At this point, there should be little doubt that there is a concerted attempt underway to use the war in Afghanistan as a justification for punitively taxing high earners.
Last weekend (noted at NewsBusters; at BizzyBlog), the New York Times discovered that wars cost money. It cited Wisconsin Democratic Congressman David Obey's concern that funding the Afghanistan effort at the level requested months ago by General Stanley A. McChrystal would "devour virtually any other priorities that the president or anyone in Congress had."
Thursday, as reported by AFP (noted last night at NewsBusters; at BizzyBlog), House Democratic heavy-hitters Barney Frank, John Murtha, and (no surprise) Obey announced the "Share The Sacrifice Act of 2010," an income-tax surcharge that overwhelmingly targets high-income earners.
Now Michigan Democratic Senator Carl Levin has weighed in. Bloomberg dutifully carried his water, as seen in this graphic containing the first four paragraphs of the report:
Levin, as is the custom of his party, confuses "wealth" with "income." The Michigan Senator also attempts to perpetuate the rich-get-richer, poor-get-poorer income-inequality myth, which is indeed a myth, at least as of 2007. Since Democrats took over Congress and Barack Obama has become president, that may have changed. Income inequality increased during Bill Clinton's 2nd through 8th years in office (measurement methods were changed during his first year in office).
Levin's idea further supports my take on all of this, mentioned yesterday:
.... the administration is putting the idea out there now as a prelude to justifying what it and Democrats in general have been referring to as an end to the Bush tax cuts -- something that should really be seen as a tax increase above what everyone has gotten used to during the past six years -- as necessary to pay for the Afghanistan War, and to try to rhetorically hogtie gullible conservatives into acquiescing to it ("You do want our soldier to have what they need, do you not? Then you'll just have to agree to let taxes increase").
The likelihood that all three parties involved -- the Times, the House members, and Senator Levin -- all had independent "Eureka!" moments leading suddenly to the notion that taxing "the rich" to pay for the war is the way to go is very, very tiny.
The likelihood that anyone in the establishment media will look into and confirm that there is an orchestrated campaign to tie the war effort to a tax hike on high earners, and to see who is behind it, is even tinier.
What would really be worth knowing is whether President Obama's obvious dithering on an Afghanistan War troop deployment decision has been purposeful. Has he been biding his time all these months specifically for the purpose of pushing a year-end "war-related" tax increase"? The likelihood that the establishment media will ever look into this possibility is miniscule to non-existent.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
glad I'm retiring
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 10:49 ET by wizardjrI'm so tired of paying these clowns to waste money. I broke into the six figure income bracket a couple years ago after nearly 45 years of being a wage slave. Now that my job has evaporated (housing industry) I'm retiring in January and glad of it. With the new taxes my net would have dropped considerably and not made the extra stress and strain worth the "reward", assuming I could get another job at my 'current' wage level.
Just like all the folks bailing out of New York and Californicate, I'm bailing out of paying taxes. I'll bet there's alot of folks like me.
I do feel sorry for my son. He's in his late twenties and screwed for the next thirty five years. My granddaughters won't have to worry though. They'll be funemployed on a government collective somewhere in the Midwest by the time they grow up.
Taxes
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 11:11 ET by ahusserI posted this today on the other NB tax blog (AFP)
"Taxes to Socialists is like alcohol to alcoholics. They never met a tax
they didn't like. However their expertise in using backdoor methods to
affect policy in whatever area they want to change has been honed to a
fine art. A tax in a liberals hands is a potent weapon of mass
destruction. In this case "preparing" us for full blown socialism on
the horizon with its encompassing debilitating taxation kind of like
slowly boiling a crab in a crabpot."
In this case promoting class envy is an old but effective tactic of the left. A form of divide and conquer. When capital and the rich leaves this country our economy will be the on par with most 3rd world socialist sh!+holes.
A song came to my head when I was thinking about a response to this blog: "... tax the rich, feed the poor till there ain't no rich no more...I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do..." from 'I'd love to change the World' Ten years After-'A Space in Time' 1971
"Somehow, I told you so, just doesn't quite say it." Will Smith in 'I, Robot.'
Congressmen and senators
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 11:17 ET by Calypso Jonesare rich. Are they paying their fair share?
What exactly is THEIR sacrifice....?
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 11:18 ET by supercon"House Democratic heavy-hitters Barney Frank, John Murtha, and (no
surprise) Obey announced the "Share The Sacrifice Act of 2010," an
income-tax surcharge that overwhelmingly targets high-income earners."
The American people have been sacrificing for two years now but yet the govt. keeps growing and Congress gets a raise. When are they going to target "high income" entitlement programs? It is not a "Share the Sacrifice" program as much as it is a Share the Wealth program and as Joe The Plumber can tell you that was Obama's plan all along. I would like to see many in Congress take part in a Share The Unemployment program. Now I could get behind that.
" if Republicans are able to stop Barack Obama on health care, 'it will be his Waterloo, it will break him...." -Sen. Jim DeMint
Grow up Levin
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 11:27 ET by BKeyserWhen will these people grow up? Why does everything have to be a 60's reunion?
"Nato should provide HALF
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 11:40 ET by Jack Bauer"Nato should provide HALF the new soldiers" Senator Levin (Douche) Michigan.
Okay, let's just dissect that piece of surreal crap.
1. Never going to happen. There's NO WAY any NATO member is going to do that for this President. No frackin' chance this side of hell freezing over.
2. Which one could anyway? Well the UK already provides the biggest contingent of troops outside the US. That would the the US's biggest European ally for the past 100 years. The country to whom Obama has specialized is saying screw you. How did you like those DVDs Prime Minsister... oh and here's another bust of Churchill you can throw in the trash.
3. Maybe the French and the Luxembourgers can make up the shortfall.
NATO - they know we'll pull the weight, and have their backs.
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 12:30 ET by pbanks7Courtesy of weaselzippers.net:
(Scotsman)- ONE of Afghanistan's most powerful warlords has urged America not to send more troops, insisting there are enough to beat the Taleban already – if the rest of Nato simply pulled its weight.
Ismail Khan, the self-styled Emir of western Afghanistan, and three-decade veteran of fighting the Taleban and the Russians, was particularly scathing about the Italian forces, in his hometown of Herat.
He said: "Most of the time they sit in their bases. We don't need more Americans. The troops that we have already – the Italians, if they were more active, if they fought, then the situation would get better."
His remarks highlight US concerns over a two-tier alliance, in which American and British troops do all the "heavy lifting", while the other nations pay lip service to the coalition.
US troops already joke that Nato's International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) stands for "I Saw Americans Fighting".
http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/Warlord-says-don39t-send-more.5826161.jp?
MSM - shaping all the perceptions you need to believe, then confirming it with a poll.
NATO and HALF a WAR
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 20:19 ET by ptsonThese pukes want to fight a half-*ssed war, lose and make NATO take the blame. WHAT A PLAN! I wouldn't trust these jerks (original definition, as in circle) to valet park my rental car.
So, I take it Levin doesn't think that TARP, Porkulus, ObamaCare
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 11:53 ET by R D Helm...and all the other hideous tax increases coming have killed enough jobs, so he wants to come along and kill even more.
Ever notice how these idiots always go right after the income range of many small business owners?
-Dave
Our elected representatives have failed us.
I'm so sick of this country
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 13:11 ET by Radical1979I'm so sick of this country making people who earn more money sound like lazy scumbags. Most people with more wealth have worked harder, in school and/or out of school, have sacrificied and saved to get where they are. Why does this country insist on penalizing that?
Here's an idea that is
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 13:15 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonHere's an idea that is 'revenue neutral' that allows increased military spending, pays for the WAR ON TERROR, and provides a more peaceful communities with vastly lower crime rates.
ZERO spending for illegal aliens except for medical necessity and instant deportation "fit to be moved by ambulance".
ANY company hiring illegal aliens, the manager and CEO automaticall get one year in prison for each illegal.
Sanctuary communities forfeit 100% of all federal funding until they come into line with NATIONAL SECURITY INTERESTS.
NO EXCEPTIONS!
But Hey! I'm just a radical, borderline right-wing terrorist on the verge of VOTING against socialism.
Obama, the first "alleged" president
http://gjresult.com
from one "terrorist" to another
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 16:42 ET by wizardjryou and others here make wa-a-a-ay too much sense. Reinterpret the 14th Amendment properly and stop the 'anchor baby' idiocy as well.
Personally I'd like to see a Federal bounty on border invaders. It would only be enough to pay for the ammo and field rations. I suspect a few of my fellow veterans would love to take a vacation to our southern border states once or twice a year. We'll even supply our own weapons and gear. And the first time someone fires on our Border Patrol Agents or Sheriff's Deputies, they immediately start assuming room temperature.
I just love how these clowns
Sat, 11/21/2009 - 13:36 ET by robertlbryantI just love how these clowns want to tax 200k+ extra heavily. How about they tax move heavily from $168k+? Oh wait, that would include Congress, huh?
Carl Levin: Comedy Gold!
Sun, 11/22/2009 - 06:21 ET by JakeMoThey have no problem funding nonsense like a study of the nesting habits of the Costa Rican sloth.
But they come to us with a tax increase to fund the basic Constitutional functions of government.