the Progressive frog-in-a-pot model. So I’m not sure how much study the OP did on the TPM. > > What motivates most of the TPM people I know is their fear that our deficits are unsustainable, their disgust with the waste and crony capitalism that has corrupted the free market, their revulsion that they have to continue sending money to DC so that corrupt government, corporations, and unions can basically steal it. > > We are not against government but against government waste. A lot of us are conservatives because, I think, most conservatives believe that we are all crooked timber and as such can not be trusted to control large sums of other people’s money (OPM). The only way to reduce corruption is SMALL GOVERNMENT. > > The OP seems to agree with a lot of what I have said, so it’s a shame he does not know more about the movement. Deficit reduction and fiscal solvency are important. But that is why this administration tried to reform health care. If you look at budget deficits over the next 75 years, something like 70%+ is due to health care (medicaid, medicare, SCHIP). So reforming health care to make it more efficient should be a priority of everyone to keep the nation solvent. People may not agree with the health bill, but the CBO said it would lower the deficit by about $138 billion in 10 years and another trillion the 10 years after that. However the tea party never even addressed this fact of health reform (how it needed to lower the future deficits). Their solution is to remove consumer protections by allowing across state selling of health insurance. As far as progressive taxes, the tea partys 10 point contract from america lists several point which are opposition to progressive taxation. [http://www.thecontract.org/the-contract-from-america/](http://www.thecontract.org/the-contract-from-america/) > [@](#): > > 1. . Enact Fundamental Tax Reform > > Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words—the length of the original Constitution. (64.90%) > > 1. Stop the Tax Hikes > > Permanently repeal all tax hikes, including those to the income, capital gains, and death taxes, currently scheduled to begin in 2011. (53.38%) What is a socialist utopia though? The tea party basically comes across as a movement of socially conservative, supply side republicans. I don’t believe the arguments that it is a grassroots movement of citizens upset over waste and deficits, because where were they before 2009? ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/86 "2010-04-23T23:52:16Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > What is a socialist utopia though? Glad you asked. It is a place where folks recognize that greed has no value for survival on a small planet. ---
**Author:** ![jcppp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ccd318/32.png) [@jcppp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jcppp)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2010, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/87 "2010-04-24T01:06:16Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > Deficit reduction and fiscal solvency are important. But that is why this administration tried to reform health care. If you look at budget deficits over the next 75 years, something like 70%+ is due to health care (medicaid, medicare, SCHIP). So reforming health care to make it more efficient should be a priority of everyone to keep the nation solvent. > > People may not agree with the health bill, but the CBO said it would lower the deficit by about $138 billion in 10 years and another trillion the 10 years after that. > > However the tea party never even addressed this fact of health reform (how it needed to lower the future deficits). Their solution is to remove consumer protections by allowing across state selling of health insurance. > > As far as progressive taxes, the tea partys 10 point contract from america lists several point which are opposition to progressive taxation. > > [http://www.thecontract.org/the-contract-from-america/](http://www.thecontract.org/the-contract-from-america/) > What is a socialist utopia though? > The tea party basically comes across as a movement of socially conservative, supply side republicans. I don’t believe the arguments that it is a grassroots movement of citizens upset over waste and deficits, because where were they before 2009? point by point - If the health care bill was about reducing costs, why didn’t it include the items most beneficial to that end (a) tort reform, (b) insurance purchase across state lines, and (c) reduce incentives for third party payer (shift tax break from corporations to individuals as McCain proposed). The bill does little (if anything) to reduce costs. The claims that it reduces the deficit are based on a lot of accounting tricks, new taxes, medixxx reductions that no one believes will survive and gaming the CBO, The administration claims it will reduce the deficit, not reduce the cost of healthcare, and the deficit reduction numbers are snake oil. We all know the Medicare cuts wont happen. the Doc fix is coming. The unions will prevent the Cadillac tax, etc. The bill was clearly intended to “spread the wealth” and if that was the goal, then fine but what wealth? borrowed money? Vat tax receipts? It’s the dishonesty that grates more than anything. Buying insurance across state lines does not remove consumer protection, since every state has protection and regulations but some states have loaded up on mandates hiking up the cost of insurance. This is a fundamental difference between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives trust people to make their own decisions and understand that consumer protection is great, but if you leave it up to the gov they will come up with mandates to buy votes from the special interests. Insurance has become another tax, another slush fund where politicians steal from the public so that the Chiropractic lobby will contribute to their campaign. I don’t see anything in the contract that is against progressive tax code. In fact it is the opposite since it is against all the loopholes that most people think favor the rich. The TPM is against progressiveism but that is a different thing completely. There was a lot of grumbling against Bush from the right starting with the Medicare part D and increased spending from NCLB, but at the time (early in the Bush administration) we were not in such a hole. Look at the deficit projections and you will see that fiscal conditions have changed drastically. You mentioned supply siders, but the truth is most economists agree with the basic premise of SS economics (the Laffer curve) and that we can not raise taxes on the rich enough to cover the hole we have just created. The problem is that you raise taxes much more than where they are now and returns decrease. This means that we have to raise taxes on the middle class. Hence the VAT talk. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2010, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/88 "2010-04-24T02:47:25Z")
> [@jcppp](#): > > point by point - If the health care bill was about reducing costs, why didn’t it include the items most beneficial to that end (a) tort reform, (b) insurance purchase across state lines, and (c) reduce incentives for third party payer (shift tax break from corporations to individuals as McCain proposed). The bill does little (if anything) to reduce costs. The claims that it reduces the deficit are based on a lot of accounting tricks, new taxes, medixxx reductions that no one believes will survive and gaming the CBO, The administration claims it will reduce the deficit, not reduce the cost of healthcare, and the deficit reduction numbers are snake oil. We all know the Medicare cuts wont happen. the Doc fix is coming. The unions will prevent the Cadillac tax, etc. The bill was clearly intended to “spread the wealth” and if that was the goal, then fine but what wealth? borrowed money? Vat tax receipts? It’s the dishonesty that grates more than anything. Tort reform would save roughly $54 billion in 10 years. A small part of health care costs. [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/09/AR2009100904271.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/09/AR2009100904271.html) What is your evidence that buying across state lines will drastically lower costs? This bill does put a tax on high end plans, which accomplishes what you are discussing with McCain and the tax breaks. > [@jcppp](#): > > Buying insurance across state lines does not remove consumer protection, since every state has protection and regulations but some states have loaded up on mandates hiking up the cost of insurance. This is a fundamental difference between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives trust people to make their own decisions and understand that consumer protection is great, but if you leave it up to the gov they will come up with mandates to buy votes from the special interests. Insurance has become another tax, another slush fund where politicians steal from the public so that the Chiropractic lobby will contribute to their campaign. That isn’t the fundamental difference between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives trust corporations to do the right thing w/o government regulation. Liberals do not. What you are describing is setting up a situation like what happened with credit cards, where companies all move to the one or two states that have the least consumer protections. All the health insurance companies will move to states that allow them to deny the most people for pre-existing conditions, rescind the most policies when people get sick, and deny the most claims. It is a recipe for junk insurance. > [@jcppp](#): > > I don’t see anything in the contract that is against progressive tax code. In fact it is the opposite since it is against all the loopholes that most people think favor the rich. The TPM is against progressiveism but that is a different thing completely. Point 10 is strict opposition to progressive taxes like dividend taxes, capital gains taxes, income taxes & the estate tax. Point 4 &10 of their 10 points are opposition to progressive taxes. > [@jcppp](#): > > There was a lot of grumbling against Bush from the right starting with the Medicare part D and increased spending from NCLB, but at the time (early in the Bush administration) we were not in such a hole. Look at the deficit projections and you will see that fiscal conditions have changed drastically. > > You mentioned supply siders, but the truth is most economists agree with the basic premise of SS economics (the Laffer curve) and that we can not raise taxes on the rich enough to cover the hole we have just created. The problem is that you raise taxes much more than where they are now and returns decrease. This means that we have to raise taxes on the middle class. Hence the VAT talk. There was no tea party talking endlessly about the constitution when Bush was in charge. Torture, warrantless wiretapping, signing statements, ‘free speech zones’, etc. The tea party didn’t care. However they rail against Obama for doing things that are constitutional. So observers come to the conclusion that the stated motives of the tea party do not match their behavior. Their motives have nothing to do with the constitution. [http://newsitem.com/opinion/constitutional-violations-we-had-plenty-with-bush-1.625108](http://newsitem.com/opinion/constitutional-violations-we-had-plenty-with-bush-1.625108) A poll found that the vast majority of economists planned to vote for Obama. > **[66% of Economists are Economists for Obama](http://econ4obama.blogspot.com/2008/09/66-of-economists-are-economists-for.html)** > > This is according to a new survey of 523 economists who are U.S. citizens and members of the American Economic Association. See a Powerpoint... > [@](#): > > 66% of Economists are Economists for Obama (vs 28% for McCain) > > This is according to a new survey of 523 economists who are U.S. citizens and members of the American Economic Association. See a Powerpoint with methodology and detailed results here. The concept of a Laffer Curve is not straightforward, and people do not know where the optimal point is. Paul Krugman has said a 90% income tax rate is too high, but 50% would probably be fine. ---
**Author:** ![Camus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ba8739/32.png) [@Camus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Camus)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2010, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/89 "2010-04-24T03:10:46Z")
> [@jcppp](#): > > point by point - If the health care bill was about reducing costs, why didn’t it include the items most beneficial to that end (a) tort reform, (b) insurance purchase across state lines, and (c) reduce incentives for third party payer (shift tax break from corporations to individuals as McCain proposed). Not to go off on a complete tangent, but when did imposing “tort reform” become a unanimous consensus? It’s just another codeword for prohibiting or severely limiting punitive damages in medical malpractice cases. The only thing is that these punitive damage awards to plaintiffs are decided by juries - consisting of everyday folks. Punitive damages aren’t something that are awarded in every case, instead they are designed precisely to punish doctors or hospitals for any gross negligence or malpractice that gave rise to the suit in order to discourage such practices from happening again. And of course, it only possibly comes into play when a jury has already found that malpractice or gross negligence have occurred and then decided to award the plaintiff anything. While there have been some pretty astronomical punitive damage awards, when did the concept become such a conservative boogeyman? ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2010, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/90 "2010-04-24T12:02:01Z")
Totally appreciate the response so far. In regard to **Czarcasm** ’s downed computer analogy, let me revise the model a bit. Your computer is acting strangely. It does everything it’s supposed to do but one. When it adds 1 + 1, it’s answer is just about anything. Time for a new CPU. Govt is not the problem. Corporate control of govt is. Since 1898, corporations have been waging their trade wars with the US military on indigenous peoples around the world. Strategic position? Natural resources and cheap labor? Time to “intervene” with some freedom and democracy, American style. I recommend a look at this. [History of U.S. Interventions in Latin America](http://www2.truman.edu/~marc/resources/interventions.html) . ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2010, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/91 "2010-04-24T15:31:21Z")
Fine. Punish the corporations. Where do you plan to work for a living? ---
**Author:** ![IdahoMauleMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/71c47a/32.png) [@IdahoMauleMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IdahoMauleMan)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2010, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/92 "2010-04-24T16:17:46Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > Fine. Punish the corporations. Where do you plan to work for a living? For the government or academia, clearly. I would have thought that was obvious. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2010, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/93 "2010-04-24T21:12:41Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > Fine. Punish the corporations. Where do you plan to work for a living? Good point. However too much corporate power can bloat an economy and threaten democracy by the public. And you need a balance. ---
**Author:** ![adhay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@adhay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adhay)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2010, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/94 "2010-04-25T20:48:09Z")
> [@elbows](#): > > So what you’d really like is a government sworn to protect the people from predatory capitalism? > > Who wouldn’t? Have you got a plan to get us there? … > > Dude, we have to start somewhere. Best bet yet. Pray that Capital grows a conscience. I’m a poor old man. I’m retired on minimum SS with a US passport. I have all my favorite drugs and toys, good health and a comfortable place to sit among friends with the odd Franklin/mo to burn. I’m living on top of the world. Where does that put my shitter? My prayer for Capital is that I grow a conscience. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2010, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/95 "2010-04-25T23:53:50Z")
> [@adhay](#): > > Totally appreciate the response so far. > > In regard to **Czarcasm** ’s downed computer analogy, let me revise the model a bit. > > Your computer is acting strangely. It does everything it’s supposed to do but one. > > When it adds 1 + 1, it’s answer is just about anything. Time for a new CPU. > > Govt is not the problem. Corporate control of govt is. > > Since 1898, corporations have been waging their trade wars with the US military on indigenous peoples around the world. Strategic position? Natural resources and cheap labor? Time to “intervene” with some freedom and democracy, American style. I recommend a look at this. [http://www2.truman.edu/~marc/resources/interventions.html](http://www2.truman.edu/~marc/resources/interventions.html) . Your “CPU” needs a few hundred days of “burn in” time time before I will consider it for my computer system, and it would help if we had some info on your company’s prior successes in the biz. Why don’t you build a few PDAs or netbooks that are competitive with the tried-and-trues, and we’ll talk, o.k.? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2010, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984/96 "2010-04-26T02:27:54Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > No, that’s “corporatism.” Everything wrong with anything is the fault of corporations. No, [“corporatism”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism) means something very different from that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trouble-with-tea-baggers-and-progressives/536984.md?page=4)