Doonesbury by Garry Trudeau for May 04, 2021


Hide All Comments
  1. Img 0910
    BE THIS GUY Premium Member 12 days ago

    Damn capital gains tax! That’s why the 1990’s were such an economic disaster!

     •  Reply
  2. Nct beach wiz
    DD Wiz Premium Member 12 days ago

    Steve Forbes (who ran unsuccessfully for the Republican nomination in 1996) is a billionaire who, like so many conservative billionaires (like the Koch brothers, Walton heirs, Mercer heirs, Steve Forbes, Mitt R-money, Bush family, and of course Donald Trump and his kids), inherited his wealth from Daddy, Malcolm Forbes, and thinks he is a “self-made rugged individualist” and believe that workers should WORK HARDER for LESS MONEY on which we pay a HIGHER TAX RATE, so the few richest elite investors can WORK LESS (or not at all, depending on how much they inherited from Daddy) for MORE MONEY on which they pay a LOWER TAX RATE (or none at all, depending on how many loopholes, shelters, deductions and offshore Cayman Islands accounts they can hide their money in).

    As for the Flat Tax, in order to be revenue neutral and just a straight adjustment of taxation principles, it would represent a massive REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH from poor and working people to the few richest elites who already have the most.

    In a true progressive tax system (which we don’t have, since the few richest elites can use deductions, loopholes, exemptions and shelters as well as special lower rates on investment profits to actually pay LOWER rates than working people), everyone pays exactly the same rate on the portion of income in the same income layer (tax bracket) and would only pay a higher rate on the PORTION of income in each higher layer of income.

     •  Reply
  3. Catinnabag2 50pct
    Màiri  12 days ago

    everyone pays exactly the same rate on the portion of income in the same income layer (tax bracket) and would only pay a higher rate on the PORTION of income in each higher layer of income.

    I’m pretty sure that’s how it works now.

     •  Reply
  4. 5446d001 5a98 4b64 8030 f545c7f6eae0
    MD Bear Premium Member 12 days ago

    I recall watching Steve Forbes being interviewed on TV during his presidential campaign and thinking there was something there was something odd about his mannerisms. It took me a while to pin it down, but it finally dawned on me: the man did not blink. Ever. It was downright creepy.

    Around that time, Michael Moore had a TV series. He also noticed Forbes didn’t blink, and asked an eye specialist about it. The doctor said that a normal person would blink every 15-20 seconds. When Moore said Forbes had apparently gone two minutes without blinking, the doctor said he “wasn’t human”. This led to Moore satirically suggesting that Forbes was a space alien.

    (Incidentally, I know Michael Moore is a flawed source. He very selectively prevents information. I rank him only slightly above annoying little right wing twit James O’Keefe, and I only rank Moore higher because I like his politics.)

     •  Reply
  5. Missing large
    Gen.Flashman  12 days ago

    Steve inherited ALL his money from his father Malcolm who inherited his wealth from his father.

     •  Reply
  6. Profile msn
    vaughnrl2003 Premium Member 12 days ago

    See this is why you don’t see nerds and geeks stomping around the capitol breaking windows and punching people. We take the field in cyberspace. Just as destructive but way less blood. …mostly

     •  Reply
  7. Missing large
    zwilnik64  12 days ago

    There is an interesting contrast here regarding the ‘tastes’ of GOP voters. Forbes was all in on the economic policies of the GOP. He didn’t play in the social issue pool. No veiled racism, no centering of the pro-life issue, and gays weren’t prominent enough yet to figure.

    Forbe’s candidacy went over like a lead balloon with voters. While the recent figure who ditched all the economic arguments, and doubled down on the racism, xenophobia and white nationalism is still the apple of the base’s eye, despite costing them control of the government.

     •  Reply
  8. Missing large
    [Unnamed Reader - c91c61]  12 days ago

    Born on 3rd base and are convinced they hit a triple.

     •  Reply
  9. Plsa button
    Richard S Russell Premium Member 12 days ago

    Conservatives are always challenging progressives like me as to what constitutes “fair taxation”, apparently assuming it’s an unanswerable challenge. Well, assuming against all experience that they’re truly seeking to expand their knowledge, here’s an honest answer:

     –For income up to $20,000, 0%.

     –For income from $20,001 to $40,000, 10%.

     –For income from $40,001 to $100,000, 25%.

     –For income from $100,001 to $500,000, 40%.

     –For income from $500,001 to $1,000,000, 60%.

     –For income from $1,000,001 up, 80%.

    And “income” would include not just wages but also the cash value of stock options, dividends, capital gains, inheritances, and perks like a company car or free use of the corporate ski lodge.

    Thus someone with an income of $2,000,000 would pay $1,277,000 in taxes. And don’t try to tell me the poor baby will be wearing hand-me-downs and eating cat food on “only” the measly $723,000 left over.

     •  Reply
  10. Avatar 2475
    Troglodyte  12 days ago

    Lost me at crusade…

     •  Reply
  11. Aatxajxdbvwd2r3ph1cjjevb2f u0urgncufrvd jd0e=s96 c
    CharlesDoyle  11 days ago

    I missed something – what was the attraction of Forbes for Michael?

     •  Reply
  12. Missing large
    jmclaughlinvt  11 days ago

    Wow 1996, it shows! Today Mike would be looking at his phone.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Doonesbury