Valerie Young, Contributor
Outreach Director for the?Caring Economy Campaign?at the?Center for Partnership Studies
Think more money at the top of the income scale means more at the bottom? It doesn?t.
November 14, 2017
Monster storms destroy coastal cities. Wildfires kill dozens of people and displace thousands more. Health insurance coverage for millions is threatened. Wages remain flat, even though worker productivity is growing faster than expected. Income inequality is getting worse. CEOs of the biggest companies earn more than 300 times what their workers do. (To fully appreciate that stunner, consider that the CEO to worker pay ratio was 42 to 1 in 1980, and 120 to 1 in 2000.)
Against this backdrop, surely the party in possession of the White House and both houses of Congress would propose a thoughtful, fresh approach designed to protect us from the devastating cost of increasingly severe natural disasters, ruinous medical expenses, and growing family financial insecurity.
Tax cuts at the top are to be paid for by the elimination of deductions working people depend on to educate themselves and care for their families. More than 2/3 of the tax cuts this bill contains go to corporations and wealthy individuals.
Unpacking the Hidden Domination Agenda
While the status of individual families will vary widely, many middle class families will pay even higher taxes under the GOP proposed ?tax reform.? Eliminating deductions doesn?t make up for all the revenue lost by the cuts on corporations and the very wealthy. And here is where the scam of this proposal gets even worse. Passing the bill would add $1.5 trillion to the national deficit, a shocking move for the party who claims to champion fiscal responsibility!
The GOP plan ?is a cynical example of domination economics that benefits those at the top on the backs of those lower down. It puts profits over people, exacerbates inequities, and ignores the rapidly closing window of opportunity that remains to remedy the damage we?ve inflicted on the environment.
Leave a Reply