The Filthy, Filthy Rich
With Bryan from Sanity in Mad City off somewhere enjoying his retirement, I feel it's up to me to expose some of the everyday lunacy at Madison's Capital Times.
Today resident Commie Dave Zwiefel opines on the evils of the Bush tax cut and how the top .1% of taxpayers are "getting richer at the expense of the country as a whole." Says Zwiefel:
The ascent of the super-rich still wasn't enough for the Bush administration, though.
Its irresponsible tax cuts, while throwing a couple of hundred bucks a year to the lower and middle classes, disproportionately went to those who already were millionaires. The 39.6 upper bracket, for example, dropped to 35 percent. When you're making $3 million a year, a 4.6 percent tax cut on everything above $319,000 ain't bad - enough for a new Mercedes or two.
Oh, where to start? How about with this handy chart:
The chart represents data from the 2001 calendar year. At that time, "the top 50% were those individuals or couples filing jointly who earned $26,000 and up in 1999." In fact, the top 25% of taxpayers payed 82.9% of all taxes. Now, explain to me how any administration can do more than "throw a couple of hundred bucks a year to the lower and middle classes" when that's all that they pay?
But back to the dastardly super rich. These free riders who aren't doing their share, are actually paying around 12% of all income taxes. Does Zwiefel really think that those folks need to foot more of the bill for the other 99.9% of the country? Wait! I think we know the answer.
What I don't understand is why folks like Zwiefel only see an ecomonic benefit to the country if the super rich's money goes to the Government. He sneers about how tax cuts allow the super rich to afford "a new Mercedes or two", but ignores the benefits of disposable wealth like that. Follow along Dave:
- Richie Rich buys a new yacht from Burger Boat in Manitowoc, WI
- Increased sales lead Burger's President, David Ross, to hire another engineer
- With her new job, this engineer is able to put a down payment on a home. She buys several thousand dollars of appliances and furnishings...
- Increasing the commission for the salesperson who served her. He, in turn, uses some of this extra money to take his wife out for a nice dinner at a local restaurant
- And, because he's feeling expansive, he tips the nice, young waitress far above his usual 18.5%
Posted by at June 8, 2005 01:19 PM
The trackback entry for this page is : http://www.inthehat.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/949
|# June 8th, 2005 1:44 PM chummer|
And as much as it pains Zweifel to say it, the Super-rich became super-prosperous in the 90s, not because of the Bush tax cuts.
Also, the Bush tax cuts made the income tax more prorgressive, not less so. The super-rich (top 0.1%) did get a bit of a break, but overall the top 1% is paying a larger percentage of total income taxes than before, but good luck getting them to admit it.
|# June 8th, 2005 1:55 PM kris|
|There were so many other things I could have talked about in that article. In the NYC article Zwiefel references they basically say that Americans don't want to tax the rich to death because they hope to rich themselves someday.
Then, they make a snide remark about "some people" think economic mobility is on the decline. However, in the source materials used, we see that even among the super rich, there's a lot of mobility. Only 25% of the top 400 taxpayers are the same from year to year. People are moving up and out and down. And besides, I don't think people think they're going to be *that* rich, but they do think there's a chance they could make $75-100 grand a year and they certainly don't want to be giving 70% of that to the government.
|# June 8th, 2005 2:10 PM no2lefties|
|Typical class-warfare, soak-the-rich rhetoric that the Democrats have been serving up for years.
If liberals like Zwiefel had their way, we'd go back to the Carter years where income taxes on the rich were very very high and the economy was in the tank.
|# June 8th, 2005 2:10 PM BrianH|
|Capitalism is a wonderful thing isn't it.
I was listening to Rush on the way to meet my wife for lunch today. Some guy was on trying to defend Howards Dean's bashing of republicans. He kept repeating phrases like "unequal distribution of income". My 14 YO son's comment was "That guy's an idiot." With an 8th grade education, he's smart enough to know that socialism won't work!
|# June 9th, 2005 11:37 AM Zeke|
|It's about punishing those who have been successful in life. It's also about the liberals making people dependent on the government for votes and power. |
|# June 9th, 2005 1:58 PM PackerFan63|
|"Oh, where to start?"
Give it up, Kris! I have given up trying to explain basic economics to people. Walter Williams, a brilliant economics professor, did a great series on everyday economics that you can read here: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0305/williams_econ9.php3.
My standard answer? "Read that series, then come back and talk to me."
|# June 11th, 2005 11:39 PM mbrlr|
|Well, all this certainly made it more progressive for the rich. Back to the 1890s we go and the permanent underclass --- and it's becoming increasingly just that, wishful thinking aside --- will go with everyone on the wonderful ride to perdition.
Pride goeth before destruction and a haughty spirit goeth before a fall.
|# June 11th, 2005 11:46 PM BVBigBro|
|Flat tax here we come! |
|# June 12th, 2005 12:17 AM mbrlr|
|God forbid. |
|# June 12th, 2005 12:20 AM BVBigBro|
|The only thing better would be about a 50% reduction in the federal government. |
|# June 12th, 2005 12:21 AM mbrlr|
|Would it surprise you to know I don't agree with that either? |
|# June 12th, 2005 12:27 AM BVBigBro|
|I've seen too much of that outfit in action. It could be done in a heartbeat.
All a flat tax would really do is eliminate the endless government knows best how you should spend your money (you can deduct this, but you can't that) mentality.