Rightbloggers Defend Rich Bastards from Obama's Tax Plan

tomt200.jpgIf rightbloggers believe in anything, it's that taxes are bad -- especially if they're on people making over a million dollars.

When it was revealed that President Obama would propose a tax on millionaires, the brethren loyally manned the barricades to defend America's rich -- e.g., Donald Trump, Kate Gosselin, Mitt Romney, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Charlie Sheen -- against peons like you.

Before we go further, we will remind our readers that once upon a time -- after the Second World War --the top marginal tax rate in America was 91 percent. Let us repeat: 91 percent. And back then the nation was doing great -- cheap gas, widespread home-ownership, and so on.

But since then tax rates have plummeted steeply, especially for rich people; and with the Bush tax cuts, rich-people taxes are down to donations-appreciated, basically.

Nonetheless rightbloggers, who either have no sense of history or hope their readers don't, acted like the proposed raise on rich folks' taxes is unprecedented, grossly unfair, and even an act of violence.

Some sources like Business Insider cleverly just announced that Obama was raising taxes ("Obama Proposes $600 Billion In Tax Hikes"), and left readers to imagine that they were the ones getting dunned. But those who engaged the issue fiercely opposed any increased taxation of millionaires.

Adding imagined insult to perceived injury, it was said that Obama's plan would contain something called a "Buffett Rule," named after billionaire financier Warren Buffett, who has long maintained that America's rich are undertaxed.

"Never mind that [Buffett]'s free to pay all the taxes he wants," cried The Lonely Conservative. Instapundit's Glenn Reynolds proposed an attack on Buffett: "I invite any tax experts out there to propose specific changes -- besides the obvious, an excise tax on fractional jet businesses -- that would hit Warren Buffett personally." Angry White Dude co-snarled: "I say tax that sumbitch Warren Buffett into welfare!"

That'll change his mind! Buffett probably never imagined such a tax would apply to him. (Doug Powers at the Michelle Malkin website also seemed to think Buffett had missed this possibility: "At least the 'Patriotic Millionaires' might be about to get what they asked for, so there's that little bit of economic schadenfreude." Imagine how different things would be if billionaires had tax accountants!)

povertysucks.jpg
I say, poors -- Obama wishes to raise my taxes! In consequence I may be forced to fire my caddy. Now oppose this for me, will you, chop chop? There's a good fellow.
"And, you wonder why they're called tax and spend liberals?" roared Gateway Pundit Jim Hoft. Later, Hoft learned that some people had gathered in protest at Wall Street, and blamed that on Obama's yet-to-be-announced plan: "Radical Leftists and Marxists Answer Obama's Call For Class War - Converge on Wall Street." Hoft showed pictures from the demo he'd found at Flickr; one such pic featured a flyer with a picture of Che Guevara, which Hoft captioned, "The leftists adore Marxist Che Guevara and hate capitalism." Another showed a sign that said "Tax the Wealthy!" and this, Hoft said, proved that the protesters "like [Obama's] 'tax the rich' plan." (Actual lefties, it has been shown, would actually prefer something more radical.)

Don Surber shifted attention from the tax plan to the Solyndra investigation, whereby a green energy company head who donated to Democrats is suspected of profiting from a government deal -- something that will strike anyone who has been following politics since, oh, the 16th Century as unremarkable. But Surber thought it "puts the robbing of the rich in proper perspective." What that perspective might be, in this case, Surber didn't clearly state -- though his claim that the Obama Administration is "pure as sewer sludge" and engaged in "crony capitalism" suggests that Surber thinks only the pure at heart may raise taxes on millionaires, in which case we must wait for Rick Perry to pull the sword out of the stone and do it.

"One thing we can be absolutely sure of: Obama's tax increases will not target the plutocrats like Warren [Buffett]," claimed Lew Rockwell, "but new and rising entrepreneurs and the self-employed, whom they both hate." Apparently Rockwell had seen details of the plan to which the rest of us are not privy, but he regrettably failed to share them with his readers.

Rockwell did call the proposed increase "oligarchical." An oligarchy is a government by a few, especially by a small faction of persons or families, but Rockwell didn't think this applied so much to ginormously wealthy corporations as to unnamed "rich bureaucrats" who will in some unspecified way not only evade the tax, but benefit from "rips-off of the productive," and who along with their "rich friends" will "get even richer through the gun."

Rhymes With Right also feared Obama's planned gun violence against millionaires, and seemed to think the New York Times had conspired to cover it up with its headline, "Obama Tax Plan Would Ask More of Millionaires." "The Obama plan, if adopted, will not 'ask' anything of millionaires," countered RWR. "It will instead DEMAND more of folks, AT THE POINT OF A GUN under threat of arrest and imprisonment. Remember, it isn't a request if failure to comply will result in criminal charges and jack-booted thugs seizing your assets."

"'Ask'? Can they really refuse?" said Tom Maguire of Just One Minute. "But no; the text indicates that the same coercive approach we have seen for decades will be employed." It's the usual IRS reign of terror -- but worse this time, because now it's against our precious millionaires! Citizens, gather your armies -- the guy in the mansion on the hill needs you!

My Voice Nation Help
26 comments
jim2011
jim2011

"Chinese Water-Torture Economics" is a more apt description. The original name of "Splatter-Down Economics" was rejected after it did very poorly in focus groups, for some mysterious reason.

Glock H. Palin, Esq.
Glock H. Palin, Esq.

"Because companies make their money off of you, the willing consumer, and if the company's costs go up, so will the price for the consumer."

Implying that companies COULD be charging more for their products, but don't out of the goodness of their hearts. Hey, moron, that's not how product pricing works. You pick a price based on how many units you will sell at a particular price and how much profit per unit you make at that price. Raising the price does not automagically translate to bigger profits, because if something costs more less people will be willing to buy it. If taxes on Pepsi Co. go up, they can't just recoup that by raising the price of a can of Pepsi Zero because that can has already been carefully priced to balance profit-per-can and sales volume.

Jeeze, would it kill you assholes to occasionally have a clue what you're talking about?

parsec
parsec

And once again, why is it that Warren Buffett should bear the entire tax burden for the top one-tenth of one percent? Sure, he can pay as much as he wants but why should the rest of those looters get a free ride?

Tom Church
Tom Church

As somebody said, when the wingers cry "Class warfare!" it means they're waging it.

OhioOrrin
OhioOrrin

have the wealthy [JOBZ] creators created [JOBZ] yet w their tax savings?

Matt Jones
Matt Jones

I love how the GOP has come to regard "tax and spend" as a pejorative - apparently they prefer their "spend and don't tax" idiocy...

Roger Ailes
Roger Ailes

I'm all for class warfare, but I'm doubtful Obama will let us win.

SamHenry
SamHenry

The wealthy should be taxed but name calling detracts from a reasoned argument.  All that has to be said is we need either a flat tax or a graduated one in which income levels (income from all sources) will be taxed.  No loopholes.  To remain in power and to bring us all together as promised when I voted for him, Obama has to strike the middle ground. We all have to bend.  The unbending right will have to as well.  It will become apparent to all that unless we all work together, this ship really will sink aided by more acrimony and civil strife.  There is no other reasoned way out except for compromise.  Speaking of history, we need to remember the Constitutional Conventions and how turbulent they were.  It 's not easy taking care of a republic.

StringOnAStick
StringOnAStick

I sincerely doubt that most of these rightbloggers are in the above $1 million tax category, or even the above $250,000 category, so it takes a really special kind of Stockholm Syndrome + abject syncophantic delusion to be this incensed about the tax rates of wealthy people who have gamed the system in order to pay a lower tax rate than their secretaries. 

Look, you idiots, they aren't going to invite you up to The Club as thanks for blogging BJ's well-rendered, they barely care that you even exist (except as useful idiots).  Aren't your knees sore and worn out yet? 

Andrew
Andrew

Rhymes with Right? Stupid doesn't rhyme with right.

RPorrofatto
RPorrofatto

I wish the administration would propose a 100% marginal rate on all income over a Billion dollars. It would not only put the brakes on such parasites as John Paulson -- who made five times that last year (yet only a paltry $4 Billion in 2007) -- but would provide even more comic possibilities from our bourgeois winger brethren rushing to the defense of people like David Tepper ($4 Billion in 2009, 15% tax rate) who likes to show off his $99 million ATM account (a mere 2.5% of his 2009 income) that he uses for mad money impulse purchases.

(math fixed. It's hard to find the decimal point in these heady sums with so many zeroes attached.)

Consumer Unit 5012
Consumer Unit 5012

"It's only called 'class warfare' when the poor fight back." - Old Geezer

Consumer Unit 5012
Consumer Unit 5012

In Indonesia, possibly.  Definitely not here in the US.

Even though we've had 10 years of Bush tax-cuts to CREATE JOBZ with already.

Ah, well - to the True Conservative, the reason for this is simple - we haven't cut taxes ENOUGH YET!  MORE CUTS!

Roy T.
Roy T.

My thoughts exactly. Some good old-fashioned class warfare is just what is needed. Bring it on.

Al Swearengen
Al Swearengen

"Obama has to strike the middle ground"?  If you can't see that Obama is the most center-right President ever, you're an idiot.  Seriously.  People with eyes and brains that aren't rotted out by cable news can see that.

commie atheist
commie atheist

That sounds like an entirely reasonable argument.  When you come up with a strategy that will convince the lunatics quoted here by Roy that compromise and bending is the way to go, do get back to us, OK?

UnholyMoses
UnholyMoses

"... we need either a flat tax ... "

Oh dear god no: http://www.thedailyeconomist.c.... (Note that the formatting on that page is toasted; not sure why.)

" ... or a graduated one in which income levels (income from all sources) will be taxed."

That's actually called "progressive taxation" and is what we have now. The problem is that it's become LESS progressive thanks to the right, who has cut taxes for the top 1% from 91% in the 1950s, to the 70ish% range in the late 60s, to the 50% - 28% range in the 80s, to 39% in the 90s, and now 36%.

The effect has been the removal of trillions of dollars from the federal coffers, the greatest wealth disparity in the U.S. since that stat has been measured, and a middle class getting its ass repeatedly kicked.

Sadly, many just respond with, "Thank you, sir! May I have another?!"

"Obama has to strike the middle ground."

Um ... really? You don't think he's tried to do just that, repeatedly, to his and our nation's detriment? If not, you haven't been paying attention, or consider "middle ground" as "whatever the GOP demands."

It's simple: The desire the rich have to steal the last crumbs from the poor is greater than the lust any poor person has had for the excesses of the wealthy.

Recreating feudalism: The right is doing it ... well, right.

Al Swearengen
Al Swearengen

The way I pronounce it, "asshole" rhymes with "right".

mistwolf
mistwolf

Blight does! And is pretty accurate, too.

I wish, as someone who is socially about as left as it gets, that I even remotely had someone within telescopic view of my end of the political spectrum. It makes me cry to see Obama called a left. Not that I have anything overly against him, but he is about as centrist as centrist gets. Probably even a bit right of center. But our discourse at this point sits at about a 7 on a scale of 1 to 10, left to right. Obama may be a 6, Bush was probably a 7.5 or so, but right now the 9's are running the show. (It frightens me remarkably that there are 10s. But give them a few years...)

Maybe if they started actually proposing things that really are leftist, Liberal views they would get somewhere. At least then they could compromise to the center, instead of just starting there and then conceding to the insane people running the Republican party these days.

Al Swearengen
Al Swearengen

Does "Appaloosa Management", Tepper's company, even have a website, much less employees?  He's quite the "job creator".  Just like all these obscenely rich hedge fund assholes, a computer does all the "work".

David in NYC
David in NYC

Actually, we have had THIRTY years of Laffer Curve-supply side stupidity (or, as Poppy Bush correctly termed it, "voodoo economics"), and we are still waiting for it to have a positive effect on the economy for anyone other than the top 1% or so.

susanoftexas
susanoftexas

No, but they did increase income inequality tremendously, which even better if you're them.

Consumer Unit 5012
Consumer Unit 5012

One of the many problems with the Democrats these days is that when they 'negotiate', they usually start by throwing out anything even vaguely 'liberal' - so by the time they'e done, all that's left if whatever the Republicans wanted anyway.

(The other problem is that they're trying to 'negotiate' with the Republicans, who've made it clear that they'll burn this country to the waterline if that's what it takes to make Obama a one-termer.)

Now Trending

New York Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...