Harvey Golub in the WSJ:
President Obama says over and over again that high-income Americans don't pay their fair share of income taxes. He says this with such conviction and confidence that many believe him—the tax code is unfair because high-income people pay too little. True, there is a lot wrong with our tax code and it is unfair, but the president is simply wrong if he believes our highest earners are not paying their fair share.
The top 1% of taxpayers pay more in federal income taxes than the bottom 90%. (The bottom 50% pay no income tax at all.) Clearly, our tax system is highly progressive, either when considering income taxes alone or consolidating personal income, corporate, estate and payroll taxes. I suppose one could argue that the code should be even more progressive, but that is a tough argument to make on the basis of fairness.
What his followers want, isn't even that noble. They want the ability to punish people who have more than they do. They want to say "Look great master... that man has a private jet... I don't have a private jet... take his away and give it to me! He has a nice car, but I want a nice car... give me his!" This is a base an evil sentiment, but it's what really drives all the people out there demanding "fairness".
It's the same exact sentiment that drove Rhodesia off the fiscal cliff when all the land owned by white farmers (many had owned the farms for generations) was taken away from them by force and given to black citizens who knew nothing of farming but had good political connections. They said they wanted "fairness" too. That's what "Fairness" means to the far left. Obama knows better than to really give them more than just a taste of it. But that's still what they're after.
4 comments:
read: The Winds of Havoc - to get an autobiographical look at what the "fairness" in sub-saharan africa truly became... in a coupling with the Fast and Furious post, Zimbabwe made sure they outlawed the guns before they advanced towards confiscation of property.
When I was in South Africa in 2001 the government had decided that there were "too many" handguns in the country and restricted the importation and ownership of handguns. I believe auto-loading long-guns are also illegal in RSA, although some exceptions have been made (backsheesh) when Beretta and Benelli promoted some wing shooting in the limpopo. I always look at what post apartheid south africa became: they took a 1st world country with a strong currency and nuclear energy and turned it on its side because economic progress conficted with "political progress".
In the villages in the northern region (Venda) It is feudalism. Sure they all wear T-shirts that say "One Man, One Vote!" but all eligible voters are told who to vote fore by their head man or chief. I could tell you some stories, but I would need a lotta bandwidth.
Nice piece Tom...You to Ikaika.. If there were not dna/rna inhibitors South Africa and alot of other countries over there would go poof in a couple of generations from HIV.
The fairness crap eats at me cause its divider/ smoke screen.I explode when I hear we are just trying to go back to Clinton era rates and there was amazing growth,..I am fine with that if you take gas back to $1.25/gallon. Take sirloin back to $1.50/lb.They never mention and are never asked bout what inflation has done to your buying power over past 20 years.What the dollar has done in 20 yrs???? Its like healthcare costs between US and Britain.The libtards never compare aaples to aaples. Hell, they never compare aaples to another fruit.
Shit.Im looking at stocks and typing aaple instead of apple.I got Steve Jobs on the brain
I am reluctant to admit it, but confiscatory tax rates have had an impact on my charitable giving. In the back of my brain, the little bell is telling me I gave at the office. So the post is correct in that "others" are choosing for me.
Post a Comment