In an earlier post, I discussed all the ways that wealthy people can reduce the rate at which they pay taxes, using measures that are not available to ordinary people, and which results of them paying at much lower rates than middle class people do.
Mitt Romney had for a long time refused to release his tax returns and suspicions were that this was because he was in fact paying at a lower rate than most people because of those above methods. Under pressure he has (sort of) agreed to release his returns around (maybe) April, and conceded that he does pay only about 15%, the same rate as the marginal rate on people whose income is in the range $8,375 to $34,000, which is even below the media income.
But the additional tidbit that was tucked away in his statement about his income was when he said, “And then I get speakers’ fees from time to time, but not very much.” It turns out that his total income from speaking fees for 2010 was $374,327.62, for an average of $41,592 per speech.
When your fees per speech is close to the median household income, and your total income from speeches alone put you in the top 2% of income earners, and you consider it ‘not very much’, then you really are living in a different world.
Romney is definitely a member of the US oligarchy as well as a member of the Mormon oligarchy; the question is, “Do we want an oligarch for President?” We have had them before, and they weren’t disasters in the job. Our first six Presidents were surely upper class; Jackson was the first “common man” and that really did not work out too well; later there were the Roosevelts who were surely upper class; the Bushes were surely in the top 1%, and there were others. Does being born wealthy disqualify a person from the Presidency?
No, certainly not. The question is whether they can transcend their class when it comes to creating and implementing policy. To be able to do that requires an ability to see the world from the point of view of those not of their class and frankly Romney has given almost no evidence that he can do that.
No, but it does raise concerns regarding this person’s ability to understand the lives of the vast majority of people in this country. Particularly when considering that tax cuts for the wealthy tend to result in either:
1. Less funding for public services that are needed by many, such as public health, education and infrastructure, because when it comes to “balancing the budget”, things like the Pentagon, military R&D and government salaries are surprisingly untouchable.
2. A larger tax burden on the middle and working class, which essentially means that the vast majority of the population are subsidizing the tax cuts of a very small elite.
“A larger tax burden on the middle and working class, which essentially means that the vast majority of the population are subsidizing the tax cuts of a very small elite.”
There comes a point where those ever increasing taxes on the income of those who can least afford them will lead to one thing: a revolution.
Get the guillotines ready, brothers….
Ps -- remember the -- apocryphal? -- words by Marie Antoinette when told the poor do not have bread to eat…famous last word.
So, Mr. Romney,watch out when you claim “not much”. Those ill considered words might come back to haunt you, even if a majority of US citizens now thinks it is ok that the wage gap between the Have Little and the Have Most is a few thousand times.
When services are cut, and the tax burden squeezes, public schools become a dumping ground for those who cannot afford a private school (which is the majority). when needing health care does cost you your house, when you get old and the pensions do not cover the necessities of life anymore…the it is wake up time.
About time to publish your whole life tax history,
AND your birth certificate, Willard Milton Romney, isn´t it??
Release the Long Form Tax Return!