Just once in the endless three years of obama spouting to tax the 'rich', equating millionaires and billionaires with professional couples earning more than $250,000, I wish some one would get it right.
The tax rates that he wants to raise are taxes on ordinary income, not investments, net worth, or other areas true millionaires keep their money. They reduce their taxes paid, not with Buffet's distorted statements about paying a lower tax rate, but by having much of their income moved to protected tax areas. All the three years of hubbub are to raise taxes on normal people working their asses off, with both parents working, to make a living and put kids through college. You know, the 10% of people paying 70% of the income taxes! There is almost no discussion of really changing tax levels for the group touted in news headlines. Hey, but it makes for good campaign hype!
Not only that, but he is proposing multiple hits to those with actual high salaries - especially professional couples. Increased tax brackets, reduced deductions, elimination of the AMT but essentially just rolling all of the extra taxes it imposes into the standard tax forms and schedules. The net overall tax is more than what the bracket reveals. Two income families and those with several kids are hit hardest. BTW, the current libbie poster boy Buffet even points out that tax rates from jobs should not be so high. Yet this hasn't stopped obama, who has never seen a tax increase he doesn't like, from endorsing both a job income tax increase and an increase on capital gains taxes.
Also, I wish someone would examine those unemployed and those of the 'poor getting poorer' sect. A segment of the poor today is a lifestyle far and above how I was raised. Further, there is a definite trend of the poor being uneducated, single parents. I knew plenty who partied through early college years and who ended up failing, plenty who made bad choices in life. So those of us who had more commitment, sacrifice, and determination to reach our goals should pay for the slackers? Nope, I have no problem helping those in real need - out of work for a time, disabled, mentally ill or challenged. But to continue to payroll those of sound mind and body who just chose to not get marketable skills or to make better choices? That is not my responsibility.
I absolutely agree with a consumption tax IF they dramatically reduce or eliminate income taxes. The primary objection is that once it starts, it never ends. It would only be a few years before income tax rates would be back to where they are now AND you would be paying the consumption tax. They would have to find some way, perhaps to the level of a constitutional amendment, that stated the federal consumption tax can not exist in combination with a federal income tax, but only one or the other can be in place. I don't think food should be taxed but a consumption tax means those buying fancy cars and mcmansions pay more. If I want to buy designer labels or eat at a fancy restaurant, I'll pay more tax than shopping at Target or eating at Taco Bell. You would get a choice on how much tax you pay. It is much more fair than penalizing those who work harder, longer hours, or multiple jobs within one family. It also protects the poor because they don't pay on their meager wages and don't pay as much because they use less expensive products. This would not penalize investment or business success either as companies would be taxed on what they spend.
