Hey, Washington! Tax those who've benefitted most from 30 years of Trickle Down Voodoo Economics...

"Trickle Down" economics was a "Trojan Horse" -- David Stockman

EXCERPT...

In the 1980’s Ronald Reagan ushered in a new era in American economics as he cut the top tax bracket from 70% down to 50% and then down again to 28%. In order to get support for doing this from the people, and also from politicians, a very crafty set of lies were produced. As David Stockman, then Reagan’s budget director, put it: giving small tax cuts across the board to all brackets was simply a “Trojan Horse” that was used to get approval for the huge top tax bracket cuts. “Trickle-Down” was a term used by Republicans that meant giving tax cuts to the rich. Stockman explains that:

"It's kind of hard to sell 'trickle down,' so the supply-side formula was the only way to get a tax policy that was really 'trickle down.' Supply-side is 'trickle-down' theory."

"Yes, Stockman conceded, when one stripped away the new rhetoric emphasizing across-the-board cuts, the supply-side theory was really new clothes for the unpopular doctrine of the old Republican orthodoxy."

"…the Reagan coalition prevailed again in the House and Congress passed the tax-cut legislation with a final frenzy of trading and bargaining. Again, Stockman was not exhilarated by the victory. On the contrary, it seemed to leave a bad taste in his mouth, as though the democratic process had finally succeeded in shocking him by its intensity and its greed. Once again, Stockman participated in the trading -- special tax concessions for oil -- lease holders and real-estate tax shelters, and generous loopholes that virtually eliminated the corporate income tax. Stockman sat in the room and saw it happen."

"'Do you realize the greed that came to the forefront?' Stockman asked with wonder. 'The hogs were really feeding. The greed level, the level of opportunism, just got out of control.'"

CONTINUED...

The Return Of Voodoo Economics

By Sebastian Mallaby
Washington Post
Monday, May 15, 2006

Nobody serious believes that tax cuts pay for themselves, as I noted last week. But most senior Republicans flunk this test of seriousness.

In January, George W. Bush declared that, "by cutting the taxes on the American people, this economy is strong, and the overall tax revenues have hit at record levels." Regrettably, this endorsement of what his dad called voodoo economics was not a one-time oversight. The next month, Bush told a New Hampshire audience, "You cut taxes and the tax revenues increase."

Bush is not alone in this. Dick Cheney, allegedly a serious person, asserted in February that the "tax cuts have translated into higher federal revenues."

Bill Frist is sometimes taken seriously, not least by himself. And yet the Republican Senate leader is capable of saying: "Many people in Washington have long known a dirty little secret about tax-cut measures: When done right, they actually result in more money for the government."

CONTINUED...

The formulation known as "supply-side economics" was actually an updated version of the tax philosophy first articulated in the 1920s by Andrew Mellon, Treasury Secretary for Reagan's boyhood hero, Calvin Coolidge. The intent was to scale back the progressive income tax; the assumption was that, once in private hands, the money would flow into capital investments, building up the supply side of the economy--new factories and technologies, a larger base of productive capacity. All together, however, Reagan's tax cuts would reduce the federal government's revenue by a total of $540 billion over five years, raising a specter that would have alarmed the conservative orthodoxy of Andrew Mellon and Calvin Coolidge--huge federal deficits, in peacetime and under a Republican President.

The CIA: Banking on Intelligence

Anthony L. Kimery

The CIA has collected, and the intelligence community has collected, economic intelligence of one kind or another since its inception. -‑ Director of Central Intelligence, R. James Woolsey

The CIA has never been above breaking the law as it battles communists, nationalists, terrorists, or the latest "national security threat": foreign‑directed economic and financial subterfuge. This growing economic focus comes at the bidding of many voices in the CIA, Pentagon, and corporate community who believe the U.S.'s primary intelligence mission should be to help industry compete in the global marketplace. There has been little public discussion, however, over just when corporate competition becomes a sufficient threat to the national security to unleash the corruptible talents of the intelligence community into the world of international finance.

"New" Intelligence Requirements: Old Practices

That line between "national security" and private financial interests has long been mutable and subject to the day‑to‑day needs of the CIA. For decades, the U.S. has used currency manipulations, embargoes, and other forms of economic pressure to undermine its foes. When the 1945 Bretton Woods agreement established the U.S. dollar as the international currency of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, the U.S. secured enormous international financial leverage. It can direct intense fiscal pressure against foreign financial institutions, and even an entire national economy, by activating the global power of the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve (along with the international financial institutions it controls). Witness the long‑standing embargo against Cuba, the economic sabotage of Nicaragua in the 1980s, the illegal withholding of Panama's canal revenues between 1987 and 1990, and the current international sanctions against Iraq. Economic motives have always driven U.S. covert operations. And bending banking regulations to the benefit of U.S. and foreign elites has been standard practice. Thus, it should be no surprise that, despite questionable legality, both the National Security Agency (NSA) and the CIA already engage in extensive economic intelligence activities wherever U.S. national security interests are perceived to be at risk.

The practice of using existing U.S. intelligence agencies to gather economic and financial data through traditional spy methods was given a boost by the Reagan administration. Incoming CIA Director William Casey's national security credentials were matched by his business background. Casey had been chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Undersecretary of State for economic affairs, and Import‑Export Bank President. He ordered the Agency's once modest

National Collection Division (NCD) to recruit major corporate executives abroad to gather proprietary information on foreign businesses and the trade and economic policies of foreign governments. This move made the NCD the largest information gathering program within the Agency's operations directorate. By 1984, more than 150 corporations were providing cover for CIA people overseas.

CONTINUED (via Waybac -- if it gives problems, PM me for article) ...

http://web.archive.org/web/20090321024311/http://covertaction.org/content/view/142/75