In 1985, President Ronald Reagan (R) gave a speech where he was appalled that millionaires were legally allowed to pay fewer taxes than the average citizen by abusing loopholes and usurping the spirit of tax laws. In 2012, President Barack Obama (D) agreed with the former president’s insight. It is being presented to Americans as the “Buffett Rule” after a speech given by one of the wealthiest men on the planet, Warren Buffett, stated that sound economics demanded the wealthy pay their fair share in taxes. However, this rule should rightfully be called the “Reagan Rule” and properly credit the insight seen by the former leader of the United States of America.
The extreme partisanship found in America’s government system creates such a profound toxin that it spreads like terminal cancer leading the country to ruin. What is most disappointing is that neither wants the cancer spread to stop, taking Americans down with their extremist views. If republicans are actually in favor of a smaller government, then why do they support loopholes that require bigger government? If democrats want more equality throughout classes, why are they supporting mogul industries like oil and mining by giving them a tax obligation not exceeding three percent and outsourcing job opportunities? Both parties should understand that the economy needs a balance of spending and revenue, not the traditional party hard-line approaches. In the end, both tactics only further destroy the country.
Republicans seem to be clinging to ghost of a president who left the country in financial ruin by supporting Bush’s elitist comment. He told a New York City audience, “If you raise taxes, you’re taking money out of the pockets of consumers.” Bush gives America the impression that the only consumers in the country are the wealthy. Odd, as people with money are generally the ones who are given or “comped” items in this country.
The Republican Party wants America to face more of the same Bush debacle by backing Mitt Romney as a presidential candidate. He believes that repealing tax cuts would slow economic growth, the creation of jobs, and constitute a tax increase. He seems to be overlooking that lower and middle-class incomes are already carrying a bulk of the tax burden while trying to figure out how to survive in an “advanced” society experiencing the highest unemployment rate since the Great Depression. This gives the impression that those with money are disinclined to create positive long-term job solutions. Rather, it appears that they are contented to continue to over inflate market prices to extract every nickel from those taxpayers carrying their burden.
This philosophy is more inline with a caste system than a class system. Now, if the actual goal is to turn America into a third-world country, then caste away. However, if the goal is to stabilize a stagnant economy and enjoy economic growth, then the “Bush Tax Cuts” line of thinking needs to be abandoned. It is counter to sound capitalism to depend on one percent of the population to bring a balanced consumer economy. The numbers don’t add up.
Democrats should get comfortable with the idea that a federal program for everything is not the solution for long-term recovery. This is a matter of the basic economic principle that a budget that spends more than it takes in is not sustainable. It is illogical for a country to spend its way out of debt.
Although Obama overall has been lackluster as a president in his first term, the “Reagan Rule” brings with it a balanced economic approach. However, to make the American economy vibrant, the administration needs to stop looking for more ways to gouge taxpayers and demand taxes from mogul industries. The mining and oil industries are costing Americans billions each year, destroying the environment, and pillaging family purses. These industries continue to do so without paying penalties for devastation and contributing next to nothing into the nation’s coffers.
The American people do not vote either party into office so they can form an extremist regime. It is expected that both parties bring points of view and reach a reasonable compromise that benefits the entire constituencyÂ—not their party and most certainly not political gain and profit. It’s time to put the clubs down and get to work.