Skip to comments.Kristol: "Won't Kill Country If We Raise Taxes A Little Bit On Millionaires" (video)
Posted on 11/11/2012 9:58:55 AM PST by i88schwartz
BILL KRISTOL: The leadership in the Republican party and the leadership in the conservative movement have to pull back. Let people float new ideas, let's have a serious debate. Don't scream and yell when one person says, 'You know what? It won't kill the country if we raise taxes a little bit on millionaires.' It really won't, I don't think.
I dont really understand why Republicans don't take Obama's offer to freeze taxes for everyone below $250,000 -- make it $500,000, make it a million. Really? The Republican Party is going to fall on its sword to defend a bunch of millionaires, half of whom voted Democratic and half of whom live in Hollywood and are hostile to Republican principles.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Every nickel of Tax Increase will be spent on another Dem Vote Buying Program!
NONE will be used to pay deficit!
That’s the truth
He’s right, depending on how “millionaire” is defined. But what it will do is show how utterly bankrupt that idea is for solving the country’s problems. Let them have it.
What is this guy saying?
Taxing an annual salary of 250K is miles away from taxing a millionaire.
Anyone who voted Democrat should be taxed at 50 percent. It’s what they asked for. Let them pay for it.
We can tax the rich to a fare thee well and it won’t make a drop in the bucket as far as the deficit. But it will drive them all to take their money offshore and invest overseas.
Repeal the Hollywood tax cuts!
New report debunks narrative on income inequality
The Latest News on Tax Fairness [top 20%’s share up, everyone else’s share down over last 30 years]
CBO: By the way, the rich already pay more than a fair share in taxes
Billy should just send the IRS all his income.
If Romney had won it would have been seen as proof that the GOP has to become more ‘moderate’ to succeed.
But Romney lost and our supposedly conservative pols and pundits are tripping over themselves to lead a GOP move to the left.
Heads they win, tails we lose.
Thanks for nuking my customers.
Squirrel pot pie anyone? In a few months, the weeds will be up for salad.
I was just thinking that they should pass a special tax on George Soros, Warren Buffet, and Michael Moore.
Moore gets taxed double—the millionaire tax and the Michael Moore fat & ugly tax.
If you want to pay more joker mouth Kristol, feel free to do it on your own. Keep your hands off other peoples money.
Hey it will make good tv having all the occupiers dance happy dances that those evil rich are paying their fair share. My list is getting fairly long on things I despise about liberalism.... Covetousness ranks right up there though. And some preach taxation as 'social justice'...
Yep, and in the meantime we’ve accepted the dems assumption that taxation can solve a spending problem.
Just ignore it and the problem will go away.
From what I have read about it is that it doesn’t increase tax revenue enough to fix the problem and it also causes a loss in jobs.
What do Bill Kristol, Dick Morris and Ann Coulter have in common?
You can’t use Marx’s ideas to help the middle class.
Marx wanted to get RID of the middle class.
That’ what we’re planning. We run a post production company in Hollywood and plan to open a branch in the Philippines. No obamacare needed for those future employees. And we keep our conservative staff intact.
Idiotic. I expect that level of reasoning from Juan or Beckel.
Any increase for those that create jobs results in higher prices for the services or goods they produce.
So who ends up paying that tax on “millionaires” ?
Wall Street Bankers, Mortgage Bankers, Rating Agencies, Real Estate brokers, assessors, FreddieM and FannieM played a key role in using complex investment vehicles to camouflage fraud and negligence. I think the Bush tax cuts should be continued for all except the industries involved with the real estate and Wall Street crash of 2008. All those involved should pay the higher rates plus forfeit all exemptions plus a 10 percent rate for Economic Damage Reparation. The millionaire who sold products one could see and understand, hired people should be left alone to continue on. Wall Street was never open nor simple, rather its complexity was used to hide fraud from consumer and gov regulators. IMHO this is where the Dems and many in the GOP will agree to.
Another problem is that there will never be an end to how much the “rich” should be taxed. It would eventually get to France’s 75%. The Dems will ALWAYS say we need to tax them more and ALWAYS put the Republicans in the position of saying, “No, we can’t raise taxes on the rich.”
Kristol’s right that this IS an unpopular position. Far more unpopular with the voters than the public’s stance on social issues. I think it’s easier to make the moral case for a flat tax with no deductions than it is to argue how much of a higher rate the rich should pay. The latter becomes a judgment call. The former is a bedrock moral principle that can be defended on the level of fairness. Why is “fair share” not defined as everyone paying the same percentage on all of their income? How is everyone being charged the same rate unfair?
Welkommen to ze United Staetz of Capitualation.. Resistance is futile.. Jaaa!
“We can tax the rich to a fare thee well and it wont make a drop in the bucket as far as the deficit.”
I think of all the principles the GOP has betrayed in the past 20 years. And I think, THIS is the one thing they think is worth fighting for?
It won’t kill the millionaires, they’ll figure out how to get out of paying it....that’s not the point.....it will kill the economy, that’s the problem.
Yep, let’s let the crack of destruction become wider.
But it WILL kill jobs and NOTHING else you moron!
(When can I expect my stuff?)
Won’t help it either dip ship. Why bother? Just to feed the class warfare BS?
Absolutely. I’ve been in the tax advising business for almost 40 years. Ive seen numerous attempts to tax the rich. They always miss the rich and hit the middlle class. Why? Because they don’t draw a distinction between high income and rich.
A person with high income may not be rich. A person without lower income may be. It depends on whether they are relying on their investments or their labor. A person who does not have to work to live as they wish is rich, but a person who has to work, no matter how much they make, is not rich.
Th reason they always miss the rich and tax the middle is partially intentional - it’s where the money is. There are fewer rich people.
It may also be unintentional, but maybe the tax law writers realize this. If one is rich, one may move one’s investments for tax advantage, in order to realize maximum after-tax earnings and mimimize the risk. Moving one’s labor is more complicated, and more difficult.
Lucy pulling the football away again. One last time. We run trillion + deficits. You could confiscate the wealth of the top 1% and not wipe out one years borrowing from China. Who do you suppose they’ll come for next?
That’s what I’ve been advocating. Give the people who voted for this what they want... good and hard.
Start with repealing tax shelters for Hollywood and the media industries.
Move on to charitable remainder trusts and foundations, which finance a great deal of left wing mischief.
Then start removing deductions - eg, allow mortgage interest deductions for only one’s own primary home, and then index it to the median price of homes in your area of residence.
Oh, thinking about other things... a transaction tax on selling/buying securities on Wall Street - say, a half-cent per transaction. Poof, HFT dies quickly and we regain some semblance of sanity in the markets. Tax unregistered bespoke securities at a rate which will flush the CDO’s and CDS’s out into the open.
The list goes on and on of ways that the GOP could give Obama supporters exactly what they want: higher taxes.
Remember the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)? That was intended to soak the rich, and instead it wound up soaking the middle class. Just as the next “soak the rich” plan will.
It would be far better to move to a consumption tax (eg, national retail sales tax) which would truly level the playing field between rich/poor and offshore vs. domestic producers.
It would also make the stimulation of the national economy a much more important thing to the Congress, since they’d derive their tax revenues directly from the national economic situation, rather than a derivative of same.
If those things happen my taxes will come down in year 2 as I report less income. The takers will be on their own once we stop printing money.
Yep, but the AMT soaks the blue coastal states residents the worst.
And for that, I like it. It’s cosmic justice, coming back around on the people who voted for nonsense like the AMT.
I will go one step further, I am calling for Dems to pay the exact same tax like they pay in France..70 percent..rich libs love Obama so much, time to cough up the cash..Sarah Jessica Parker, Eva Longoria, Beyonce, and all the rest of them..Id like to see the look on their smug faces when they hear they will have to pay 70 percent..hope they are wearing dark pants
I am really tired of DUMB you know whats....MILLIONAIRES have TAX attorneys and Accountants who they can pay to REDUCE their taxes...take a look at Warren Buffet and Bill Gates and others....soooo...WHO will pay MORE in taxes? The MIDDLE class you dumb you know what!
>>It may also be unintentional, but maybe the tax law writers realize this.
It is very intentional. As you said, its hard to move labor income offshore but easy to move wealth. Second, the wealthy are represented by the banks and Wall St and that’s who owns both sides of the RepubliCrat Party.
Once a Democrat gets a Republican to go along with a tax increase, they change the increase to include everyone who pays taxes. Oldest trick in the book.
Or they’ll just flee the country, like Denise Rich did.....just because they voted for higher taxes, doesn’t mean they voted to be subject to them. Taxes are for the “little people.”
Criticize them all you want, but those Democrats sure learned their lessons from recent history -- and they learned them well. As they learned back in the 1993-94 budget cycles, never legislate a massive tax hike in Congress if a Democrat in the White House has to sign it into law. This is why, for example, the "Bush tax cuts" are still in place more than a decade after most of them were put in place. They even survived a two year period in 2009-10 when the Democrats controlled the White House and both houses of Congress and could have ended them without any opposition at all.
UM....We are in one of the “blue coastal states”....and will get hit by the AMT for the first time ever this year, due to family business issues ... So, aim your wrath at the LEFTISTS NOT the Left coast....
It won’t kill the economy, but it will have a small detrimental effect on it. Not sure I am opposed to the idea of letting the economy decline as the results of Obama policies become obvious for all in reality (not just theory).
I'm sure you're checking with a tax specialist on this, but one thing I learned is that a person in the AMT bracket who does not own a home is in a pretty enviable position. The AMT eliminates most itemized deductions and replaces them with a single large personal exemption, so if you find yourself in that position there is no value in having the ability to deduct mortgage interest, state and local taxes, etc. In my case, the personal exemption under the AMT far exceeded what would have been available to me in the form of itemized deductions anyway.