The Associated Press unwittingly stumbles onto the truth in this
sophomoric exercise designed to carry water for Barack Obama's idiotic "spread the wealth around" comment to Joe the Plumber.
John McCain is pouncing on Barack Obama's call for shifting more wealth from richer Americans to poorer ones, likening it to socialism. His remarks win applause at campaign events. But they ignore the nation's long tradition of redistributing huge amounts of wealth through tax-and-spending policies.
So why do we need to spread
more of it?
Placing a heavier burden on the wealthy has been a cornerstone of the federal income tax since its inception in 1913. Under its "progressive" formula, in which the wealthy pay higher tax rates, the richest 5 percent of Americans now pay well over half of all federal income taxes.
That's a point conservatives have been pounding home for decades. Yet we're told they're not
paying their fair share. Still, I must admit, it's about time a reporter actually mentioned this fact.
Forty percent of Americans pay no federal income tax at all, although it is the government's largest revenue source. Meanwhile, they benefit from various social programs aimed at low-income households, another feature of a system that redistributes money.
Conservatives, citing such statistics, say the country needs no more top-to-bottom shifts of wealth.
SO when Barack Obama promises a "tax cut" to 95% of the public, means 40% of American who pay no federal income tax will be getting something for nothing.
McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, has hammered the issue since Obama, talking to an Ohio plumber, said he would raise taxes on the wealthy and cut them for lower-wage workers, adding: "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."
Many Americans think that sounds "a lot like socialism," McCain said in a radio address Saturday. "Barack Obama's tax plan would convert the IRS into a giant welfare agency," he said, "redistributing massive amounts of wealth at the direction of politicians in Washington."
McCain accused Obama of "class warfare." But McCain is the perpetrator, argue Democrats, who contend he is trying to fuel middle-class resentment toward poorer people with inflammatory words like "socialism" and phrases reminiscent of Ronald Reagan's attacks on "welfare queens."
Why is the word
socialism inflammatory to
socialists?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.