"Giving Money to the Very Rich" - the Liberal Mindset on Display

By Proof

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

On Fox News Sunday this AM, Juan Williams displayed the typical liberal mindset concerning government taxation: It's their money.
If you earn or possess money or other assets in any way, it's because the government, in their beneficent mercy, allowed you to keep it. Senator Claire McCaskill was on FNS as well, touting the same line, just not in such short compass as Mr. Williams.

How, the convoluted lexicon of liberalspeak, did "not taking from" ever equal a "gift"? If the Bush tax cuts are extended, the government is not "giving" anything to anyone. They are just taking at the same rate they did before. For the sake of accuracy, it was the Democrats who forced the sunset provision in the Bush Tax Cuts in the first place, and this administration, who are cheerleaders for letting the tax cuts expire, will be responsible for what should properly be characterized as the "Obama Tax Increases".

Since a tax increase "on the rich" will play well to Obama's base, Democrats think this bit of class envy will give them a populist cachet. But, let's change the currency for a moment, shall we? Many parents speak of their children as a "treasure". Let's apply liberal taxspeak to child rearing:

First, if you have more than two children, the government will "give" you two of them. It's not "fair" for you to have more than two while some people have none at all. So, two of the children you already have will be "given" to you by the government, and any others, for the sake of fairness, will be redistributed. (It may be that some of those without children wouldn't want to take any, but they have to. It's only "fair"!)

Allowing people to keep more of what they earn is not "giving" them anything at all. All this is aside from the argument about taxing gross income, rather than net income, which the libs like to gloss over. A small business with a gross income of $250,000 will not take home anywhere near that much. If they invest money back into the business or hold back reserves (or at least try to) to meet payroll for their employees when revenues are down, they take home even less.

Ask yourself, who is going to employ more people? A business grossing $250,000 or a business grossing $1,000,000? Why take money out of the hands of the people who create the most jobs? Then ask yourself, is the government better suited to direct wealth to create solid, self sustaining jobs with a minimum of waste, fraud and abuse or the private sector? Rather than address the fact that these taxes (and new regulations) will impact small businesses hard, Democrats are focusing on class envy.

But, for now, I'd settle for getting rid of the Orwellian Newspeak that allowing people to keep more of what they earn is "giving money" to them. It's only fair...

Cross posted at Proof Positive, per LCR shameless blogwhoring, (somewhat related) discussion via a more-than-predictable NYT Frank Rich column at Memeorandum


  1. Don't you know that all income belongs to the government by default?

    My other favorite is: "How are you going to PAY for that tax cut?"

    Control the language, control the thought. Orwell would be disturbed but impressed!

    1984 was a warning, not an instruction manual.

  2. I believe Mr.Rowe said it best, the Government is much like Vegas - house rules,and the house will win every time. Until that is, we stop playing the game.

  3. It really doesn't matter how much we are taxed... Even if there isn't enough for them to spend, they'll just print more...

  4. "How are you going to PAY for that tax cut?" The other side of the same coin, Nick! But, yeah. That one bugs me too!

    CS: I've been to Vegas.They have much more respect for other people's money than the government does. All my contributions in Vegas have been voluntary.

    John: The inflationary capabilities of the government printing press are always scary.

  5. http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=45690

  6. Vegas slots are required by law to have at least an 80% payout.

    I don't know about you, but the government takes twice that max vig from me, and it gives me zero chance of winning a jackpot.

  7. Nick: I don't know about you, but in Vegas, my "free" drinks usually end up costing me $20 - 50 bucks! That's almost like the government!


Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.