Why Is It Ok To Hate Rich People?

I was reading an article in the New York Times about Hillary’s economic plans should she become President, and this paragraph in particular struck me:

Her first priority, she said, would be changing the tax code. She has proposed tax credits for college tuition, retirement savings, health care and alternative energy use, most of which would go to lower- and middle-income families. She would also raise the top marginal rate to 39.6 percent, its level for much of her husband’s administration. Increasing high-end tax rates would bring in $52 billion a year, her campaign says, and help pay for some of her other proposals.

Democrats often accuse Republicans of passing tax legislation that favors “the rich,” with the sometimes (but not always) unspoken subtext of Republicans being motivated by hate of the “poor” in their actions. But is legislation that denies successful Americans access to tax relief on par with what their less successful fellow citizens really any better? Why is it ok to “hate” the rich, but not the poor?
Seems to me that we’re all citizens and that we should be treated equally under the law whether we’re rich or poor. Think about it…how often do liberals complain about “the poor” not being treated equally when it comes to something like the criminal code? I think we could all agree that citizens should be treated equally when it comes to the criminal code, but shouldn’t we be treated equally when it comes to the tax code as well?
For instance, Hillary would deny “the rich” tax credits for using alternative energy, saving for retirement and paying for college. But don’t we want the upper class to save for retirement? Don’t we want them to be more efficient in their energy use? Don’t we want their kids to go to college like everyone else’s?
And yes, I know that the common assumption by liberals engaged in class warfare is that “the rich” can take care of themselves. To some extent that’s true, but let’s remember that a $100,000 college tuition bill or even just saving for retirement are challenges even to members of the upper class.
Frankly, I’ve grown weary of politicians who further complicate our already abysmal tax code with laws pandering to one specific demographic or another. We can debate over how much in taxes we should all pay, but when it comes to tax relief we should all be treated equally.

Tags: ,


«
»
  • http://www.indymedia.org/en/index.shtml Angry Vertebrate

    I don’t understand why liberals believe that their redistribution of wealth is beneficent. They use the force of government to compel citizens to surrender their money — Ace

    It seems as though you understand very little.
    Here is a little introduction. Workers and capital produce wealth. That’s it. Whether it is Nike shoes, or a Toyota Corolla, or a shiny new haircut. Labor and capital.

    So, either a millionaire is cutting a lot of hair, or they are redistributing wealth from the producers to themselves. All the govt is doing is taxing a little bit of this ill-gotten wealth and returning it back to the producers.

    To prevent this immoral redistribution of wealth to the leisure class, we should work to abolish current forms of ownership, and slash back the state which enforces this. This way we get to keep the wealth we produce.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Let alone state taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes, etc etc etc.

    The only tax play that’s right would be for everyone to pay a flat rate on what they earn. Everyone’s in the same boat.

  • robert108

    He thinks the govts job is to allow the transfer of
    income, from those that produce it, to him and his buddies.

    You lie again; I think the govts job is to keep out of private enterprise. Distribution is according to achievement, not to your Marxist brand of forcible redistribution for political purposes.
    You are dead wrong, as usual.

    BTW, because you are completely ignorant of real economics, you are incapable of “explaining” anything to me.
    Capital flows to areas of greater return, and those areas are productive people. You are full of shit, as usual.
    Marxist shit.

  • pparets

    Kevin: As are 95% of the contributors to this blog, including – probably – you, along with 78% of all college graduates in America.

  • http://www.valleydeals.com/cgi-bin/board2/YaBB.pl Kevin

    That the owner of capital is necessarily the best manager of that capital
    certainly hasn’t been proven.

    Ask anyone who has ever had a business expense account if that is true. LOL!

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Punishing the producers and rewarding the slackers is a great recipe for stagnation.

  • robert108

    So, either a millionaire is cutting a lot of hair, or they are redistributing wealth from the producers to themselves.

    Wrong. They are supplying the capital at risk, so the workers will be able to earn a living. Do you know anything about how much it costs to set up a business and run it before any profits come in, AV? If you don’t, you are simply another ignorant Marxist.
    Wealth redistribution is from the productive sector to the non productive sector, by means of govt coercion.

  • Elmont

    The richest one percent of this country owns 33% of everything in it. That’s right, the top one percent owns 33% of everything for themselves. The top twenty percent of this country, in terms of wealth, owns more than 80% of everything? Do you folks get that? A small part of this country is in control of almost all the wealth. And yet, people are so confused that they believe it is in their interests to protect these richest individuals from paying some more of their money so that they rest of us dont go broke.

  • http://www.indymedia.org/en/index.shtml Angry Vertebrate

    This is a really simple idea Robert108. If I had some shares in Google in my pocket, the share of capital they represent would be just as productive as if the shares were in your pocket, hence owner agnostic.

  • robert108

    That the owner of capital is necessarily the best manager of that capital certainly hasn’t been proven.

    It depends on the skill of the owner, obviously. You have no point here.
    You confused a financial instrument with actual capital in your previous “example”.

  • robert108

    Ask anyone who has ever had a business expense account if that is true. LOL!

    Relax, Kevin. AV is simply a Marxist who buys into the lie that capital and labor are separate and at odds with each other; in addition, he hates private property, so he comes up with these nonsense arguments that mean nothing in the real world. What he’s trying to sell is that people don’t earn their capital, so therefore it’s OK for the govt to steal it and redistribute it. Inverted morality is all it is.

  • http://www.valleydeals.com/cgi-bin/board2/YaBB.pl Kevin

    Who is “rich?”
    How much money does one have to accumulate to generate a lifetime stream of income like Gaylord Conrad and Earl Pomeroy have enjoyed and always will?

  • Mike88i

    It kind of hard to save when some greedy bosses pay minimum wage—-it’s hard to eat, let alone save!!! So no, sadly the poor will never be rich. And unfortunately, we’re seeing folks with a MBAs going broke, losing their homes, and standing in line at food banks. So the old “get a college degree” argument no longer applies. Our economy is a direct result of uneven wealth possession made possible through poor wages, overseas labor, high prices, and deregulation.

  • http://www.indymedia.org/en/index.shtml Angry Vertebrate

    Good comment Mike88i, just ignore Robert180, he is just an extremely closed-minded ideologue. He thinks the govts job is to allow the transfer of income, from those that produce it, to him and his buddies.

  • http://www.indymedia.org/en/index.shtml Angry Vertebrate

    Just because somebody has $1,000,000 doesn’t mean there’s $1,000,000 less for the rest of us to have. — Rob

    You being funny?

    If the dude with the million bucks handed it over to “the rest of us”, then we would obviously have an extra million bucks to spend.

    Not much of an accountant are you?

  • robert108

    AV: Owning stock certificates is only one of the many kinds of capital; you can’t start a business with them, though. Once again, you demonstrate your ignorance.
    For some, playing the stock market is a form of gambling, but it’s not the main source of our prosperity in any way. Rather, it’s a reflection of our productivity that we can even prosper through trading in financial instruments.
    You apparently have no idea of how our system works.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    How often are people earning minimum wage even worth that?

    On the other hand it’s not that hard to make yourself worth more than that. Unfortunately many slackers would rather sit around and bitch.

  • Ace

    I don’t understand why liberals believe that their redistribution of wealth is beneficent. They use the force of government to compel citizens to surrender their money, spend it on various social programs, and have the temerity to say that they are helping the poor and downtrodden. If they asked people to voluntarily give, then they could be praised for appealing to the generosity of Americans to help less fortunate. However, liberals appeal to our baser instinct of covetousness and use our envy to justify taking wealth from the rich. There is nothing magnanimous about these actions. Liberals who create these programs do not bear the full cost for them; rather they force many Americans who would not agree with such programs to fund them any way. There is nothing fair or just about this.
    I wish I had a solution for the problem, but as long as a majority of Americans continue to be seduced by class warfare, I see no democratic way of resolving this in the short-run.

  • http://www.valleydeals.com/cgi-bin/board2/YaBB.pl Kevin

    At a top marginal rate of 39% plus a FICA tax of 15.3%, productive people will have over half their income taken by the government. That’s not much different than slavery in my book!

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/Anna/ Anna

    product of government schools?

    As a matter of fact, I am also public schooled …

  • Bat One

    As a matter of fact, I am also public schooled …

    Anna,

    Yes, but you have obviously overcome that disability handsomely. Anarchist Vegetarian, however, by his own admission,

    I assure you that I wasn’t paying nearly enough attention for it to have affected my upbringing. I am basically self-taught in a lot of fields.

    has no one else to blame for his deficiencies but himself.

  • robert108

    This way we get to keep the wealth we produce.

    Without capital investment, there won’t be any wealth to keep.

  • http://www.valleydeals.com/cgi-bin/board2/YaBB.pl Kevin

    If you work for yourself, you won’t have to worry about a greedy boss.

  • http://www.indymedia.org/en/index.shtml Angry Vertebrate

    What do you want to bet Anarchist Vegetarian is a product of government schools? — Kevin

    I assure you that I wasn’t paying nearly enough attention for it to have affected my upbringing. I am basically self-taught in a lot of fields. :)

    They are supplying the capital at risk… — Robert108

    Okay, I concede they are gambling/speculating with their capital, but they aren’t producing (yet they are consuming). Why not tax the bejesus out of these gamblers and speculators?

    Without capital investment, there won’t be any wealth to keep. — Robert108

    As I have explained to you before, capital is owner agnostic. Not even the evil bastard Milton Friedman had a good case for the current models of the ownership of capital.

  • robert108

    AV: The funniest part of your belief system is how you invert morality to justify stealing from those who are most productive; it explains why socialist economies tend toward stagnation. Instead of working together to be productive, Marxist ideology creates an adversary relationship between labor and capital(an artificial one, based on medieval hereditary class distinctions), to the detriment of both, while an economically free system celebrates the overall productivity of all the kinds of capital working together, and kicks ass.

  • robert108

    Mike: Do you complain when the govt takes its “share” of your earnings before you even get them? How greedy is the govt.? At least your boss gives you a place to work, equipment to help you be more productive, and everything else you need to make a living, plus doing your accounting for you. If you don’t like minimum wage, educate yourself, train yourself, learn things which will make your time more valuable. The govt only takes from you. Wake up!

  • http://www.indymedia.org/en/index.shtml Angry Vertebrate

    Look Robert108, you are confusing two separate ideas management and ownership. Well managed capital is certainly more productive than poorly managed capital.

    That the owner of capital is necessarily the best manager of that capital certainly hasn’t been proven.

    Bat One: I would never blame my deficiencies on others anyway. :)

  • pparets

    Hilary’s tax plan is typically bogus, leftist/liberal “class warfare” intended to whip up her minions among the oppressed. And we keep saying we’ll sit this election out on principle. Not a good idea.

  • robert108

    Not much of an accountant are you?

    Ever hear of double-entry bookkeeping?
    Wealth is not created by welfare, which is simply shifting things around. The guy with the million created it, but the ones who stole it created nothing except karmic debt. Big difference. The guy with the million created jobs and income for others in the process of creating the million. The welfare recipients only spent it. Big difference.

    Not much of an economist, are you?

  • robert108

    As I have explained to you before, capital is owner agnostic.

    Your speculations are economic nonsense. As in every other human endeavor, investment is better done by some than by others, and successful investment is the creator of not only the potential for wealth, but often of wealth itself. Of course the owner and controller of capital makes a difference; witness the incompetence of “govt enterprise”. Nothing compares to “free people making free choices” when it comes to producing the greatest good for the greatest number.
    Economically speaking, Marx’s arbitrary division between capital and labor is nonsense; labor is simply human capital, and the correct combination of all the kinds of capital is productive. Your medieval hierarchical thinking is comical, at best.
    Your personal attack on Milt Friedman is also pathetic. You have nothing, other than what capital investment has provided for you.

  • Bat One

    The richest one percent of this country owns 33% of everything in it.

    Elmont,

    Step away from the Kool-Aid jug and think for a minute, please. Who did all those “rich” people take their wealth from? Not you, and not anyone else. The vast majority of people who are rich got that way by earning their wealth, by creating value and opportunity and wealth for others and for themselves, and have been rewarded for doing so. So why aren’t you rich? Who took your wealth away from you, anyway? The answer is no one took it, ’cause you’ve done nothing to earn it in the first place!

    As for this,

    …people are so confused that they believe it is in their interests to protect these richest individuals from paying some more of their money so that they rest of us dont go broke.

    In all my years I have never read so pitiful an example of liberal envy and class warfare as that. What a hopelessly miserable life you must lead. So tell us, please, exactly where does it say that keeping you from “going broke” is anyone else’s responsibility but yours? Perhaps if you worked harder… and smarter… you wouldn’t have so little to show for your life and so much to whine about.

  • http://www.valleydeals.com/cgi-bin/board2/YaBB.pl Kevin

    What do you want to bet Anarchist Vegetarian is a product of government schools?

  • robert108

    The answer to your question is that Dems are wedded to Marxist economic belief, which holds that someone can only become “rich” by stealing from the poor, and so redistribution is not only “fair”, but is actually “social justice”. Of course, the premise is wrong; rich people have more money because they are more productive, generally speaking. Part of this mistaken belief is based on Marx’s antipathy toward the nobility, who mostly had money from inheritance. He therefore characterized the rich as being unfairly so.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    A large portion of the public won’t save, won’t do what’s necessary to get ahead and won’t ever be rich.

    That’s their fault, not the fault of people that do the right thing and provide the investment to benefit everyone.

  • robert108

    Our economy is a direct result of uneven wealth possession made possible through poor wages, overseas labor, high prices, and deregulation.

    Before you drink any more of that Marxist class envy KoolAid, consider that in our system, those who achieve more earn more. In your bullshit Marxist world, nothing you can do will enable you to elevate yourself, since outcomes are “equalized”. Wage differential is the incentive to achieve more for yourself, and by doing that, you benefit us all. Wake up!

  • halatbis

    Rob, you need to consult your Democrat dictionary: the words Equal and Fair have special meanings in their dictionary. It is entirely fair to take from someone who has and give it to someone who does not–especially if the “does not” person is your voter or one you can buy. Hey, fair is fair!

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    It kind of hard to save when some greedy bosses pay minimum wage

    So why don’t you make yourself worth more to an employer than minimum wage?

    Why not start your own business?

    Nothing is stopping you.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    Elmont, wealth (outside of land) isn’t a zero sum game. Just because somebody has $1,000,000 doesn’t mean there’s $1,000,000 less for the rest of us to have.

    Wealth is created.

  • WOOFX

    Wealth is created.
    You could have “created”
    a lot of “wealth” shorting
    the market last week?

    Wealth is accumulated
    by many means.

  • Matt

    Some act like money is valuable even after they die. its a waste of time. its a fad that is being played… no matter how much you have you're still just a human-being… An animal.. that buys tinker toys from other animals.. its bs…

  • Adf

    For the most part rich people are disliked. This is because most people are jealous and because some rich people look down on others. However, the reason the rich have higher taxes is because most know how to take advantage of certain systems and pay very little.

  • Sdmf_gearhead

    Amen that is the truth and its a shame that we are allowing the demacrates to start class warfare like this it will eventually get people hurt. A flat tax is the only thing that makes sense for the tax code and the big part is getting all politicians no matter what side they are on to live with in their means and not spend everything we have because that’s the biggest issue we are facing as a country.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development