Looks like Robin Hood economics is back. The democrats are planning to tax the rich to pay for a cool trillion in government healthcare expansion. One representative is quoted as saying taxing the rich is better than nickling and diming everyone else who has no money to take.
At this point, I just throw my hands up!
Who is "rich"? Is it $250K or above? How much are you going to tax them? Is there concern this may lead to a relative decline in investment since they have the resources to save and invest in enterprises that may cause jobs? Are there enough rich people to tax to come up with over a trillion in ten years? Might this cause further disincentives for future recipients of government health services to economize on it since those who are receiving the care don't pay for it, they have no "skin in the game"? If you simply confiscated all the homes and all the wealth from folks in Greenwich, CT; McClean, VA; Beverly Hills, CA; Palo Alto, CA or other cities where the people have cash, would they still have enough? Are they planning, perhaps, to install prison terms for anybody with an annual income of $1 million?
Would that make liberals feel better? The way the democrats are going about addressing income inequality is to bring the rich down, not to bring the poor up. Is that really the best approach and what this country wants?
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment