Posted on 04/13/2011 4:28:58 AM PDT by Kaslin
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.
So far as Congress' ability to prey on the rich, we must keep in mind that rich people didn't become rich by being stupid.
The only viable solution to the budget problem is the one solution that congress simply won’t consider: make significant and deep cuts in spending.
Ergo, we, as a nation, are f***ed.
F***ed = Fooled :)
Wish we could get Walter to run for POTUS-!
Walter is a wise man. RIP Mrs. Williams.
Just think. All those brilliant, intellectual Independents
will coyly vote left, once again, in the coming months, because they instinctively know that Progressives are just as brilliant, knowing, and wise as they are.
(Thank goodness for brilliant, intellectual, genius Independents.)
IMHO
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.
This goes hand in hand with the Law of Unintended Consequences. People do change their behavior when you change the rules.
It is indeed, but the last sentence said it all for me
Exactly; you must be a mind reader...
"When we're finished eating the rich, we'll eat you!"
"Eat the fat people before the rich!"
"When we run out of rich, eat each other!"
Unmentioned were the hordes that pay no taxes. The lower middle class that contributes nothing must begin to contribute their fair share.
To many pay nothing
Good article. Too bad any Lib that reads it will blow it off as anti-tax propaganda. Just as the rich didn’t get rich by being stupid Liberals didn’t get that way by having common sense.
That’s why I love the Fair Tax - its makes the “poor” pay their fair share.
True.
$113,000 starts the top 10% of income brackets. $250,000 is only the top 2%. How can we expect improvement with such numbers?
To this point, how will we as a nation behave when all the new “healthcare” costs; i.e., “taxes” are imposed?
The Dems and libs are actually schizophrenic when it comes to the subject of “the rich.” Many of my lib friends used to regularly make anti-rich statements to the effect that the rich were mostly thieves who didn’t deserve their money. The only thing was my Dem friends, the ones excoriating the rich for having more money than they did (my lib friends also had more money than I did), would have liked nothing more than being filthy rich themselves. It all boils down to jealousy. Someone has a dollar more than they have, and they can’t stand it.
Yep and the idiot libs keep supporting rich democrat politicians.
It is about jealosy, but if the libs grew a brain and looked at just how wealthy their favorite congress types or senators are, they would be shocked.
but they would have to grow a brain first.
I'm not sure where his statistics are coming from, but wouldn't of those "corporate profits" overlap the income of those $250k income folk? I think he's effectively double-counting some of that money.
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.