Sunday, April 20, 2008
Obama's False Tax Facts
It is what he said in the Wednesday night debate that is so incredulous and eye-opening, with misdirected anger and fallout from Obamaniacs directed at debate moderator ABC News Anchor Charlie Gibson.
The debate topic was raising the capital gains tax. Obama said he favored raising the top capital gains rate to 28%. Doing this, according to the Friday, April 18, 2008 Wall Street Journal is a "tax hike on some 100 million Americans who own stock, including millions of people who fit Mr. Obama's definition of middle class."
Twice - twice - Charlie Gibson tried to explain to Obama that raising the rate of capital gains taxes results in less revenue for the government and twice Obama denied this proven history of this fact.
From the WSJ, (italicized emphasis the WSJ):
[Obama said], raising the capital gains tax is necessary, "to make sure...that our tax system is fair and that we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don't have it and that we're able to invest in our schools. And you can't do that for free."
But Mr. Gibson had noted that higher rates yielded less: revenue. So the news anchor tried again: "But history shows that when you drop the capital gains tax, the revenues go up?" Mr. Obama responded that this "might happen or it might not. It depends on Wall Street and how business is going."
When the tax rate has risen over the past half century, capital gains realizations have fallen and along with them tax revenue. The most recent such episode was in the early 1990s, when Mr. Obama was old enough to be paying attention. That's one reason Jack Kennedy proposed cutting the capital gains rate. And it's one reason Bill Clinton went along with a rate cut to 20% from 28% in 1997.
Either the young Illinois Senator is ignorant of this revenue data, or he doesn't really care because he's a true income redistributionist who prefers high tax rates as a matter of ideological dogma regardless of the revenue consequences.
Obama has to know raising the rate on capital gains will reduce revenue, but he doesn't care because he's a populist. He's a populist who doesn't think anyone will notice, or question him on his beliefs or policy. But Charlie Gibson did, and boy did he and ABC get a trashing from the rabid Obama supporters who believe their Golden Candidate is above any second-guessing.
In the debate Hillary Clinton also said she would consider raising the capital gains rates and also promised not to raise taxes on middle class Americans, "people making less than $250,000 a year."
Obama also proposed lifting the cap on wages subject to payroll tax. The WSJ:
"If you raise the payroll taxes, that's going to raise taxes on [people earning $97,500 in 2007 and is $102,000 this year," said] Gibson. Ignoring the no-tax pledge he had made five minutes earlier, Mr. Obama explained that such a tax increase was nevertheless necessary.
If the issue of taxes and how Obama feels about them - and how he flip flops on them - isn't a legitimate issue for any debate moderator to pursue questioning, what is?
The real irony here is that some of the Obamaniacs - especially those who now disdain Hillary - were part of the same crowd who wanted to censor ABC Television for their mini-series critical of the Clinton Administration, "The Path To 9-11." The hypocrisy of some people knows no bounds, does it?
If Obama is so sincere and honest, and has nothing to hide and is so knowledgeable on all the important issues, why are his supporters so deathly afraid of him being asked hard questions - sometimes more than once? Of what are they afraid?
Links to this post:
accordance and compliance with Fair Use Section 107 U.S. Copyright Code.
All other images and content © 2005-2009 David Drake.
Not responsible for content contained at linked sites.
Policy on commenting:
- Anonymous comments have little chance of being published.
- Comments made on posts 60 days old or older have little chance of being published.
- Published comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog author.
- Discretion of publishing or rejecting submitted comments rests solely with the owner and creator of this blog.
- Comments that egregiously "plug" (i.e. advertise or promote) another site or blog will be rejected. This doesn't mean you cannot include a link to your story, blog or to another site, but don't go overboard.
- Profanity is not a disqualifying factor, but profane rants solely for purposes of profanity are unlikely to be published.
- The owner and creator of this blog is not liable or responsible for the opinions of those who comment.