Video: Class-warfare economics won’t work
posted at 4:45 pm on June 15, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Dan Mitchell has another of his indispensable videos on economics from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity. This time, Dan goes after a staple of American politics — class warfare. Once thought mostly dead, this cheap populism arose again with a vengeance in 2008, at first fueled by John Edwards and adopted by Barack Obama. But as Dan points out, the data shows how damaging that kind of economic policy can be to standards of living, employment, and wealth creation:
Unfortunately, the next few years will provide a laboratory for a full-fledged pursuit of “soak the rich” economics, as if we didn’t have enough evidence of it from the 1970s and before. Videos like these will become more important as we remind people that all of the pain we will suffer from these policies will be entirely self-inflicted, which may create an even stronger impetus for the return of fiscal conservatism.
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 Next »
I can’t take this dude seriously with that tie on.
bluejacket on June 15, 2009 at 4:48 PM
Those silly bourgeoisie.
/sarc
bluelightbrigade on June 15, 2009 at 4:48 PM
sadly, no one that supports Mr. Obama can get their head far enough from his behind to think for a second about the ramifications of his policies. Thank you sir, may I have another.
search4truth on June 15, 2009 at 4:48 PM
The boobswoisie will rise up and throw off their chains and so on.
Akzed on June 15, 2009 at 4:48 PM
Nice tie, Dan.
Connie on June 15, 2009 at 4:51 PM
They will go unseen, inasmuch as there are NBA finals, and Super Bowls and World Series and lots of beer to be drunk on weekends … and whatnot. Oh, and reality shows with important things like Paris Hilton’s new “BFF” and “celebrities” in Costa Rica … and whatnot. Oh, and commercials on television showing what Americans do best, stuffing fast food down their pieholes, while clamoring for male enhancement and feminine hygiene products.
Heavy sigh.
OhEssYouCowboys on June 15, 2009 at 4:51 PM
That tie shows the first year of production at Government Motors.
OhEssYouCowboys on June 15, 2009 at 4:54 PM
If by “working” we mean getting a politician elected by an uneducated electorate, then yes, class warfare does work.
Cicero43 on June 15, 2009 at 4:56 PM
The Leadership Institute!
I worked for these guys last year. Absolutely the best introduction to the conservative movement I’ve had in my life. Their work is indispensable, and needed now more than ever.
Alexander on June 15, 2009 at 4:56 PM
And then perfected by Mike Huckabee… for what its worth.
Zetterson on June 15, 2009 at 4:59 PM
OhEssYouCowboys on June 15, 2009 at 4:51 PM
Thank you, as a man of few words you just said it all for me.
aceinstall on June 15, 2009 at 5:01 PM
Joe the plumber got him to admit his idelogy. The MSM have gave aid and abetted his cause. Both are to blame. Not what are we going to do about it. The idiots who voted for him thought he would spare them a house payment and gasoline expense. They are just beginning to see that he lied to them and that every word he sputters is a spin on the truth. They listened to him when he said folks needed to put
off going to Vegas and be willing to make sacrifices only to see him lolligag to NYC, CHICAGO, PARIS or whereever the hell he feels the need to spew his lying BS. Every dog has his day. People don’t like being lied to or being used. People also don’t like seeing someone steal their money and make fools of themselves. This is the change and hope you voted for, not me. Pass the kool-aid to the thirsty trolls on this site, they’re spitting cotton.
bluegrass on June 15, 2009 at 5:04 PM
Jesus CHRIST, you brain-dead conservatives will NEVER GET IT!!!
It’s not about whether it WORKS.
It’s all about whether it’s FAIR.
Jesus, buy a freaking clue, WOULD YOU?!
/full barking moonbat mode OFF
manofaiki on June 15, 2009 at 5:04 PM
The liberals don’t stop at coveting thy neighbors goods, they wan’t to confiscate them. I would like to see one liberal that won the lottery and didn’t complain about the taxes on their winnings.
fourdeucer on June 15, 2009 at 5:04 PM
Fair hit. Something tells me he won’t try it again.
BigD on June 15, 2009 at 5:05 PM
Until we return to teaching history that was, instead of history as interpreted by unrepentant class warriors, there is no chance that people will ever learn from history.
This time will be no exception.
MarkTheGreat on June 15, 2009 at 5:07 PM
Ed – looks like a typo in the commentary on the video – I think you meant to say John Edwards reintroduced the class warfare theme in 2004,when he was Kerry’s running mate; not 2008 by which time he was pretty much out of the running for President.
manofaiki on June 15, 2009 at 5:09 PM
It makes perfect sense to me.
Terrye on June 15, 2009 at 5:11 PM
Of course this video is all about class warfare — the class warfare spearheaded by the rich to shift the burden towards poor people.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 5:15 PM
:)
Gave out a bogus syllabus once for an AP Chemistry class in which I said I was going to grade based on Class Warfare principles. It was the leftist parents that threw the biggest hissy fits about the spoof. They never saw the hypocrisy of their taxation positions.
chemman on June 15, 2009 at 5:16 PM
Heh!!
Cindy Munford on June 15, 2009 at 5:17 PM
OT: Walpin on Beck now!
Weight of Glory on June 15, 2009 at 5:17 PM
Yeah! Screw that equality and personal responsibility garbage! Its so unfair!
Zetterson on June 15, 2009 at 5:17 PM
The resurrection of Getalife.
chemman on June 15, 2009 at 5:19 PM
This makes no logical sense.
If the “burden” used to be on “the rich”, what was the “burden” they were bearing? Were “the rich” subsidizing “poor people”? Well, if that’s the case, then the “burden” was just being put back on those who rightfully owed it, no?
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Start with the tax rate on “the rich” (say tax rate for income over 250k) at 30%. Supposedly, it’s class warfare on the rich if you raise it to 35%. So what is it if you drop it to 25%?
It’s class warfare on the poor.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 5:26 PM
Since you seem to be so well informed, perhaps you could enlighten everyone here about just how much of the Federal Tax burden in this country is presently being carried by those who make less than $40,000 a year.
Speak up, don’t be shy.
manofaiki on June 15, 2009 at 5:27 PM
Since the raising of that rate on ‘the rich’ doesn’t take one dime out of the pocket of the poor, explain that.
manofaiki on June 15, 2009 at 5:28 PM
Right after you tell me how much of the resources these people actually have.
Start with 40k, substract all your reasonable expenses, including health insurance and the rest, and tell how much you have left.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 5:29 PM
I’m not sure I follow you.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 5:30 PM
I always thought “fairness” was about equality… For Everyone
Acording to liberals it’s about PUNISHMENT ….For Some
Liberals have never wanted fairness they want punishment!
They want to punish buisness, or smoking, or drinking, or investing, or savings, or car ownership, or food, or christians, or jews, or whomever and whatever get’s in their way to “utopia”….
babydoll4you on June 15, 2009 at 5:33 PM
It’s all about social
jealousyjustice.Daggett on June 15, 2009 at 5:34 PM
Why is it the taxpayers responsibility to take care of people who have spent a lifetime making poor choices, starting with not taking advantage of a free education. The safety net is suppose to be for people incapable of taking care of themselves, not those who choose not to. Regardless of the percentage of income a rich person pays, it doesn’t come out of the pocket of a “poor” person. I think the number of people who don’t pay taxes (Earned Income) would surprise you.
Cindy Munford on June 15, 2009 at 5:37 PM
The reality is, Americans do not understand basic economics. We’ve complicated things too much and the basics have been lost. A good portion of Americans don’t even know how to balance a checkbook, let alone use any kind of understandable argument for higher taxes on the “rich”.
I think Obama needs to start spreading his money around to make it fair for others too, including his immediate family. Do as I say, don’t do as I do. All it takes is Obama to speak to the masses and the hypnotized follow willingly without understanding. Lemmings.
jeridhill on June 15, 2009 at 5:38 PM
I call it “a good start”.
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 5:39 PM
Why is it that all of you always see a thief or idiot in anyone not able to make ends meet?
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 5:39 PM
Well I guess you’ve justified what the other side does: “a better start!”
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 5:41 PM
With some exceptions at the top and bottom, most people get paid pretty much what they are worth. Labor markets in the US are incredibly efficient. The idea that there are all these people making 40K who are somehow getting gipped in their compensation is sheer self-serving fantasy. The reason you make what you make and I make what I make is due to our respective contribution to society and our ability to make claims on goods and services based on that contribution. If your contribution to society does not enable you to live the lifestyle you prefer, increase your human capital value via some sort of education or training for higher value work. Don’t come to me with some sob-story because, frankly, I don’t care.
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 5:43 PM
I see neither and it’s never too late to fix the situation. Hard to blame a child for parents who don’t permote the importance of an education but once said child is an adult, it’s time to fix the problem. That’s what grown ups do and their are tons of people willing to help. Stop encouraging victimhood.
Cindy Munford on June 15, 2009 at 5:43 PM
Why is it that you are unable to discern the difference between those who are really and truly unable to care for themselves and those who make a choice to game the system rather than take some personal responsibility.
califcon on June 15, 2009 at 5:44 PM
Of all the comments that have ever been posted here, it would be hard for me to find one stupider than this.
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 5:46 PM
Not surprising that you can’t follow simple logic.
Over half the population doesn’t pay ANY Federal Income tax.
The less than 50% of the population that DOES pay Federal Income Tax are supporting and subsidizing the government services provided to those in the bottom 50%+ who are receiving gov. services.
With me so far?
Class warfare is where you constantly attack the productive class providing all the money to support BOTH their own private enterprises in the private sector AND the services given to other people in the public sector.
These people are demonized and called the enemy, greedy, manipulative, evil, etc. etc. because as government entitlements grow, and the class of people in the country dependent on those entitlements grows, more money has to be poured into the system.
And of course, there’s only one place to get it – from people with money. So the government has to go confiscate more from them to keep feeding the growing machine.
And every single time the productive class balks at having more of it’s money confiscated, the way politicians get aorund this is to play the class warfare card:
The rich STILL aren’t paying their FAIR SHARE!
No matter how much they are paying now, you just KNOW it’s still not enough.
The top 10% richest Americans are presently carrying over 80% of the Federal Income Tax burden in this country. That’s 10% of the citizens carrying 80% of the burden.
And yet still the political class, needing VAST SUMS OF NEW MONEY to keep up with their VAST SUMS OF NEW SPENDING, are going to ask these people to carry even more of the burden.
And if they balk at doing so, the politicians will demonize and punish them.
And nobody is talking about cutting the tax rate on the rich to 25% so that’s a red herring.
Not one dime is coming out of the pocket of the poor if the rate stays where it is or if the rate goes up like Obama intends for it to. So stop panicking.
Class warfare is waged on the poor by Leftists who condition people to spend their lives enjoying ‘free’ services paid for by others in exchange for votes.
manofaiki on June 15, 2009 at 5:47 PM
In the end, it is about punishment for everyone who is not them. They do this by setting up special facilities for the party elites and those with hard currencies and then ones for everyone else.
Spread the misery!
Laurence on June 15, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Fine, but then don’t be surprised if people making 40k a year are not paying more taxes either.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 5:54 PM
This is a distinction I see no one making here.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 5:56 PM
IT worked for Hitler. What I will never understand is the One`s method of bringing the achivers down instead of helping the under achivers get to the top. It defies logic to me, maybe its above my IQ I don`t know.
LSUMama on June 15, 2009 at 5:58 PM
Now how would THAT ever happen in the next 3 1/2 years?
Hasn’t Obama promised repeatedly that anybody making under $200,000 a year will NOT see their taxes go up?
You’re not calling Obama a liar, are you?
manofaiki on June 15, 2009 at 5:58 PM
You’re not calling Obama a liar, are you?
manofaiki on June 15, 2009 at 5:58 PM
Can`t wait to read this !
LSUMama on June 15, 2009 at 6:00 PM
Are you including kids in there?
No, because you seem to see the US as 300 million silos, where in reality it’s one country. The question isn’t who is subsidising who, the question is how what we need and we meet our financial obligations. So if all of us need an army, and only 10% of the people can pay for 90% of the army, there is no subsidizing going on here. It’s just that to pay for that army the one making 90% of the money needs to fork over 90% of the cost.
How much of the wealth do these people have?
We need things like armies, police department, schools, roads, welfare, etc. Then we need to find a way to fund it all.
For real? Explain to me what the Bush tax cuts were and are then?
Class warfare is equaly waged by the rich trying to keep as much of their money as they can. Which is fine by me, but just call it like it is.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 6:03 PM
I’m not calling Obama a liar.
Although I personally am against blanket pledges to raise or not raise taxes. I think Obama (and every President) shouldn’t tie his or her hands for nothing.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 6:05 PM
What’s with the tie? It’s like my doctor coming in with serious news wearing a clown nose. Come on.
marklmail on June 15, 2009 at 6:07 PM
I supported something like Steve Forbes’ plan where people who made below a certain threshold (I seem to recall it being around 35K) paid no taxes and those above paid a flat tax. I supported it when I made less than 35K a year and I support it now that I make more.
All tax revenue does is aggrandize idiots in DC who, if they worked for me in the private sector, wouldn’t be given the responsibility it would take to order new pens for the office supply cabinet. I wouldn’t hire Obama (or any of the Dem leadership) as my administrative assistant.
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 6:12 PM
That’s the same progressive plan we have today except that you would have 2 rates. It’s like going back from VGA to a monochrome monitor. Or like going back from colour tv to black and white tv.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 6:14 PM
mr. mitchell, can you see the growing disparity between the rich and the poor in America? looking ahead to the future, is that a good thing or a bad thing?
nice tie, espèce d’idiot.
sesquipedalian on June 15, 2009 at 6:18 PM
Two of my adult kids are single and make between 30K and 45K,trust me they pay plenty of taxes. No Earned Income Tax Credit for them, nor should there be. Get a grip you want these people to have all the perks no responsibility. Why? Because it isn’t fair other people do better? We are granted equal chances in the pursit of happiness, not equal outcomes.
Cindy Munford on June 15, 2009 at 6:18 PM
I can’t listen because I am at work, but lots of folks are having a hard time getting past the tie.
Cindy Munford on June 15, 2009 at 6:20 PM
I see this thread has turned into our “ain’t no cure for stupid” demonstration du jour . . .
califcon on June 15, 2009 at 6:20 PM
Bottom line, This is why Statism in all it’s many forms, has failed and Will fail, each and every time it’s tried.
So WHY are we trying it again?
Chainsaw56 on June 15, 2009 at 6:20 PM
No, it’s better than today’s progressive plan because it doesn’t disincentivize any earnings once you’re past the $35K threshold, unlike today’s plan, where the various tax rates kick in as you go higher. Once you know that your tax rate will remain the same whether you make 100K or 250K, it can make a difference in how you trade off leisure for work.
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 6:21 PM
So you really think that the kids of your kids will have equal chances in the pursuit of happiness as compared to the kids of families making 135k and 140k?
Sorry, but when the game is so rigged to begin with, I wouldn’t use the words “equal chances”.
Now granted, even unequal chances doesn’t necessarily mean that the one starting with 135k will necessarily win over the one with 35k, but if I had to pick, I would rather start with 135k over 35k.
And in terms of paying plenty of taxes, I am sure they don’t pay as much in absolute number as the one making 135k or 235k.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 6:22 PM
So you really think that taking an extra 3%, even 10% of every dollar disincentivizes people from making over a specific amount?
Really?
If the rate would go up from 25% to 28% for the dollar you made over 100k, you would sit down and debate whether or not to make that 1$?
I understand if the rate jumped from 25% to 75%, but the progression in our current progressive rates are never quite that bad.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 6:25 PM
So Obama didn’t lie?
People making under $200,000 a year are not going to see their taxes go up?
manofaiki on June 15, 2009 at 6:26 PM
Were you always an envy-obsessed failure?
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 6:27 PM
Has attempting to equalize outcomes ever worked?
And please, the country is headed down the toilet, and your worried about a TIE?
Chainsaw56 on June 15, 2009 at 6:28 PM
Not from what I’ve seen so far.
(But of course it depends how you assess that. For me, if the national debt goes up, it is implicitly a increase in taxes, it’s just that you don’t get charged yet. Using that as a criteria, I think it’s clear individual taxes are going up)
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 6:29 PM
Move web site to offshore servers: $75 (or less)
Set up Belize Corp owned by Bahamian Trust: $1500
Set up offshore credit card processing and bank account: $650
Slip offshore VISA/MC/credit/debit/ATM card into pocket: $0
Send taunting email to Obama White House: Priceless
ElRonaldo on June 15, 2009 at 6:31 PM
Absolutely, my kids had the same chances as the kids of parents who make a lot more money then our family did. They may not have the inside track on Ivy League schools but that doesn’t impress me anyway. Hard work in school and place of employment will give you a nice living in the United States. You need to focus on the possibilities not oportunities not taken. There are always more chances to change a less than perfect situation. I am not saying it isn’t harder the longer you wait but whining doesn’t get anyone anything.
Time and time again it has been proven that if you lower the rate of taxation on the successful more money comes into the Treasury and more people become successful. If the idea was good enough for JFK why isn’t it good enough for you?
Cindy Munford on June 15, 2009 at 6:32 PM
Where do you see envy-obsessed behavior?
Show me please.
Just because I state to you the obvious?
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 6:34 PM
Anyone who claims to know the exact slope of the labor supply curve in relation to tax rates without having done extensive and exhaustive empirical work and analysis is probably lying.
That said, directionally it is almost irrefutable from an intuitive sense that, yes, there will be less labor supplied if the tax on that labor increases.
Congratulations, I have now taught you day 1 of Econ 101.
Perhaps you might want to sit through the entire semester before presuming to decide tax policy for the most advanced economy in the history of the world.
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 6:34 PM
Just a couple of thoughts:
Rich people could never get poor enough to make the poor people wealthy.
When is the last time you got a job from a poor person?
DL13 on June 15, 2009 at 6:34 PM
What people are overlooking here is that if the Federal Rate goes from 33% to 35% on the richest Americans, a lot of these people live in states like New York which also has a state income tax which will take an additional 6%-8% of their income.
Here’s the current tax rates:
http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=164272,00.html
So if the Federal Rate is 33% and the State rate is %6, that’s 39% of income going to taxes. “Just another 3%” doesnt sound like much, true. But if it’s going to move a person’s total tax rate from 39% to 41% what’s going to happen is what we are seeing in New York and New Jersey and elsewhere – people getting the heck out of the state.
The economy runs on the productive class that can not only fund their own private businesses and enterprises with their earnings, but also fund the public sector with taxes that are taken from them by the State.
When the overall taxes a person like this paying both locally and Federally start reaching the 40% range not surprisingly the person working hard to earn this wealth wants to put the brakes on this.
You can call him greedy all you want. It doesn’t change it.
manofaiki on June 15, 2009 at 6:34 PM
Using that logic, if we lower the tax rate to 0.0001%, would we maximize the amount of money into the Treasury?
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 6:35 PM
When is the next Milton Friedman going to emerge? Some might say Sowell or Stossel-stache but they are good debaters, Milton was a master debater (ABSOLUTELY NO PUN INTENDED). We need a cross between the intellect of Thomas Sowell and the communication and debating skills of Dinesh D’souza. John Bolton is my favorite guy right now…he killed it on Maher. Even Maher was clearly afraid to get into it with him for fear of being made to look like the intellectual child he is.
CapitalistObserver on June 15, 2009 at 6:36 PM
An additional thought: when their overall taxes hit 40% these people don’t have much left over just to keep their businesses up and running, much less grow and expand it, create jobs, grow the economy, etc.
But don’t wait around for Leftists to figure that out.
manofaiki on June 15, 2009 at 6:37 PM
Calling people wanting to keep the money they’ve worked for “class warfare” is a clear case of envy. They’ve got it and you want it.
Wrapping it up in rationalizations doesn’t make it any less envious.
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 6:40 PM
How many companies are in debt (have assests less than liabilities) yet have jobs for other?
Mathematically these entities would be poor.
Yet they are able to “provide” jobs.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 6:42 PM
Otherwise knoiwn as “just don’t hire them”.
tarpon on June 15, 2009 at 6:43 PM
I’m saying this “class warfare” argument cuts both way.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 6:43 PM
When does the 40% hit you? Before or after your expenses?
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 6:44 PM
Obama knows that a rising tide lifts all boats, but he’s too busy trying to sink the fleet. He must believe that, because the government prints the money, government owns the money. In his twisted mind, as long as we don’t run out of paper and ink, we’re golden. By the time his fellating media figures this out and reports the truth, it will be much too late. God help us, because we are too stupid to help ourselves.
SKYFOX on June 15, 2009 at 6:44 PM
America needs a
progressiveregressive tax rate. This way there will be incentive to be productive. Lets say if you make 50k/yr you have a tax rate of 20%. 100K/yr has a tax rate of 10%/yr and 250k+/yr have a rate of 5%!Wow what a great idea. Something tells me we would see a boom in technological and entrepreneurial advancement. We would also see a lot less “psych”, “sociology” and “environmental studies” majors (ie. pointless majors that contribute nothing to society).
One of my vices is that I tend to mentally operate in the world of the physically impossible as opposed to what is feasible in this educationless nanny state society.
You know why I think WW1 and WW2 was overall good for America? It forced Americans to be (or to remain) independant and tough as nails! We churned out no nonsense entrepreneurs and engineers like crazy over the following decades as we stormed miles ahead of any other country and erased all most of the enormous debt we incurred to finance the war. Now we’ve spent in real dollars more than even during WW2 except now our society is filled with wussies with pointless degrees.
CapitalistObserver on June 15, 2009 at 6:47 PM
Only to someone who believes he has a legitimate claim to another’s labor. With the exception of true public goods, for which most or all citizens should contributed, any other claim to another’s labor is illegitimate. This has been known since the time of Aristotle.
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 6:48 PM
A psychiatrist once told me the one class of persons he absolutely found impossible to help were those raised on welfare as it destroys their character and enterprise. And this is the class of people the dear leader wants to enlarge and enlarge at the expense of the productive.
Dhuka on June 15, 2009 at 6:52 PM
Are you suggesting we should have a flat fee tax? Where every breathing american is asked to chip in the EXACT same amount of money?
If you are not suggesting that, then any system creates a legitimate claim to another’s labor. Progressive taxation, flat tax, fair tax, they all do.
So you can’t have it both ways.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 6:55 PM
From a practical perspective, I’m saying that it’s probably best to accept a little illegitimacy, but I think it’s getting to be a bit much.
For an allegory of what happens to the rich under a system that goes too progressive, look at the story of Boxer in “Animal Farm”. I’m not your Boxer.
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 7:09 PM
So really the only question isn’t if we accept it or not, but how much of it we accept. That’s a much different discussion.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 7:20 PM
Also, since I was saying that there are such things as “public goods”, which are open to everyone and are truly what is meant by the phrase “taxes are the price we pay for civilization”, I am already assuming there are some legitimate claims on my labor. It’s when the notion of “public good” gets expanded to include things that are better provided by private arrangements that the justification of taxation becomes tenuous.
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 7:20 PM
Does medicare qualify? I.e. guaranteeing health insurance for senior citizens?
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 7:25 PM
Ever read “The Rainbow Fish” or “The Giving Tree”? Both horror stories in the guise of children’s books about the relationship of givers and takers and what happens when the givers don’t say “NO.”
aero on June 15, 2009 at 7:30 PM
If you’re too cowardly to watch the video, don’t post here. It’s obvious to the rest of us.
fossten on June 15, 2009 at 7:36 PM
They don’t hit me personally. I only make around $85,000 a year.
But they do hit people I know, including several of my former employers.
Maybe you’re not aware of the problems facing New York and Califorina with droves of the productive class leaving the state to get away from the escalating state taxes so they can bear their escalating federal taxes more easily?
CA. is now about to be bailed out because they can’t find enough rich people in the state to hang their tax tab on.
manofaiki on June 15, 2009 at 7:36 PM
No, but isn’t “The Rainbow Fish” pro sharing?
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_Fish)
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 7:37 PM
By the way, it’s the rich people spending their own money that makes our economy grow.
The State taking their money away from them and redistributing it to the more worthy does not grow the economy one bit.
But you already knew that.
manofaiki on June 15, 2009 at 7:38 PM
No. You don’t get to define class warfare as something else. Here’s a clue for you, since you seem to have none – non-rich people want to keep as much of their money as they can too. This isn’t class warfare either, it’s normal.
fossten on June 15, 2009 at 7:39 PM
I watched the video and got to enjoy the lopsided argument.
Can I post now?
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 7:42 PM
What do the more worthy do with the money they get? If not create generate more consumption?
I guess using this logic, we should increase taxes on the poor and reduce taxes on the rich, because only the rich people really know what to do with their money.
Sounds very elitist to me.
mycowardice on June 15, 2009 at 7:46 PM
No, that is not a public good.
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 7:52 PM
Who wants to move to Ireland with me?
foucaultsvac on June 15, 2009 at 8:00 PM
That’s why one of the main items for discussion at the G-20 summit was going after tax havens.
Can’t let jurisdictions compete on actual quality of services rendered for tax revenues now. Not with all those parasites looking to feed at the public trough.
venividivici on June 15, 2009 at 8:01 PM
This guys voice sounds like Wallace Shawn who played Vizzini in The Princess Bride. I’m expecting him to say at any moment, “INCONCEIVABLE!”
shick on June 15, 2009 at 8:13 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »