You know in the wake of the election you would think Congress would get it through their heads that we don’t want more government spending, that we’re sick of the debt and that we want to strengthen the economy. This week, Congress has taken up trying to extend the “Bush tax cuts.” This would be a great step in strengthening the economy, reducing spending and believe it or not cutting the deficit; however, Democrats are determined to not give cuts to the “rich.” They want to extend the tax cuts for the middle class, but not those they deem “wealthy.” This has brought three points to my mind.
First, I thought the Bush tax cuts were only for the wealthy. After listening to Democrats claim, for the last seven years, that Bush’s cuts were only for the “rich” and Republicans only cared about wealthy executives someone please explain to me how the Democrats can suddenly continue the cuts for middle class earners. The current tax rates are expiring; if Congress does not act rates will return to 2000 levels. If the Bush tax cuts were not extended EVERYONE’S taxes would have gone up. He cuts rates across the board, for all income levels, and the very fact that these cuts are extended proves he cut middle class taxes. Now, because Congress acted to save only part of the cuts, only some people will see the same rate. Those that create jobs and wealth, their rates will go up.
Second, I thought these cuts hurt the economy and would not create more jobs. If that is the case, then why don’t we raise taxes? If cutting the tax rate starves the government (it doesn’t—instead revenues increase when income tax rates decrease) and costs our economy jobs why not do the opposite. That would imply raising the tax rate would create more jobs and grow our economy. The Democrats claim unemployment benefits help the economy, especially if we run a deficit to do it, so why not use the same logic here? If reduced rates hurt the economy then higher rates must benefit it. Since politicians want to strengthen the economy surely they would raise taxes, right? I presume, since even the Democrats want lower rates (at least for the “middle-class”), then higher taxes do in fact hurt the economy.
Finally what gives the government the right to dictate who is rich and how much is enough? Why is the threshold set at $250K? Why not $150K? And why are those you make more not entitled to keep more of their own money? It’s their money and they can spend it better than the government, despite progressives’ beliefs. If they do not need more than that, why not just confiscate everything they make beyond the given threshold? This is nothing more than a ploy to redistribute wealth. The government has no right to come into your life and deem what you can and can’t have, what is “necessary” and what is not. Beyond the fact it is well outside Constitutional bounds and the foundations in the Declaration of Independence, it removes all incentive to strive and work hard. Why work to create a business and improve your station or to better your kids’ lives if the government is just going to take it away because your life style is deemed excessive? That is bogus. Our freedoms are being slowly eroded and our economy totally sabotaged while we sit and watch it happen, all while our politicians hide behind their cheap class warfare gimmicks.
From Rational Voice: In addition to everything my partner has said here, I would like to share this piece from the Wall Street Journal again examining these taxes and their expiration. And now that the bill for extending tax cuts only to the middle class has went down in flames in the Senate, liberals are again screaming that Republicans only want tax cuts for the rich and don’t care about the middle class. The reality is that extending tax cuts only for the middle class will do more harm to them and the overall economy than good. These are not the people that produce jobs. Extending the tax cuts for both the “rich” and the middle class, hell just the “rich” alone, will do more to help the middle class and the entire economy. It allows small business owners to keep more of THEIR money. The more money they have, the more they can put towards hiring a new employee. If their taxes go up too much, they may have to actually fire people just to pay them, especially if their profit margins are already razor thin. That’ll do wonders for the economy and job creation, won’t it? And even the actual rich out there keeping the current tax rates will be able to help the economy by having the capital needed to help entrepreneurs fund their start-ups or to invest in other businesses and technologies that will help spur more job growth. With this, there will be more job creation.
The simple fact is that the middle class doesn’t create jobs, nor do they have the capital necessary to help invest in businesses that will undoubtedly help create jobs and get this economy going again but liberals keep playing this class-warfare game while living in a fantasy world instead of looking at the undeniable economics facts. They keep furthering the image that they are the compassionate ones and the the Republicans want the middle class to suffer while the rich get richer. This isn’t true though. If we fail to extend tax cuts to the people who create jobs and have enough money to make a significant impact on investments in this country, the middle class will suffer and unemployment will continue to rise while the economy really tanks. How’s that for compassion? Not to mention the fact that, like I pointed out here a while ago, the wealthiest Americans have actually been paying an ever increasing percentage of total income taxes since the Bush Tax Cuts were enacted, shifting the burden more on the rich than the middle class. If anything, I’d say that’s more compassionate than the liberals out there are pushing but they’ll never admit it.