Hill: Rising Dem star Tim Ryan splits with party, endorses corporate tax cuts

[McGovernForPrez]

I mean if we are specifically talking about cutting the corporate tax rate then he's right. Evidence shows that it's highly inefficient and causes corporations to invest money they could invest in expanding into hiring tax lawyers to find loopholes. America has like the second highest corporate tax rate of any OECD nation. Most progressive policy wonks agree on this. The same nations praised for their single payer healthcare also have very low corporate tax rates.

If Tim Ryan simply wants to give carte blanche to corporations though, he has another thing coming. There's a lot of regulatory reform needed in this country. If Democrats want real success with tax and regulatory reform they need to seriously look through to see which regulations are necessary, which aren't, and which need to be created. Lot's of regulation actually helps big businesses, just like lot's of deregulation also helps them. The proof is in the pudding so to speak. It all comes down to details. I'm all for a crackdown on big business but we've gotta do it in the most effective way possible, and that means creating regulations and removing them.

[McGovernForPrez]

I saw this a few days ago when he said it, and it certainly boosts my opinion of him.

He's right, though. Going anti-business will hurt the party.

+1. Being anti-business simply continues a leftward trend of Democratic party of the last years. May be it would be more honest to rename it as a Socialist party?? And look whether former WWC supporters will return "en masse" because of new "class" approach of the party? But i fear in such case you can kiss goodbye to those anti-Trump middle class suburbanites, who actively supported Clinton against Trump. They are not anti-business, for sure. Choose one, party!))))

P.S. It really amuses me when, say, Silicon Valley and Upper East Side, very rich people comprise a very big part of party's megadonors. Will they support a new, rebranded, "Democratic Sociaist party"?

The party isn't "anti-business". They're just "anti-consolidation of market power". Right now corporate consolidation is at an all time high and his having major negative impact on the country. Being against "big business" means being for "small business". This is the charade that the Republican party has managed to put in the minds of voters. They've managed to convince people that what's good for large well established corporations is also good for small ones. In reality, what's good for large businesses is antithesis to what's good for small businesses. Large businesses use government as a means of rent seeking behavior. They use some regulations to push out competition, while they remove others to make it easier for them to do so. Entrepreneurship has been on a steady decline in America since the Reagan years, despite all of the "pro-business" policies the GOP has pushed. The GOP has been a tool for economic rent seeking for awhile now, and ultimately is far worse for small business than Democrats are.

[McGovernForPrez]

The House GOP gets a lot of flack for being a mix incompetent crazy people, undiagnosed psychopaths and sleepy old white guys, but the House Democratic caucus is an underrated dumpster fire.

There are like, 5, likeable people among them and the rest are either laughably corrupt machine products or dorky technocrats who would never be willing to do anything that would make someone angry at the next local Chamber of Commerce meeting.

I think you over exaggerate how bad the Democratic caucus is. I can name 5 likable Democrats from my state alone. I refuse to believe only 2% of Democratic congressman are both non-corrupt or non-technocrats.

[McGovernForPrez]

The Swedish welfare state runs on a corporate tax of like 22%. Americans obsess way too much over specific taxes.

Reducing loopholes and lowering rates is a good idea either way.

Which, to be clear, Ryan also advocated.

Which loophole did he talk about? Did he talk about effective tax rates? That idiot was making GOP talking points like you can't be the party of redistribution & business isn't competitive. Part of it is a lie, part just hackish.

Ryan is meeting a lot of donors for his rumored Presidential run. A 30% or 35% or 25% is a not a huge issue.

This is just false. Ryan said you can't just be the party of wealth redistribution and that Democrats also have to focus on the generation of wealth. Which is true.  I think he's wrong to say a corporate tax cut + the closing of loopholes will bring jobs to Youngstown, Detroit, and elsewhere, but he's 100% right that Democrats need to incentive job growth in those areas.

I agree, generation of wealth is also very important, maybe not as much as redistribution, but it'll make redistribution easier. I'm not sure whether or not that's what Tim Ryan meant though.

[McGovernForPrez]

The Swedish welfare state runs on a corporate tax of like 22%. Americans obsess way too much over specific taxes.

Reducing loopholes and lowering rates is a good idea either way.

Which, to be clear, Ryan also advocated.

Which loophole did he talk about? Did he talk about effective tax rates? That idiot was making GOP talking points like you can't be the party of redistribution & business isn't competitive. Part of it is a lie, part just hackish.

Ryan is meeting a lot of donors for his rumored Presidential run. A 30% or 35% or 25% is a not a huge issue.

This is just false. Ryan said you can't just be the party of wealth redistribution and that Democrats also have to focus on the generation of wealth. Which is true.  I think he's wrong to say a corporate tax cut + the closing of loopholes will bring jobs to Youngstown, Detroit, and elsewhere, but he's 100% right that Democrats need to incentive job growth in those areas.

I agree, generation of wealth is also very important, maybe not as much as redistribution, but it'll make redistribution easier. I'm not sure whether or not that's what Tim Ryan meant though.

If you look at the full quote -- which I would post instead of link, but there are some strange rules about pulling more than a few sentences from articles -- it's clear he means the Democratic party has to be the party of both wealth redistribution and creation. His conclusion you do the latter through cutting the corporate tax rate while also closing loopholes is a somewhat odd one.

I mean if corporate tax cuts are given as a concession to allow better wealth distribution in other areas I can see that being an alright deal.