I Care if Millionaires Pay More in Taxes and I’m not a Millionaire

With Republican friends like Bill Kristol, who needs Democrats to condemn? Here’s the latest from supposed conservative Kristol on raising taxes:

“I don’t think Republicans have the leverage or it’s worth using whatever leverage they have in maintaining rates at 35% instead 37 or 38%. I just don’t think it’s economically — as far as policy — especially if you can take it up to millionaires… A lot of Tea Party members don’t care that much if a couple millionaires pay that more in taxes, honestly.”

I care. Once you give government officials an inch on taxes and spending, they take 100 million miles. Kristol is a fool if he thinks that a tax increase on millionaires is going to fix anything. In fact, a millionaire’s tax will only embolden the Democrats to spend even more money to buy even more votes.

When the 16th Amendment was passed, most Americans were not affected by it. The incomes of couples exceeding $4,000, as well as those of single persons earning $3,000 or more, were subject to a one percent federal tax. One percent!

An income of $4000 in 1913, given the ravages of inflation, would be more than $88,000 in today’s dollar valuation. Most married couples didn’t make $3000 a year in 1913.

In 1913, the top tax rate was 7% on incomes above $500,000 ($10 million in 2007 dollars) and a total of $28.3 million was collected. Less than 1% of the population paid federal income tax from 1913 to 1915. The people who voted for the income tax believed that only the “rich” would be paying the tax. Like today, the people who voted for the income tax voted because only other people would be paying it. Not them.

It’s no wonder that liberals are called Progressives. They are willing to settle on very small gains in legislation at the beginning so over time they can increase its effect. This has happened with every legislative act. We’ve seen the growth of every program. Can you imagine what’s going to happen to a healthcare bill of 2700 pages once the bureaucrats start interpreting it for us and the mandates keep increasing?

Benjamin Franklin said the following in 1789: “In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” But this was before taxing power was handed over to the federal government. Will Rogers (1879–1935), humorist and social commentator, with more than a century of congressional foibles to evaluate, was more accurate: “The difference between death and taxes is death doesn’t get worse every time Congress meets.”

Liberals, and those who bow down to their decrees, contend that taxation is all about social justice. In their view, a group of philosopher kings is needed to determine what’s just. It didn’t work for ancient Greece and it won’t work today since those in charge don’t have a fixed moral standard to determine what’s just or unjust.

Walter E. Williams wrote: “Let me offer you my definition of social justice: I keep what I earn and you keep what you earn. Do you disagree? If you do, then tell me how much of what I earn belongs to you, and why?”

The problem is that other people are telling us what of ours belongs to them, and they don’t have to tell us why. A political party that endorses the killing of pre-born babies doesn’t care about stealing your money.