Posted on 03/27/2010 7:41:33 AM PDT by Dallas59
After the Senate passed a "fix-it" bill Thursday to make changes to the new health care law, Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the influential Finance Committee, said the overhaul was an "income shift" to help the poor.
As Democrats tout the moral underpinnings of the federal health care system overhaul -- ensuring health care coverage for nearly all Americans -- one senator appeared to go off message when he said the legislation would address the "mal-distribution of income in America."
After the Senate passed a "fix-it" bill Thursday to make changes to the new health care law, Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the influential Finance Committee, said the overhaul was an "income shift" to help the poor.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
What we really have going on in this country is a MAL-DISTRIBUTION of EFFORT.
I should also add that not only are the wealthy mostly unaffected by progressive income taxes, but those on the receiving end never seem to receive enough to get out of poverty either. A poor person would need a very high income indeed to actually escape poverty and accumulate wealth.
Really? Well, I don't see them beating down anybody's doors to pay theirs. Why don't you ask the "wealthy" (which by an ever decreasing standard might include those who make 100K in a few years time) how they feel about taxes?
And I should add that I don’t think you get sarcasm very well.
Well, Max, why not set an example for all us peasants, and turn over 90% of your wealth to the government so it can be redistributed to those who need it more than you do.
As I recall, Hussein once said reparations “don’t go far enough”.
We’re seeing another step in Hussein’s grand plan to incorporate sweeping reparations through socialism.
Consider a person with a $75,000 per year job who decides to take on another job to help pay for his children's education. Lets suppose his second job also pays $75,000. He is now working 80+ hours per week to pay for his kids' college. His total income is now $150,000 per year and he has moved into a punitive tax bracket. If his wife works they will be subject to the AMT.
Is that fair?
Many small business owners work 80+ hours per week. If they make $200,000 should they be punitively taxed for their work ethic?
The current tax code is designed to punish success and reward failure. Is that what we really want?
It’s really the redistribution of poverty.
Plus, a great deal of that wealth always sticks to the fingers of the redistributors.
Just when America needs everyone pulling as hard as they can, those of us who can decide for ourselves how much we want to produce are going to start easing the throttle back. Of course this is exactly the result the commie bastards are trying to produce. Keep your arms and legs inside the car folks!
The answer is that small business man needs to let most of his workforce go and throttle back to the least amount he really needs. Go Galt.
This is how they really speak behind those closed doors when they feel that the proletariat is not listening. True Marxists...all of them. They MUST BE ROOTED OUT!
So many public figures on the left are “slipping up” and saying this outright, that I’m wondering if they’re doing it on purpose to get the “shock factor” out of the way in their ongoing effort to have people accept socialism as a fact, as a good thing. So that they can finally come out of the closet about it, be open about it, without being harmed politically. There just may be enough stupid parasites in this country that it might work. These parasites already accept every facet of socialist government except the label.
I wasn’t criticizing your original point. I was simply adding to it that even though many people (not necessarily you) use the term wealth redistribution, it’s not wealth so much as income that’s being shared.
I also agree the wealthy (especially rich leftists) don’t seem inclined to give up their lives of comfort in order to help the people they claim to care so much about. How many of those rich senators on the left dispose of their OWN homes, investments, etc for the cause.
If you already have wealth, you just aren’t hurt the same way as someone who is trying to build wealth. A wealthy person could live off their investments and avoid high taxable income. You or I, should we attempt to build wealth, have to earn far more in order to pay our cost of living as well as come up with something extra to invest.
One question that liberals dodge is: "Why are the chronically indigent in that condition?" The answer is that early on in their lives they make bad lifestyle decisions that inhibit any chance of success: dropping out of school, drug and alcohol abuse, teenage out-of-wedlock births and criminal activities, to name a few. Of course, being born stupid into a lazy family culture doesn't help either.
The Leftists have taken their clothes off and have crossed the Rubicon for the attack! We will have many more defensive struggles against the left including amnesty, energy taxes, card check, but despite that, we need stay on the offensive with the impending constitutional crisis caused by the progressives.
This is the crisis created (I believe intentionally by the Left) by the establishment of a health care mandate. The mandates as federal law essentially establish a new precedent for the federal government to force individuals to engage in contacts with others. If left unchallenged, federal power will also be unchallenged. This must not slip out of the headlines and we need to redouble our efforts to insist on state statutes and amendments that nullify the mandates. We need more state AG lawsuits. All governors and presidential candidates must take the pledge to de-fund, interpose, and issue executive orders against the mandates (and any other unconstitutional aspects of 0bamacare) on behalf of their citizens.
At town halls, we must continue to demand answers from people like Queens Rep Anthony Weiner as to exactly how will you enforce your mandates? I believe that Weiner waffled because there may not be any statutory authority for the IRS because the mandate is not an income or payroll tax but is in effect a capitation tax and out of their jurisdiction. It is possible that congress may have to pass some Soviet style law giving the IRS the specific authority to fine, tax and penalize in this situation. Another winning debate for the Left? A chance for Rush to defy authoritarianism by publicly refusing to comply!
Politics is war without weapons. We cannot win this war through defensive action alone. History has given us numerous examples (the current war on terror, the Inchon landing in Korea and the Romans invading Carthage) that offense is needed for victory. They have exposed themselves. The Leftists are clearly our irreconcilable and mortal enemies.
“Well, Max, why not set an example for all us peasants, and turn over 90% of your wealth.....”
He supposedly owns more than 100,000 acres in Montana.
If he does, I wonder if he would like to sell about 50% of it and turn the proceeds over to the federal government?
Now, that would be integrity.
IMHO
You are correct. Every year for decades, the “charity indexes” show the poorest and most conservative states as being at the top in charitable giving, and the richest and most liberal being at the bottom.
Max Baucus? I prefer Baucus kept to a minimum.
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.