This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
In the White House rose garden today, President Barack Obama unveiled specifics for his muchanticipated deficit-reduction bill, a $450 billion casserole of renewed spending, higher taxes and an unwavering refusal to confront economic reality. Among the lowlights: 1. Around $800 billion in revenue resulting from eradicating the Bush-era tax cuts 2. Another $480 billion or so resulting from limiting or ending itemized deductions from those in the upper income brackets, and finally 3. A special “Millionaire’s Tax” to confiscate the property of citizens unlucky enough to have mistakenly succeeded in America. That last provision was inspired by multi-billionaire Warren Buffett, who – thanks to his ability to claim his nine-figure income as “capital gains” – actually ends up having to pay a lower tax rate than the guy who washes his limo. Buffett was able to convince the administration that America’s wealthy deserved a higher tax rate, and that the revenue from it would significantly lower the country’s crushing federal debt. He is, of course, demonstrably wrong on both assumptions. The great majority of millionaires pay at a tax rate of 35%, while the rate for the majority of middle-income taxpayers is a much-lower 20%. The upper 1% of all tax filers is responsible for paying nearly 40% of all taxes collected, and greater than 50% of tax filers pay nothing at all. For Buffett, who lists a personal annual income of about $100,000 a year, “rich” people getting the taxes they “deserve” is a matter of perspective. As conservatives never tire of pointing out, were the government to confiscate every dime of people who earned $10 million or more in a year, Washington would have enough revenue to run for approximately three and a half weeks. Doubling the tax rate of those earning as low as $1 million might produce as much as $19 billion in revenue – chump change in the world of deficit reduction. To be fair, the administration has not defined what the new rates would be or the specific income brackets effected. Yet, if even this cursory an analysis displays the idea’s glaring flaws, how is it that the Obama administration cannot see them as well? The answer lies not in the administration’s commitment to fiscal health but in their commitment to politics. Fomenting envy throughout the country is a winning strategy for the unrepentant leftist, even if it requires a stubborn rejection of the truth. From a strictly Constitutional viewpoint, progressive taxation is grossly un-American. The “rich” are not some separate species of citizen that plummeted down from space. They drive on the same roads, are defended by the same military, represented by the same politicians, and appeal to the same courts as the rest of us. However, in the twisted maze of socialist logic, being able to “afford it” is automatic justification for getting mugged. None of this is new, certainly, but the novelty within this plan is its overwhelming audacity. Obama’s Democrats have tried for decades to drain the capital out of America’s wealthy, but never before have they proposed such mammoth increases in taxes during so widespread and persistent a recession. Grasping the incomes of the “rich” amounts to grasping their capability, the capability to invest, consume goods and services, hire employees, take entrepreneurial risks, and provide the engine which will lift the American workforce out of the Obama abyss. For two and a half years, the administration responded to the economic sinking ship by re-arranging deck chairs and blaming the previous captain. But when they begin to drill holes in the lifeboats, it is time to say enough is enough.