Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, September 04, 2008
David Strom :: Townhall.com Columnist
Robin Hood Economics
by David Strom
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


You have to give him credit; the Obama tax plan has a lot of appeal to the average voter. The sales pitch, repeatedly endlessly, is that under Obama 95% of Americans would see their taxes go down.

Of course, it’s not as simple as the Democratic candidate would like you to believe. Both the nature of the tax “cuts” Obama puts in place and the tax increases he is trying to sell could have serious impacts on future economic growth. Not to mention the ability of the American economy to get back on track building the number of jobs and growing wealth in this country.

John McCain’s tax plan is far from perfect, but at its core is reducing taxes on job creation and kick-starting the economy. The idea behind the plan is that a good job with a strong and growing business is a far better way to drive Americans’ incomes up than to distribute short-term government handouts, as the Obama plan does.

What is Obama offering? A witch’s brew of tax credits that are aimed at various groups rather than lower taxes for everybody. Obama pays for these tax cuts by increasing the capital gains tax, keeping America’s 2nd highest in the world corporate taxes, and whacking upper-income earners with dramatically higher taxes. All things aimed squarely at reducing economic growth.

Tax credits for some and raising taxes on the wealthy are standard fare for Democrats. Call it Robin Hood economics, which is based on the idea that the idea of wealth in America is fixed and the role of government is to make sure that it gets into the right hands.

Such a plan would make sense if the economy were built on stealing from the poor and giving to the rich; then Obama would be the Robin Hood figure who was simply setting things right by reversing the transaction.

But modern economies build their wealth through investment and job creation, and Obama’s tax plan is aimed squarely at reducing investment and punishing wealth creation. Obama’s tax increases to pay for his new programs amount to billions of dollars on investments.

John McCain’s economic plan is aims to reduce the immediate tax burden of millions of ordinary citizens through tax cuts such as increasing the per-child personal exemption. But it also stimulates the economy by reducing the costs of doing business in the United States. More investment at home means more jobs and higher incomes for Americans.

Not to mention that millions of Americans are counting on their investments to help fund their retirement plans in the coming years, and Obama’s plan takes a bite out of their future wealth.

As anyone who has thought about outsourcing knows, America could and should be a much better place to do business than it is. The United States could and should be much more competitive than it is because of our high taxes and complicated regulations.

That’s the true story behind McCain’s plans to reduce corporate tax rates and cut taxes on dividends. Believe it or not, the United States actually has higher corporate tax rates than almost any other country. McCain aims to cut those taxes to stimulate economic growth, and keep rates on capital gains low to encourage Americans to invest in the future.

Obama wants to increase the tax on capital gains, cutting the investments that drive our economy—and history shows that higher capital gains rates actually means less tax revenue for the government as people change their investment behavior. That slows economic growth by making America less attractive to do business in.

Obama’s plan banks on Americans not understanding the basic economics of tax policy. It assumes that Americans would be willing to trade a more robust economy under McCain’s plan for a shot at some tax credits they may or may not qualify for.

That’s a bad bet for Americans and may well be a bad bet for the Obama campaign. His witches’ brew of tax increases for some and tax credits for others add up to a substantial increase in taxes overall. Those “middle class” tax cuts might be paid for with fewer jobs for Americans.

That’s a pretty high price to pay for a shot at a few tax credits.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

David Strom is the President of the Minnesota Free Market Institute. He hosts a weekly radio show on AM-1280 "The Patriot" in Minneapolis-St. Paul, available on podcast at Townhall.com.

Be the first to read David Strom's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

Robin Hood gets a bad rap
Obama and the Dems twist the true image of Robin Hood. Robin was not some bleeding heart socialist, he was a property owning noble who fought against oppressive taxation from King John and the Sheriff of Nottingham. Taking from the rich and giving to the poor meant taking from the taxing kleptocrasy and giving it back to the people who earned that money in the first place.

Excuse me Prince John
King Richard was fighting to liberate Jerusalem at the time.

Some things change, and some things stay the same don't they.

hmmmmm
Robin Hood economics also keeps the poor poor, period.

David writes:
What is Obama offering? A witch’s brew of tax credits that are aimed at various groups rather than lower taxes for everybody.
===
Because this man has never run a business in his life, nor had to pay hos own way in life, he shows what happens when such men are given positions of power and he must be stopped.

Anytime the government places a tax on any business, that tax is paid by the consumers.

Its so simple yet this supposedly intelligent man proves beyond a doubt how ignorant of how the real world works its too far fetched to accept he is smarter than a rock.


Excellent article by David Strom
Republicans can't say it enough...we have some of the highest, if not the very highest, taxes on corporations, in the world. Then, we sit here wondering why our companies move overseas and/or outsource jobs overseas. There is no reason why we shouldn't reduce corporate income taxes to keep companies here in the states, and employing people in the states. Conversely, Obama's plan doesn't make a bit of sense. It's trickery, similar to what Bill Clinton did when he promised tax cuts so he could narrowly win election. He promptly raised taxes, not lowering them. So on the one hand we can't even trust that Obama would offer the limited tax cuts he's pushing, AND even if he actually did, the Robin Hood situation that Stroms points out would occur and would badly harm the economy.

Just at time when the economy could use a little help, we'd be starting down a road of economy suppression. Not very smart, but typical of Obama and his lib handlers.

Tax credits are like retail rebates
less than 70% of all homeowners itemize to get the mortgage tax deduction. Once you hide the tax credit behind a form or a specific requirement you will most likely reduce the "value" of said credit to said needy group by two-thirds. Is that great business or what? Increase taxes to cover a $100 program and on give out $30 to $35 in benefits. I am taking my money to Vegas.

Robin Hood was a Republican
To say that a Democrat engages in Robin Hood economics seems to be a misnomer. Correct me if I’m wrong about the origins of the story, I’m basing my understanding on the Disney Version. In the Disney Robin Hood, the rich person in question that Robin Hood is stealing from, is not a business owner or a successful hardworking labor. The rich person is the Sheriff of Nottingham was just also happens to be the tax man. He goes around shaking change from the pockets of children to fund his lifestyle and projects and keep his gang together. Robin Hood is stealing from the tax man! Obama is the tax man. McCain (has the opportunity) to be Robin Hood. Let’s take back Robin Hood from the Democrats, and refer to Obama as the Sheriff of Nottingham, one of the scummiest most ignoble characters in western literature.

Yes, while Obama Hood pretends to
rob from the rich and give to the poor, what he and his Leftie cronies what to do is rob from everyone and have a big party in Washington, frittering the money away and giving it to Leftie special interest groups.

I think Obama and his friends are more like the Sheriff on Nottingham and King John, while pretending to be like Sheriff John.

If Obama's choice of associates are any indicator, I fear that a lot of my hard-earned money is going into the pockets of America-haters and Marxists.

Robin Hood stole back taxes
I find it foolish when government increases in tax rates is compared to 'Robin Hood' economics. Robin Hood's legend is based on returning (immoraly high) taxed earnings back to the people it belongs to. Our weathy Americans should pay more based on income, but not more than a fair share. If you make ten times another's wage you pay ten times more in taxes. Simple yet fair. And biblical, too. To punish someone for making more money than another (and that's what escalating tax rates do) is both unfair and immoral, not to mention bad for the economy.

Truth
All those stupid liberals out there thinking their party is really going to give them anything they steal from the producers in this country. Morons.

Only stupid, lazy, ignorant wastes of human flesh vote democratic because they're resentful of the successful. Democrats are the screw up who goofed off in school, did crime and fouled up their lives. Now they're old and they've been left behind so they look around and demand stuff from the rest of the people who did the right thing.

Democrat governments simply use the money they steal to staff government agencies with their relatives and friends. They create new management positions, but no one to actually do the work. So when a democrat voter calls an agency and says, "Hey, I'm not happy. Do something about it", the agency says,"Hey, stupid. We're under staffed and over worked. We don't have the people or the money. But vote for us again and we'll take more money from the guy who stole your wife."

Let Obama change the tax code in whatever way he wants. The day after the code is law the Gulfstream II's will land at the DC airport and drop off a bunch of sharks in tassled shoes who will go into town and take all the democrats, bend them over their chairs and breech load them like the whoars they are and the code will be changed.

Poor mr_sparky
doesn't seem to grasp the obvious...conservatism is what has allowed the daughter of an elementary schoolteacher to go from public school kid to business owner just after attending a non-ivy league school. Then from hockey mom to VP candidate in less than 15 years.

news flash: PEOPLE FIND A WAY TO ACCOMPLISH THE THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO THEM.

The reason our companies
Outsourceing jobs, either highly technical or lowly manufacturing, is because labor is cheaper over there than here. It has nothing to do with corporate tax rates. Higher corporate tax rates only stifle corporate profits, not where the products are manufacturered. And the profits are stifiled if the companies pay the taxes. Many large corporations do not pay any income taxes at all.

Labor is cheaper overseas because they do not have the high economic standards that Americans have come to expect. And no, I am not advocating lowering our standards.

And the labor rate is lower because they do not have the bad, evil nasty regulations like, safety glasses, breathing appratus, sanitation, enviromental, work rules, safety rules, rigging rules, welding specifications and all of those other "regulations" you want to eliminate.

Yep, those regulations cost money, they save lives and in the long run are beneficial to our economy and our style of life.

Hey OBAMBIE TROLLERS!
SARAH PALIN kicked OBAMBIE and your butts last night. And she did it without the help of STYROFOAM GREEK columns or a TELEPROMPTER!

Get ready for JOHN MCCAIN to put the final nails in your collective coffin tonight.

Did you hear your candidate out there today at his PRESS conference SNIVELING like BAMBI!

Say good-bye to the TELEPROMPTER KING. YOU and OBAMBIE are FINISHED!

Bush Tax Cuts
The Bush tax cuts affected everybody. They were instrumental in helping the economy make it in the wake of the 9-11 debacle.

Obama and the Dems hated them - and they have sworn that they will let those tax cuts expire. They don't consider that a tax increase and they're getting away with it thanks the the MSM.

Abolish the income tax
Can anybody spell F-A-I-R T-A-X?


NOT WEALTHY
My husband and I are not wealthy. We are in the 15% tax bracket. If President Bushs tax cuts are not made permanent or are allowed to expire, our income tax bracket will immediately jump to 27%. Every tax bracket will be significantly increased.
How clever of b.H.obama to promise to reduce the majority of Americans taxes--AFTER--our taxes are first nearly doubled. Maybe he'll lower our taxes from 27% to 25%.
With all the written, radio and TV warnings of scams and identity theft that we are inundated with, half the American people are being blind, deaf and dumb to b.H.obamas 'MOTHER' of all 'SCAMS'

Obamanomics
will focus sucking taxes out of investment income, and corporate profits.

These groups already pay most of the taxes. And it is these groups, or through these groups that keep America's economy growing.

Under Obamanomics, the cost of living will skyrocket, as all of our good and services will double in order to recover from federal taxing. Unemployment will also rise to ridiculous levels as corporations slim down and streamline in order to turn a profit.

In short, get ready for stagflation and the msiery-index all over again.

What Do You Call This?
Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor. Our current system we borrow from Asia, spend the money on ourselves and leave the debt to our children. Then we heaped on them a multibillion dollar Medicare drug benefit to pay for.

What do you call a generation that just plain steals from its children?

Fair Tax
I agree with Willis, 1:08 am. Let's abolish the IRS! It is doable, but it must come from the ground up. Write your congressmen today...I'm for the Fair Tax!!

Mr.Strom
Americans,such as yourself,are just too uninformed in the area of economics, to make intelligent assumptions.President Bush and his Congress cut taxes and where are we today?The economy has a weaker foundation than before.I could help you to understand where we are economically.But,why?September 15, is a Monday,watch the markets."Dumb As"...

IF WE CAN RALLY FOR
"DRILL NOW, DRILL HERE' Then we can 'Rally' for, "REFORM NOW, REFORM HERE". Our Government, BOTH Parties, got us into our economic mess and the Party which will fight to "REFORM' the size, corruption, unbridled spending and earmarks in Washington, while keeping us safe from terrorist attacks, is the only "HOPE" we have to survive as a Nation.

ROBIN HOOD ECONOMICS
This may seem like too fine a point, but Robin Hood would have been a Conservative. What the story says he did was specifically to take assets from the King and the King's agents, such as tax collectors, and return them to the people who actually EARNED them. This was not income redistribution, but income refunding in response to unjust and excessive taxation.

Here's another vote for the FairTax.

Nick in Austin
The Bush tax cuts were not instrumental in restoring the economy after 911. The economy was stimulated by the Federal Reserve lowering the prime rate to around 1%. Some credit has also been given to the automotive companies for creating the buyer rebate programs that got customers buying cars again. (This attribution goes to the Rushman, I have no idea if it is true)

Those tax cuts will never be payed for by any increase in tax receipts from the minor %.7 increase over the next 20 years that they created.

If the estimates are correct, the tax cuts will reduce tax receipts over the 10 year period by about $500 Billion dollars. This comes at a time when we are spending more on the interest for the National Debt than almost any other government agency.

Hey Pablo....
Then tell how much of MY MONEY am I allowed to keep? Tax cuts are not PAID for, it OUR money to start with, not the governments. Understand?

Robin Hood Econ
Willis in NC is right on the mark. The only way out of this wealth envy cycle is the Fair Tax.

A bucket of water
The best example of taxing was told by someone else. Assume that your income is a bucket of water. The government immediately pours out half of it into their pan as a "tax". Now they want to take a new tax from the "rich". Those are the people who own businesses you purchase from.

The government isn't going to take the tax from you, of course, only the rich. So the tax will only come from the rich side of your bucket. But guess what the water level does.

Mr. Chitown
Tax cuts are paid for by stimulating the economy with money that is not sent to the taxman.

If the money received by the government in new tax receipts generated by a stronger economy are greater than the revenues lost by lowering tax rates, than the cuts were paid for by the stronger economy.

I am assuming that you are not one of the top 1% in this country that received the larger percentage of the tax cuts. If you want to pay for tax cuts than give the majority of it to the middle class instead of the wealthy.

If the "rich" (top 1%) receive more money how does that stimulate the economy? They invest it in stocks and other investments. They purchase more goods and services, the same as what the middle class would do with the money, invest and purchase. Do the “rich” purchase more goods and services than the middle class?. No they don’t. But why does their money create more jobs and investment than if the middle class has the money?

If the purpose of the cuts are to stimulate the economy than give the money back to the segment of the economy that will do the most with it.

Robin Hood in Texas
We have a Robin Hood Law here in Texas. It was named that for the idea that they take money from richer schools to give the poor ones.

The only trouble is that the government tends to keep 90% of the transfered money as a handling fee.

If you check the Welfare Department, which is supposed to be transfering money from the rich (taxpayers) to the poor (on welfare) about 90% of that money is also kept by the government as a handling fee.

An economist recently noted that if Welfare was clsoed down and the IRS, who sends checks out every year anyway, was to split up that money and send it out to everyone who's return showed they were making below the poverty level, there wouldn't be a poverty level in the U.S. All would be above it. And there would be money left over.

Charles: Fair Tax
In the first place, I like to buy things knowing what they will cost from the price tag - not going to the counter and learning it costs a lot more because of the sales tax.

Second, the rich will buy more than I will since they have more money to buy with - but they don't have to spend all their income to buy everything they want. So they pay less of their income in tax than I would. What is the difference in what they do now?

Third, economists have shown that the people setting up the "Fair Tax" are actually setting it up so they get far more tax money than they are doing now - which leaves less for us.

Until I get a far better assurance of how they intend to do this, I'll keep what we have.

Do you remember
when our brillant congress put a high tax on luxury yachts? What happened? The wealthy not being stupid and not wanting to waste their hard earned money, stopped buying yachts. Yacht building businesses closed down and workers lost jobs.

How long before a President Obama killed the "golden goose?"

we need steeper tax cuts
My weekly salary before taxes is $623, so my daily take is $123. My yearly salary before taxes then equates to $32,396, which is below mean salary for my demographic. I pay $142 in Federal income tax per week. So, essentially, I work a little over 1 day per week to support Uncle Sam. I got a grand total of $16 dollars back in my tax refund of last year, and owed $100 to the state I live in.

Our taxes are ridiculously high already.

For my income bracket, McCain's tax plan lets me keep an extra $100 bucks over the course of the year. Obama's plan lets me keep $800 bucks over the course of the year. The question though is, will my cost of living escalate and absorb the $800 extra I'm getting to keep?

If, like 47% of all other Americans, I'm living hand-to-mouth, then my expenses are approx $32k. If my cost of living increases by just 2.5% (holding inflation) then my $800 tax break is already consumed.

You can't look at the income tax alone when weighing the competing plans, because ultimately all taxes are paid by individuals. Corporate taxes are passed off to consumers via higher prices. This is a fact in a free market; an increase in corporate taxes (and tariffs) equates to an increase in the cost of living for all consumers. Obama plans to increase both.

The water bucket is an apt analogy.

Pablo...
I asked how much of MY MONEY do you think I should be allowed to keep? %80?, %70?, %60? What is the answer? Should taxation be used to make all earners equal?

And no, I'm not a top 1% guy, but I aspire to be one. Don't you? You can't get there by somebody redistributing the income of the high achievers to the low achievers/do-nothings. You get there by hard work. Or is that a foreign concept to you?

Now about your "rich" 1%-ers. They are the job creators in this country, by expanding their small business and highering new employees. 70% of people in this country work for small business and small business creats 80% of all new jobs. Raise their taxes by 50k a year and a 50k a year employee will most probably be out of work.

You said "Do the “rich” purchase more goods and services than the middle class?. No they don’t." Actually, yes, they do. They consume more goods and services than the middle class. They have more discretionary income to do so. Loco nails it when he said "Do you remember when our brillant congress put a high tax on luxury yachts? What happened? The wealthy not being stupid and not wanting to waste their hard earned money, stopped buying yachts. Yacht building businesses closed down and workers lost jobs." The "rich" are not stupid, they spend their money wisely. Over tax them and they take their money offshore to invest in more favorable tax enviroments. That kills the economy.

Moreover, when was the last time you were given a job from a "poor" man?

And I reiterate, tax cuts are not paid for by any kind of economic stimulus as a result. I don't care what your leftie profs say in econ class. IT'S MY MONEY TO START WITH TO DO WITH WHAT I WANT! NOT THE GOVERNMENTS! Why you cannot understand that concept mystifies me.

Another Lawyer; NO THANKS
*
Obama for CHANGE, "Spare CHANGE"

Thats whats left of the family budget after 2 Lawyers take over the White House.

Haven't Lawyers inflicted enough pain on our society, now they're going to put 2 more, who've never had a job in their entire lives, in supreme command. This country's finished.....

Bill
The "Fair Tax",is a thinly veiled attempt to fund the "States Right Agenda".I know, most Americans are not very sophisticated, when it comes to economics but some are.Sorry...

Obamanomics
To state it simply, we just can't afford Obamas spending. I think we need to start the fair tax!! I have already changed alot of my spending habits, I don't think I can change anymore. I don't consider myself rich, but the democrats sure do.

ChitownHammer and Pablo
I saw a report recently from an economist. (don't remember where or who). If you take ALL money earned by anyone who makes over $50,000 a year you could run the Federal Government for 11 days.

Considering that the government can't run ONLY 11 days a year, I think we can safely say that the rest of us making less will have to cough up a significant amoung of extra tax money to pay for the rest of the year. I'd just as soon they cut expenses rather than raised my tax.

ChitownHammer
I suspect that the reason Pablo can't seem to get it through his head that the money you make is yours is because he doesn't really pay tax - he gets it from the government instead. People who earn it are actually selling part of their lives (the time spent at work) for money to pay expenses and whatever else they need. Those on the dole use someone else's life (by demanding money be taken from them) for their own use while they run around.

My wife and I have this argument every once in awhile when she decides she needs me to do part of her work so she will have more time to run around.

Flat Tax vs. Fair Tax
The Flat Tax simply sets a single tax rate for everyone. The last time I heard was that the government wanted 17% if they did this. (An economist said that 11% would equal what they spend today.) The main complaint is that the tax rate for the rich would go down while the tax rate for the poor, who generally pay little or nothing, would go up. Especially since ALL income, including Welfare, would be taxed.

The Fair Tax is a sales tax. It depends upon what the government wants. I don't know for sure what the government has determined but I do know it is over 25% of the price of whatever you buy. This could be easily changed - and it also gives the government far more tax money than they get now. Considering that I spend nearly every penny I make, that means my tax (now at 20%) would go UP 5% more.

I prefer the tax I pay now.

Robin Hood Economics
It really bothers me when people inappropriately use the Robin Hood analogy when concerning wealth envy situations. Rather. it was the citizenry vs the government, or the royalty/nobility, more accurately.

Anyone willing to fight for a smaller, less intrusive government should be considered a hero, a "Robin Hood." Whereas, anyone who uses or proposes to use the government to extract money from those who earn it and distribute it to those who do not should be viewed as an extortionists or a "Prince John" or "Sheriff or Notingham."

Obama should be viewed as the royalty here and McCain the hero

Robin 'stole' from the tax collector...
...and gave it back to the taxpayer.

Obama is apparently trying for a rerun of the late 70's, and I was at least smart enough to pass on that idea the first time. The democrat party has no one to blame but themselves for committing their party to another far left nominee. Watching them panic and freak is always fun though.

Obama's promising me the shirt off someone else's back for my vote is real big and generous of him, but it's immoral(theft), and passing a law to make it legal and call it progressive taxation doesn't change that.

Hood
Vote for Change

It's all you'll have left in your paycheck

Obama '08

One thing I cannot understand:
Why does the Democrat Party believe that the voters want a large tax increase? The only ones I know in favor of it are those on Welfare. Do they believe that the Welfare voters are enough to elect them? Or do they believe that the rest of us are that stupid?

to Killer
First, to "Killer"; what is this "States Rights Agenda" to which you refer, (I can hear the sinister laughter already)? Where we stand now, the Fed as assumed FAR more power than was ever intended, solely because our States and We the People have stopped defending our selves from its encroachment.

To 45Caliber
I'd suggest you read Neal Boortz's book on the "Fair Tax" a.k.a. HR.25, either the first or the follow-up. Hell; I'll even send you a copy.

You stated "In the first place, I like to buy things knowing what they will cost from the price tag - not going to the counter and learning it costs a lot more because of the sales tax."
The point is that the Fed tax is to be *included* in the price tag; it is an inclusive tax (like income) not an exclusive (State sales tax). The premise is that once the excessive cost of tax compliance is removed, prices will drop due to competition - the tax is then re-added at the retail level (before the register) to come out about neutral.

Further:"Second, the rich will buy more than I will since they have more money to buy with - but they don't have to spend all their income to buy everything they want. So they pay less of their income in tax than I would. What is the difference in what they do now?"
The "rich" have always had more means than "the rest of us". Even the uber rich have to live by some sort of budget or end up like a lottery winner (most are worse off after 2 years than when they started). The point is that HR25 provides that you only pay as much tax as you *want to* by spending your cash - it makes no difference how it is earned. If you want to spend a lesser percentage, you have 2 choices; withhold spending, or bust your butt and earn more. That's FAIR.

To 45Caliber, Cont'd

Lastly: "Third, economists have shown that the people setting up the "Fair Tax" are actually setting it up so they get far more tax money than they are doing now - which leaves less for us."
Huh? Setting it up so that 'they get more tax money'? The tax payers are *not* tax-consumers. Keeping what is yours is NOT the same as petitioning for redistribution (share of the booty looted from others). And in no way does that mean that there is "less for us". The U.S. economy is not a finite pie, and income is not a zero-sum game.

If you want more, sacrifice some time and money on education and investment rather than partying and travel. If (you) choose to play rather than be responsible, it isn't MY job to hand over my hard-earned cash to continue to keep (you) comfortable.

One last comment, then back to work; the Fair Tax isn't perfect. It does nothing to address rampant Federal spending, nor State or municipal. The idea for now is to fund the Feds at the same level as now, but the tax is more *transparent* which makes it far more difficult for our wonderful Reps in both houses to increase taxes with the slight-of-hand to which they've become so adept. Of course, it cannot be enacted without ALSO repealing the 12th Amendment or we'd be in a worse situation - BOTH an income tax AND a sales tax.

More on Fair Tax
45Caliber, again. it is obvious that you haven't a clue about the Fair Tax. First, the Flat Tax as you describe would be bad for some, but part of the issue is that the majority of the population pay little to nothing in FED taxes, now, and have no ownership in the process. 17% is nothing, although it is *still* "Progressive" as the wealthier will still pay more than others - the percent is static.

This leaves out that the concept of a tax on income, a DIRECT TAX which was prohibited until the 12th Amendment should be abolished. The Fed can (and until the turn of last century, did) support itself on consumption and excise taxes. These stealthy income taxes have only served to vastly expand gov't power.

The Fair Tax (eg HR25) is an INCLUSIVE sales tax, currently estimated at 23% given the Fed's bloat - and INCLUDES funding for wasteful, unconstitutional programs like Social Security, Welfare, Medicaid etc., ad nauseum. This would amount to a TAX CUT given your above analogy, as you may be in the 20% bracket, but SS alone is another 14% (7% withholding, and 7% is the "company contribution" - this is your money, and it is hidden from you). I am not counting Medicaid taxes, either. Given this simple scenario, your ACTUAL rate is 34%, not 20%, so the Fair Tax as you describe is an 11% savings!

Reply to post 42
45Caliber, you asked:
"Why does the Democrat Party believe that the voters want a large tax increase? The only ones I know in favor of it are those on Welfare. Do they believe that the Welfare voters are enough to elect them? Or do they believe that the rest of us are that stupid?"
the short answer is "yes".
The voters to which the D pander want tax increases, not on *them* but on everyone else. this is how the 12th was passed in the first place (it started out as a 3% tax on the top 1%, reasonable, right? Look where we are now).
And again, Yes - the D's think that there ARE enough people who are tax consumers (ticks if you will) who will vote because of what the D's will give. Case in point: O has recently stated that he would give all "needy" a $1000 handout to help pay for energy consumption.

And we thought that vote-buying was a Fed crime...

And lastly, YES - they DO think that the rest of us are that stupid.

Peter and Paul
When you rob Peter, you can always count on Paul's support.

45caliber
You will never see a Flat tax or Fair tax in America. Why? The Federal Reserve...I could help you to understand this phenomenon.But you already understand this economy so well.September 15,2008,oh what a DAY!!!

Chitown
I would like to respond to your questions. I have no idea how much of your money you should keep. If you want to keep it all that's fine with me. But don't expect the fire dept. or the police dept. to come to your house. Kind of a metaphor.

You’re other questions;

Now about your "rich" 1%-ers. They are the job creators in this country, by expanding their small business and hiring new employees.

No my friend, the top 1% are not the economic stimulus that you think they are. But if you listen to Rush and the other talk show hosts you will think that the top 1% are the "job creators".

The job creators are the small business owners that you mention, and damn few of them make over $300,000/year (top 1%). The majority of those small business owners have less than 50 employees and they primarily do business in their community. That means the jobs they create are in their community. They invest in their community.

70% of people in this country work for small business and small business create 80% of all new jobs. Raise their taxes by 50k a year and a 50k a year employee will most probably be out of work.

Who says we are going to raise taxes $50k year on people making $100, $200 or even $300k per year.

You said, "Do the “rich” purchase more goods and services than the middle class? No they don’t." Actually, yes, they do. They consume more goods and services than the middle class. They have more discretionary income to do so.

On this point you are completely wrong and it pains me to hear this kind of rhetoric. If you think that the 1.5 million people in the top 1% spend more than the next 90% of the population you are way off base. We have a $13 trillion economy and you say that the top 1% (3,000,000) people will spend more than the 240,000,000 people that make up the middle class?

Chitown 2
Loco nails it when he said, "Do you remember when our brilliant congress put a high tax on luxury yachts? What happened? The wealthy not being stupid and not wanting to waste their hard earned money stopped buying yachts.

Ya' know, I couldn't care less about the yacht builders. I wish them well and believe me there will always be plenty of money around for them. But I do not see why the middle class, the people that make this country run, should not be
given the majority of the dough that the government is giving back to us.

The "rich" are not stupid, they spend their money wisely.

I have news for you; there are just as many stupid rich people as there are stupid middle class people. The percentage is exactly the same. I usually go with 80% of any population group is stupid at any one time.

Over tax them and they take their money offshore to invest in more favorable tax environments. That kills the economy.

Okay, we will over tax them and they can take their money anywhere they want. The middle class will do what it has always done, drive this country forward. Create new business and create new millionaires.

Here's a clue, over 10 years the tax cuts give $500 billion to the top 1% of the population. 3 million people.

The middle class (80%) of the population will receive $500 billion in tax cuts. Now makes the top 1% more qualified to spend their money than 80% of the population.

45cal
If you yake all of the prople thatmake over $50,000/year and take all of their money, it would run the Federal government for 11 days.

If you took that money it would be around $13 Trillion, give or take a few bucks. The federal budget is somewhere around $3 trillion/year.

Rough numbers, just kind of hogging the basic facts around.

What kind of 45 cal have you got?

Obama's Marxism
The liberal left in this country wouldn't understand economics if it punched them in the face. I would love to know how many stupid liberals blindly follow Obama who have retirement accounts at work. These dummies don't realize that Obama's capital gains tax increase would have a world of negative impact on them! How utterly stupid can one be?! Another thing I love is how liberals say that republicans like to give tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas. Companies don't ship jobs overseas - they're CHASED overseas by high taxes and regulations. And who's good for doing both? Liberal democrats! Rush Limbaugh is right: Ignorance is the most expensive commodity we pay for. And if Obama gets into office, bend over and grab your ankles.

loco
Yes I remember the yacht tax. It was eventually repealed when the odious drunkard Ted Kennedy wanted to buy a yacht, so he used his position of power to pressure the other members of Congress to vote for the repeal. Truly disgusting.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.