Comments (69) | Add a comment
Sherman Frederick
Obama's plan: Eat the rich, chain the poor
President Obama is right about one thing: Because we live in a marvelous country with unmatched opportunities, all citizens must to do their "fair share" to support her.
There are only two hitches: The president doesn't really mean it, and there's no consensus on what is "fair."
When the president rails about tax equality and fairness, he does it not in the context of a serious debate on tax reform, but as a 2012 re-election tactic. You know this because the president has plenty to say about the unfairness of billionaires paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries, but he goes mute on the unfairness of letting half of American citizens escape without paying a dime in federal income tax.
In that regard, Obama policies have become the democratic threat Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville observed in the 1830s: "A democratic government is the only one in which those who vote for a tax can escape the obligation to pay it."
And therein lies the great divide for the 2012 presidential election. We all want equality, but those who lean toward free enterprise want equality foremost in liberty, and those who lean toward socialism want equality foremost in servitude to the entitlement state.
So when President Obama says he wants everyone to pay his or her "fair share," listen up. What usually comes next is a profoundly unfair plan that gives large numbers of citizens a free ride at the expense of the so-called "rich."
In 2011, the income tax broke down like this: The rate for the poor was 10 percent, the rate for the middle class was 25 percent and the rate for the rich was 35 percent. But after tax credits were applied, that translated into the top half of Americans paying 97.3 percent of the federal income tax burden and the bottom half paying 2.7 percent.
There's no fairness in that. Of course, the income tax is just one tax. The bottom 50 percenters certainly paid into the system via other taxes, primarily the payroll tax. But so did the upper 50 percenters through capital gains, among others.
And that's the underbelly of Obama's rhetoric: He advocates an acceleration of this imbalance.
This is not to say that the U.S. tax code isn't a complicated mess. It is. We desperately need a good, sane discussion on tax reform. (A little discussion on spending wouldn't hurt, either.) But sanity and fairness are not what Obama is angling for. He's looking to grow a constituency who look to him and his party for a free lunch, just as de Tocqueville warned.
Reform means that we look at the whole system, loopholes and all, and try to come to a national consensus on what "fair share" really means. It certainly cannot mean that 50 percent of Americans get to pay virtually nothing in income tax for the privilege of living in this country.
The starting point for an honest conversation would be the principle that everyone should pay something in federal income tax. And yes, that means "the poor."
When President Obama stands before the American people, like he did last week in the State of the Union address, and invokes that supercilious tone to preach to us about hard work, success and the American dream, his policies of class warfare expose him as a politician of style, not substance.
If we're going to create an "economy built to last" everyone should pay a "fair share"?
Zero, Mr. President, is not fair.
Sherman Frederick, former publisher of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, writes a column for Stephens Media. Read his blog at www.lvrj.com/blogs/sherm.
Trending topics:
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Yeah Yeager lets tax 'the poor' more than ZERO- how about that? I got a better idea...How about everyone in the country pay 15 percent of their income; no matter how much they make?...and no exemptions for anyone...including corporations!...what do you think?...No, you liberal - leeches don't want fairness...what you want is control!...and deep down in your dark - hateful - hearts you are envious and jealous of anyone who is more successful than your lazy arses!!! Stop it with the whining and try working!!!
Obama worse than Hitler?.......Hitler was one of the three worst evils of the 20th Century, surpassed only by those heroes of the Internatioanl Left, Stalin and Mao. Hitler killed 12MM in the Holocaust (6MM Jews and 6MM politically incorrect), and another 30MM in WW2. Stalin killed 30MM of his own people in the purges and forced Ukraine famine, and another 20MM fighting his former ally, Hitler. Mao killed 80MM of his people.
…but NONE of these men so ably and quickly began to destroy America as has Barack Obama - the greatest enemy America has ever faced. And one our military seems unwilling an uninterested in fighting - turning their collective back on the ONLY Constitutional duty they have - protecting our Constitution.
It is time - past time, really - to realize that Obama / Pelosi / Reid / Rangle / Schumer / Dodd / Frank… are greater enemies of America, our Constitution, the Rule of Law and to our future than were Hitler or Imperial Japan…
Go RON PAUL!!!!
What else do Republicans ever propose folks, besides tax cuts for rich people and 'poor people paying their fair share?'
That is why they exist. Everyone should now know that. So the question is, how many people here agree with that Republican solution to our problems? Tax the rich less and the poor more, that is what Republicans call "fair."
So your solution, Sherman, to our deficit and debt problem is "the poor" need to start paying their income taxes? Damn them.
That is basically the Republican solution to the greatest income disparity between American citizens in the history of this country, the POOR NEED TO PAY MORE IN INCOME TAXES.
How come that doesn't offend people? How do Republicans get away with this s***?
I've got 10 reasons why they get away with this nonsense but the reason I think it happens is because the 'liberal media' have gotten too rich and too lazy to even care anymore, let alone do their friggin' jobs. So we, the vast majority of extremely intelligent Americans who don't pay much attention to politics,start believing 'poor people not paying income taxes' is really any kind of even remote reason why we are running trillion dollar a year deficts.
Toss the Bamster... Jan Brewer for Pres.
Newt: Mitt Can Have Florida But This Is Going All The Way To The Convention.
Sorry about that, Vermin.
petenyc: "Facts smacks, anyone can prove anything with facts."
Mr. Frederick is correct that "the income tax is just one tax," and that "the bottom 50 percenters certainly paid into the system via other taxes, primarily the payroll tax." That is why, when you look at all taxes (sales, payroll, property, gas,) the idea that 50% of the population is sponging off the top is complete bunk.
Only 14% of Americans did not pay income or payroll taxes. And those who pay not FIT are either dirt poor or elderly. Think a widow living only on Social Security (a non-taxable benefit.). Only five percent of those paying no FIT are non-elderly households making more than $20,000.
As for the FIT percentage born by the top one percent, that is largely because the redistribution of wealth to the top one percent in the past three decades has been so dramatic. According to CBO, since 1979 income grew by 275 percent for the top 1 percent of households, 65 percent for the next 19 percent, Just under 40 percent for the next 60 percent, and 18 percent for the bottom 20 percent. The top fifth of the population saw a 10-percentage-point increase in their share of after-tax income. Most of that growth went to the top 1 percent of the population.
No one can stir up moderates and other thoughtful people like the ultra-right-wing, neanderthal propagandist.
No one can stir up the radical leftist like Sherm. If it was an event in the olympics, Sherm would take the gold, silver and bronze.