Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

This was a topic I wanted to address and after a bit of research saw that CATO already has. The points that need to be made are:

1. An Income Tax is not a Tax on Wealth or the Wealthy.
2. Obama's high tax rate on high income is actually a Wealth Prevention tax! It prevents poor people from becoming wealthy.

What Obama's tax does is destroy the American dream by making it impossible for people who are not already wealthy to become wealthy. What kind of hope is that???

1 posted on 09/04/2008 9:51:12 AM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Always Right
Sowell discusses this in considerable detail:


2 posted on 09/04/2008 9:57:29 AM PDT by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
some have argued for a wealth tax, but that doesn't work either.

Usually, wealth has already been taxed during its accumulation. To tax it again on a yearly basis is absurd.

3 posted on 09/04/2008 10:01:06 AM PDT by Go Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right

Properly defined, an income tax is a tax on the acquisition of wealth.

Since the “rich” are already wealthy, they may not have appreciable taxable income, and thus may not in fact pay any significant tax. Secondly, the wealthy can afford to use tax-free instruments like tax-free municipal bonds and so forth, such that they do not have any taxable income, or that that taxable income may be small when considered in the context of their entire income.

Also, those who may earn $250K may not earn that for many years such as a practicing professional attorney or even MD. The entrepreneur, may make that in a single year and make less in the years preceding and following such an event.

This is what the royalists in Europe have done to prevent the rabble (aka newly rich) from invading their enclaves like Monte Carlo and keeping them as surfs and peasants and taxpayers.

If one were able to keep the fruits of one’s labors, one might not have to work until 67 years old. You could make good living and in 20 to 30 years leave the labor market for a comfortable life. I know the money that has been stolen from me in taxes would if properly invested like the other monies I have managed to save, would allow me to leave the workforce next year after 30 years. As it stands now, I will have to work until the day I die (family history suggests that my demise will be at age 67).


4 posted on 09/04/2008 10:08:44 AM PDT by Ouderkirk (I will not vote for Obama not because he is black, but because he is RED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right
The second family is clearly far better off financially than the first family, yet many in the U.S. Congress, including Sen. Barack Obama, want to increase taxes on the first (and poorer) family and not on the wealthier family.

Not to worry. Obama's policies (which I detest -- don't get the wrong impression) are more evenhanded than this would indicate. He taxes heavily and directly the income of the first family. His policies will also bring about inflation and dollar debasement, which will tax the much larger principal of the second family. Everybody takes it in he shorts. The second family just doesn't get to write a check--their nest egg is nibbled away just the same.

5 posted on 09/04/2008 10:39:44 AM PDT by Pearls Before Swine (Is /sarc really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right

“They want to tax those (who make more than $250,000 a year) who are trying to become rich, while preserving the status for those who already have wealth.”

Heh, I find that revelation amusing. People think that by increasing taxes on the “rich” are heling them, yet they’re helping the people they hate. Wonder how long it’ll take that to sink in?


6 posted on 09/05/2008 6:29:22 AM PDT by RWB Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Always Right

What he should be taxing is consumption, but that would be “fair” and therefore note result int he outcome that Obama and his liberal brethren want.


9 posted on 09/05/2008 11:30:41 AM PDT by tcostell (MOLON LABE - http://freenj.blogspot.com - RadioFree NJ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson