Will Other Leaders Follow the President's Lead

by: Justin Krebs

Thu Feb 26, 2009 at 10:48


Everyone's hurting and nobody has money.  

Residents plead for help from their cities, which seek bailouts from the states, which flail as they hope for Federal or divine intervention.

No governor can be solely blamed for his or her states crisis; the real test of their leadership, now, is how governors tackle the solutions.  And whether they'll be as honest about some issues -- such as the need to increase revenue -- as the President was in his address to Congress.

As a New Yorker, I see a very simple question:  will Governor Paterson follow President Obama's lead to ask citizens who earn more than $250,000 to pay their fare share?

Justin Krebs :: Will Other Leaders Follow the President's Lead
Governor Paterson has fallen into right-wing thinking, suggesting a host of regressive taxes that would affect regular New Yorkers, and considering severe cuts from hospitals to legal aid to education...exactly the kind of divestment that's not going to help us get out of this mess in the long term.

And one sees his strategy:  an accidental governor, running for re-election in one year in tough times, believes he needs the support of the State's elite.

But he now has a chance to change this perspective.  For one, the public would stand with him if he asked the wealthiest New Yorkers to pay their way -- a recent poll put public support 4-1 in favor.

Now, even more than siding with the public, he has the ability to side with the President.  Obama is suggesting we ask more of Americans earning above $250,000 -- the same threshold the Fair Share Tax Reform movement in New York is pushing for.

Paterson may not be able to make a case for revenue on his own...we know the right-wing machine will slam him for any tax increase.  Fortunately, he's not on his own.  There's a little megaphone called "the White House" that will be carrying his message on this one.

There aren't always opportunities to dramatically change a state's relationship to revenue, or the expectations we have of our most fortunate -- so when there's an avenue open, we need to move through it.

I just hope the Gov realizes this opportunity.  The President is leading.  If the Governor won't lead, then at least he should follow.


Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Why? (0.00 / 0)
Why is Paterson so afraid of asking the rich to pay their fair share? Why must working class people suffer in New York? I don't get it.

Yes, Virginia, there are progressives in Nevada.

Explain... (0.00 / 0)
Please explain how those paying in a higher tax bracket are not paying their fair share.   They pay a higher percentage of their revenue... if anything the system is unfair in terms of equality... Who cares, they should be taxed anyway... I just curious this philosophical debate about fairness.  There is nothing fair about our tax system in general.

[ Parent ]
The former governor cut taxes for the rich. (0.00 / 0)
So, even if the % is higher, it is not high enough.  Furthermore, given that the rich have more money, the impact of paying higher taxes is less.

A fair tax system is a progressive tax system.  Those who have money must pay a fair share of that money.  The reason infrastructure maintenance, public transit expansion and maintenance, etc. are in crises is because of the Reagan led the movement away from a progressive tax policy.  

First, you have to reject the notion that we are a society of individuals.  We are a community.  Certain goods benefit everyone (mass transit, public health, quality schools,....).  A progressive system of taxation makes sure that everyone pays their fair share.

I live in a true blue state--I will have a choice in November


[ Parent ]
Fair Share? (0.00 / 0)
What exactly is a fare share tax?  

Yeah... (0.00 / 0)
I had this same question.  I have no qualms with taxing the rich more... They can afford it more than the little guy.   But I don't think the current tax system is fair at all... They pay a higher percentage of their income than we do... I don't think that's fair, but I don't CARE that its not fair.   A flat tax is a fair tax, but again... I don't care about being fair to rich people..> I consider it payment for all the advantages and perks they have in life.  

I'm just not sure how you say that they aren't paying a Fair Share or that the higher taxes on the rich are fair?  They aren't... but again... Screw em.  Who cares?


[ Parent ]
A flat tax is not a fair tax--it is the opposite. (4.00 / 1)
The issue is not about the percent paid in taxes.  The issue is about who can afford to pay more.  A flat tax has an adverse affect on non-rich people because they do not have as much disposable income as rich people.  The impact of a flat tax is more acutely felt by those who earn less than someone who is wealthy.

For example, let's say the flat tax rate is 7%.  On the left, there is a family whose gross income is $50,000.  On the right, is a family whose income is 300,000.  Under a flat tax, the 50k family pays $3500.  The 300k pays 21K.  Yes, $21K is more than $3500.  However, after paying that tax, the 50 k family is left with 46,500 to live on, while the 500K family still has 279K to live on.  A progressive tax allows the income disparities to be taken into account.

I live in a true blue state--I will have a choice in November


[ Parent ]
still confused (0.00 / 0)
I undestand your math however,what you are sayin is that the person who makes 300K and pays 21K in taxes is not paying enough to equally balance the lifestyle of the person making 50K.  It sounds like punishment for making to much money.  We all know and realize that the lifestyle of the person making 300k is going to be different than one making 50K.  I too believe that a flat tax would probably not work however, I have a difficult time taxing a small sector of the American public at between 35% and 39.5% in order to allow the larger portion of the American sector to pay very little or no taxes like most do.  I am in no means in that higher tax bracket...but it just does'nt seem FAIR to me.

[ Parent ]
a beneficial perspective (0.00 / 0)
it needs to be taken into account when talking about what "fair" taxation is that there are certain expenses of living that are relatively fixed costs. if you are living in new york on $50k a year chances are you will spend most of that just on living expenses (especially if you have dependents)so that (using LeeNYC's numbers below) $3500 will probably be a fairly large chunk of disposable income. If living expenses are $40k then it is 35%.

on the other hand those making $300k, even if they spend 4x the amount ($160k) on living expenses, which should be fairly comfortable (even in nyc)then they would have to pay $50000 in taxes to equal the same percentage of disposable income.

the only way a flat tax could ever be considered fair is if "necessities" were priced as a percentage of your income.


[ Parent ]
Tax'em more (0.00 / 0)
Rich people do pay a larger percentage of tax but I guess its just not enough.  Becuase all persons that make at or over $250,000 per year are spoiled, rotten idiots, they deserve to be taxed more.  This will teach everyone not to strive for bigger and better.  Its a down right shame how working americans have such a strong desire to succeed and make more money!!!

250,000 is too low a threshold. (0.00 / 0)
In NYC, a dual income from a household where one spouse is a principal and the other a firefighter with a rank make that much money.  These are public employees--not titans of wall street.  They are not rich--they are comfortable.

The tax surcharge should be placed on those who earn $500K or more.  A Quinnipiac poll (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1318.xml?ReleaseID=1265)  shows strong support for such a tax by those who would pay it.  

Patterson has assembled a new political team, maybe this will get him on board.


I live in a true blue state--I will have a choice in November


500k sounds good (0.00 / 0)
i would even bump it too raising tax a lot on those making 750k

another tax that is not fair is how the social security tax/payroll tax works, i always forget the wording, but i know we are only taxed on the first 90k we earn, this ceiling should end

whatever you think people owe you, that is what you owe people


[ Parent ]
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox