>

It was a stupid idea anyway.
A fucking 30% sales tax?!? These people are fucking idiots. >

Yeah it’s disproportionately hit wage earners, while corporate employees ride the stock valuations to even higher riches. >

Its not that simple. Those folk are already doing that and getting away with paying whatever sales tax is now.
But a national sales tax on consumption would hit everyone equally.
Plus this bill provided for credits each month for those at the poverty level and below refunding back any taxes paid thus making this a progressive tax instead of a regressive tax.
I'm a damn hard core liberal and I supported this tax.
Pay down the national debt and then use it to expand the social safety net.
We could also add a 1% tax to stock trades as well to stabilize the markets and raise the minimum wage to a living wage and index it to inflation to be adjusted daily to stabilize inflation.
A safe, predictable market. >

What was the part about repealing the 16th amendment? >

This is it, folks. The best and the brightest of the GOP are in power in the House and what was the first thing they came up with? A 30% tax on all retail sales. Awesome. That's gonna really help reelection. >

Oh, they're counting on us to forget all about the whole thing by then. 
They expected people to get over the Roe v. Wade decision after the leak and before it was struck down after all. We were suppose to put January 6th out of our minds as well.
Edit: and they'll be right about people forgetting the things that were brought forward and didn't pass, because there'll be a fuckton of that. It's only getting started. >

How do you say fuck the poor without saying fuck the poor? National Sales Tax. >

Just pointing out, Republicans have found plenty of other ways to say "fuck the poor" >

Lowering taxes on the rich, gutting Obamacare, over funding the DoD, cutting SNAP.
“Fucking over the poor since 1864” should be their campaign slogan. >

Please, paying to avoid the draft started in 1863. >

But it doesn’t sound as catchy! >

GOP: Screwing Over You & Me Since 1863 >


House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Tuesday told reporters he opposes legislation to abolish the IRS and replace federal taxes with a 30% sales tax.

Republican tax policy:  a single mom paying 30% sales tax on a gallon of milk while the wealthy pay nothing on multiple sources of income >

Sorry what, abolish the IRS? Are you fuckin' serious? Dude how blatant do they need to be for people to realize these fucks don't care about anyone but themselves and their corporate overlords >

you probably haven't seen it because you're not in their conservative news bubble, but the IRS has been completely demonized in the last 6 years, especially in the last 2. Most the GOP voters are convinced that Biden has weaponized the IRS to attack conservatives. 
How convenient for the rich that the government body that enforces tax policy is now super partisan, and may be gutted as soon as the right wing takes power. >

They stripped the irs of its power long ago. To audit an actual wealthy person (someone who is worth >$10 mill) takes actual resources and effort. It’s just like the SEC, completely feckless and defunded on purpose. Then when you propose a modest increase the GOP go absolutely insane and say that the gov’t is going to fema camp them and do martial law. >

GOP: The system is broken. How can we make it even worse? >

Given they think all government is bad, it’s kinda the point >

Nothing says, "I have no idea what it's like to live paycheck to paycheck" more than this idea. >

You know something is a bad idea when McCarthy shoots the idea down. Marge and the rest of her Goon Squad will be bellowing for his dismissal any moment now. >


Why it matters: The move effectively kills the legislation, which was part of a deal McCarthy made with hardliners in his conference to secure the speakership earlier this month.
What we're hearing: Top Republicans told Axios that McCarthy's agreement only guaranteed the bill would get a hearing in committee — but that doesn't guarantee a floor vote.

I'm guessing that the "hardliners" will not be too happy with this simply because McCarthy agreed to hear it in committee and nothing more.  They aren't pushing this bill for fun - they very much want to pass this.  I'm hoping this pisses off at least one of them enough that they decide to put McCarthy's speakership up for a vote. >

And those hardliners are idiots.  It's a Speaker's job to protect his conference from being forced to vote on bills that make them look horrible to voters, and have no chance of passing anyway.
It would be political malpractice for McCarthy to allow a floor vote on this. >

I like the way you pretend McCarthy is a normal politician who cares about looking horrible to voters. >

Well, in his malformed way, that is exactly what he's trying to do.
Were this to go to the floor the voting public would get to see just how shitty the Republican caucus is as a whole. By killing it in committee he is shielding his base from the truth, the truth that most house Republicans would vote for this.
There is no freedom caucus group of hardliners anymore, they are all hardliners.
And the proof will be that no four or five Republicans in the house are going to split off in the next two years to pass any sane legislation beyond the debt ceiling votes. >


the truth that most house Republicans would vote for this.

But not enough of them to pass it.  So exposing them to the public on this issue provides no benefit.  Even one of such limited mental capacity as McCarthy realizes this. >

The hardliners are going to throw a fit. >

We might see a new speaker very soon.... >

There's a wonderfully cynical political novel.  'The Fools In Town Are On Our Side' by Ross Thomas.  In it, an ex-CIA agent is hired to make a small Southern city "so corrupt, even the pimps will vote for reform."
At this point, it looks like the GOP is trying to show how incompetent it can be. >

I’m disappointed only in that this would have sunk the GOP for a decade. But a more regressive ‘up yours’ to non-rich Americans is hard to imagine >

Oh there's plenty more to come, and probably much worse to boot. >

I mean they would like to bring back chattel slavery >

Sounds like a good way to create a recession, though. >

When the best policy you have is too stupid >

Good. Horrifically bad idea to even be floated. Why aren’t we talking about a windfall profit tax? Oh yeah, because the GOP is nakedly corrupt and somehow the idiots in this country keep electing them >

It would create absolute chaos as well.
A world in which businesses start offering cash prices to avoid paying sales taxes, and the IRS is abolished regardless, so whose gonna stop this from snowballing through the US?  It would DECIMATE American tax revenues and programs that rely on them. >

National Sales Tax is one of the stupidest things to come along. Proposed way back by Steve Forbes, presidential candidate. Remember him? >

This is a distraction. They float an idea that is easy to hate, easy to shoot down. Then they come to an “agreement” which is way worse than we would have originally been okay with that further hurts the middle and lower class, but hey, at least it’s not a 30% sales tax right? >

Probably the first smart thing he's done as speaker. It would be political suicide. Absolutely psychopathic idea, legitimately revolution-triggering. >

Hey you know how you're mostly paying somewhere between 12 and 24 percent on your income? Scrap that, pay 30% on all goods you purchase but trust us it's cheaper >

Here's an idea: what about a transacional tax on every transaction on Wall Street, and stop trying to shift all tax burdens on weary Americans who are losing purchasing power to inflation and watching our costs go up daily?
Think about it: each day, the New York Stock Exchange averages 38.3 million transactions, which is almost 10 billion transactions per year. Let's pretend that every transaction accrues a flat 1 cent tax. That would generate $100 million in revenue in one year (and perhaps have regulatory effect to reign in market manipulation by bot activity, thereby decreasing that number somewhat... But I digress).
So then, what if it weren't a flat tax? What if the accumulation of wealth by the wealthy didn't also starve the economy? Food for thought. >

This never had a chance of passing. It's the sort of bill Republicans often float just to set the bar super low, so that when they float a different, slightly less shitty bill, they can convince their followers to support it. Think of it as adjusting the overton window for this sort of issue. >

This was the best idea they could come up with.  They will only get worse from here. >

McCarthy better start packing up his Speaker's office. >

These idiots actually proposed this, and should be pilloried. But no, all we hear about is Biden coming to take their gas stoves, which was never proposed by any Democratic politician. >

Legislation baby >

Even the meek GOP majority knows this is a non-starter. >

Talk is one thing actions are another. >

Sales taxes are notoriously regressive, perfect for the GOP agenda. >

Only chickens balk. >

Can we get a democratic representative to propose an amendment that:
This sales tax only applies to things that cost over 10,000*the federal minimum wage? >

Absolutely!  Oh btw the minimum wage is now $.01 lol