On The Right, Yet In The Wrong

In an article published in the Washington Times, Grover Norquist is crying once again about taxes. While it’s fair to say that nobody likes paying taxes, Norquist, at this point in time, should well understand that taxes are a necessity, if for no other reason than to enforce patent laws that make his privileged friends rich.

He claims that, originally, it was promised that only the “really rich” would have to pay taxes, and that “taxes would remain forever low”. Who ‘they’ are or when and in what context the promise of ‘forever low’ taxes was made, he doesn’t say.

Referring to the advent of the Tax Law of 1913, the dumb-ol', forever-incompetent Federal Government understood something that Norquist does not, that taxes should be levied in accordance of not just ability to pay, but in proportion to the benefits received from the government.

(Isn't it amazing? In Washington, people go from working within government, where they are deemed utterly incompetent by many republicans, to lobbying for republicans, where their incredible personal talents are highly sought.)

Some of the benefits received disproportionately to those with large incomes were (and still are): patent law enforcement, infrastructure acquisition (roads, freeways, interstate highways, sewer systems to remove industrial waste, electrical grids to provide the means of powering manufacturing facilities, maintenance of bridges, etc.)

Sure, individuals with lower incomes benefit from those things as well. But not anywhere near the extent that, say, Walmart or Cargill or Georgia-Pacific or Apple benefits from them. The average Joe doesn’t benefit from used-by-all infrastructure to the point where they are able to accumulate enough money through use of it to, say, buy or create their own political party.

Norquist wants government to ‘leave us alone’. Most people would have no severe argument with that concept. Except that most individuals can’t afford to hire their own private army of lawyers to go the owners of big corporations to recoup the cost of all that infrastructure that those same big corporations use more of than all the Jane Six-pack’s of the country do, put together.

That’s one reason why we have government in the first place. 

In a “Message to Congress on Tax Revision” from June 19th, 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt said:

“On the basis of these studies and of other studies conducted by officials of the Treasury, I am able to make a number of suggestions of important changes in our policy of taxation. These are based on the broad principle that if a government is to be prudent its taxes must produce ample revenues without discouraging enterprise; and if it is to be just it must distribute the burden of taxes equitably. I do not believe that our present system of taxation completely meets this test. Our revenue laws have operated in many ways to the unfair advantage of the few, and they have done little to prevent an unjust concentration of wealth and economic power.” (Emphasis added).

Norquist continues his whine[1], describing how that tax rates have gone up and the highest income amounts for those rates have gone down, over time. What he fails to grasp (intentionally – it’s his job to fail to grasp things like this) is the reason for this is that the original rates and amounts were out of synch with reality.

Reality isn’t Norquist’s strong suit to begin with. This is Grover speaking:

"Americans for Tax Reform is a national taxpayer organization dedicated to opposing any and all tax increases. We work at the national, state and local level for lower taxes, less government spending and limited government."

This is what intellectuals refer to as 'Bullshit'.

He calls what’s happened with the tax code –get this- “Trickle-Down Taxation”. (Grover, take a piece of well-meaning, friendly advice: Don’t use that term while having a beer at your friendly neighborhood watering hole. Just don’t.)

See how funny he is?

Whatever term is used to describe the phenomena, what it actually does is it forces the fat-cats to be responsible citizens. And it is forced – it has to be – the Mammon worshippers won’t do it on their own.

He adds that the Alternative Minimum Tax was “invented to punish 155 Americans who bought municipal bonds”. Wrong again, Grover. This requires correction:

The AMT was created to:

“ensure that the highest-income households could not exploit loopholes, exclusions, and deductions to avoid paying any federal income tax.”[2]

The only people being ‘punished’ were ultra-wealthy tax scofflaws who think that ‘taxes’ are something that ‘commoners’ only should have to pay.

Norquist’s use of the number ‘155’ is meant to convey a small, targeted group of people in order to make his larger point: That the tax now applies to many, many more than originally intended – see how cancerous government is?

He goes on to lament Obama’s tobacco excise tax, and how it disproportionately affects the poor and middle class, which is an argument that’s nearly as old as the Union[3]. More importantly, even though he decries this ‘sin tax’, has joined a similar fight against alcohol[4], but is oddly comfortable with a tax on weed[5]. Consistency is not something this man values.

Norquist wants a future America to resemble the country’s first 137 years – where a man was a man and a woman couldn’t vote and other men were property, where children worked in factories and if they got hurt – too bad. Ahh, the good old days.

But the best part comes when he talks about states with no income tax – and boy, oh boy – does he get things wrong.

He asks you to imagine living in a state that has no income tax, implying that it would be an improvement. And it would – but only if you’re already wealthy. According to the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy:

“virtually every state’s tax system is fundamentally unfair and is made more so by the absence of a progressive personal income tax…”

But Norquist doesn’t care about the plight of the poor, and any talk we hear from Republicans about helping people move up the economic ladder is simply lip service.

In fact, Norquist really doesn’t care about taxes – what he cares about is his employer’s having to pay taxes.

[1] I for one, am getting quite tired of hearing from the very, very, well-off about how hard their lives are because of their wealth and how they use it. See “Charles Koch’s Pity Party”.
[2] http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=1063
[3] http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/nc/nc2b_3.htm
[4] http://articles.philly.com/2006-10-14/news/25417105_1_tax-exempt-groups-senate-report-nonprofit-groups
[5] http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/10/grover-norquist-gives-pot-taxes-high-five

Grover Norquist and the John Birch Society – Part 1

When the workers at Volkswagen’ Tennessee plant began organizing, with the acquiescence, if not outright encouragement of management, they knew there would be some amongst the workforce that felt differently than the UAW leadership and many other of their coworkers about unionization, and that having the union represent the workers was not a given.

What they couldn’t have anticipated was the resistance from the Governor of the state, Bill Haslam and one of the state’s Senators, Bob Corker, both Republicans. Considering that the management of VW was more than okay with the idea of the workers organizing (in fact, they consider it vital that their workforce be organized in some fashion) and that one of the Republican tenets is ‘local control’, why would organizing be a problem for anyone?

When it started to look like the union would get voted in, both Haslam and Corker sprung into action to thwart the effort, despite the Republican party’s position on ‘less government interference’.

But they weren’t alone. Grover Norquist, he of the ‘No Tax Pledge’, decided that the workers in Tennessee were having trouble deciding for themselves whether they wanted to be represented by the UAW or not. Because, after all, what did those workers know? None of them were the President of any lobbying groups.

An odd development, I thought, since this had nothing to do with raising taxes – because management at VW were going to have their workforce organized in some fashion no matter what anyone else thought about it (and the worker’s panel may insist that no future plants be built in the southern U.S. because of the efforts of Haslam, Corker, and Norquist)

Research into Norquist made it clear: Norquist is, perhaps not officially, but definitely in spirit, a Bircher – as in the John Birch Society. His philosophy mimics the Bircher’s exactly.

No, not really. You see, one of the guiding principles the JBS claims to adhere to is ‘individual liberty’, and Norquist definitely doesn’t believe in that – at least not when it comes to workers joining a union that is. No matter. The Birchers don’t believe it either. What they do believe, regardless of what they claim to believe, is individual liberty only for those they deem worthy – big money interests.

Like the Koch brothers. Their father Fred was a founding member of the JBS and both brothers were members, at least for a while. Charles resigned at one point over the Vietnam war. But he rejoined, at least in spirit (the JBS doesn’t publish the names of its members).

Koch money, and Norquist’s leadership may not have created the Tea Party (don’t count it out), but Koch money has supported the nascent movement and Norquist provided strategy. And it’s always been that way with the JBS.

The JBS was active in the Goldwater presidential campaign in 1964 (Goldwater’s famous quote about ‘extremism is no vice’ was a shout-out to the Society) and Ronald Reagan’s victory in California[i]. When Reagan took the White House in 1980, he had Norquist nearby and asked the young promising extremist to start what became Americans for Tax Reform.

Norquist has stated many times that he'd like America to return to the good old days of the 1880's. No Social Security, No labor laws, no safety net, no unions. He'd probably like to see only landowners voting as it once was, or some of us being declarred 3/5's of a person. Norquist marches in lockstep with JBS ideology, and it'd be damn hard to be more rabidly conservative than that.

The Society seemed to have gone dormant for years, particularly after William F. Buckley, Jr.’s denouncement of the group. But they’ve never gone away completely. For years, no one heard the name of the group, but that’s has changed.

End of Part 1


[i] James Phalen “Mutiny In The John Birch Society” Saturday Evening Post, April 8, 1967.

If Peter Pan and Ayn Rand Had A Child...



According to 60 minutes, Norquist got the idea to “Brand the Republican Party as the party that will never raise your taxes” when he was 12 years old and volunteering for the Nixon campaign.

“If the parties would brand themselves the way Coke and Pepsi and other products do…”

Strange in and of itself. There’s nothing wrong with it, just damn odd. How many 12 year-olds think that way?

In the piece, 60 minutes goes on to say:

“Many Republican congressmen fear retaliation from Norquist if they even suggest that a tax increase for the wealthiest of Americans should be up for discussion…”

Emphasis mine.

This really is no secret, that the opposition to tax increases applies only to the wealthy and not to Joe six-pack, and is demonstrated clearly in Norquist’s silence about taxpayer funding for a new sports facility for the Milwaukee Bucks basketball Corporation.

Norquist is most known for his ‘Pledge” that he forces republicans to sign, promising that they will never vote for a bill that raises taxes. In fact, it’s not enough to sign the pledge once, as Mitt Romney learned. And woe be to any who refuse to sign, as defeating them will become Norquist’s new mission.

Former Senator Alan Simpson, Co-Chair of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, considers Norquist to be “megalomaniac, an ego maniac". Simpson is what is referred to as an ‘adult’ and understands that in the real world, compromises need to be made and that stomp-your-feet-and-hold-your-breath-till-you-turn-blue demands are not how responsible adults operate.

Norquist wouldn’t know much about that, never having a position of real responsibility. Unless, you consider writing speeches and making threats real responsibility.

According to www.nndb.com, Norquist equates taxing rich people with the holocaust. To paraphrase, Norquist says that it’s not right or okay to do something to a group of people just because you’re not doing that thing to everyone.

Yet, this philosophy doesn’t extend to the non-wealthy. Grover, genius that he is, can’t seem to grasp that when he fights for and wins tax breaks for the already wealthy, a greater tax burden falls in those less able to pay them.

In an article in Mother Jones, Ralph Nader says Norquist’s quest is:

“the most powerful, nihilistic movement in Washington…It is such a cold-blooded atmosphere it would sustain icicles.”

And it shows. Willing, if not eager, to strip the needy and elderly of any semblance of a social net, all so that the wealthy prosper further.

The article adds:

Norquist calls it[1] the “Leave-Us-Alone Coalition,” a grouping of gun owners, the Christian right, homeschoolers, libertarians, and business leaders that he has almost single-handedly managed to unite. The common vision: an America in which the rich will be taxed at the same rates as the poor, where capital is freed from government constraints, where government services are turned over to the free market, where the minimum wage is repealed, unions are made irrelevant, and law-abiding citizens can pack handguns in every state and town. "My ideal citizen is the self-employed, homeschooling, IRA-owning guy with a concealed-carry permit,” says Norquist. “Because that person doesn't need the goddamn government for anything.”

This is the Tea Party agenda, word for word. Or, it would be if the Tea Party had a standard platform. It doesn’t because there is no one Tea party. That may be by design, because then you can’t target them. It becomes political Whack-A-Mole.

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of Mr. Norquist is that he knows how to win. The vision for America that he adopted back when he was 12 years old is coming true – pick up any paper, visit any news website, and it’s all there.

Norquist wants the country to return to the status quo of yesteryear – the ‘gilded age’ minus the economic prosperity (because economic power leads to political power) for common folks, the era of the Robber Baron. The only cure for this dystopian Randian vision is to use the same tools that progressives used 100 years ago: educate, organize, and vote.


[1] The ‘Wednesday morning group’.

A Triple-Foul

I’ve read that soon, print newspapers will be a thing of the past.

I know of one that few will miss: The Milwaukee Urinal-Journal Sentinel.

The reason that prompts me to make such a statement is that the only good thing about the paper is the local section.

Most of the editorials are predictable, even laughable.

Case in  point: the April 20^th editorial regarding the soon-to-be new Milwaukee Bucks Basketball Corporation facility.

In the editorial, the Journal’s editorial board makes the argument that, since it’s a foregone conclusion that taxpayer money will be spent to fund a new arena (and maybe more), the community should step back, take a deep breath, and think about the big picture.

In their minds this means consideration for a number of other things, such as maybe some kind of museum, or stores, or whatever that ‘we’ might want to include in this new facility.

But not, for instance, any tie-in to mass transit. The Journal says that’s another conversation. I disagree.

Since it’s inevitable that public money is going to help the new millionaires who bought the team make even more money, and that it’s likely that this public money will come in the form of a sales tax, and that many of those who will end up paying this new sales tax use mass transit to go the low paying jobs that provide the income that will be taxed, providing improvements such as more routes into suburban industrial parks and the like should be at the forefront of the discussion, and is not ‘tangential’ as the board suggests.

Where are all the anti-tax conservatives? Why haven’t we heard the usual hew-and-cry from the Tea Partiers, Neocons, and the rest of the Rabid Right? Where’s Grover Norquist?

Norquist, he of the “No Tax Increase Pledge”, insinuated himself into the Volkswagen-UAW flap over the union’s effort to organize workers at the VW Tennessee plant, which had nothing to do with tax rates anyway. Where is this self-appointed slayer of bigger government, this Champion of the 'Leave Us Alone' mantra? Why doesn’t it bother him that the people of southeastern Wisconsin are about to be oppressed by a new layer of taxing-authority government?

I keep forgetting that people like Norquist don’t really care so much about taxes, what they care about I that their friends aren’t taxed. And since this new Bucks tax will be paid by those with little to no political clout whatsoever, all is fine.

It probably does irritate Norquist that the new owners have pledged $100M to help build the facility. Fools. Don’t they know they could get that money from taxes as well?

We have our own local version (kind of) of Norquist in the person of Christian Schneider, columnist for the above mentioned newspaper and avid Scott Walker lapdog. The only reason Schneider hasn’t gone batshit crazy over the impending new tax is because his LordMaster™ Scott Walker hasn't yet made an edict regarding the issue.

He does, however, find it within him to make such funny jokes about how the team could come up with the rest of the money for the facility without raising taxes. While Schneider’s column is meant to be tongue-in-cheek, it really is foot-in-mouth.

First, the math. While not meant to be realistic, they betray how the right thinks about people’s money. Not big corporations or the very rich, but regular people’s money. The numbers don’t reflect any sort of reality because they don’t need to. Not in the context of raising taxes for a new basketball temple or when lowering the tax rates on the very wealthy, which the not very wealthy at all end up paying so that the much-more wealthy can enjoy themselves during their much-more frequent downtime. The only thing that matters to Schneider or Norquist is that no one with money is going to have to pay anymore tax. King’s don’t pay taxes, their subjects do.

Once again, those on the right (The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Grover Norquist, and Christian Schneider, in this case) demonstrate that they don’t have to actually live the values they proscribe for others, as long as the proletariat does.

With Grover Norquist, Everything Old Is...Still Old

I recently came across a book written by Grover Norquist, the right’s self-appointed taxpayer watchdog. I was interested because this guy stuck his nose into the Volkswagen-UAW organizing issue in Tennessee.

At the time, I was wondering what business he had inserting himself into the fray in the first place.

I had heard his name many times over the last three or so decades, knew he was all about reducing taxes, and really had, nor have, any problem with that concept per se. But, I couldn’t help but wonder where he got off sticking his nose in an issue that had nothing to do with tax rates, but it might have something to do with this.

More to the point, I did, and still do, wonder why the authorities let him interject himself. Would I get the same entrée if I wanted to have a say in the matter? Would you? Of course not. If someone from the political left had come to Tennessee to try to steer the issue, you would have heard the hew and cry from the right regardless of what part of the country you were in.

Why didn’t anyone, especially the actual duly elected authorities in Tennessee cry foul when this happened? That’s a question that wont get answered at this time, but, it has been noted.

What I’d like to bring to your attention is the book Norquist wrote shortly after the Republicans took the House of Representatives in the 1990’s. The book, “Rock The House”[1] is little more than Grover gloating over the win, and proclaiming that this new order will last until the very end of time, because people, finally, got things right for once:

“The Republicans capture of the House of Representatives is the conclusion of a 40 year struggle by a conservative nation to overthrow a liberal political elite that has used gerrymandering, incumbent protection laws, and taxpayer dollars to stay in power.”

Nevermind that once in power, these pure-hearted patriots did exactly the same things.

When discussing liberals, Norquist has this to say:

“Those who have viewed the tax dollars of the American people as their own bank account, have despised those they would rule, and who have built up myths to obscure and defend their policy failures, have lost.”

Nevermind, again, that these defenders of crony capitalism immediately rigged the tax code in favor of the already wealthy – transferring even more wealth from the middle class to the already well-off – which, if nothing else, demonstrates their disdain if not outright hatred for the poor and struggling.

And if that’s not enough, consider how these same gallant republicans take to name calling when describing the needy as ‘takers’, while the rich aren’t greedy, they’re ‘job creators’.

Perhaps the liberals did think of taxpayer money as their own bank accounts. However, the right has actually made taxpayer dollars their own, through subsidies for already profitable companies and ever lowered individual and corporate tax rates.

Grover continues his love letter:

“Republican control of the purse strings will cut off hundreds of thousands of parasites who would live off the work of others.”

Again with the name-calling.

Seriously, Grover, there simply are not that many Alice Waltons.

He adds a statement that is plain disturbing, forewarning us of how these defenders of American Freedom plan on governing:

“New Republican’s are a new breed of political leaders who view the politics of campaigns and the work of governing as a seamless garment.”

Too bad no one read this book when it came out. It could have saved the people of Wisconsin, among others, a lot of trouble.

Norquist informs his readers “Why The GOP Took Back The House In 1994”, and provides 7 reasons, one of them, Reason #3 – he cites the role of ‘coalitions’. This begs the question: Why, when it’s on the right it’s a ‘coalition’, yet when it’s on the left, they are ‘Special Interests”? the answer is that this is nothing more than tried-and-true semantics in action. Norquist owes Frank Luntz a beer.

But I’ve saved the very best of Norquist’s attempts to persuade for the last.

This is the part I’ve been waiting for.

“The mandatory recycling laws passed so cavalierly…involve enormous expenditures of time and energy by families and individuals”

Grover must be the absolute laziest Son-Of-A-Birch ever. Really? Throwing that empty bottle into the other bin that’s right next to the one for garbage is an ‘enormous energy expenditure’?

We know you’re fat, Grover, but come on!

All-in-all, if you haven’t read this book, you haven’t missed anything, regardless of what your political philosophy is. It's little more than a love letter to the right, and to himself. He could have saved a lot of time, paper, and ink and just fellated the whole crowd.

---

[1] Rock The House, Grover Norquist, VYTIS Publishing Company, Ft. Lauderdale, FL. 1995

http://books.google.com/books/about/Rock_the_House.html?id=pkhCF0ziHaIC

A Team Effort

The chart below shows the top 10% share of wealth in the United states since 1917 as well as the corporate tax rate on the 1st $25,000 of taxable corporate income. Keep in mind, this is the taxable income, which is the amount of income that is taxed after all legal deductions have been made.

Considering the tax code is rife with deductions of all manner (many completely understandable and justified), including deductions for depreciation of machinery and equipment, interest on loans (when applicable), etc.

Note that the rate came down considerably from around 1950 to about 1986, where is has leveled off at about 15%, while the share of wealth enjoyed by the top 10% has increased. The chart shows the how changes to the tax structure lead to increased wealth concentration.

Above is a chart showing the top 10% share of incomes in the United States versus the world-wide average since 1908, taken from the Paris School of Economics online database, and is not, as of the date of this posting, exhaustive. Data is being added, and this post will be updated accordingly. To see an enlarged view, click here.

As you can see, and as has been the headline of countless articles and stories on all media, wealth is being concentrated at the top brackets. The chart shows that the trend world-wide (the average for those countries included in the analysis) is toward continued wealth concentration.

One thing that is clear is that this concentration of economic power is not reserved to one political party above another. Both Republican and Democratic administrations have had a hand in this trend, both in the earlier (1921-1933) and the current era.

Another thing that is abundantly clear is that the U.S. trend is steeper than that of the average for all countries in the analysis.

The more recent trending starts around 1971 and continues today, some 41 years later, while the earlier phase lasted only about 20 years and ended right around the time the U.S. began ramping up its wartime arming efforts, when the country needed funding and altered tax rates accordingly.

For a larger view of the chart above, click here.

This chart shows the US trend relative to plus or minus one standard deviation.

The light blue bubble on the right shows the region on the graph from around 1986 to the present.

As you can see, historically, while at times hovering at or near plus 1 standard deviation from the average, the US trend never exceeded that limit for any significant length of time. Starting in 1986, the situation changes.

At that time, we see a pronounced departure from historical trends for the top 10% wealthiest and their share of all wealth.

The next chart graphs the average of the countries analyzed and adds 1 standard deviation (which varies from year to year) to that average. This is the blue line.

The line above it, (red) graphs the share of wealth (as a percentage) of the top 10% wealthiest in the U.S.

As shown on the chart, the equation, based on the historic trend, which describes the forecasted percentage, is listed above the graph. This trend analysis indicates that by the year 2018, a full 50% of the country's wealth will be held by the top 10%.

Also, the trend for the U.S. is growing at a faster rate than the trend for the rest of the world. The real question then, is "how long can this trend continue?"

To see a larger view, go here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1plRSev1LgyXzdCVmNXaGxrSjA/edit?usp=sharing

This chart adds the Gross Domestic Product and at the right-most portion, we see that the GDP matches the top 10% share of wealth nearly perfectly. Of course, correlation is not necessarily causation, and in this case the concentration of wealth in the US cannot be the cause of the GDP rise. That is, unless this concentration of wealth is accompanied by a concommitant rise in investment. But, is that the case? Is that what has been happening?

Taxes Are Not punishment

More accurately stated, taxes are not meant to be punishment.

• Taxes are where the money came from to build the roads you use to bring in the raw materials you convert into products which are then shipped using those same roads…
• Taxes are where the money came from to install waterlines to your manufacturing facility, as well as the sewer lines taking your waste away, in order to keep your production lines running...
• Taxes are where the money came that made sure the trucks carrying your goods to market won't blow up on the way, killing your employee and destroying your goods…
• Taxes are where the money comes from that paid the lawyers who wrote the contract laws that make certain you’ll get your money when a customer reneges and refuses to pay you the money you rightfully have coming to you…
• Taxes are where the government gets the money it needs to protect your patent rights, so that you can continue to be successful and not have to worry that someone will steal your design from you and cheat you out of what is rightfully yours…
• Taxes are where we get the money to pay congress to pass treaties like NAFTA, which only benefit companies like yours, not workers, and not government, only you…
• Taxes are where the money comes from to do basic scientific research that gives birth to new technologies that companies like yours profit by…
• Taxes are where society gets the money it needs to make sure your kids don’t have to breathe in too many carcinogenic particulates on their way to school…
• Taxes are where society gets the money it needs to make sure the food your kids eat won't make them sick…
• Taxes are where society gets the money it needs to make sure that the elderly are forced to live in squalor…
• Taxes are where we get the money we need to hire police departments to protect your family and your possessions…
• Taxes are where society gets money to provide for fire departments so that if your house starts on fire, help is on the way…

And so very much more!

So, you've made it and you’re wealthy. Good for you. The rest of us don’t begrudge your success. In fact, we’d like to emulate it. We just want you to be as responsible towards paying your fair share of taxes as you were in building your success so that the rest of us have a real shot at it.

By refusing to do your share, you’re making it harder for those of us still trying to make it. For every penny of taxes you evade, that’s one more penny the rest of us have to make up for.

That penny only benefits you, by the way. Even though the rest of us helped pay for the roads, the sewers, etc. You are the only one who sees benefit of the penny of taxes you evaded. You cheated. 

By paying your fair share of taxes, you are ‘paying it forward’. You’re making sure that the next generation has the same opportunities you did. You’ll be doing for them what someone did for you.

Now, if all that isn’t enough to give you pause maybe this will:

• Taxes are also where we get the money we need to train the country’s armed services to prepare them to go to war to protect your freedoms, including the freedom to run your own business…And
• Taxes are where we get the money to provide vocational training to veterans when they return to civilian life…so that they have the skills needed to go to work for you.

Maybe we could state this another way:

Don't pay taxes but then don't cry when the competition uses your patents...and no one cares.

Don't pay taxes but then don't cry when your house is on fire...and no one cares.

Don't pay taxes but then don't cry when people cheat you out of your profits...and no one cares.

The truest test of character is doing the right thing even when no one is looking.

Barba Tenus Sapientes

"The best off...should pay at a rate at least equal to what low- and middle-income families pay." - Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy

Scott Walker wants to change how Wisconsin collects taxes. He wants Wisconsin to join the cast of states that have no income tax. That doesn't sound so bad at first hearing, but, like all things Walker, this needs further unpacking.

Let's look again at the chart shown previously:

It should be pointed out that simply because a state may not have an income tax in no way should be interpreted that no taxes are paid. They just aren't call income taxes.

You see how the line showing the current tax structure for Wisconsin has a sort-of hump in the middle? And, how that is in contrast to the other lines, which represent who pays what percentage in taxes of personal income for non-elderly taxpayers?

The reason for the hump is to give those on the bottom of the earnings scale a break. It's no secret that lower-income people have less to work with in the first place.

As you can easily see, people in the lowest 20% , pay from 5.7% to a whopping 16.9% of their income in taxes in one form or another, be it sales, property, or excise tax. That 16.9% figure? That's from Washington, where there is no state income tax. It's also the highest percentage paid by anyone in any category.

Generally as one moves from lowest to higher income brackets, the percentages of taxes paid goes down, but not the dollar amounts. This is as it should be.

Take a look at the chart below:

The upper and lower lines represent the range I believe distribution of tax burden will be within.

The line in the middle, labeled Walker's Wisconsin, is what I think the state's tax structure will look like after Walker obeys his overseers and does their bidding. The structure will favor the better off, and the least well off will carry an unfair burden. No surprises there.

Yet, I still wouldn't be surprised if Walker tries to take it a step further, if not right off the bat, then at the next budget cycle, by removing features such as exemptions for children, sales tax deductions for groceries, rent, heating,etc.

Walker's not stupid and he's sure to incorporate at least a few progressive features into the scheme, such as:

• Property tax Homestead exemptions - at least for the elderly. 
• Provide a tax credit to offset impact of sales tax - at least for lower-income taxpayers. 
• A tax credit linked to Federal poverty level and/or to inflation. 
• Standard deductions and child-care exemptions. 
• Refundable Earned Income Tax Credit. 
• Limits itemized deductions for upper-income taxpayers. 
• Use of Combined Reporting for corporations.

But I'm certain that once he sells the state on discarding the graduated income tax, he (if he's still Governor and not..and not..I can't say it...) then train his efforts to punish and reward freely:

• Providing total exclusion of Capital Gains taxes (that's how rich people make their money make their money). 
• Eroding the Combined Reporting requirement. 
• Higher reliance on property taxes. 
• Decoupling exemptions from inflation indexes. 
• Removal of Federal Income Tax deduction. 
• Institute only non-refundable EITC. 
• Higher reliance on sales and excise taxes.

Neither of the above lists are exhaustive. Think of it as a game: remove two from column A and add three from column B.

I hope I'm wrong - and there's a chance I am, since Walker is running for president. Maybe the strategy is to do this one thing right to show the people he really cares. Because he does - about his ambition.