The king of income redistribution is at it again for the
umpteenth time. It’s not like we haven’t
heard this “spread the wealth around” pitch from Obama before as he keeps
pounding away at those darn rich people who dare to work hard to expand their businesses
so we can have job growth through free enterprise and avoid the pitfalls of
socialism.
How many times do we have to listen to this guy crab about
the Buffett rule where big Warren pays taxes at a lower rate than his
secretary? I think he is out of ammunition and
like the television shows, he is heading into his summer reruns.
It looks like his ideas about the economy and taking from
the rich aren’t going over so well. A
current Washington Post /ABC News
poll shows 44% endorsing Obama’s handling of the economy while 54%
disapprove. On the other hand, the same
poll shows that 47% trust Romney with the economy over Obama who has 44%. Never mind that Romney hasn’t been nominated
or seriously campaigned yet.
According to columnist Charles Krauthammer, Obama is using
the Buffet rule as a political ploy to gain acceptance by “pitting the 99%
against the 1%.” He is selling the idea
of taking from the rich and giving to the poor. He knows what his audience likes to hear.
“Obama does not know how to govern or is he a good president but he sure
knows how to campaign” says Krauthammer.
The second method Obama uses to incite his base is that
since the rich pay only a 15% capital gains tax, they are paying far less in
taxes than others like the middle class.
Not so, says Charles. He says
that although the capital gains tax is 15%, it has been proven over the last
half century that if you raise capital gains taxes the amount of money going
into the treasury is actually less than if the tax is lower.
When asked in 2008 by Charles Gibson of ABC News if he would
raise capital gains taxes even if it meant less revenue, Obama replied: “Yes, in the name of fairness.” Krauthammer says that Obama can’t run on his
record and doesn’t have a vision for his second term, so why not run on
fairness?” Why not, indeed? He isn’t going to balance the budget anyway.
According to Steve Hayes of The Weekly Standard, the Buffet rule would raise about the same
amount of money in one year as the federal government accumulates in debt in a
single day. So, what is the big deal
about the rich and the 15% capital gains?
The lower the taxes they pay, the more they can put back into their
businesses to create jobs and more customers. However, Obama tells his crowd that lower
taxes on the rich mean the poor are being screwed. Hence, his incorrect “fairness” spiel.
It doesn’t wash and even liberal writers like Dana Milbank
of the Washington Post call the
Buffett rule a “gimmick.”
As far as the rich not paying their fair share, here are
some numbers from the Americans For Tax Reform:
PERCENT OF ALL TAX REVENUE: Top
1%, $344,000+ income: income tax, 39.5%,
All Federal taxes, 28.1%. Middle
Quintile, $65,000 income: income tax,
4.6%, All Federal taxes, 9.2%.
AVERAGE TAX RATES:
Top 1%: 19% of income taxes and
29.5% of all Federal taxes. Middle
quintile: 3.3% of income taxes, 14.3% of
all Federal taxes.
The Democrats like to reference John Kennedy as one of their
great presidents. John Kennedy lowered
the capital gains tax. I guess he had a
different definition of “fairness” that didn’t include redistribution of income
and class warfare.









.jpg)







