- Politics and Social Issues»
- Economy & Government
Are people REALLY that dumb?
Obama playing on ignorance and class envy
I saw an ad today where Pres. Obama was criticizing Gov. Romney because he made $20 million dollars, but only paid 14% taxes. Right off the top I see by Obama's admission that Romney must have paid at least $2,800,000 – That’s two MILLION eight HUNDRED THOUSAND dollars. That is more than most of us EARN in a lifetime. But… since Romney made $20 million, that can’t be enough, right? – and Obama wants to make sure that the 48% of people who pay NO TAXES hate his guts.
Here is the reality of this. In order for someone to get their tax rates down, they have to have “tax deductions”. These are set up by Congress as a reward for people to spend their money the way the government wants. Such as, if you buy a new “green” air conditioner for your house you can deduct around $6500 off your income. If you buy one of the government electric cars, you can deduct about $4500. If you give to charities, you can deduct up to 10% of your income. And it goes on and on and on. Spend your money the way the government wants and you get deductions.
For Romney to get down to 14% (“if” that is how low it really is) he had to have spent a LOT of money where the government wanted it. All tax write-offs are HIGHLY scrutinized by the IRS and I am sure that if any write-offs were not eligible it would have been headline news. If he got his taxes down to 14%, he should be applauded for spending his money the way the government wanted… and it had to be a LOT OF MONEY he spent to get down to just 14%.
On the other hand, if Obama had no tax write-offs, then he failed to spend how his government wanted. He failed at economics as it is always prudent to utilize tax advantages. Most every business person I know keeps receipts, etc. and takes advantage of every deduction they can. If Obama didn’t, well …
Bottom line is that Obama is upset that Romney chose for himself how he spent the money. If Romney only gave 10% to charity (which is likely low due to his strong religious history), that means he gave at least 2 Million dollars directly to help people. Obama wants to stop individual deductions and dictate what charities are supported (like ACORN and other pro-abortion entities) or use that money for “investments” (like Solyndra and the other six green energy companies that received $Billions from Obama that all went or are nearing bankruptcy).
He wants people to think Romney is doing something wrong when he has done exactly what all of us try to do – he has just worked his buns off to get where he is doing it with millions of dollars where we have to do it with plain dollars. lol
Utilizing directed tax incentives IS the way to get wealthy people to put their money to work. Cities that want large corporations to move to their city have ALWAYS given tax breaks. The companies pay less taxes, but they bring a boom of economic growth and put people to work. Reagan turned Carter’s debacle around by giving businesses major tax breaks for people oriented expansion. Businesses paid less taxes, but hundreds of thousands of people were put to work. The taxes they paid more than made up for the less taxes paid by the businesses… and the government coffers filled fast.
It worked then and it can work now, but the key is “directed” tax breaks. Reagan gave breaks for “people oriented expansion”. Cities give breaks for economic growth. EVERY major city is offering breaks for wealthy people to spend their money to develop low-income areas. Do we now condemn wealthy people because they spend their money in these areas and pay lower taxes for it?
Wise up and see through these ads whose sole purpose is to turn class envy into votes. Prove that you are smarter than the president gives you credit for. Applaud the wealthy when they get tax breaks – shucks, let’s give them more – because it means they are spending their money to do the things that are needed.