In wake of last night’s Republican defeat, let us take, for a minute, the Paul Ryan budget issue. They have a plan, and progressives have a plan, but both have to realize that something is going to need to be done. If we are not going to go with Ryan’s plan, then how do we afford Medicare, etc.? I’m all for making political hay on this issue, but if we don’t do what Ryan says we should do, how do we continue to pay for those programs?

Our argument needs to be on the lines of how do we get the budget in balance. I think Progressives really need to focus on the contrast – we support taxes on those that are doing so well, defunding two (2½?) wars, and eliminating subsidies for those all ready doing so well (I speak here not only of the oil industry, but of many subsidies in the agriculture sector, too). I don’t think we should let go of this issue, and simply preach a gospel of fairness (theologically minded friends and Friends, can you argue the Gospel is a gospel of fairness? I won’t, feeling that I am not in the place to comment upon it now, but it seems to me a case could be made).

Much of the conservative point is that their taxes are too much of a burden. While our corporate tax rates as a percentage of  income are higher than many, our personal tax burden is not significantly higher than most countries, and certainly lower than most. The Republican theory is that lower taxes increase production and create jobs (that’s a situation to look at in another blog). I don’t think their policy is that complex – lower taxes regardless of who gets hurt.  Their argument is that their taxes are just too high.

So are mine.

I am with them in that I grumble about them. I could really use the money. But there are two things I’d like to note:  First, I will pay more if I have to if that’s what it takes to keep the safety net in place for those most vulnerable. Second, I did pay more in taxes that many, many companies. Of note, my Federal taxes totaled $8,957 for 2011,  which was at least $8,857 dollars more than GE (who internationally made 10.4 billion in profits). I paid  $156,008,857 more than Exxon Mobile (who had earnings of 1.6 billion during that tax year) and I paid $ 1,900,008,957 more than Bank of America, who got 1.9 billion in returns on profits of 4.4 billion plus almost a trillion dollars in bailout money!). While I appreciate the confidence the government has shown in my earning ability, I am hard pressed to feel this is equitable.

For arguments sake, let us assume my effective tax rate is around 20%. If we simply taxed Exxon and BOA at my tax rate, the treasury would have been $ 6.736 billion better off. Well, together the country would have been$ 6,736,008,957 better off. (I’m sincerely curious as to how the conservative wing would respond to this in terms of their argument that the individual is better than directing spending than the government is). Add in the 2.2 billion that Oil and Gas companies get in special subsidies, and the total would have made a net difference of $ 8.936 billion (OK,  $ 8,936,008,957 if you’re still counting on my contribution). As Everett Dirkson used to note: "A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money".

This is only marginally about the budget:: It is simply a call to fairness. I’d be willing to pay (somewhat begrudgedly) another $ 500 a year to save Medicare, but you know, I really kind of want to see GE, BOA, and EXXON chip in too.