Why do almost all wealthy Democrats want to increase taxes on the wealthy and upper middle class? The answer is quite simple; BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO INTENTIONS OF PAYING THEM ANYWAY.
For instance; Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. tried to avoid $500K in his home state's sales and excise taxes by docking his newly purchased $7 million 76-foot yacht in Rhode Island.
Massachusetts lowered its state income tax in 2001, but given the presumably large number of rich people who wished to pay more taxes, the state allowed tax payers to check a box and voluntarily pay the old, higher rate. In a liberal state of over 3 million tax payers, only a tiny fraction of 1 percent -- 930 taxpayers paid the higher rate.
Among those who refused to pay the higher rate were Sen. Kerry and Rep. Barney Frank. In Frank's case, he refused to pay the higher rate because, he says, "I don't trust the legislative leadership and Gov. (Mitt) Romney to make the right decisions." Instead, Frank said, "I'll donate the money myself."
And of course, John Edwards, former senator and Democratic presidential candidate: His wife, Elizabeth, once called him a person of "character" because Edwards voted against his own economic "interests" by voting for higher taxes. Well, OK, but like billionaire investor Warren Buffett, who urges higher taxes, Edwards is less than keen on paying them. As a lawyer winning major jury awards, John set up a subchapter S corporation to pay himself through dividends -- and thus avoid $600K in Medicare payroll taxes.
And, let’s not forget the Kennedy’s: The late Ted Kennedy and his family shield their money through a series of complicated family trusts first begun by father Joe Kennedy. The trusts transfer wealth from generation to generation while avoiding estate taxes.
And, the late Ohio Democratic Sen. Howard Metzenbaum: He enjoyed a lifetime rating from Americans for Democratic Action of 95 (100 being perfect) and a zero from the American Conservative Union. He never met a tax hike he did not like. He moved to Florida when he retired from the Senate. Why Florida? Because, Florida has no state estate or personal income taxes.
The list goes on and on, but I’ll mention just one more, and that would be, the so-called Civil rights leader, Al Sharpton: Although he supports increasing taxes on the rich, Sharpton, it seems, fails to do his part when it comes to actually paying them. As of last year, according to the New York Post, Sharpton owed $3.5 million in state and federal income taxes. And his nonprofit, National Action Network, as of 2011 owes nearly $900K in unpaid federal payroll taxes.
If these wealthy left wingers want to avoid paying their fair share, they need to at least drop all the hypocrisy.
While I’m on a rant about taxes, I would like to point out that, people really do make decisions and change behavior (and location) in response to taxes. Compare the economies of Texas and California, two border states with similar immigrant populations. Texas is a no-income-tax, right-to-work, business-friendly state with substantially less regulation than the Obama-like high-tax (especially on the "the rich" and on business), forced unionism, heavily regulated state of California.
According to Investor's Business Daily, state gross domestic product growth in Texas was 3.3 percent in 2011 and 5.2 percent in 2010, while California was 2 percent in 2011 and 1.7 percent in 2010.
Texas has created more than twice as many new jobs as California and has a below-the-national-average jobless rate of 6.8 percent. California's unemployment rate is 10.2 percent.
One finial comment, because people do change behavior in response to taxes, raising them can result in getting less revenue. John Kennedy said, "It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low -- and the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut rates now."
JFK had his faults,
but unlike other Democrats, he at least understood economics.
MORE ON THE SUBJECT!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment