What happens when the voter in the exact middle of the earnings spectrum receives more in benefits from Washington than he pays in taxes? Economists Allan Meltzer and Scott Richard posed this question 27 years ago. We may soon enough know the answer.
Barack Obama is offering voters strong incentives to support higher taxes and bigger government. This could be the magic income-redistribution formula Democrats have long sought.
...
In all, three out of every five voters will pay little or nothing in income taxes under Mr. Obama's plans and gain when taxes rise on the 40% that already pays 95% of income tax revenues.
The plunder that the Democrats plan to extract from the "very rich" -- the 5% that earn more than $250,000 and who already pay 60% of the federal income tax bill -- will never stretch to cover the expansive programs Mr. Obama promises.
source
Like everyone except the most hard core libertarian loon I accept the fact that some taxes are necessary in order to support the infrastructure that makes America as livable and productive as it is. I can even support a progressive tax structure under the theory advocated by Adam Smith that those who benefit most from a society should do the most to support it.
What I can't support is stealing from one group in order to give benefits to another group. That is precisely what Obama is proposing.
And here is what pisses me off - Remember when Clinton pushed through his tax reforms and people who made over a million dollars had all sorts of new taxes thrown at them. Well two groups were exempted Pro-Athletes and Entertainment figures. I am sure we will follow the tax the productive reward the mindless Democrat Hollywood horde plan again. Because you know the world can live without the drugs Merck makes, but not without a new George Clooney movie.
No comments:
Post a Comment