Via Raw Story (emphasis added):
Influential US lawmakers on Thursday called for levying a new income tax to pay for the war in Afghanistan, warning its costs pose a mortal threat to efforts like a sweeping health care overhaul.
…The group included House Appropriations Committee Chairman Dave Obey; Representative John Murtha, who chairs that panel’s defense subcommittee; and House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank.
The proposal, a heavily symbolic measure seen as having next to no chance of becoming law, would impose a war surtax on income beginning in 2011 — though it would allow the president to delay implementation by one year upon deciding the US economy is too weak to sustain such a tax shift.
Symbolic? No chance of becoming law? Why is serious governance treated as a joke in Washington?
#1 by cav - November 20th, 2009 at 11:00
We’ll have to ask permission of the rich.
#2 by David - November 20th, 2009 at 12:26
Some Republicans would probably wish to cast me out of the party for this, but I completely agree on this one. We should pay for our wars. If we felt the cost of them we might be more careful about when, where, and how we fight them.
#3 by Larry Bergan - November 21st, 2009 at 00:48
Can I symbolically pay the taxes on my house – damn, I just sent them to the county assessor today.
I’m confused. I thought Obama said he was going to include the war cost in the budget.
#4 by Jimson Steils - November 21st, 2009 at 14:24
Who are the people in “our” wars?
Wars are meant to pay for themselves, or any costs transferred to those with the least to do with it. Just isn’t working out as planned unless you are on the contracting side. Or maybe it is. If the war is costing us 1 million dollars per soldier per year, somebody is making bank.
#5 by cav - November 23rd, 2009 at 10:09
Lawmakers Propose ‘War Surtax’ to Pay for Troop Increase in Afghanistan
FOXNews – Mike Emanuel – ?40 minutes ago?
Two top Democrats say they want to impose a new tax on the wealthy to finance any increase in US troops for the Afghanistan war.
#6 by Larry Bergan - November 23rd, 2009 at 15:44
Every once in a while Carl Levin says something I really like. Maybe now we can see some REAL debate about war funding!
#7 by cav - November 24th, 2009 at 10:01
Ken, how would you feel if Healthcare were taken ‘off budget’ like the Bush-wars were?
#8 by cav - December 1st, 2009 at 10:07
Pertinant dialog on Obama’s Afgan / Pakis surge.
What I don’t get is the absolute disconnect or compartmentalization. No money for health care, creating jobs, education, rail, etc., but always enough to go and kill some brown people or to prop up big banks and insurance companies.
They are counting three things. 1) the racism of many voters, who believe social spending goes to black people. These voters are perfectly ok with spending to kill brown people and probably also think they will someday be millionaires who deserve tax cuts. 2) $3M/day in Village hookers and blow. 3) the SCLM will never call them on it.
#9 by rockymtivy - December 2nd, 2009 at 14:54
why wasn’t this concept of paying for our war promulgated during the Bush years? Why not a surtax on weapons manufacturers?