What if Obama does raise taxes on the rich? Then what?
I’ll admit it: There’s a part of me that wants President Obama to get every last tax increase he proposed this week.
Let him close the loopholes and raise tax rates on “millionaires and billionaires” — defined, in his world, as married couples who earn a combined $250,000 a year and individuals who bring in $200,000. Let him tax capital gains at the same rates as wages. Let him squeeze more revenue out of oil and gas companies. Let him sock it to the corporate jet owners.
And then, when the economy keeps foundering and the jobless are still out of work and the budget remains unbalanced, let him tell us what comes next.
You see, I don’t think there is a Plan B, because I don’t think his proposals amount to a Plan A for growing the economy, or creating jobs, or balancing the budget — or for anything besides raising taxes for the sake of raising taxes.
Obama’s quest to raise taxes, especially on “the rich” and corporations, has reached Ahab-like levels of obsession. The question doesn’t matter; for him, the answer is “raise taxes.” The $447 billion piece of legislation he proposed earlier this month was not so much a jobs bill as it was a tax increase-justification bill.
Obama’s already admitted more than once that he knows better than to believe infrastructure jobs involving the federal bureaucracy are truly “shovel ready.”
He may already be too late in calling for schoolhouse renovations if they’re to be completed by the end of next summer.
We’ve already seen, with the bankruptcy of the solar panel manufacturer Solyndra — in the exact month analysts predicted, and despite a half billion in federal loan guarantees — the folly of trying to shove taxpayer dollars out the door to private ventures quickly enough to count as a job-creation measure.
But none of that matters, because I don’t think that’s the point for him.
I don’t agree with those who think his intention is to destroy the economy or ruin the country. I don’t know if he believes his tax maneuvers will have an effect that’s opposite of what basic economics suggests — although I am certain he believes that a more muscular central government is in the public’s best interest.
I don’t know why he would continue to think people will put stock in super-investor Warren Buffett’s anecdote about paying a lesser share of his income in taxes than his secretary, when there are piles of data that make clear this situation is not an epidemic in our country.
I do know that we’ve known about this tax-the-rich tendency since the 2008 campaign. During one debate, Obama said he would raise capital gains taxes even if doing so resulted in less federal revenue, out of his sense of “fairness.”
I don’t know why he would feel that way. There are plenty of dime-store psychological analyses of Obama out there, if you’re into that kind of thing. I just know that one constant for the man who came to the White House as a self-proclaimed “blank screen” has been the push to tax the rich more heavily.
But ultimately, satisfying my curiosity about what Obama would do and say differently if he got his way on taxes, and proved it didn’t work, isn’t worth the collateral damage. Because here are a few other things I know:
I know the Reverse Rumpelstiltskins in Washington can’t take gold out of private hands and spin it into straw fast enough to do more good than harm.
I know that, even by the White House’s own projections, this soak-the-rich strategy won’t come close to balancing the budget — especially when it’s used to justify increasing spending even further.
I know the Obama approach — complicating the tax code even further, just to scratch this anti-rich itch — will only make it harder to reform the tax code. And that will make it harder to draft a broader strategy for reducing deficits and debt.
Finally, here’s something I can only suspect: that Obama’s answer to “what comes next?” once the millionaires and billionaires have been tapped will not be to cut spending as needed to achieve fiscal balance. Instead, it’ll be to define “millionaire” much lower than people who earn just a quarter of that amount.
(Note: This post, my column from Thursday’s print edition of the AJC, draws and expands on a few thoughts I posted earlier this week.)
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
419 comments Add your comment
Joe the Plutocrat
September 22nd, 2011
3:25 pm
UGA1999, all the GWR proves that he was involved in another shooting/crime earlier in the evening. to my knowledge the illegal (or legal) discharge of a firearm is not a capital offense (actually, I guess it now is)
UGA 1999
September 22nd, 2011
3:26 pm
KyleKyle….really it seems you need to read and learn up on your judicial system knowledge.
a dad
September 22nd, 2011
3:27 pm
Y’all are hopelessly stubborn. You make my ex look like Ghandi….
UGA 1999
September 22nd, 2011
3:27 pm
Joe….with the same gun? Same casings….he proved he was capable of murder. DUDE read up on the case….he killed someone else earlier that night!
Joe the Plutocrat
September 22nd, 2011
3:29 pm
a dad, and Officer MacPhail is dead, and no execution will change that fact. re: abortion, my point was; if we execute criminals for financial reasons (less mouths to feed), we are no better than those who abort fetuses for the same reason. has nothing to do with guilt or innocence on the part of either party; and Troy Davis would not be the first “wrong place at the wrong time” person to die at the hands of the state. ever heard of Kathryn Johnson?
UGA 1999
September 22nd, 2011
3:31 pm
Joe……wow you are pointless dude. Your opinion doesnt matter now. The fact is they had 20 years and mulitple appeals and every court rejected it.
Joe the Plutocrat
September 22nd, 2011
3:33 pm
UGA1999, one more then I gotta go’ being capable of murder is not proof that he killed MacPhail. shell casings fired from the same weapon is not proof he killed MacPhail. show me a murder weapon. show me DNA evidence. if he “killed someone else” earlier in the night why was he sentenced to death for the MacPhail shooting, and not the other homicide? perhaps because MacPhail was a police officer? as if the life of a police officer is worth more than “someone else’s” life.
John
September 22nd, 2011
3:33 pm
Gotta love Republicans…will all the talk about Obama not being a leader and going after Pelosi who was able to get bills passed, Boner can’t even get his own bills passed in the House which his party controls. What an embarrassment when GOP leaders can’t get their own bills passed. No Disaster aid for the states and looks like another threat of government shutdown by the Republicans.
GT
September 22nd, 2011
3:33 pm
UGA 1999, since I have never killed anybody that is one I didn’t worry about reading too closely. I guess that would be a good excuse for this prison guard when he wakes up at Heaven’s door. You see St. Peter I thought it said Thy with it was talking about thall, now let me in before I kill some more people.
However we read the first word the killing part is still in there and it doesn’t say a word about any age limits or our opinion of the human we kill.
Joe the Plutocrat
September 22nd, 2011
3:34 pm
and UGA1999, the Warren Commission “testified” that Oswald acted alone, and 10 years later as Senate Committee on Assassinations said he didn’t.
KyleKyleGoAway
September 22nd, 2011
3:35 pm
@uga 1999 @326 – that’s funny. Hilarious, actually. Hint: I’m a scholar of (United States) constitutional law. I’m more than comfortable with my “learn[ing] up on [my] judicial system knowledge” [sic], [sic] and yet more [sic].
Jefferson
September 22nd, 2011
3:36 pm
There’s no doubt who killed the convict.
UGA 1999
September 22nd, 2011
3:36 pm
GT….I assume you are a vegitarian as well?
UGA 1999
September 22nd, 2011
3:37 pm
Kyle…..somehow i doubt what you say.
John
September 22nd, 2011
3:38 pm
Republicans are getting what they want…let everyone take care of themselves and get them off the government teat…starting with the states who need disaster relief.
a dad
September 22nd, 2011
3:39 pm
Joe, yes, I’ve heard of Ms. Johnson and am familiar with her case. I’m also familiar with James Bryd’s case, for that matter. Also with T Davis’s shooting at the pool party in Culpepper, and a bunch of other cases throughout the country (occupational hazard).
My point was to get this discussion back on track, drop all the personal attacks and name calling, and try to get everyone to express themselves intelligently, cite to actual evidence (and not just regurgiated “stuff” they read somewhere) because at times this blog, and even Bookman’s, can provide me with a different persecptive. Makes me go “hmmm.”
As for executing Davis, my position is not financial reasons. I am a “life for a life” person. I have no sympathy for criminals whatseover, and from studying Davis’ case, looking at the number of trips he had up and down the judicial system, well, let’s just say the media hasn’t reported everything accurately. One instance, how many people were talking about the poolparty incidentwhere Davis shot someone in the face? Don’t you find it interesting how that minor little tidbit never made it into any of the arguments to let him go, commute his sentence? See what I mean about learning new stuff. Have a good day. UGA99, behave…..
KyleKyleGoAway
September 22nd, 2011
3:41 pm
@uga 1999 @336pm – go check out ‘the china study’; vegitarianism [sic] is actually quite good for you.
a dad
September 22nd, 2011
3:42 pm
KyleKyle – a conlaw scholar? Is that you RS?
KyleKyleGoAway
September 22nd, 2011
3:43 pm
@uga 1999 @337pm – your doubts, no matter how strong your convictions of same might be, can’t change reality as it is.
Toby
September 22nd, 2011
3:44 pm
I can imagine Wingfield standing by someone drowning, holding a life preserver & shouting, “ten dollars or no help… this is hardcore, Darwinist economics, this is the real world sucker”.
UGA 1999
September 22nd, 2011
3:44 pm
Kyle…I know it is good for you but you failed to answer my question. Are you a vegitarian?
KyleKyleGoAway
September 22nd, 2011
3:44 pm
@a dad @342pm – yes and no
KyleKyleGoAway
September 22nd, 2011
3:48 pm
@uga 1999 @344 – you directed the question to gt, not me (see, again, suggestion, above, re: reading comprehension and private college). Since it has been redirected to me, I’ll play: not yet, but I’m moving in that direction (see, again, suggestion, above, re: the china study). Heading to a meeting now, so … ta.
a dad
September 22nd, 2011
3:48 pm
Kyle2 – self-styled or studied?
As for vegetarianism, it’s good and bad. Strict vegan goes against out biological makeup, which is because we don’t have the multi-chamber stomachs typical of true herbivores, means we’re omnivores. But just like “a mom” probably told you, everything in moderation.
UGA 1999
September 22nd, 2011
3:50 pm
A dad….dont bother they wont get it.
KyleKyleGoAway
September 22nd, 2011
3:52 pm
@ a dad @ 348 – both. Re: vegetarianism, I don’t plan on cutting out meat and other animal based food products in their entirety, just greatly reducing their intake. I’m not kidding or being facetious about the china study, btw; it is eye-opening stuff and (seemingly) scientifically sound.
CJ
September 22nd, 2011
3:53 pm
Kyle wrote, “The $447 billion piece of legislation he proposed earlier this month was not so much a jobs bill as it was a tax increase-justification bill.”
Have any of the comments above pointed out that 60 percent of Obama’s “tax increase-justification bill” are tax cuts?
a dad
September 22nd, 2011
3:54 pm
UGA, I’m a dad. Can’t help trying even if it makes me blue in the face. Here’s one we can all agree on. Former Houston Rocket star Yao Ming is campaigning against shark’s fin soup. He says of al lthe sharks are killed out of the ocean, it will have a disasterous effect on the ocean’s ecological state. R or D, redneck or lib, sportsman or vegan, that’s something we can all agree on.
Now, after me, “kum bah yahhhh….”
UGA 1999
September 22nd, 2011
3:54 pm
Dow now down 470 points!
a dad
September 22nd, 2011
3:57 pm
CJ – expound please.
KyleKyleGoAway
September 22nd, 2011
3:59 pm
@ a dad @354 – you’d think we all – or at least most of us – would agree on climate change, too. Alas, a sizable portion of our elected officials think it is a hoax. Slick Rick: how have your prayer festivals helped out (I) with rain in your state and (II) our economy? Not so well, huh?
UGA 1999
September 22nd, 2011
4:01 pm
Kyle….climate change or global warming?
Road Scholar
September 22nd, 2011
4:04 pm
Kyle there is a Plan B; it was/is the plan to continue to slash taxes on business and the wealthy. Has that worked? It is a yes or no question, something a republican can’t answer w/o blaming something else. So…….is it yeas or no????? No blaming now!
Why don’t we slash taxes for those under $200K to zero. Then the businesses and wealthy can take over this counrtry and pay for all the programs they want, but you cannot touch entitlements!
a dad
September 22nd, 2011
4:05 pm
Kyle 2, personally, I’m not entirely 100% convinced it’s not just cyclic changes, but whether it is or it isn’t, is taking reasonable (note that qualifier) steps to clean up our surroundings really a bad thing? I’ve walked in some of the most pristine environments on earth (Alaska, Iceland, New Zealand, etc.) and am old enough to remember clean air and dirty $ex (forgive the tired line). What really ticks me off is we have some of the greatest minds of all time, and we can’t come up with feasible solutions for all this bs?
Anyway, why don’t we all tone down the personal attacks and focus on rebutting each other articulately and intelligently. There, the gaunlet has been laid. In your hands folks, A dad, out.
GT
September 22nd, 2011
4:05 pm
I just think this execution or any execution is a moral issue. If this entire In God we Trust is just to get votes admit it. I notice Bush backed off some of his rock solid beliefs after he was out of the White House. He said the Bible can not be interpreted word for word as an actual happening. I guess in that light, kill could have four or five different meanings; the trouble is when you change that word the abortion issue changes too. It is a slippery slope and the main reason we kill is for our own satisfaction, kind of like having sex. The best I can tell though, God allows sex in certain situations, can’t remember any details about what killing is good and what is bad, so I guess killing is worse than sex.
John
September 22nd, 2011
4:06 pm
Kyle,
Will you next topic be the great leader Boner is that he cannot even get his own bills passed.
From Politico…
The pressure from an angry Speaker John Boehner didn’t work — he even threatened to strip committee assignments. Four dozen Republicans —mostly conservatives — wanted more cuts, and they just said no, creating an uncomfortable scene on the House floor as the funding bill failed on a 195-230 vote.
Now, to prevent a government shutdown, Republicans will have to rewrite the bill and figure out how to get the votes.
That underscores Boehner’s ongoing problem — he can’t rely on Republicans to stand with him if Democrats decide to unify against him.
Republican leadership aides say their hefty “no” caucus — folks who oppose their leadership no matter what — limited their options on the bill. Lawmakers and aides say Boehner may end of making an example of somebody in the GOP conference — though it’s not clear what the punishment will be — for defying him.
Boehner, Cantor and McCarthy struggled all day to win over recalcitrant GOP lawmakers. Boehner, who doesn’t traditionally vote, came to the floor for both series of votes earlier in the afternoon to personally grab members for one-on-one lobbying.
It’s been a tumultuous few months for Republican leaders. Boehner had to back down on his attempt to cut a $4 trillion “grand bargain” with President Barack Obama over the debt-ceiling increase, and later had to back down on a balanced-budget amendment vote in the face of fierce opposition from within his own conference. In the end, Boehner and Obama stood on the sidelines as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) put together the framework for the deal that avoided a debt default.
“DeLay would never have lost this vote,” noted one veteran GOP lawmaker after Wednesday’s upheaval. The Republican member was speaking of former Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), known as “The Hammer” by Republicans and Democrats alike. “DeLay would never have brought this thing to the floor until he knew that he had the votes.”
mudfoot
September 22nd, 2011
4:12 pm
What if the GOP gets it’s way and taxes are NOT raised on the uber-wealthy? What then? Squeeze it all out of the middle-class so the large majority of what little money IS being spent dwindles to nothing? The majority of the country’s wealth is already sitting stagnant in the form of record profits reaped by these “job creators” who are not and have not been creating jobs. Suck what little the middle-class is presently circulating out of them and our economy is truly and completely over.
KyleKyleGoAway
September 22nd, 2011
4:17 pm
@ a dad @405pm – I’ve considered the ‘cyclical argument’ as well and if we are talking about a few aberrational events here and there it might have merit. However, if you look at the available data, it becomes clear that we are witnessing a consistent pattern of severe aberrational weather events across the entire globe that is completely in line with numerous scientifically sound projections. Where I agree we can disagree are the prescriptions for fixing the problems, but their very existence ought not to be a topic for debate except by the most ignorant/mis-informed/ill-informed among us.
GT
September 22nd, 2011
4:18 pm
Delay didn’t have a nut house to round up like One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Jack Nicholson looks healthy compared to some of these guys. The House looks like it has gotten into a run down neighborhood.
Martin Williams
September 22nd, 2011
4:18 pm
Kyle, I always thought you are a smart guy but I am truly wrong and you just like the rest of the GOP folks. Let me ask you this question Kyle, how are we as a Nation paying for these two plus WARS created by the GOP and some silly Democrats. Tell me also how can we be in two wars and continue to give tax breaks. I ‘ll tell you this as a free infomation that, the United States unemployment will be around 15% before 2015 as people like you continue to believe that tax breaks create jobs.
a dad
September 22nd, 2011
4:26 pm
“most ignorant/mis-informed/ill-informed among us.” Yup, that b me. Just kidding. I said I wasn’t 100% convinced. That doesn’t mean I completely discount global warming/climate change/etc. And I look back at recorded weather when massive events like Krakatoa, Pinatubo, etc. occurred as well as paying attentio to seasonale vents like hurricanes, etc. Not convinced 100% simply means there may be more at play, some of it nature in origin. See, we can agree and have discorse without resorting to name calling, you weiner! Just kidding. Got to run boys and girls. Kyle W, keep up the fun.
CJ
September 22nd, 2011
4:34 pm
“a dad” at 3:57,
Correction: 55 percent of the $447 billion American Jobs Act consists tax cuts, not 60 percent–
$175 billion for the proposed employee payroll tax holiday plus plus $70 billion for the proposed employer payroll tax holiday and extended deductions for new investment.
Math: ([175 + 70]/447 = 55 percent).
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
September 22nd, 2011
4:39 pm
What if the GOP gets it’s way and taxes are NOT raised on the uber-wealthy?
————-
The federal government might have to get by on $3 trillion a year.
Oh the humanity!!
I Report (-: You Whine )-: Thee Magnificent!!! mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
September 22nd, 2011
4:56 pm
Obama’s presidency lurches from fad to fad — from gays in the military to “green jobs” to the “Buffett rule.” Hyped as a profound presidency, it has turned out to be an embarrassingly frivolous one. Sober historians of the future, not cowed by political correctness, will no doubt look back and say that Obama fiddled while America burned, indulging his sophomoric socialism, environmentalism, and social engineering at a time of terrorism and economic crisis.- Nuemayr, AmSpec
And I don’t know how much more fiddling the USA can take, just sayin…
Impeach obozo now!
KyleKyleGoAway
September 22nd, 2011
4:57 pm
@ a dad – you strike me as a rational, reasonable, thoughtful and well-considered fellow and I apologize if you thought I was referring to you. I was speaking instead about the (often rabid) wholesale deniers. I’ll go out on a limb and suggest that both Kyle and uga 1999 might be among them.
KyleKyleGoAway
September 22nd, 2011
4:59 pm
@uga 1999 @401pm – global warming is contributing to climate change, so climate change. You’re welcome.
a dad
September 22nd, 2011
5:19 pm
Kyle – nah, just messing with you. I tend to have a somewhat smart@ssed, slightly sarcastic sense of humor but I’m most harmless. Wouldn’t be offended in the least even if you were laughing at me. Indeed, why should I be the only one not doing so….
CJ, thanks. I still think we’re hosed though. Personally, I believe it all started with Gordon Gecko’s
Greed is Good” line.
Gee, can’t wait to see what KW writes about for tomorrow. Later y’all.
JDW
September 22nd, 2011
5:29 pm
@Larry, who wrote, “What if the GOP gets it’s way and taxes are NOT raised on the uber-wealthy?…The federal government might have to get by on $3 trillion a year…Oh the humanity!!”
Actually $3 trillion a year is about right…problem is because Repugnicans have driven the economy and the tax rates down in the ditch federal receipts will only run about $2.1 Trillion while expenditures ran $3.7 trillion. My guess is if the Repugs will get revenues to $3 then the Dems will cut spending to $3 and everybody is happy
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2011/tables/11s0467.pdf
Zeb
September 22nd, 2011
5:39 pm
It will have no meaningful effect on the economy other than to lower the deficit. These people aren’t hiring anyway so let’s even out the tax code. If they don’t like it, let them move; surely some european country would gladly take them on for 60% of their gross. Or maybe they can move to someplace that has no taxes..other than a military dictatorship to exact an unknown “tax” such as your head or all you own whenever it suits them. I say tax the heck outta them.
Dora
September 22nd, 2011
5:55 pm
Watch out “uber” rich..There is always a balance. History is a witness. Too many of you and not enough of us always leads to a shower of blood. The problem is, the rich always think they control the flow; they do to a certain point, then the masses overflow and sweep away all traces of the former.