GOP Congressman Schools Liberal Comedian on Taxes
CNN may claim to be the serious, centrist news network but it says something about its broadcast when a liberal comedian is a regular panel member and is allowed to toss slanted, obnoxious questions at a Republican guest. Such was the case on Tuesday's Starting Point when comedian John Fugelsang tried to stick it to Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.)
Discussing the Buffett Rule, Fugelsang framed the debate on simplistic liberal terms. He asked the congressman if he thought persons "who don't work for their income" – who live off their investments – should have a lower tax rate than those "who work for their income." [Video below the break.]
Fugelsang's premise reads as if there's no work involved or risk involved in becoming a successful investor. It discounts the path people may have taken to get to a lucrative career.
Hensarling responded that many of the investors are taxed twice because of the corporate tax rate, and that the top one percent pay more taxes than Americans think.
"[I]f you look at the facts, the top 1 percent of all Americans are paying about 38 percent of the income taxes," the congressman stated, adding that according to IRS data, millionaires pay an average of 24 percent in income taxes versus the $50-100,000 bracket which pays an average of only 9 percent.
"Again, we can have a debate about what's fair, but we ought to have a debate about what are the facts," the congressman schooled the comedian.
A transcript of the segment, which aired on April 17 on Starting Point at 7:50 a.m. EDT, is as follows:
JOHN FUGELSANG: Good morning, Congressman. I have a simple yes or no question for you. Thank you for joining us.
Rep. JEB HENSARLING (R-Tex.): Well, good luck.
FUGELSANG: Okay. Do you believe that individuals who don't work for their income, that is individuals who live off investments and interest, deserve to pay a lower percentage of their taxes than individuals who work for their income?
HENSARLING: Well, I think a lot of those people are paying taxes twice because of the corporate income tax rate.
FUGELSAND: A lower percent?
HENSARLING: Corporations don't pay taxes. People pay taxes. So if you would get rid of the corporate income tax, then I think a very good case can be made about equalizing the two. But again, if you look at the facts, the top 1 percent of all Americans are paying about 38 percent of the income taxes. We can debate whether that's fair or not.
According to IRS data, those who paid between 50,000 and 100,000 in income are paying an average of 9 percent. Millionaires pay an average of about 24 percent. Again, we can have a debate about what's fair, but we ought to have a debate about what are the facts.
And the President wants to single out six or seven loopholes in the tax code. Republicans want to pick up the internal revenue code and throw it in the nearest trash can and start over again with something that is fair, flatter, and simpler for all Americans. Not trying to have the politics and division and envy, which the President is trying to have.
FUGELSANG: So that's yes. Thank you.
HENSARLING: Again, if you get rid of the corporate income tax, otherwise you're paying twice. I mean, a lot of times dividend and capital gains is taxed at a 35 percent rate first. Then it goes on to the individual for the second go-around, which is another 15 percent. So it may give the illusion of paying a lower tax rate, but in fact, it's a higher tax rate.
- Matt Hadro's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Right on Jeb
Submitted by mmilesll on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 3:20pm.
It is always great to have a conservative who knows what he is talking about tell a liberal-who NEVER knows the facts. This "comedian" is truly a joke, spinning the leftwing line.
Who says that John Fugelsang
Submitted by John21 on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 3:23pm.
Who says that John Fugelsang is a comedian?
Have you ever seen his show?
In a 30 minutes show you may giggle 30 seconds at most.
He show no real talent on the stage or on the tube but he is a dependable left wing liberal so CNN will keep him employed.
Has he ever said anything not left wing?
Has he ever said anything intelligent?
Has he a clue what he is talking about from minute to minute?
I am sure that CNN really wants people to believe that it is not left wing and maybe they can get the Kool-aid drinkers to buy it, but no one with a brain would believe it.
missing
Submitted by Tjexcite on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 3:50pm.
The whole arguments is that when someone is living of their investments is that they already paid taxes on it when they first earned that money. Now, they loan it to someone and get a payment back for use of that money and taxes again. So they pay together 45% or so. 30% when they first got it as income tax and 15% in capital gains tax all on the same dollar that they first earned with work.
On top of that
Submitted by KornKing on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 4:42pm.
it was still taxed at corporate level before dividend being paid, as well as FICA being paid on it when it was originally earned@7.65(15.3% if self employed)
Answer yes or no, Johnnie
Submitted by Pilgrim1949 on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 4:34pm.
Did you walk to work, drive to work or bring your own lunch to the office today?
Fair 'nuff, equally-valid question based upon the ASSumption?
Yes or no -- have you stopped playing with yourself under the desk when you're on-air?
Geezey looweezy what a pretentious little twit.
"Ye canne change the laws of physics....." but some politicians believe that with the right legislation you can pretend they don't really apply to your own pet projects...
Maybe
Submitted by peteydee on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 4:41pm.
Instead of calling them newscasters or news journalists their new title can that of "news comedian"
The real point is that their ability to claim LOSSES is limited
Submitted by Rover on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 4:43pm.
If someone buys stock, it goes down and he loses $10,000, he can only claim a $3,000 loss by current tax rules, I believe. (someone please correct me if I'm wrong here.)
If the stock goes up and he MAKES $10,000, that's all a capital gain and it taxable. Since Uncle Sam has limited the ability to make a deduction of the entire loss, there's a SERIOUS disincentive to invest if there's not a correspondingly low tax rate applied to the capital gain. I think the stock market would crash, and we'd have another Great Depression, if there appeared to be a realistic possibility that the capital gains rate was going to go up by any significant margin. It would become too risky to buy stocks, and nobody would invest any more.
There's one thing the liberals are doing, over and over again, that is really making me angry: they play this semantical game, where they talk about Buffet's, and other's, overall tax RATE being lower than most in the middle class, then side-step and pretend that they're talking about total taxes PAID. I don't believe for an INSTANT that Buffet paid less in taxes than his secretary, and in fact I'd be surprised if he didn't pay 1,000 times what she paid; although I'm sure he paid an overall lower RATE than she did. The liberals then argue that the wealthy are not paying their "fair share," because they claim, dishonestly, that the wealthy are paying less taxes than the middle class.
Hensarling pointed out how MUCH of the tax burden is being carried by the wealthy, which is an important point. But while we have to keep those numbers handy and throw them in the face of the liberal who is spouting talking points, I think we need to be more proactive in pointing out this continuing lie they're getting away with.
Wait...
Submitted by retrocon on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 7:56pm.
trying to explain dividend/capital gains tax to a liberal is like trying to explain quantum mechanics to a chimpanzee.
Even if they could understand the words, it would still be meaningless.
New idea
Submitted by TXTRUTH on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 12:23am.
I guess this is the new way liberals will trash anyone who disagrees with them. They fall back on, but I am only a comedien. Bill Maher uses this line all the time and I have noticed more and more of the really nasty stuff is presented this way.
Maher, a comedien, imagine
Submitted by billb on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 9:23am.
Maher, a comedien, imagine that!
I'm 74 years old, I worked
Submitted by billb on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 9:19am.
I'm 74 years old, I worked for 55 of those years. Here's the question...."Is it okay for me to now stop working for my income?"
Good morning billb
Submitted by cocodrie on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 9:37am.
You have two years on me. Don't quit now because if you do, Obabble will have a death panel at your door in the morning with an exit strategy. They will assist you in getting to your new destination in eternity.
Jesus Loves You so much He died for you