The Tax Shift

TheMercenary · 10-31-2008, 01:00 PM

A friends comments.

"Obama knows or should know that there is no way he can finance his new programs by increasing the burden on the top 5%, even to the point of absurdity. He will raise taxes on everyone and just call it something else. Come to think of it, by raising taxes on corporations (all the smart people know that corporations don't really pay taxes, they just pass it on as the cost of doing business and raise the price of goods) he will have already broken his promise to not raise taxes on the botttom 95%."RR

(da meat)
Obama and the Tax Tipping Point
How long before taxpayers are pushed too far?

What happens when the voter in the exact middle of the earnings spectrum receives more in benefits from Washington than he pays in taxes? Economists Allan Meltzer and Scott Richard posed this question 27 years ago. We may soon enough know the answer.

Barack Obama is offering voters strong incentives to support higher taxes and bigger government. This could be the magic income-redistribution formula Democrats have long sought.

Sen. Obama is promising $500 and $1,000 gift-wrapped packets of money in the form of refundable tax credits. These will shift the tax demographics to the tipping point where half of all voters will receive a cash windfall from Washington and an overwhelming majority will gain from tax hikes and more government spending.

In 2006, the latest year for which we have Census data, 220 million Americans were eligible to vote and 89 million -- 40% -- paid no income taxes. According to the Tax Policy Center (a joint venture of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute), this will jump to 49% when Mr. Obama's cash credits remove 18 million more voters from the tax rolls. What's more, there are an additional 24 million taxpayers (11% of the electorate) who will pay a minimal amount of income taxes -- less than 5% of their income and less than $1,000 annually.

In all, three out of every five voters will pay little or nothing in income taxes under Mr. Obama's plans and gain when taxes rise on the 40% that already pays 95% of income tax revenues.

The plunder that the Democrats plan to extract from the "very rich" -- the 5% that earn more than $250,000 and who already pay 60% of the federal income tax bill -- will never stretch to cover the expansive programs Mr. Obama promises.

What next? A core group of Obama enthusiasts -- those educated professionals who applaud the "fairness" of their candidate's tax plans -- will soon see their $100,000-$150,000 incomes targeted. As entitlements expand and a self-interested majority votes, the higher tax brackets will kick in at lower levels down the ladder, all the way to households with a $75,000 income.

Calculating how far society's top earners can be pushed before they stop (or cut back on) producing is difficult. But the incentives are easy to see. Voters who benefit from government programs will push for higher tax rates on higher earners -- at least until those who power the economy and create jobs and wealth stop working, stop investing, or move out of the country.

Other nations have tried the ideology of fairness in the place of incentives and found that reward without work is a recipe for decline. In the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s, Margaret Thatcher took on the unions and slashed taxes to restore growth and jobs in Great Britain. In Germany a few years ago, Social Democrat Gerhard Schroeder defied his party's dogma and loosened labor's grip on the economy to end stagnation. And more recently in France, Nicolas Sarkozy was swept to power on a platform of restoring flexibility to the economy.

The sequence is always the same. High-tax, big-spending policies force the economy to lose momentum. Then growth in government spending outstrips revenues. Fiscal and trade deficits soar. Public debt, excessive taxation and unemployment follow. The central bank tries to solve the problem by printing money. International competitiveness is lost and the currency depreciates. The system stagnates. And then a frightened electorate returns conservatives to power.

The economic tides will not stand still while Washington experiments with European-type social democracy, even though the dollar's role as the global reserve currency will buy some time. Our trademark competitive advantage will be lost, and once lost, it will be hard to regain. There are too many emerging economies focused on prosperity and not redistribution for the U.S. to easily recapture its role of global economic leader.

Tomorrow's children may come to question why their parents sold their birthright for a mess of "fairness" -- whatever that will signify when jobs are scarce and American opportunity is no longer the envy of the world.

Mr. Lerrick is a professor of economics at Carnegie Mellon University and a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122463231048556587.html

TheMercenary · 10-31-2008, 01:01 PM

Don't think tax rates matter to business decisions? Ask H. Wayne Huizenga, the owner of the Miami Dolphins, who declared earlier this week that he intends to sell up to half his ownership in the NFL franchise before next year. Why? Because as he told a Florida newspaper, Barack Obama "wants to double the capital gains tax, or almost double it. I'd rather give it to charity than to him."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122533091992582863.html

Pico and ME · 10-31-2008, 01:11 PM

Yeah right, he'd rather NOT give it to the the county that supports his effin team. What a loser.

classicman · 10-31-2008, 01:15 PM

Exactly Pico - Now you got it. He would rather decide who to donate his money to - Not the Gov't.

Shawnee123 · 10-31-2008, 01:15 PM

Sounds like a flaming asshole to me, yep.

Apropos.

Oh, look...there's Pokey, following Gumby around to the end.

TheMercenary · 10-31-2008, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

Oh, look...there's Pokey, following Gumby around to the end.

Why do you have to say that? You like flame wars?

TheMercenary · 10-31-2008, 01:21 PM

Well I guess if you pay x-millions of dollars for your own team, you might feel a bit put off if one day you woke up and the gobberment say gimmie half your profits. Yea, I'd sell. I'd look for an overseas buyer.

lookout123 · 10-31-2008, 01:24 PM

I'd sell just because it's a loser team living on the coattails of a bunch of guys in 1972.

oh, and increased capital gains taxes are BS.

TheMercenary · 10-31-2008, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123

I'd sell just because it's a loser team living on the coattails of a bunch of guys in 1972.

oh, and increased capital gains taxes are BS.

Thank God the only real capital gains we will ever get as a lump sum came this year and not next.

Shawnee123 · 10-31-2008, 01:33 PM

Pssst, you can't READ me if you really have me on ignore, Pokey.

Oh, and about you not craving validation? You've been crying since the whole thing started. "What should I do? Please tell me what you think." Which isn't really the same thing as being an attention whore. I get all the attention I want, and discard what I don't, which you should know from the time you pretended to be all alone and sad to get attention, until it came out you're a big liar. That's when I started being suspicious of you and your motives, and have become more keenly aware of how you play around like a child (when it comes to social issues) or a pubescent teenager (when it comes to relationships.)

You don't want to push me on this. Whatever you think you can do to make me miserable on the Cellar, I got right here in the palm of my hand as well.

TheMercenary · 10-31-2008, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

Pssst, you can't READ me if you really have me on ignore, Pokey.

Psst, he is reading my quotes of your comments I believe. I have people on ignore and that is the only way I see their comments.

Shawnee123 · 10-31-2008, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Psst, he is reading my quotes of your comments I believe. I have people on ignore and that is the only way I see their comments.

So he should get his handy dandy blinders out. They usually work for him. :p

classicman · 10-31-2008, 01:26 PM

Lets see perhaps because she knows I have her on ignore, wouldn't have seen it and therefore couldn't respond. BTW thanks for quoting it.

Here is my response:

I've put myself and my "unpopular opinions" out here infinitely more than you, all the while knowing they differ from most other posters. I'm looking for that interaction. That exchange of ideology, opinions thoughts and insights. I'm not like you looking for validation from people on the internet that you so desperately crave yet apparently do not have. I'm obviously not trying to win any popularity contest. If I were I just be another attention whore like you.

TheMercenary · 10-31-2008, 01:34 PM

I wish this site was updated because it has all the elements I am interested in seeing. I bet the graphs would not change nor the percents, only the raw numbers.

http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/

HungLikeJesus · 10-31-2008, 01:40 PM

But who paid for his stadium? I'm sure he was happy to accept public funds for that.

10-31-2008, 01:00 PM	#1
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	The Tax Shift A friends comments. "Obama knows or should know that there is no way he can finance his new programs by increasing the burden on the top 5%, even to the point of absurdity. He will raise taxes on everyone and just call it something else. Come to think of it, by raising taxes on corporations (all the smart people know that corporations don't really pay taxes, they just pass it on as the cost of doing business and raise the price of goods) he will have already broken his promise to not raise taxes on the botttom 95%."RR (da meat) Obama and the Tax Tipping Point How long before taxpayers are pushed too far? What happens when the voter in the exact middle of the earnings spectrum receives more in benefits from Washington than he pays in taxes? Economists Allan Meltzer and Scott Richard posed this question 27 years ago. We may soon enough know the answer. Barack Obama is offering voters strong incentives to support higher taxes and bigger government. This could be the magic income-redistribution formula Democrats have long sought. Sen. Obama is promising $500 and $1,000 gift-wrapped packets of money in the form of refundable tax credits. These will shift the tax demographics to the tipping point where half of all voters will receive a cash windfall from Washington and an overwhelming majority will gain from tax hikes and more government spending. In 2006, the latest year for which we have Census data, 220 million Americans were eligible to vote and 89 million -- 40% -- paid no income taxes. According to the Tax Policy Center (a joint venture of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute), this will jump to 49% when Mr. Obama's cash credits remove 18 million more voters from the tax rolls. What's more, there are an additional 24 million taxpayers (11% of the electorate) who will pay a minimal amount of income taxes -- less than 5% of their income and less than $1,000 annually. In all, three out of every five voters will pay little or nothing in income taxes under Mr. Obama's plans and gain when taxes rise on the 40% that already pays 95% of income tax revenues. The plunder that the Democrats plan to extract from the "very rich" -- the 5% that earn more than $250,000 and who already pay 60% of the federal income tax bill -- will never stretch to cover the expansive programs Mr. Obama promises. What next? A core group of Obama enthusiasts -- those educated professionals who applaud the "fairness" of their candidate's tax plans -- will soon see their $100,000-$150,000 incomes targeted. As entitlements expand and a self-interested majority votes, the higher tax brackets will kick in at lower levels down the ladder, all the way to households with a $75,000 income. Calculating how far society's top earners can be pushed before they stop (or cut back on) producing is difficult. But the incentives are easy to see. Voters who benefit from government programs will push for higher tax rates on higher earners -- at least until those who power the economy and create jobs and wealth stop working, stop investing, or move out of the country. Other nations have tried the ideology of fairness in the place of incentives and found that reward without work is a recipe for decline. In the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s, Margaret Thatcher took on the unions and slashed taxes to restore growth and jobs in Great Britain. In Germany a few years ago, Social Democrat Gerhard Schroeder defied his party's dogma and loosened labor's grip on the economy to end stagnation. And more recently in France, Nicolas Sarkozy was swept to power on a platform of restoring flexibility to the economy. The sequence is always the same. High-tax, big-spending policies force the economy to lose momentum. Then growth in government spending outstrips revenues. Fiscal and trade deficits soar. Public debt, excessive taxation and unemployment follow. The central bank tries to solve the problem by printing money. International competitiveness is lost and the currency depreciates. The system stagnates. And then a frightened electorate returns conservatives to power. The economic tides will not stand still while Washington experiments with European-type social democracy, even though the dollar's role as the global reserve currency will buy some time. Our trademark competitive advantage will be lost, and once lost, it will be hard to regain. There are too many emerging economies focused on prosperity and not redistribution for the U.S. to easily recapture its role of global economic leader. Tomorrow's children may come to question why their parents sold their birthright for a mess of "fairness" -- whatever that will signify when jobs are scarce and American opportunity is no longer the envy of the world. Mr. Lerrick is a professor of economics at Carnegie Mellon University and a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122463231048556587.html __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

10-31-2008, 01:01 PM	#2
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	Don't think tax rates matter to business decisions? Ask H. Wayne Huizenga, the owner of the Miami Dolphins, who declared earlier this week that he intends to sell up to half his ownership in the NFL franchise before next year. Why? Because as he told a Florida newspaper, Barack Obama "wants to double the capital gains tax, or almost double it. I'd rather give it to charity than to him." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122533091992582863.html __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

10-31-2008, 01:15 PM	#4
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	Exactly Pico - Now you got it. He would rather decide who to donate his money to - Not the Gov't. __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

10-31-2008, 01:15 PM	#5
Shawnee123 Why, you're a regular Alfred E Einstein, ain't ya? Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 21,206	Sounds like a flaming asshole to me, yep. Apropos. Oh, look...there's Pokey, following Gumby around to the end. __________________ A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones who need the advice. --Bill Cosby

10-31-2008, 01:21 PM	#7
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	Well I guess if you pay x-millions of dollars for your own team, you might feel a bit put off if one day you woke up and the gobberment say gimmie half your profits. Yea, I'd sell. I'd look for an overseas buyer. __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

10-31-2008, 01:11 PM	#3
Pico and ME Are you knock-kneed? Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Middle Hoosierland Posts: 3,549	Yeah right, he'd rather NOT give it to the the county that supports his effin team. What a loser.

10-31-2008, 01:24 PM	#8
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	I'd sell just because it's a loser team living on the coattails of a bunch of guys in 1972. oh, and increased capital gains taxes are BS. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

10-31-2008, 01:33 PM	#10
Shawnee123 Why, you're a regular Alfred E Einstein, ain't ya? Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 21,206	Pssst, you can't READ me if you really have me on ignore, Pokey. Oh, and about you not craving validation? You've been crying since the whole thing started. "What should I do? Please tell me what you think." Which isn't really the same thing as being an attention whore. I get all the attention I want, and discard what I don't, which you should know from the time you pretended to be all alone and sad to get attention, until it came out you're a big liar. That's when I started being suspicious of you and your motives, and have become more keenly aware of how you play around like a child (when it comes to social issues) or a pubescent teenager (when it comes to relationships.) You don't want to push me on this. Whatever you think you can do to make me miserable on the Cellar, I got right here in the palm of my hand as well. __________________ A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones who need the advice. --Bill Cosby Last edited by Shawnee123; 10-31-2008 at 01:38 PM.

10-31-2008, 01:26 PM	#13
classicman barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy. Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 23,401	Lets see perhaps because she knows I have her on ignore, wouldn't have seen it and therefore couldn't respond. BTW thanks for quoting it. Here is my response: I've put myself and my "unpopular opinions" out here infinitely more than you, all the while knowing they differ from most other posters. I'm looking for that interaction. That exchange of ideology, opinions thoughts and insights. I'm not like you looking for validation from people on the internet that you so desperately crave yet apparently do not have. I'm obviously not trying to win any popularity contest. If I were I just be another attention whore like you. __________________ "like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

10-31-2008, 01:34 PM	#14
TheMercenary “Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo” Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Savannah, Georgia Posts: 21,393	I wish this site was updated because it has all the elements I am interested in seeing. I bet the graphs would not change nor the percents, only the raw numbers. http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/ __________________ Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!

10-31-2008, 01:40 PM	#15
HungLikeJesus Only looks like a disaster tourist Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: above 7,000 feet Posts: 7,208	But who paid for his stadium? I'm sure he was happy to accept public funds for that. __________________ Keep Your Bodies Off My Lawn SteveDallas's Random Thread Picker.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)