March 15, 2015


I gotta pay my taxes. You gotta pay your taxes. So isn't it odd that 3 busloads of protestors had to head to Greenwich, Connecticutt on Saturday to demand that rich people pay their fair share of taxes? Surely, the wealthy could easily afford to pay theirs. But they don't want to, just as many of us don't WANT to pay our taxes every year. We have to--they don't. Why should the mega-rich pay taxes when they get a much better return on their investment from buying government officials on up to our president? You know that crazy rising GOP star Tom Cotton who spearheaded the now-denounced Republican letter to Iran telling them to ignore Obama's attempt a a nukes deal? Why was stopping an Iran deal such a big issue for him? A pro-Isreal group gave $1 million to his campaign. You have a voice in this country if you can afford one--why do you think blacks are being gunned down by cops with no repercussions? They can't afford to buy politicians. That's how it works, folks. These bums in office are supposed to represent those of us who vote for them, but instead, they represent whoever pays them. Note that these protestors are specifically denouncing the millions given to DEMOCRAT Mario Cuomo to make sure that income inequality is not eased in New York state. Neither party represents working Americans and the challenges they face--that might cost the filthy rich a bit more to fix.

But isn't it sad that citizens have to go out in the rain to demand that people and corporations pay their fair share of taxes? Why are no candidates addressing gross injustice? Many huge corporations pay $0 dollars in taxes and many more get breaks or exploit loopholes like moving their headquarters to the Caribbean. Despite the meager economic recovery under Obama, one trend continued throughout the Bush and Obama regimes--CEOs making enormous record profits. A perfect example of the widening gap between the mega-rich and the rest of us. When Romney was running, the last thing most of the country wanted was a government for the 1% which he advocated. And which he was caught on tape denouncing many of us as "takers" at that fundraiser in Palm Beach. So he lost. Yet with Obama, we got a government for the 1% anyway. And if huge corporations are really in good with our government, they don't just get off from paying their taxes or a large portion of their taxes. If you're as tight with the government as the banking industry is, you can actually declare that you are "too big to fail" and have taxpayers like you and me bail you out with the hundreds of billions of dollars Bush and Obama green lighted. And Obama has littered his cabinet with fox-regulating-the-hen-house wall streeters.

It's very sad that protesters, not the government or any major candidates, have to lead the call for the wealthy to pay their fair share. But the overall goal of our government is to shaft the poor--who have no money and therefore no voice--and to work on behalf of the 1$. This mission crosses party lines. And as we prepare for an election, know that while a few candidates like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren support evening income inequality, they can't afford to even run (much less win) without spending millions. Can the poor/middle class afford to give millions? Nope, so their interests won't be represented. And Hillary is seen as the Democratic front runner because she can raise the money need to win. And she'll raise it primarily from huge corporations who she'd have to repay once in office. At the average worker's expense. Just as Obama campaigned in his last election on a promise to raise taxes on the wealthy who earn above $250,000. He won and immediately changed that to $400,000--which lost the government a fortune! Our politicians are so in bed with the 1$ that they don't even want tax dollars from the wealthy--they're getting much more directly through campaign donations.

Look at the demands of these Greenwich, Connecticutt protesters. Better wages, affordable housing and more funding for public schools. Don't most of us want that? Yet none of the Republicans running for president are addressing these issues. And Hillary, the heir presumptive, hasn't yet figured out which lies she's going to tell to trick voters into thinking she doesn't represent the 1%. We also won't hear Hillary discussing how unfair the Citizens United ruling, which enables corporations to give unlimited, secret amounts to political campaigns--because she'll be too busy collecting coins. We need to hear candidates saying corporations must pay their fair share of taxes.

Here's what the protesters were saying as they targeted the home of hedge fund billionaire Paul Tudor Jones.

“The hedge funds are inequality on steroids,” Kink said.

“People are making fortune after fortune off of other people’s misery,” Kink continued, contrasting Bill Ackman who he said has made serial fortunes with Burger King, McDonald’s and Wendy’s while fast food workers and their families struggle to survive, often winding up in homeless shelters.

Kink said the  protesters were from several groups whose messages dovetail. “We’re advocating fair share taxes on those who can afford to pay, better wages for workers and funding for public schools,” he said.

Asked why the protesters were targeting Paul Tudor Jones on Saturday, Kink said, “Paul Tudor Jones specifically led the donors, the super PACs, the PACS that have piled $40 million in campaign cash into New York politics. Our governor, Gov. Andrew Cuomo, got $4.2 million himself and and another $2.6 to committees he controls.”

Kink said Tudor Jones was one of ten billionaires who created “New Yorkers for a Balanced Albany,” and along with Paul Singer, Dan Loeb and Louis Bacon raised $4.2 million in just 10 days.

“They swung control of the state Senate over to the Republicans, so they have low taxes, loopholes and no fair share taxes on the rich,” Kink said. “They are destroying the public school system with their latest policy preference for charter schools,” he said, adding that 97% of New York students do not go to charter schools. “They’ve hijacked the entire education agenda for their personal predilections.”