Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Obama wants massive tax hike to pay for Social Security

The LA Times’ “Magic Negro” wants to tax those mean ol’ nasty rich folks to fund everyone else’s retirement. From ABC News:

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., is considering a major tax hike on the rich to shore up the nation’s Social Security system.

“If we kept the payroll tax rate exactly the same but applied it to all earnings and not just the first $97,000,” Obama wrote this week in an Iowa newspaper, “we could eliminate the entire Social Security shortfall.”

Right, because businesses would just absorb the extra taxes (i.e. revenue shortfalls) without making any changes, right? Don’t you just love these functional economic illiterates?

Anywho, here’s a typical example of economic ignorance displayed by the left and the MSM (pardon the redundancy):

Obama’s idea, which he described on the op-ed page of Friday’s Quad City Times as being “one possible option” and not a formal plan, would raise more than $1 trillion over 10 years by subjecting income of more than $97,000 to a 12.4 percent tax. Half of the tax would be paid by employees and half would be paid by employers.

OK, for those of you who actually believe your employer pays half of your Social Security taxes, here’s an economics lesson for you, free of charge (and I know how you libs like “free” stuff, so “You’re welcome” in advance):

Your employer does not pay for any smidgeon of your Social Security taxes…you do. Your employer figures out how much it will cost him/her to hire you (salary, benefits, training, AND Social Security taxes), and then acts accordingly. For example, let’s say you make $50,000 per year (gross salary). It costs your employer much more than your $50,000 salary, and your salary and future raises will be based accordingly. All your employer does is collect the taxes from you in the form of smaller-than-it-otherwise-would-be salary and raises. Even if you get a nice salary and/or a big fat raise, know that it would be even fatter if your boss didn’t have to collect taxes from you. In other words, you would be making at least 6.2% more if not for the Ponzi scheme tax (er, Social Security tax).

In other words, the “employer’s share” of the tax doesn’t come from your mean ol’ nasty corporate bosses’ coffers. It comes from your own pay check. The sooner you people get it through your head that businesses do not pay taxes but merely collect them, the better off you’ll be.

Old Soldier has a good post on this, too, including mentioning that the 51% of taxes that the top 5% of wage-earners pay obviously isn’t enough for the left. These fools cannot be trusted to manage the purse strings of our country!

Advertisement

September 24, 2007 - Posted by | economic ignorance, Obama, taxes

5 Comments »

  1. I wonder if Hussein’s plan took into account the millions of ILLEGALS (and their extended family members) that the Democrats are hell bent on providing Social Security benefits to?

    Comment by Kanaka Girl | September 24, 2007

  2. KG I’m afraid I can’t trust Hussein nor Shillary. They just want to raise taxes because that’s the goal of the left. If Hussein really wanted to help social security then he/they wouldn’t have fought so hard to derail Bush’s plan several years ago. If I remember correctly the dems said there was no problem with social security.

    Comment by tnjack | September 24, 2007

  3. I’m afraid I can’t trust Hussein nor Shillary.

    tnjack – I don’t think we can trust ANY Democrat.

    Comment by Kanaka Girl | September 24, 2007

  4. I can’t believe the Dems are still running on their old class warfare campaign. It doesn’t work! Whether you claim the rich are cooperation’s or wealthy inheritants, the numbers they talk about will crush the average Middle American trying to become rich or in the case of a farmer or small business owner just trying to make ends meet.

    By crushing the supposed rich with taxes, you’ll crush the working poor they claim to do all this for, when the “rich” can’t afford to pay their salary.

    Comment by Steve | September 24, 2007

  5. By “payroll” tax, he means the FICA tax, and expanding it to beyond the current $97K/year would, in effect, turn Social Security INTO a redistributionist “welfare program,” or at least MORE of ONE, then it now is!

    Obama’s economics are as misinformed as are his geopolitics (“Let’s invade Pakistan”).

    In fact, Americans are even NOW over-taxed and over-regulated and more than that, those “evil rich” people won’t be paying those extra taxes, WE will!

    How so?

    Well, the “truly rich” are those who DON’T rely on income for wealth, folks like the Heinz-Kerry’s, the Keane’s and Kennedy’s, etc and they don’t pay much in income taxes.

    Higher income earners (those earning over $200K/yr or more) tend to have a lot more disposable income and, as a result, can defer more of their income, thus avoiding those higher tax rates.

    That’s why Democrats always make their tax increases ACROSS the board….and the ONLY folks who “don’t rely on income for their wealth,” and “don’t have much disposable income” are the average wage-earners….regular working people.

    THAT’S why all these “tax the rich” schemes ALWAYS sock it to us regular folks. They’re designed to do just that!

    Comment by JMK | September 25, 2007


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 25 other followers