Ask how this will help

How will higher taxes lead to a more robust economy?

  • Follow Editorials

It may not have seemed like it when you stood in line at the store before Christmas, but experts say this was a deeply disappointing retail season.

Sales growth was expected to be 3 or 4 percent, and ended up being less than 1 percent: 0.7 percent, to be precise. That’s an anemic number reminiscent of the 2008 recession.

They cite several reasons for the slumping season, including wounded Northeast markets from Superstorm Sandy, a cloud of grief from the Newtown shooting – and gridlock in Washington that many fear could lead to higher taxes and perhaps even another recession.

This president has been quoted in the past as saying you shouldn’t raise taxes in a perilously weak economy, and yet higher taxes on upper-income Americans appears to be the width and breadth of his domestic agenda. And he looks prepared to crash the economy over the fiscal cliff in order to get them.

That may not come as a surprise to those who heard him say in a 2008 primary-election debate that he’d raise capital gains rates as a matter of fairness – even if the move brought in less revenue, as has historically happened.

No one has yet explained how higher taxes will help the economy. Indeed, it’s likely that siphoning more money out of the private economy and into the federal bureaucracy will only make things worse.

Yet, President Obama and other Washington Democrats have managed to bamboozle the media and much of the country into believing that the federal government and the economy are the same thing, and that things can get better if Washington can just get its hands on certain people’s bank accounts.

Economists of any political stripe can show you that no amount of taxes will satiate the federal government, which currently borrows about 40 cents of every dollar it spends. In short, we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

But Democrats appear
fatally allergic to thrift; they have no appetite for spending cuts whatsoever. And there can be little doubt that this president’s obsession with taxing those earning $250,000 or more cast a pall over the Christmas buying season, and is haunting tuned-in Americans even now.

It’s a bit silly to be so obsessed with “fairness” when the ship is threatening to go down – and when it’s clear that we can’t tax our way out of a spending addiction. Moreover, this notion that the “rich” don’t pay their fair share isn’t supported with any facts whatsoever.

For one thing, what is rich? Mr. Obama talks about taxing millionaires and billionaires, but his plan would tax couples at $250,000 and up, individuals at $200,000 and up. That’s hardly millionaires or billionaires, and it includes small business owners whose companies show a healthy cash flow but which are, in fact, barely getting by.

When recently given the chance by House Speaker John Boehner to actually tax “millionaires and billionaires,” Democrats declined. That’s odd, if that’s their goal.

In addition, nearly half the country pays no federal income taxes at all, and in 2009 the top 1 percent of earners paid 37 percent of taxes; the top 10 percent paid 70 percent of taxes.

Mr. Obama has yet to explain how that is so grossly unfair.

Or how grabbing more money for Washington will help the economy.

Rather than blindly push the president’s class-warfare agenda, when will the “mainstream” media ask him how it will improve the economy? When will they exhibit a modicum of the journalistic skepticism they’re supposed to show our leaders?

Comments (44) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
Riverman1
93608
Points
Riverman1 12/27/12 - 05:52 am
12
3
Forward

It’s not about the economy, but it’s about redistributing the wealth as with everything. It’s playing to the demographics of the Democrats.

The union pension funds, Obama care and welfare programs must be funded at all costs. Social security for those making too much will be cut next. The same with military retirements. If you don’t belong to a union with some bent nose thugs getting out the Democratic vote they’ll be coming for what you have. They'll Benghazi you. Forward.

Techfan
6462
Points
Techfan 12/27/12 - 06:46 am
4
17
We just had an example in the

We just had an example in the last presidential election that someone who makes $13 million and over $20 million per year can pay a tax rate of 13%-14%, and you can bet those were the 2 years that he had the highest percentage paid (in 2011, he purposely overpaid to keep the rate above 13%). Is that paying his "fair share" when the folks I work with who earn high 5- low 6 figures salaries are paying over a 20% rate plus paying payroll taxes? I guess it's ok because these are the "job creators". We see the jobs rolling in.

Riverman1
93608
Points
Riverman1 12/27/12 - 06:51 am
12
1
Technan

EVERYBODY pays the same capital gains tax rate.

Techfan
6462
Points
Techfan 12/27/12 - 07:02 am
5
12
"we have a spending problem,

"we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem."
We have revenue around $2.3 trillion. Of that $818 billion is payroll taxes and should be reserved for SS and Medicare.
That leaves $1.482 trillion. Our real military spending is $1.3-$1.4 trillion dollars, which miraculously equals about the same amount as what's left over after payroll taxes.
So, do we have revenue or a spending problem? If the AC is willing to eliminate the entire rest of the federal government, I guess you could say a spending problem. If, on the other hand, they think we should fund the judiciary, have roads, national parks, or any other function of the government, it has to be a revenue problem. That is, unless the AC sees the obvious in that the military industrial complex has done what Eisenhower warned us it would do. "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist." We spend roughly 50% of the world's entire military budget every year, year in and year out. The question is, how much does the AC want to cut military spending so there's enough left to operate the government? Probably none, especially if like every other community they fight to keep their federal dollars rollling in.

Riverman1
93608
Points
Riverman1 12/27/12 - 07:16 am
10
2
Enough?

"...enough left to operate the budget."

Heh. How in the world do you determine that? The figure jumps around like roaches in the Democratic Caucus room when the Raid comes out.

Riverman1
93608
Points
Riverman1 12/27/12 - 07:25 am
10
2
Democratic Party (non)Budget

The budget of the Democratic Party carried to fruition is confiscate all wealth and send the people to work on collective farms and forced labor projects. Make Pol Pot Secretary of Commerce.

Riverman1
93608
Points
Riverman1 12/27/12 - 07:51 am
12
3
The Democrats Won't Submit a Budget

That's because Democrats don't want their give-me constituents to get mad at any cuts. They can't submit a budget that makes sense anymore than a drunk can trying to balance his checkbook after a fifth of rum. They want the Republicans to be the ones responsible for cuts.

OpenCurtain
10049
Points
OpenCurtain 12/27/12 - 08:41 am
9
2
Tech fan you quote the millionaire paying 13%

Why not also quote the fact many donate $millions$ to charities and in this case $3.5 Million to various charities.

If I were a Millionaire I too would prefer to donate directly instead of using a Middle man, The Fed in this case, that uses over $2 for every $1 collected in taxes.

This why we have a $16,000,000,000,000.00 ($16T). Because the Fed wants more to spend more.

CBO FACT:
If we confiscated 100% of the top 10% of the American wealthly, it would run the USA for ONLY 16 days.

What do you propose we use to run the FED the other 351 days?

FACE IT
Our government needs to learn to live within OUR means, not theirs.

ymnbde
10662
Points
ymnbde 12/27/12 - 08:44 am
7
1
proportionate

is not the relationship between tax RATES and tax REVENUE. Past tax hikes have resulted in less revenue, past tax reductions have resulted in more revenue. If the richest counties in America voted for more government, one should be given pause to wonder... where does their money actually come from? The elimination of competition? Government subsidies? Our wonderful media, again, have allowed the hollywood storyline of rich people (my goodness they're so mean) to foster indignation in the poor people. Actual rich people, in the monetary limits described by our radical left, work more than 60 hours per week and are responsible for many jobs. They are the people that actually make things and make things work and they work hard doing it. They've worked hard at school or at learning a business or trade. Sure there are a few that have inherited money, or gotten lucky, but jealousy is no basis for a successful government.

OpenCurtain
10049
Points
OpenCurtain 12/27/12 - 08:50 am
9
0
A parting thought

The Left Wing Liberal way is NOT working
The Far Right Wing is NOT either.

Maybe it is time to get back to basics and get agendas out of government and run it according to the orginally put forth Constitution meaning.

Whatever else we do to fix this mess, we must 1st stop the constantly reinterpreting of the constitution, to meet each
new special social or business agenda?

Bizkit
35538
Points
Bizkit 12/27/12 - 08:47 am
5
0
Actually a 2011 study

Actually a 2011 study demonstrated about 45-47% of Americans pay no federal income tax-which doesn't mean that pay no taxes just no federal. Just one of may falsehoods in the diatribe.

OpenCurtain
10049
Points
OpenCurtain 12/27/12 - 08:56 am
6
0
the 2011 study omitted

while not INCOME TAXES....

But the average person still pays numerous hidden or tacked on taxes for purchases.

So a person even on government assistance is still paying hidden or direct federal taxes of 10 to 12%. Which are passed down into the product costs or directly example GAS, Beer, Liquor, wines, tires, and smokes.

OpenCurtain
10049
Points
OpenCurtain 12/27/12 - 09:11 am
8
0
Until we get Government

out of social building, economic steering
and institute a Flat Tax with ZERO deductions.

It will not be a fair or equal tax.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 12/27/12 - 09:48 am
7
4
Fair share? sheesh. So
Unpublished

Fair share? sheesh. So those paying zero income tax are paying their fair share? Those getting EIC are paying their fair share? Those who live off the government and pay zero taxes AT ALL are paying their fair share?

d1zmljqg
997
Points
d1zmljqg 12/27/12 - 09:49 am
4
6
"No one has yet explained how

"No one has yet explained how higher taxes will help the economy. Indeed, it’s likely that siphoning more money out of the private economy and into the federal bureaucracy will only make things worse."

The Bush tax cuts took money away from the Federal Revenue and eventually we found ouselves in a hole. We had had a balanced budget, and a tweak here and a tweak there the economy and the federal bureaucracy were running like a fine tuned machine. IMO I think Karl Rove and the Bush neo-cons thought that the budget surplus and projecting such surpluses for the future and giving the "so called" tax cuts would trickle down to create more jobs while maintaining a robust economy, but mainly keep neo-cons, right wingers and renegade Republicans in perpetual power. He huffed and he puffed and he blew the house down.

itsanotherday1
48303
Points
itsanotherday1 12/27/12 - 09:52 am
4
1
Bizkit

Were you talking about the editorial? If so, they clearly state federal income tax when referencing the ~half who don't pay.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 12/27/12 - 09:55 am
9
4
I appreciate when people use
Unpublished

I appreciate when people use buzzwords like "neo-con" over and over. It lets people know that very little of what they wrote is worth reading. Without those indicators, one might have missed the point that revenue went UP when Bush cut taxes, and might actually believe what the person posted as true. Thanks. Maybe if they start off with "military industrial complex" or another buzzword, it will help too.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 12/27/12 - 09:56 am
7
3
itsanotherday....also if your
Unpublished

itsanotherday....also if your sole source of "income" is from the govenrnment welfare, then you effectivly pay zero tax of any kind.....since it wasn't your money to begin with.

Bizkit
35538
Points
Bizkit 12/27/12 - 10:06 am
6
1
The article is accurate

The article is accurate describing Obama's wanting to raise capital gains taxes for "fairness"-despite the historical loss of revenue. Obama's mantra to tax the rich (as he denigrates them and dehumanizes them as thieves to warrant his discrimination) doesn't solve any economic problem. Obama is an ideologue who knows nothing of economics-he could care less. He has an agenda not a plan. The best thing that could happen to us is to fall off the cliff and raise everyones taxes-bellyup we all created it so we need to do our "fair" share, gut govt because that is the only way to control these fiends. We may go into a recession but likely come out better in the long haul which will better than either Dem or Rep solutions. Those morons will be too busy blaming each other. I'd rather fall off the cliff than suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.

rmwhitley
5547
Points
rmwhitley 12/27/12 - 10:12 am
0
0
The lefties
Unpublished

have done it in Russia, not working, in Cuba (people are starving and trying to leave in droves ref. Mariel boat lift) and they're doing it here. These sickies have been at it at least since WWII. Sen. Joe McCarthy R. Wis. tried to warn Americans more than 55 years ago. Beatniks, hippies, occupiers. All cut from the same communistic cut of cloth. Won't earn an honest living. Ask the seiu and uaw?

Bizkit
35538
Points
Bizkit 12/27/12 - 10:18 am
3
2
Perhaps it is time to evolve

Perhaps it is time to evolve and move past specific entitlements and dissolve social security and medicare. Both programs just demonstrate the failure of govt and people could use the money to direct as they see fit. Save medicaid is a new efficient form to serve more poor and make it all federal with no state contribution-but without social security and medicare we can afford it. Both are progressive dinosaurs and demonstrate the failure of progressive policies. The budget demands would shrink dramatically.

soapy_725
44111
Points
soapy_725 12/27/12 - 10:24 am
0
0
How do we arrive at FAIR? We would like to know.
Unpublished

Fair is subjective. Say we could calculate how much it cost to feed, clothe, house, transport and educate a single American citizen. Say we could (we can't). Is this citizen in Manhattan or Moundville AL? Honolulu or Casper WY? Then we could multiple that number by t he number in a household. That figure would be completely tax exempt. ( a tax deduction ) We think we already have that figure. Only per capita income above the "living allowance" would be taxed. And it would be taxed at 15%, not 35%. Would that be fair? A family of four with 60K in income from all sources. 40K living allowance. 20K taxable at 15% ($3000). A family of four with 20 mil in income from all sources. 40K living allowance. 19 + mil taxable at 15% $2.85 mil).

Is this the FAIR people want? We would honestly like to know. It sounds right? But we may be talking 60% of the population would pay no tax?

We personally do not care if Bill Gates does not know his net worth. As best we can determine, he started out under the same rules of economics as the homeless man on the corner. We started out with a government education, plus a desire to succeed. Our measure of success was not equal two Bill Gates, therefore we do know our net worth. Success is relative. Failure is relative. But under socialism, but are equal. Both are considered fair.

GREED will always trump FAIR.

harley_52
25857
Points
harley_52 12/27/12 - 10:32 am
8
3
The Important Point....

....missed by most, is that Obama's goal isn't now and never has been to create a strong, robust economy with entrepreneurs achieving success and wealth by investing their effort and their capital in businesses which, as they grow, employ more and more workers. That is NOT part of his plan.

That model is "unfair" and transitory. It punishes the working class and will naturally and necessarily lead to a revolution by the poor and downtrodden lower class against "the rich" who have achieved their wealth by exploiting "the poor." He doesn't want to see a strong, healthy, capitalistic economy, nor does he want a small, unintrusive central government.

Stop listening to what he SAYS and start watching what he DOES. Stop scratching your head about why nothing he SAYS he does ever works.

It's a sham. He is right in the middle of "fundamentally changing" America and most of us don't even know it.

allhans
24880
Points
allhans 12/27/12 - 10:53 am
7
2
Democrats need more revenue

Democrats need more revenue to pay for votes so they can retain their power which means perks, and more, more, more money for their own pockets ANd that almighty power!
Is that so hard to understand. This isn't about we the people, it is all about the elected top dogs and we can't go broke soon enough for the big O..The poor will be the first to notice it.....

Jane18
12332
Points
Jane18 12/27/12 - 11:00 am
3
2
"fundamentally change"

Thank you Harley. No one really wants to believe Obama hates America and her citizens, but he does! They need to realize what ''fundamentally change" means. Some of us took him at his words when he said them..........................I'd say he has been effective in so many ways!

freeradical
1175
Points
freeradical 12/27/12 - 11:19 am
1
2
Most americans are too stupid

Most americans are too stupid to connect the dots in any form of taxes

vs deficit vs economy equation .

They only connection the feeble brain can make is that if someone

else is getting robbed then they stand a chance of getting some of the

goodies .

It is capitalizing on the worst evil aspects of human nature .

Greed & envy .

The last time a politician ever based his entire rise to power on going

after the money of a class of people who had stolen everybody else's

money people ended up having the gold in their mouths ripped out

right before they

were marched to the " showers " , made into lamp shades , bars of

soap etc,etc,etc,,,.

At its core Obama's message is the same , get their money and get rid

of them .

nofanofobama
6993
Points
nofanofobama 12/27/12 - 11:17 am
7
2
It's sad that not one deficit

It's sad that not one deficit proposal actually starts to reduce our actual spending. The dims keep telling us that reduce spending ie..govt spending cuts will hurt the economy by taking money out of the economy yet they are wiling to take another 100 billion or more out of the economy by taxes. Why will that not hurt the economy? The day of reckoning is coming soon. It's not a spending problem it's a moral problem. It's simple greed that turned govt helping programs into entitlements without responsibilities by power grabbing politicians. So that we have now a country split into two, the takers and the makers , and a prez who exploits this because deep down he hates our country.

nofanofobama
6993
Points
nofanofobama 12/27/12 - 11:34 am
3
1
DOD spending roughly 700

DOD spending roughly 700 billion but if you include a slew of other programs you can grow it to tech's 1.3 trillion or so. So lets add homeland security, FBI counter terrorism, debt payment for wars, and a whole host of billions from other depts that might be defense related. Pension and health care for veterens would need to be added. So it's really misleading to say its military spending.

harley_52
25857
Points
harley_52 12/27/12 - 11:35 am
7
3
Jane18....

I can't say whether he "hates America and her citizens," but I am thoroughly convinced he seeks the fall of Capitalism and Democracy (I know it's really Representative Republicanism) in the United States. Those who haven't read Karl Marx lately really should brush up on it and watch carefully what Obama does to see if it fits.

Replace the words "the rich" with Marx's word "bourgeoisie" and when he says "the middle class" think of Marx's word "proletariat." Read the Communist Manifesto. It's not that long and it's not hard to understand.

Revolution is the name of the game. And how does one get the revolution started? Just ask Professors Cloward and Piven. Create a helpless society so dependent on the government that all the freebies become life's necessities and "rights" rather than "gifts."

What President Obama and the rest of the ultra left are up to is NOT hard to see. They seek to "fundamentally change" America and he even told us they were going to do it. Labor Unions and naive college students are their tools of the trade.

It's happening right before our eyes, folks. And most of us are either in total denial, are too lazy to educate themselves to their own peril, or are too self absorbed and selfish to really care.

The America they're building is not the America your fathers and grandfathers fought and died for.

Willow Bailey
20605
Points
Willow Bailey 12/27/12 - 12:28 pm
4
2
Look at Obama's background.

Look at Obama's background. He is a "Marxist Sponge-Bob".

Back to Top

Top headlines

Kettle donations rise in 2014

After a disappointing showing last year, donations to the Salvation Army's local Red Kettle Campaign have risen nearly 20 percent in 2014.
Search Augusta jobs