Joe Kristan raises some excellent questions for tax increasers in It’s Okay to Feed Them to Piranhas, They’re Rich:
Anybody who wants to increase taxes on “the wealthy” should first address these questions:
- What rate do you want to see the “rich” pay? If it’s not the proposed 39.6% (or 43.4% under Obamacare), what is it?
- Is there some point where a taxpayer should have a right to keep his earnings, no matter how much?
- Does raising tax rates on “the rich” backfire at some rate? Is there a tax rate that damages the economy enough that the harm caused to the non-rich exceeds whatever benefits come from raising tax rates? What is that rate?
- Is there some point where you will say the government has enough money and power and shouldn’t get bigger? What is that point?
Until people who want the Bush cuts to expire answer these questions, I assume that the proposed Obama rate increase is just a down payment on their next tax increase.
Right on, Joe. Those who want tax increases on the rich will propose a second round of increases ten minutes after the first increases become law. It’s what they do.
Although I believe that slippery slope arguments usually make for bad law, in this case we should oppose even modest tax increases on the rich for the same reason pro-choicers oppose a ban on partial-birth abortions and gun rights advocates oppose a ban on assault rifles.
They do not do so because they favor partial birth abortions and assault rifles, but rather because they know once their opponents ban those things they will set their sights on the banning of first trimester abortions and handguns.
6 responses so far ↓
1 Joe Kristan // Aug 19, 2010 at 9:32 pm
Peter, thanks!
2 garth // Aug 19, 2010 at 11:54 pm
Peter, I think your general view that slippery slopes make for bad law is much wiser than this exception you are willing to make.
Ditto partial birth abortions and assault rifles.
Even with significant cuts in entitlements and other spending the government needs more revenue. There is no practical way around this. And if the Middle Class is taking hit with entitlement cuts, why should they take ALL of the hit with tax increases?
3 Peter // Aug 20, 2010 at 9:30 am
Garth,
Temporary expansions of government almost without exception become permanent expansions of government. It’s out of control and the only way politicians will get serious about reducing fraud and waste is if they know they can’t just confiscate more of the citizens’ wealth.
I will pay more taxes when the government starts being responsible with the taxes I already paid it.
4 garth // Aug 20, 2010 at 7:53 pm
Peter, what you describe is classic “starve the beast”. We are about to enter the fourth decade of its failure.
5 Peter // Aug 20, 2010 at 9:37 pm
garth,
I beg to differ. This beast has been eating quite well, thank you very much.
It keeps getting bigger and bigger and bigger. Soon it will burst.
6 Tax Increases: The Slippery Slope Argument at Taxes // Aug 21, 2010 at 2:06 am
[...] [...]
Leave a Comment