Skip to comments.Eat the Rich (Oh, you gotta read this)
Posted on 09/22/2011 1:22:25 PM PDT by Scythian
By Walter E. Williams (Archive) Wednesday, April 13, 2011
I've often said that I wish there were some humane way to get rid of the rich. If you asked why, I'd answer that getting rid of the rich would save us from distraction by leftist hustlers promoting the politics of envy. Not having the rich to fret over might enable us to better focus our energies on what's in the best interest of the 99.99 percent of the rest of us. Let's look at some facts about the rich laid out by Bill Whittle citing statistics on his RealClearPolitics video "Eat the Rich."
This year, Congress will spend $3.7 trillion dollars. That turns out to be about $10 billion per day. Can we prey upon the rich to cough up the money? According to IRS statistics, roughly 2 percent of U.S. households have an income of $250,000 and above. By the way, $250,000 per year hardly qualifies one as being rich. It's not even yacht and Learjet money. All told, households earning $250,000 and above account for 25 percent, or $1.97 trillion, of the nearly $8 trillion of total household income. If Congress imposed a 100 percent tax, taking all earnings above $250,000 per year, it would yield the princely sum of $1.4 trillion. That would keep the government running for 141 days, but there's a problem because there are 224 more days left in the year.
How about corporate profits to fill the gap? Fortune 500 companies earn nearly $400 billion in profits. Since leftists think profits are little less than theft and greed, Congress might confiscate these ill-gotten gains so that they can be returned to their rightful owners. Taking corporate profits would keep the government running for another 40 days, but that along with confiscating all income above $250,000 would only get us to the end of June. Congress must search elsewhere.
According to Forbes 400, America has 400 billionaires with a combined net worth of $1.3 trillion. Congress could confiscate their stocks and bonds, and force them to sell their businesses, yachts, airplanes, mansions and jewelry. The problem is that after fleecing the rich of their income and net worth, and the Fortune 500 corporations of their profits, it would only get us to mid-August. The fact of the matter is there are not enough rich people to come anywhere close to satisfying Congress' voracious spending appetite. They're going to have to go after the non-rich.
But let's stick with the rich and ask a few questions. Politicians, news media people and leftists in general entertain what economists call a zero elasticity view of the world. That's just fancy economic jargon for a view that government can impose a tax and people will behave after the tax just as they behaved before the tax, and the only change is more government revenue. One example of that vision, at the state and local levels of government, is the disappointing results of confiscatory tobacco taxes. Confiscatory tobacco taxes have often led to less state and local revenue because those taxes encouraged smuggling.
Similarly, when government taxes profits, corporations report fewer profits and greater costs. When individuals face higher income taxes, they report less income, buy tax shelters and hide their money. It's not just rich people who try to avoid taxes, but all of us -- liberals, conservatives and libertarians.
What's the evidence? Federal tax collections have been between 15 and 20 percent of the nation's Gross Domestic Product every year since 1960. However, between 1960 and today, the top marginal tax rate has varied between 91 percent and 35 percent. That means whether taxes are high or low, people make adjustments in their economic behavior so as to keep the government tax take at 15 to 20 percent of the GDP. Differences in tax rates have a far greater impact on economic growth than federal revenues.
DUmmies would love to see the 100% tax on “the rich” and corporations.
They would never think about... who we tax next year?
We’d become North Korea rather quickly.
Why not Michael Moore? He’s well-marbled.
“Rich” is, of course, a relative term. As Pol Pot demonstrated, the most successful rice farmer on a village of rice farmers is rich and must be killed. “I’m so poor and he’s so rich, where is the justice in that?” Social justice and economic justice go hand in hand.
“That would keep the government running for 141 days, but there’s a problem because there are 224 more days left in the year.”
The average liberal doesn’t think much beyond TOMORROW, let alone 141 days out. This will be lost on them, since more than simple 2-5 word explanations are beyond thier attention span.
Would require to much marinade?
Yeah,this was posted when it was current, a few days before tax day. I remember because I love the way he broke it down.
Harvest the politicians and democrats for body parts and most of our problems would be resolved.
This is excellent:
hahaha! I saw that video when I read the OP article! It is also excellent.
Do looters think about where they are going to get the wine a week after they burn down the liquor store?
Remember that gym club ad in SF a few years ago: When the aliens get here, they will eat the fat ones first. Well, if the socialists continue on their wealth envy mania, they will eat the wealthy first and then move on to the main course...the middle classes.
I can think of no other illustration of how SPENDING is the problem and not lack of REVENUE.
But Zero pontificates, saying “It’s math.”
The average liberal doesnt think much beyond TOMORROW, let alone 141 days out.
Reminds me of congress including many of the Republicrats. Just a few months ago they told us they would pass a one time debt ceiling raise and take action to avoid having to do it again. Don’t look now.... we are at the debt ceiling again.
The true definition of stupidity and the best evidence that we might be fortunate to have the whole thing simply implode before it gets even worse.
If the ‘rich’ were forced to sell their assets- jewelry-yachts-cars-mansions- Just WHOM would be the buyers??????
“If the rich were forced to sell their assets- jewelry-yachts-cars-mansions- Just WHOM would be the buyers??????”
Good question, ain’t it funny how some people never get smart enough to ask it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.