Using Bribery in Exchange for Power
November 2, 2009
- Trust us.
Democrat’s plan is to fund their healthcare power grab using income of those without enough votes to defend themselves – high producers.
The current healthcare bill is funded largely from a 5.4 percent tax on individuals making more than $500,000 a year and couples making more than $1 million, starting in 2011.
A family of four making $5 million a year would see a $434,500 tax increase, about a 32 percent increase, according to the analysis.
The new health care tax would come on top of other tax increases for the wealthy proposed by Obama. The top marginal income tax rate now is 35 percent, on income above $372,950. Obama wants to boost the top rate to 39.6 percent in 2011 by allowing some of the tax cuts enacted under former President George W. Bush to expire.
Besides the loss of economic freedom of high producers, such a system where the lower 70% pay little or no taxes and get free services invites corruption, and end of society.
They become one issue voters, keeping in office whoever reallocates to them “free stuff”, while ignoring all else.
This is carte blanche permission for political parties to sell missile technology to the Chinese, “bailout” industries of their friends, destroy the currency through spending, maintain wrong immigration policies, seize private assets, even control who lives or dies.
R.D. Walker :
Date: November 2, 2009
This is the weird thing about the left. They don’t get economics. Seriously, they don’t at all. They don’t understand that the economy is one big machine and every part is connected to every other part. They actually seem to believe that they can experiment with the carburetor and it won’t have an affect on the functionality of the rest of the car.
This is the most common identification of bad economics: the failure to realize that you cannot make changes to the system without it changing the operation of the entire system. Bad economists like to show only part of the impact of what they do.
You can’t tax a source of revenue without it decreasing. Democrats look at the income of the wealthy and believe that they can tax it as much as they want and the gross revenue they tax will not change. Of course it will. As taxes increase, they are avoided and gross revenue is decreased. Eventually tax revenues are decreased.
Meanwhile, as tax revenues decrease, costs of services increase. Wealth is destroyed, debt increases, the currency is corrupted. The Democrats will only point at the “good” they did with free health care.
That is the point of Frédéric Bastiat’s essay on political economy, “That Which is Seen and Unseen.” When the government spends a shit load of taxpayer money on some massive spending project like a new governmental complex in Washington, what is seen is the building, the trucks the materials and all the workers. People think, “well that is good, look how many jobs it created and all the materials that had to be purchased.”
It is a fallacy, however, because of what is unseen. Unseen is the billions of dollars of items that could have been purchased if tax payers had been allowed to keep their money: cars, houses, clothing, electronics, vacations and an infinite list of goods and services that are unseen. These unseen items would have improved the lives of the citizenry far more than a new governmental compound. They would have also created more long term jobs than a construction project. They would have also move the wealth through the economy much more efficiently than the central bureaucracy.
The statists, however, never talk about what is unseen. They ignore it as if it doesn’t exist and promote only what is seen. Sadly, what is seen is paid for in much, much greater loss by what is unseen.