Bent Notes

Your 401(k) is not safe from House FHers.

Your required reading for today:  WSJ editorial on what a load of hooey the 95-percent-of-households-get-tax-cuts line is.

There are seven “tax credits” that are key to the Chicago Marxists plan.  Six of them are “refundable,” which means you get a damn check from the US Treasury whether or not you have any tax liability. 

Now, consider the size of the increased burden on that other 5 percent - the most successful and job-creating among us.

Now consider that these “credits” get phased out for the lower-income folks as their incomes rise.

It’s really quite simple what The Chicago Marxist proposes to do: seize money from successful people using the state’s monopoly on the legitimate use of force, give it to other groups, and then discourage those groups from aspiring to success themselves.

1.) This constant use of the term “middle class” by Biden and the Chicago Marxist.  It’s being employed to plant the notion of a zero-sum game in voters’ minds, as if tax “breaks” for corporations or “the wealthy” somehow somehow deprive “ordinary” Americans of income.  Pretty easy to demolish, really.  Point out that some 40 percent of U.S. households don’t pay any taxes, and the top 10 percent of earners pay well over 50 percent of the nation’s taxes.  Then point out that the Chicago Marxist is being disingenuous to the point of intelligence-insulting with his condemnation of “tax breaks” (grrrrr, there’s that term again; I’ll get back to that one shortly) for corporations that “ship jobs overseas.”  They do so PRECISELY BECAUSE THEY FIND A MORE FAVORABLE TAX ENVIRONMENT IN SOME OTHER COUNTRY.  The whole thing can be condensed to a soundbite-sized rebuttal: No one in this country - no individual or business - needs to pay once cent more in taxes.

2.) The Chicago Marxist’s health-care proposal.  As with all FHer schemes, there are two parts to this one: the Santa Claus part, and the how-we’ll-pay-for-it part.  Here’s how you nuke this one: the Santa Claus part involves a narrowing of the individual’s range of choices, and the second part involves naked wealth redistribution.  (See item one and the theft of the money of those with incomes over $250,000.)  That’s really as wonky as you need to get.  Again, this one can be condensed to a soundbite that tells the whole story: SENATOR OBAMA, IT’S NOT YOUR MONEY.

Oh, yeah, and demolish this business about tax “breaks.”  Once again, it’s an attempt to get voters to think that high tax rates for a particular group were some kind of baseline, and that any subsequent lowering of that was some kind of deviation, a momentary respite because the government, benevolent entity that it is, wanted to give them a leg up for a little while, and that now it’s time for such a group to return to “patriotic” levels of coughing up its money.

The American people aren’t idiots.  If this stuff were expalined to them exactly like this, they’d see what was really going on.