Joe the Plumber: Obama’s plan a “socialist slippery slope”
posted at 11:10 am on October 16, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Good Morning America’s Diane Sawyer spoke with Joe Wurzelbacher this morning. Having become the nation’s most famous plumber, Wurzelbacher explains that he doesn’t make $250,000 now, but hopes to do so as a small business owner. And he sees no reason why that will remain the cutoff in an Obama administration, anyway:
It sounds like Joe may have liked Steve Forbes in earlier campaigns, and for good reason. He gets to the heart of the argument with Sawyer when he talks about penalizing success, and that Americans should get treated equally. Why do we have escalating tax brackets on higher incomes at all? Why are we penalizing the success that we proclaim as the American Dream?
Democrats like to play class warfare games, but Joe isn’t having any of that. He notes that $250,000 is a mighty arbitrary figure, and nothing prevents Obama from suddenly deciding that $150,000 is the entry-level point for the wealthy, or $100,000. It’s a “slippery slope”, he tells Sawyer, and it’s socialism.
Joe’s not terribly impressed with “The One”, either, as he tells John Gibson (via Johnny Dollar):
In the future, though, Joe may want to steer clear of the tap-dancing analogies.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « 1 [2]
Don’t worry, the MSM will take a few reporters off of “Trig Watch” and send them his way. If the poor guy so much as bought a Playboy mag, they’ll be all over him.
Waterboy on October 16, 2008 at 12:08 PM
Maybe you could also point at the dozens of commenters after that comment that said it was not the right thing to do, etc.
mycowardice on October 16, 2008 at 12:21 PM
Is this guy a Palin 2012 voter or what?
To all the Noonans, Buckleys, MacDonalds, Parkers, Brooks, etc.:
Yah, this guy is just a xenophobic extremist yahoo who is taking over the party. I can’t believe we would let this plebian vote. What’s wrong with the Republican party? Taken over by hardworking plumbers rather than us non-working latte drinking socialites. How dare they give us their opinions.
Sapwolf on October 16, 2008 at 12:25 PM
As tax rates increase the economy slows down, meaning there is less income overall to tax. As tax rates decrease the economy picks up, meaning there is more income overall to tax. This means there exists some tax rate where any increase above that rate the government collects less money as they are slowing the economy and depressing incomes to apoint that there is less income overall. This was shown to be the case when both Kennedy and Reagan decreased tax rates but overall tax revenues increased drastically.
No one knows the optimum tax rate, where tax revenues are maximized. However, I am sure it is well below the 39% rate that Obama is purposing for the highest tax bracket. I remember paying 39% under Clinton, and felt like the government was robbing me. It hadn’t been that many years earlier when my entier yearly income had been less than what I was paying in taxes. Just because I worked hard the government was robbing me of my hard earned money. The colonists dumped tea in Boston Harbor over a 2% tax, and yet some how it is Ok for the federal government to take 39% of some one’s income now.
I understand that some one making more money can afford a greater percentage of their income, but once you go over a certain percentage you decrease tax revenues. Also, once you go over a certain percentage you are just robbing people. A 39% tax rate on anyone’s income is too high.
I would also like to point out that the Democrats are aware that increasing tax rates will decrease revenue. This isn’t about balancing budgets, but is all about class warfare.
Buford on October 16, 2008 at 12:31 PM
I like how he’s wearing his work shirt. Now there’s some good old fashioned capitalist plugging.
- The Cat
MirCat on October 16, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Another gem. Thanks Carbon.
Sapwolf on October 16, 2008 at 12:35 PM
We need to mass produce “I Support Joe the Plumber,” t-shirts, signs and bumper stickers.
mindhacker on October 16, 2008 at 12:40 PM
I wish some of the Republicans on t.v. would give voters a concrete example of what happens when Democrats start “spreading the wealth” to make things more “fair.”
There’s a recent example that would probably resonate with a lot of voters: Democrats wanted to spread the wealth of homeownership, since it’s not “fair” that everybody can’t own a home. So they passed laws like the Community Reinvestment Act, which forced banks to lower their lending standards and give mortgages to low-income people who wouldn’t have been qualified for the loans under then-existing standards. Then Democrats had GSE’s like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy millions of those sub-prime loans from the banks. When the real estate market tanked, taxpayers found themselves on the hook for the hundreds of billions of dollars in losses resulting from all the defaults on the tens of millions of sub-prime loans.
Hey, America, how’s that “spreading the wealth” thing working out for you now?
AZCoyote on October 16, 2008 at 12:40 PM
Next smear in the works: Wurzelbacher is Trig’s real father.
Abby Adams on October 16, 2008 at 12:41 PM
The overall point is that under Clinton, the economy was doing just fine with a tax rate of 39%. That you feel like the government is robbing you at 39% versus 37% or 33% isn’t a fair measure to use. Our tax policy has be to be looked at as a whole, including the deficit, the national debt, our commitments, our priorities, etc. Back in the Teo Harbor days we didn’t have things like social security or medicare. We now do. We have to pay for them.
If it takes the government to take 39% of the income you earn over 250k to repay the national debt, why would you be against it? The 90s clearly show that a 39% tax bracket wasn’t too much. We were able to come up with balanced budgets with that rate.
I agree with you that I don’t know what the optimum rate or the optimum distribution is. But just because the number doesn’t look good isn’t a sufficient reason to dump the number.
As for the class warfare, I’ve yet have to understand why conservatives feel we should have taxes based on how much money you make. When you go to the movies, it’s the same price whether you make 10,000 a year or 1,000,000 a year. Why should taxes be based on the amount of money you make?
mycowardice on October 16, 2008 at 12:43 PM
Did you hear his interview about being proud of being an American? proud of being in Iraq? Tired of nasty trash talk about his country? Loved it, loved it, loved it!
anniekc on October 16, 2008 at 12:43 PM
Are you frickin’ kidding me that the scum at Huffpoo published his address and phone?? What dirtbags. his family will need protection, and I’m NOT joking.
anniekc on October 16, 2008 at 12:50 PM
There just are not enough women here at HotAir. If it had been a woman on that rope line, better yet a good looking woman, you guys would have been all over the comments about her looks. And all the power to yah. I’m glad Sarah et al. do it for some of you red blooded men. Glad you aren’t a bunch of metro/flakey girly wussies.
But I’m going to have to say what isn’t being said:
This man is HOT
He’s a PILF
Joe the PILF…brains, a bald sexy head, and made Obambi look stupid (not that it’s hard to do.) What more could a girl want?
mauioriginal on October 16, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Yeah, just ask Warren Buffet.
PresidenToor on October 16, 2008 at 12:50 PM
I am Joe, the plumber!!!
southsideironworks on October 16, 2008 at 12:51 PM
Man, Diane Sawyer is almost giddy with her messiah doing so well in the liberal media eyes.
Tobias2012 on October 16, 2008 at 12:53 PM
I am Joe, the plumber!!!
Abby Adams on October 16, 2008 at 12:53 PM
Is there a remedy for watching/listening to Diane Sawyer?
I’ll try a shower first.
Christine on October 16, 2008 at 12:59 PM
I am Joe the Plumber, and I am Sarah Palin.
capitalist piglet on October 16, 2008 at 1:02 PM
AZCoyote on October 16, 2008 at 12:40 PM
GREAT GREAT GTREAT point and 1200% correct on every level. McCain could use that to tie Fannie and Freddie to the dems neck and sink them.
unseen on October 16, 2008 at 1:06 PM
My making enough money had nothing to do with the Clinton government and everything to do with my hard work (90+ hours per week sometimes). In fact the economy under Clinton had pretty much nothing to do with government policy, but with the technology boom. The economy would have performed about the same with anyone as President as it was riding an artificial technology bubble.
This statement screams Communist. The fact is, if I worked for the money it is mine, not the governments. The government should only take what it needs to perform its legitimate jobs. Spreading my wealth around to others, just because I have more than them, is not a legitimate job of the government. This is in fact what Obama said he intends to do btw.
I can’t speak for all conservatives, but I personally am against taxing incomes. Whenever you tax something you tend to decrease the amount of it in the economy. I understand the whole progressive vs. regressive tax arguments, but surely there is something that could be considered non-repressive taxing besides income. Taxing spending would probably be a better tax, as the rich do indeed spend more than the poor, making this also a progressive tax.
Buford on October 16, 2008 at 1:11 PM
Thank you for that Joe, you are one of the few who gets it. Socialism does not work and America’s tryst with socialism is the reason our economy is in crisis. We need to get back to basics, back to free enterprise and kick the government out of the charity business which they have absolutely no Constitutional authority for in the first place.
Maxx on October 16, 2008 at 1:12 PM
I am Joe, the plumber!!!
Maxx on October 16, 2008 at 1:21 PM
“It’s not that I want to punish your success, I just want to make sure that everybody that is behind you, that they have a chance for success too. I think that when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”
Chariman Barack Obama, 2008
reaganaut on October 16, 2008 at 1:33 PM
I wonder if Joe the Plumber has hired a publicist yet.
chiefeditor on October 16, 2008 at 1:33 PM
If this has already been covered, please forgive me.
My lib friend just emailed me that Joe the Plumber is the son-in-law of a Keating and was planted.
I’m seeing it come up on google on some blogs.
Are you on this Ed?
I did point out to my lib friend that I didn’t care if he was a plant, he is a tax-paying citizen with a legitimate gripe about BO’s tax plans and class war-fare.
I’m just wondering if this is going to blow-up?
ConMom on October 16, 2008 at 1:35 PM
No, it’s not going to “blow up” - they are just going to treat him to the typical anal exam they would give anyone who would dare to make Obama appear to be the Marxist bastard he is.
He’s a regular guy - that much is obvious. They’ll go after him, but it will backfire like a Ford Pinto.
capitalist piglet on October 16, 2008 at 1:44 PM
A “socialist slippery slope?”
Imagine that, coming from a smooth talker like Barack “ShamWow” Obama…
Gilda on October 16, 2008 at 1:47 PM
That’s really too good.
LibTired on October 16, 2008 at 1:54 PM
THIS is Sarah Palin’s Joe Sixpack.
rightallthetime on October 16, 2008 at 2:05 PM
wow…Diane Sawyer is awful.
bridgetown on October 16, 2008 at 2:52 PM
I`m sure Diane Sawyer had her standard “you just don`t get it do you, you dumb middle-class schmuck” face on.
Or was it her “I don`t understand this common sense stuff you`re saying” look?
*stands up and declares* I am Joe the plumber too!”
ThePrez on October 16, 2008 at 3:01 PM
This nation functioned perfectly well when income taxes were an emergency war measure thanks. The difference is people were expected to provide for themselves and did for the most part. Our government takes between 15-25 of all wealth generation each year from our economy and still it is not enough, I am beginning to suspect it never will be.
Every cause becomes an emergency and the link to a better tomorrow artficially propped up from true competition because of the superstate using its ungodly concentration of wealth and regulatory power to kill all alternatives to whatever “the next BIG idea is. Were the stakes not getting so high it would be amusing to do a hard analysis in a scholarly fashion of how many cases of “just a few more regulations and it’ll be perfect”. Fact is our sysytem as currently set up is so horribly inefficient in delivery of “fairness” that were it a tax-exempt organization it would be under serious investigation by the IRS.
There is no magic way to “eliminate the middleman” when taking my wealth to give to you.
The federal bueracracy ALWAYS gets its 20-70% cut in the flow of budget to aid.
sven10077 on October 16, 2008 at 3:16 PM
“SENATOR GOVERNMENT….MEET JOE THE PLUMBER.”
gracie on October 16, 2008 at 3:20 PM
Diane Sawyer made $12 million last year.
What did Obama make, like $4 million?
But Joe is making too much money.
Jim Treacher on October 16, 2008 at 3:30 PM
He’s not modern gentry, but a yeoman who puts on airs old boy….
sven10077 on October 16, 2008 at 3:34 PM
If I thought that this was an isolated instance, I would point it out. I read DailyKos multiple times per day — don’t ban me from here, please — and this is not the exception over there, this is the rule. You pointing out that some minority of posters over there took exception doesn’t change the fact that that site is a hub of malice and hate.
LastRick on October 16, 2008 at 3:51 PM
About everyone of the comment I read after that post were all saying that it was not right to have done that. I would not call that ’some minority of posters’.
mycowardice on October 16, 2008 at 4:01 PM
You really are a clueless idiot, aren’t you. The Obambi campaign isn’t getting it’s money’s worth with you.
The fact is that we shouldn’t have any income tax at all. It was supposed to be a temporary tax to provide for the rollout of the telephone system way back when. But guess what? The government decided that it wouldn’t be temporary after all.
And that bs about 20K for everybody regardless of income is pathetic. How ’bout 10% on everybody, regardless of income. You’re so balls out for ‘fairness’. Let’s really be fair and let EVERYBODY share the load equally. And that includes the nearly 35% that currently pays no income taxes at all… you know, the ones Obambi wants to give ‘tax credits’ to, even though they don’t contribute.
Useless parasites. Screw socialism. The best anybody could reasonably ask for is the mere opportunity to succeed and that’s what people will do anything to get to this country are after. I have no use for those who would sponge off society and then berate me because I’m not paying enough taxes to suit them.
techno_barbarian on October 16, 2008 at 4:43 PM
The Biblical prescription for supporting the Temple & the priests in ancient Israel was across-the-board ten percent–called the tithe–whether rich or poor.
jgapinoy on October 16, 2008 at 5:05 PM
Joe the Plumber FTW!
Cr4sh Dummy on October 16, 2008 at 5:42 PM
Exactly! So why aren’t you pushing for everybody to pay the same regardless of how much they make? Why tax success? You live in america, we send you the bill. If we need 300 million in spending, everybody should pay 1$. It would make the system way easier. Flat fee (not rate!) for everyone
mycowardice on October 16, 2008 at 5:49 PM
defendfaithandfamily on October 16, 2008 at 5:52 PM
Because then the taxman would be like “popeye” or debtor prisons would become all the rage.
We rebelled against England for a sub 2% tax as it impacted most people….Scranton Joe is barking up the wrong tree….Taxation is an evil but a necessary one inasmuch as there are duties the feds are expected to perform. Income taxation is an affront to logic however as it penalizes as currently rendered success. If the “number needed” required a true base operating budget of a federal government that acted strictly within its Constitutional broach was 17-22% then everyone should pay that so the poor take a bigger interest in politics beyond “who gwone give me de refundooble kredit?’ The fiercest poison we have as a society is not the “free market” it is the freeloader Markers who target those who work hard and suceed for punitive taxation.
Any government rish enough to give you whatever you want has most assuredly marked everything you have for future reference on “need”.
sven10077 on October 16, 2008 at 6:26 PM
Comment pages: « 1 [2]