We aren't socialists. You are a loon.
Are we square? On Oct 24, 12:39 pm, "M.A. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We're all socialists nowJohn McCain is accusing Barack Obama of socialism. > But all US tax policy is designed to spread the wealth -- even McCain'sConor > Clarke guardian.co.uk > Wednesday October 22 2008 19.00 BST > So it turns outJoe the Plumberisn't really a plumber, and his first nameisn't > really Joe, and his businessdoesn't really make anything close to $250,000 a > yearand thus wouldn't experience any additional tax burden under Barack > Obama's plan. But really, who cares? Joe the Plumber isn't the one running > for office - yet! - and it's only mildly disgraceful that John McCain seems > to be selling his entire economic policy on the rapidly deflating authority > of a single Ohio fabulist. The real scandal is that Obama's exchange with > Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher continues to haunt the Illinois senator. This > would be the exchange in which Obama said the following: "I think that when > we spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." > Since Obama's tax plans have been public for months, it's slightly perplexing > that this has suddenly become the greatest gaffe sinceJohn Kerry got into a > chronological train wreckto the tune of $87bn. But it has. Conservative > columnists are greedily dissecting this supposed slip of the mask, and Sarah > Palin has used it as an occasion to observe that this is"not the time to > experiment with socialism". "Spread the wealth around: We will focus acutely > on that," McCain strategistSteve Schmidt told the New York Timeslast week. > "Spread the wealth around is a big mistake." > But if spreading the wealth is a big mistake, somebody better tell John > McCain! Upon taking an idle flip through the Arizona senator's tax plan, I > can't help but notice that he offers continued support for something called > the "income tax", which, in its current form, imposes a tax on earnings at > marginal rates that start at 10% and extend up to 35%. I have my suspicions > that this means some individuals will have a portion of their income taxed at > 35% while other will have their income taxed at only 10%, if at all. This tax > revenue will be redistributed in the form of government programmes, and I > cannot shake the nagging feeling that this progressive redistribution will > involve "spreading" the wealth. > Of course, an alternate interpretation is that spreading the wealth is just > another name for government as we know it, and that virtually every > politician to the fiscal left of Ron Paul supports it in some form. Their > reasons for support might vary. Some believe progressive taxation is > justified by the fact that individuals receive diminishing marginal returns > from each additional dollar they earn, and others argue that the wealthy > should have a disproportionately large responsibility for maintaining the > system that allowed them to accrue an immense number of dollars in the first > place. Take your pick. But please, let's not kid ourselves into thinking that > the choice between Obama and McCain is a choice between someone who's going > to spread wealth and someone who's going to let it be. > Even the Ron Pauls and Grover Norquists of the world support some kind of > redistribution. Just about any form of flat tax, "fair" tax or value-added > tax will also involve taking more money from some than from others, and > redistributing that money through government services that we will each enjoy > to varying degrees. Just about the only tax that would not involve spreading > the wealth would be what's called a head tax: charging a fixed amount per > person, irrespective of income. I do not know of a single politician that > advocates the exclusive use of head taxes. > There are big differences between progressive income taxation and a flat tax, > but McCain and Obama are not separated by such differences. Their plans > varyonly in the degree to which they are progressive. McCain's plan for > progressive taxation involves extending elements of George Bush's 2001 and > 2003 tax cuts such that the top marginal income tax rate remains at 35%. > Obama advocates letting the tax cut for the top bracket expire, which will > raise the rate to 39.6%. (For comparison, the top marginal rate under > Republican president Dwight Eisenhower was above 90%.) > The difference between 39.6% and 35% is important, but it requires a special > brand of hypocrisy for McCain to pretend, as he has repeatedly over the past > few days, that it's the kind of difference that makes Obama a "socialist". > Before voting against the Bush tax cuts in May of 2001 - one of the tax cuts > he now hopes to extend - McCain said that he "cannot in good conscience > support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate > among us, at the expense of middle-class Americans who most need tax relief." > And as recently as 2003 McCain was telling Katie Couric that "low- and > middle-income Americans are paying a significantly larger amount of their > income in taxes" than they had historically and that he would "like to see > them get the bulk" of any future tax relief. > Palin's Alaska, meanwhile, has more taxes per resident, more spending per > resident and enjoys more federal dollars per resident than any other state in > the country. As if that weren't enough, Alaska also has so many taxes on oil > that each resident gets a $2,000 cheque from the state each year, which Palin > recently bumped up to $3,200. Palin onceexplainedthis preposterous boondoggle > by noting that "unlike other states in the union" Alaska was a place "where > it's collectively Alaskans own the resources [sic]. So we share in the wealth > when the development of these resources occurs." > Excuse me, "share in the wealth"? By her own standard, Palin is a socialist! > When McCain repeats his lines about socialism it's annoying, but when Palin > does it, it's actually kind of funny. As the governor once said, the first > time it's tragedy, the second time it's farce. Or maybe that was someone > else.http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/oct/22/john-mccain-barack-obama-socialism --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
