Posted on 06/29/2011 9:04:14 PM PDT by conservativebuckeye
Ben Stein was on with Laura Ingraham, who was filling in for BOR. He was on there advocating massive tax increases on the wealthy. He claimed that the greatest economic growth in our nation's history occurred when taxes on the wealthy were highest. I always thought he was a smart guy, but I guess I was wrong. Did he sleep through the 80s?
Ben Stein is usually pretty sane. This was a major brain fart.
Just think of Herb Stein and price controls during the Nixon Presidency. The Father wrote the policy and the Son wrote the words. LOL
He’s been advocating higher taxes for years.
I think everybody forgets sometimes that there are 40% of Americans who PAY NO TAXES WHATSOEVER!...39% of those get three times their money back by filing earned income. And that the upper tax brackets already pays 49% of ALL the taxes paid in this country.
And lest you forget, there’s not a dime of taxes paid in this country that the wealthy didn’t have to risk their money to earn first and share that wealth with their employees for an honest day’s work. Remind yourself that the money you pay your taxes with was first EARNED by the wealthy’s innovation and without them you don’t have a pot to pixx in. Unless of course you’ve created your own company and your own product to sell, which gives you all the protections that the wealthy have in those tax loopholes.
Government employees don’t even have a frarking dime that somebody else didn’t earn first.
I happen to love the wealthy. The wealthier they are, there’s more opportunity for me to make a good comfortable living doing an honest days work, and earn with them. And I refuse to play the hate games that liberals play while pretending they don’t know where the HELL their own money comes from. Especially the leeches in Washington, DC and government jobs.
If wealthy liberals in Hollyweird want to rant because other capitalists just like them make the majority of their money off the middle class, we can certainly fix their tax bracket by not buying the bang, bang, shoot ‘em up and porn flicks and raunchy music. Otherwise, if they think they’re not taxed enough, they are certainly able to write an extra check to the government and send it in at anytime they want to.
I hated tax accounting, but you can't make big money that way, because you disrupt so many money carts...
I do have many reasons to state this truth as the biggest problem with American tax system... believe me the little guy still is earning less than a Million... I did not mean to offend you, only our crude tax system that makes it so easy to not see why it is so one sided
the rich I could care less about...but if Stein says to tax them more, than I think the opposite should be done...
No, he has said many times that he himself should pay much higher taxes
Ok, now I finally finished the clip you sent me, and I have to say I disagree with most of what Ben Steain said. That having been said, I have to say that he is correct that a low tax rate does not necessarilly mean there will be economic growth, but I have to qualify that.
I’ll use the term “Economic freedom.” Economic freedom (which includes less or no taxation), is what allows for an economic growth. A person, or society, must be industrious and have incentive to be industrious to be prosperous. So, if there is more taxation, there is less economic freedom because people cannot keep their money, and thus, an economic downturn. However, you can lower the tax rate to zero and still have no economic growth. This could be due to regulation or a number of other factors (resources, etc.). Increased regulation and control (permits, EPA nazi policies, denied leases, zoning, on and on) also stifle economic freedom. So, while I agree that a low tax rate is beneficial to economic growth, it is not the only factor.
Hence, with less regulation, or a sky high demand (as I mentioned in the mid 1900’s, we had the manufacturing base to cater to the world, and the demand to buy our goods—now neither is in our favor), we could still have growth amid high taxation. However, we have ZERO favorable conditions going for us at this time, so I agree that lowering the tax rate would not necessarily paint a better economic picture (frankly, the U.S. economy as it is is toast, because it’s only based on foreign subsidization of our gov.).
We have a whole mess of problems, and I can guarantee that a higher tax rate will solve none of them. What the U.S. needs is economic freedom, and that includes a lot less taxes. In other times, we may have been able to live with them, with other factors offsetting them, but right now we can’t afford ANYTHING stiffling what’s left of the sinking economy.
The top 1% of income earners paid $400B in Federal Income Tax in 2008, out of $2.5T income. And that doesn’t even count the portion of the $300B in corporate taxes that could be attributed to them as shareholders in corporations. You consider that “not much” in taxes. 1% of the people paying 40% of the income tax is somehow “not much” ? This 1% earns only 20% of all income, but pays 40% of the income tax, while 50% of the people pay NOTHING. You need to go to IRS.gov and look at the tax stats before you spout such nonsense as “the elites don’t pay much in the way of taxes”.
“Government employees don’t even have a frarking dime that somebody else didn’t earn first.”
Bingo, and at all levels, Federal, state and local. I read (but am unable to find the link), that between all federal, state and local governmental employees and those paid by government contracts, 7 of 12 in the workforce are considered “Government” employees. I dunno if it is true, but based on just a few numbers, I think it likely. When you factor in the millions of Teachers, Military, and Police/Fire, they add up into the millions, for just 3 groups (Workforce is over 100 Million). Let alone city works, administrators, lawyers, and on and on.
If true (debatable, but I believe it), then each producer is paying for himself/herself and another person and a half. I cannot fathom the prosperity our country would have if everyone was producing and not mooching. It would be hardly the world we live in at all.
$400B/2.5T= 16%. Also, it’s paid after all expenditures, unlike those who are paying it on their income, and not through corporation tax sheltering.
I’m not unfamiliar with statistics. And the 50% who pay no federal income tax are paying oodles through opportunity cost. End all entitlements, and create only a consumption based tax, with NO allowances/deductions or credits, and eliminate all government spending, and you’ll create freedom. Until then, the elites (ala George Soros) merely manipulate the ignorant into thinking the politicians are cause of the problems.
Ben would be better off putting down Mother Jones and picking up a WSJ. Back in April the WSJ pointed out that taxing the rich 100% would only raise only $938 billion. Not nearly enough to cover just this years spending bill.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704621304576267113524583554.html
If the Democrats really wished to redistribute money from the wealthy they would advocate an asset tax or intangibles tax in addition to the income tax. Take a percentage of the net worth of people above a certain threshold. For example a 2% tax on net worth would raise a considerable amount of money. Take Oprah Winfrey, reported to have a net worth of $2.4 billion. A 2% “wealth” tax would raise $48 million per year. Barack Obama’s $10,000,000 net worth would generate $200,000 per year. George Soro’s has a net worth of $14 billion which would raise $280 million per year at 2% and $1.4 billion at 10%. Wouldn’t that only be fair?
The liberal millionaires and billionaires will gladly accept an increase on marginal tax rates and then use their influence to work loopholes into the system to reduce the bite of the taxman. However, put a true asset or net worth tax on them and you will hear the engines fire up on the private jets as they take their wealth out of the country to other nations.
While I am not an advocate of increases in marginal tax rates nor a wealth tax in a perverse sort of way I’d like to see the Republicans aggressively propose a wealth tax and watch the Democrats squirm when their wealthy backers say “no way”.
For anyone who reads “Ben Stein’s Diary” in The American Spectator, this will come as no surprise. He’s been getting more and more liberal in his views over the years, and he has suggested more than once that rich people can afford to pay more taxes.
He has the usual liberal rich-guy guilt. And, from what I can see, he should. He gets parts in Hollywood productions because of his connections. His politics are obviously tailored to please those people. He claims he doesn’t get paid much for those appearances, but they are clearly important to him or he wouldn’t do them.
He was claiming in one of his recent “Diary” entries that he isn’t rich. But by reading other diary entries, you find that he has several houses (Malibu, Palm Springs, and a place somewhere near Hollywood). He also used to have a place in Sandpoint, Idaho, but he may have gotten rid of that one, because he hasn’t mentioned it in a while.
I keep wondering how long The American Spectator is going to keep carrying his column. His politics do not align with the other contributors in that magazine. It’s weird to read someone pushing for higher taxes in a conservative magazine.
16% is 16% and 0% is 0%. $400B extracted from 1.5M people is an average of $267K in Federal Income Tax from each person in that group. Government is the only good or service where two people who receive exactly the same item are charged wildly different prices — and do not have the option of declining. How’d you like it if the grocery store demanded to know how much money you make before they set YOUR “special” price for a gallon of milk ?
Even a Sales Tax would not be “fair” to the wealthy, it would just be more fair than what we have.
A 10% sales tax on all retail goods and services would collect more revenue than both individual and corporate income taxes. I’m all for eliminating these income taxes completely. Also eliminate the employee side of the payroll tax and simply have the employer pay 10% on all labor and dividend expenditures to fund any social safety net (replace SS with a poverty-level wage replacement at retirement age, and people can save the 7.65% they were paying in FICA to flesh out their retirement). Together, these two taxes would more than replace the existing Federal Income and Payroll Tax revenues while making the US the cleanest tax environment for businesses to operate in.
PS. The reason the “wealthy” and corporations were able to “pay” high tax rates in the 50’s & 60’s was because they could pass those costs along to consumers in what was essentially a captive market, ie. before the global economy stocked the shelves of WalMart and the auto showrooms. If American producers try to pass along tax increases today, a foreign competitor eats their lunch, and another American business goes overseas or bites the dust. Democrats have always understood the wealthy and corporations would pass along the tax costs and they count on it so they can vilify the “wealthy” and buy votes from the “poor” — they’ve scapegoated the wealthy when they knew all along the impact would really hit the poor and middle classes.
Ben Stein is letting his guilt show.
The fact of the matter is that no amount of taxes extracted from anyone is “fair” but if someone chooses to have government of any type, then it must be funded one way or another. If you look at the history of the Fed and the current tax code, then you know that the elites (most wealthy of the “wealthy), are the very people drafting the laws that benefit themselves the most.
I’m not a libertarian, so I’m not going to pretend no one should pay taxes. The fact is that unless (not going to happen, until perhaps the Second COming of Jesus Christ) people are willing to perform their civic duties for free and be true public servants, then government will cost SOMETHING, in monetary terms. So in terms of fairness, I believe that a tax, tariff, call it what you will, on goods can be the ONLY constitutional tax, when apportioned (the only legally obtained tax). Because (at the FEDERAL level only, states have their own constitutions) people are meant to be able to opt out of a tax, by not purchasing the good or service that is taxed.
I think we agree far more than disagree.
Regarding:
“Also eliminate the employee side of the payroll tax and simply have the employer pay 10% on all labor and dividend expenditures to fund any social safety net (replace SS with a poverty-level wage replacement at retirement age, and people can save the 7.65% they were paying in FICA to flesh out their retirement). Together, these two taxes would more than replace the existing Federal Income and Payroll Tax revenues while making the US the cleanest tax environment for businesses to operate in.”
I’m not in favor of any socialist garbage (all social welfare programs included), nor income tax (tax upon labor), whatsoever. I realize that it has somehow been indoctrinated into us that it’s necessary, but I was blessed to have been raised around and by people old enough to remember a time before the entitlement programs. Additionally, the history of the 16th ammendment is replete with shady deals, and unproven powers, which is why we are continually told that paying Federal personal income is “voluntary.”
And I concur with your entire last paragraph.
You hit the nail on the head. There are all kinds of perks corporatists give themselves. IIRC, in the late 90’s (?), my father was telling me about the new tax laws that affected if say a company had a private (company) yacht or such that only the executives were privy to use, they were to make access to the yacht available to anyone in the company in order to not personally pay taxes for the asset as part of the executive pay. (That sentence was garbled, but hopefully understandable). So, the executives solution was to decide that it was a “company” asset, but that anyone who chose to use it, had to pay a pro rata amount of the property taxes while they used it, meaning they may have to pay a few thousand dollars for the day or whatever the cost was, thereby eliminating the ability of the “lesser” employees’ access to the property. The lesser paid employees could not afford the pro rata property tax, but the executives could, allowing them to keep the perks they gave themselves.
Essentially they loopholed the loophole.
“And all this while the public sector thrives on big salaries and benefits not enjoyed in the private sector.”
Truer words have never been spoken. I’m in favor of eliminating at least 9/10 public sector jobs, and creating a “term limits” of sorts on them. In my opinion (and I know it’s probably an unpopular one), there should be NO lifetime government job of any type. And I don’t think there should be ANY retirement or pension system of ANY kind to ANY government employee. Give them their wage and let them decide how they wish to prepare for their future.
There should be no looming pension crises, and unbalanced budgets, because someone was promised something down the line in the name of political expediency.
Yes the tax system is rigged, but it’s rigged as a means to buy the votes of those who get the deductions. Get off your high horse and smell the roses. Congress will never agree to a flat tax or a consumption tax because it takes away their ability to buy votes.
Yes, the rich are able to take advantage of the tax system but that’s only because they can hire really good accountants, but the system is not “rigged to the rich..” per se. Of course, if you define the “rich” as anyone successfully engaged in private enterprise, then I guess in a demented sense, you could interpret the system as being rigged to accommodate those people. That would say far more about you than about the tax system.
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.