Posted on 01/08/2003 10:36:42 AM PST by Willing To Listen
You have just unwittingly stumbled upon the Libs' Game Plan. Their plan is to have all the income taxes paid by less than 50% of the voting-age populace. When that happens, they figger, tax cuts as a campaign issue will be OVER.
Jeff Greenfield had a very interesting bit to say on Errin' Brown's NewsNight on CNN last night - especially since it was Jeff Greenfield and that it was CNN. He said that the Dems are barking up the wrong tree on the class warfare angle - that they're still stuck in a kind of late 1940's mentality when refering to the "rich" as those making $100,000 a year. Back then, he said, that was a lot of money - but TODAY it's just a middle-level manager. Plus, he said, there's another angle the Dems are forgetting. The poor may not have much NOW, but they want their KIDS and their GRANDKIDS to be RICH. And they DON'T want their grandkids to be denied a chance to be rich - and then have it all taxed away when they get there.
You can visit CNN's transcript page and find the exact exchange. I was, for once, flabbergasted.
Michael
(1) A who is in the lowest 10th percentile for wealth in any given year (including those persons who are drawing welfare) has less than a 10% chance that they will still be in that situation in 10 years.
Why? See 2.
(2) Most poverty is age related. Most people at the bottom of the income curve are young. Lower class or middle class background, they are poor in their teens and 20's. But as they get older, they work their way up the income curve, acquire property, and do well.
The study found that there were very few "welfare queens" (although of course they exist.) The strongest correlation with wealth was age.
Well, duh!
Sure, as it applies to income taxes. But, their next plan I'm sure involves making payroll taxes progressive. You know, "From each according to his ability...."
Plus, he said, there's another angle the Dems are forgetting. The poor may not have much NOW, but they want their KIDS and their GRANDKIDS to be RICH. And they DON'T want their grandkids to be denied a chance to be rich - and then have it all taxed away when they get there.
Now, if many liberals -- poor or not -- give a hoot about what taxes their grandkids might have to pay, that would surprise me. I'm sure those who do give it any thought rationalize it such that, if their grandkids are fortunate enough to be rich, they'll owe it to their grandkids' less-fortunate contemporaries to shoulder the tax burden, just like today's 'rich' owe it to them. I think Greenfield gives them way too much credit.
i.e.
Tax cuts for the deserved.
Tax cuts for the bill payers.
Reward the payers.
Feed only the horses who are pulling the wagon.
You don't need new horse shoes if you're not pulling the load.
Shut up if you're not pulling your load.
etc.#;^)
TAX CUTS FOR TAXPAYERS!
Has a nice ring to it, doesn't it?
Just five years ago the above would have been considered absurd ---- today however, that just might be their plan.
Find out who wrote it. I almost got sued for doing that once.
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.