Right Thinking From The Left Coast
Do, or do not. There is no 'try'. - Yoda

The left will HAVE to rob the middle class to keep their spending up

That’s what becomes obvious from this WSJ article about where the tax money is.

A dominant theme of President Obama’s budget speech last Wednesday was that our fiscal problems would vanish if only the wealthiest Americans were asked “to pay a little more.” Since he’s asking, imagine that instead of proposing to raise the top income tax rate well north of 40%, the President decided to go all the way to 100%. Let’s stipulate that this is a thought experiment, because Democrats don’t need any more ideas. But it’s still a useful experiment because it exposes the fiscal futility of raising rates on the top 2%, or even the top 5% or 10%, of taxpayers to close the deficit. The mathematical reality is that in the absence of entitlement reform on the Paul Ryan model, Washington will need to soak the middle class—because that’s where the big money is.

There you have it: the middle class will have to be socked, because that’s where the money is. Don’t take my word for it. Here is the WSJ article explaining the problems the left have when they tell the lie they can cover their massive spending by just confiscating the wealth of the rich:

Consider the Internal Revenue Service’s income tax statistics for 2008, the latest year for which data are available. The top 1% of taxpayers—those with salaries, dividends and capital gains roughly above about $380,000—paid 38% of taxes. But assume that tax policy confiscated all the taxable income of all the “millionaires and billionaires” Mr. Obama singled out. That yields merely about $938 billion, which is sand on the beach amid the $4 trillion White House budget, a $1.65 trillion deficit, and spending at 25% as a share of the economy, a post-World War II record. Say we take it up to the top 10%, or everyone with income over $114,000, including joint filers. That’s five times Mr. Obama’s 2% promise. The IRS data are broken down at $100,000, yet taxing all income above that level throws up only $3.4 trillion. And remember, the top 10% already pay 69% of all total income taxes, while the top 5% pay more than all of the other 95%.

We recognize that 2008 was a bad year for the economy and thus for tax receipts, as payments by the rich fell along with their income. So let’s perform the same exercise in 2005, a boom year and among the best ever for federal revenue. (Ahem, 2005 comes after the Bush tax cuts that Mr. Obama holds responsible for all the world’s problems.) In 2005 the top 5% earned over $145,000. If you took all the income of people over $200,000, it would yield about $1.89 trillion, enough revenue to cover the 2012 bill for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security—but not the same bill in 2016, as the costs of those entitlements are expected to grow rapidly. The rich, in short, aren’t nearly rich enough to finance Mr. Obama’s entitlement state ambitions—even before his health-care plan kicks in.image

So who else is there to tax? Well, in 2008, there was about $5.65 trillion in total taxable income from all individual taxpayers, and most of that came from middle income earners. The nearby chart shows the distribution, and the big hump in the center is where Democrats are inevitably headed for the same reason that Willie Sutton robbed banks.

And there you have it. The rate at which the cost of these entitlements are growing so far surpasses that of even the wealthy to produce new wealth, that the middle class will have to be raped to cover the gap between outlays and receipts. The left’s been trying real hard to tell you that all they need to do is bend the rich over the barrel and play “Deliverance” with them - after all, these crooks stole their money! And that’s just social justice to take it back – to close the gap, but that’s bullshit. The rich don’t have the money to cover these expenses, even if we take it all each year, and that’s a fact. And note that so far we have NOT looked at the added cost of Obamacare in these calculations, which means that the outlays from government are going to be far higher than these baslines while the available pool of cash isn’t. Obamacare is going to be the proverbial bullet to the head.

So cut it anyway you want, in the end the collectivst nanny staters will have to soak the middle class they are pretending to be doing all of this for, and soak them hard they will. At the rate that the cost of the nanny state is growing, we simply do not have the wealth to sustain it, even after we soak the middle class as well, to keep it up. Collectivism just serves to make everyone but the elite masters live in poverty and misery, as history has shown repeatedly, but these morons simply refuse to give up on their egotistical belief that they will actually be the first to bend reality to their ideological will. My guess is that these collectivist scum know that they can’t fix the problem by ripping the rich off, but they don’t care as long as it helps the greedy and jealous moonbats that buy this shit continue to froth at the mouth.

In the mean time the real world keeps moving on, wealth keeps getting destroyed while people’s life long investments get wiped out, and Emperor Nero keeps fiddling while Rome burns. The Cloward & Piven group currently running the country into the ground keeps winning however. The lesson is simple: the nanny state is unsustainable. We are too close to running out of other people’s money to make it keep working. And that’s not going to change no matter how hard the left hopes it will or pretends it can make it so. Broke is broke.

Posted by AlexinCT on 04/18/11 at 10:32 AM (Discuss this in the forums)


Posted by on 04/18/11 at 08:00 PM from United States

AHHHH Shutttt UP!!!

What a maroon!

and this....

this too.....

Posted by on 04/18/11 at 08:46 PM from United States

Moogoo, we’ve talked about your posting shit you don’t understand.  Please pull your pants up and go to your room, the adults are talking....

Posted by Miguelito on 04/19/11 at 12:32 AM from United States

I cannot believe that it only takes $114k/yr household income to be in the top 10%!  That just does not sound right to me.  Based on that, I just edged into that top 10% and I’m not “rich” by any means.  Granted I live in San Diego and we have a very high cost of living but while I live comfortably, I’m not taking treasure baths.  But, like most others, if I were to lose my job and not be able to get another in a reasonable amount of time, I would lose my house and most of my stuff.

Plus, it only taks $380k/yr to be in the top 1%!  So much for those tons making bajillions being those uber rich top ones.

Posted by AlexinCT on 04/19/11 at 10:06 AM from United States

Posted by muirgeo1 on 04/18/11 at 07:00 PM

More unsourced links, with manipulated information that you hope will fool people that don’t have the patience to dig through the bullshit, Moogoo? Don’t you get tired of linking shit that can’t be verified or looked at and being called on it? For all I know those graphs are all from the DU or some other “progressive” bunch of fakers, or worse, government manipulated data to help some political agenda. BTW not a single one of these bullshit graphs or even that joke of a NYT article you link disputes what I have pointed out: The left will have to raid the middle class, and raid them hard, to keep this spending going. There is no way to lie your way out of that, because the numbers never add up.

And that stupid NYT opinion piece by an amateur that has no clue, cherry picked information so he could present you information completely out of context so he could make the absolutely idiotic case that the left is good at anything other than screwing people over, man, that’s priceless. Here are some fun facts for you Moogoo! Everythime we have an economic downturn you can blame it on something the ideological left did coming to bite us in the ass. The blame game showing Bush & Nixon having bad returns when the crisis that happened was precipitated by leftist bullshit - Vietnam and Loans & securities scheme - are proof of that. Every time you see a demcorat with good numbers, someone else did it. Case in point Clinton, which had to be dragged kicking and screaming by a republican congress to do everything that the left now gives him credit for, except for his constant lying. That they blame on others.

Don’t you ever get tired of making such an obvious ass out of yourself dude? Is it your goal in life to make people think you are stupid, then surprise them by making yourself looking even more stupid every time you post? Or are you getting paid to keep coming here and make a fool out of the left?

Next entry: Why Polls Don't Matter

Previous entry: Is it April first today?

<< Back to main