Obama’s tax plan: It’s about revenge, not revenue

SoakTheRich

Is soaking the wealthy ever the answer?
Photo credit mises.org

President Obama’s insistence that the wealthiest Americans pay even more in taxes has nothing to do with “fairness” or a need for more revenue. It’s all about punishing the rich.

For at least five years now — even before he was elected — we’ve heard President Obama state over and over that he seeks a tax policy “that asks the wealthiest Americans to help pay down our deficit, to do their fair share.”

Such statements always leave Republican lawmakers shaking their heads.

“You got the top 2 percent paying almost half of all income taxes. Is that fair?”  asked Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., according to Fox News.

Nonetheless, on New Year’s Day, Obama was granted his wish. He got a 13 percent tax hike for the wealthiest Americans. But that hasn’t satisfied him. Like a dingy-faced Oliver Twist holding his empty bowl before him, he now implores Congress, “Please sir, may I have some more?” That’s right — he wants more revenue.

All of this caused me to wonder: “What the hell is going on here?” When the top 2 percent pay half the tax revenue and half the wage-earners don’t pay anything, something is really screwy here.

Even the most Keynesian of economists generally agree one cannot raise taxes in a sluggish economy and expect good results.

I suppose what truly highlighted this for me was Dr. Benjamin Carson’s speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, in which he emphasized that everyone should have a stake in America’s future — everyone should have skin in the game.

Then I did a little digging.

Obama 2008 debate

OBAMA: “Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital-gains tax for purposes of fairness.”

On April 16, 2008, “ABC World News” anchor Charles Gibson co-moderated a Democratic presidential debate between then-Sens. Obama and Hillary Clinton.

The subject was tax policy. When bringing up taxes on capital gains , Gibson stated “in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased. The government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.”

“You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital-gains tax,” Gibson said specifically to Obama(?). “As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, ‘I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton, which was 28 percent.’

“It’s now 15 percent. That’s almost a doubling if you went to 28 percent. But actually, Bill Clinton in 1997 signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent.”

OBAMA: “Right.”

GIBSON: “And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.”

OBAMA: “Right.”

GIBSON: “And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased. The government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down. So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?”

OBAMA: “Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital-gains tax for purposes of fairness.”

There’s that word again — fairness. It has nothing to do with accepting a policy that brings in the most revenue and is best for the nation. It has everything to do with making the wealthy pay more because that is Obama’s definition of “fairness.”

And that’s why Barack Obama is so wrong for America.

Featured posts:
Washington gun bill includes annual home inspections

Who will beat the nation’s ‘most vulnerable Democrat?

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee: I am a freed slave

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed
About Michael Dorstewitz

Mike has been with BizPac Review almost from the beginning. Email Mike at michael@bizpacreview and follow him on Twitter at @MikeBPR.