The rich have to pay their fair share! This is the favorite line from the Libs and the Progs who will have you believe that the rich are evil, greedy people who do not earn their wealth but have acquired it through shady means. Not only that, but the rich keep getting richer while the poor keep getting poorer. That’s another favorite prog line. Unfortunately for the wealth envy crowd, this is simply not the case. Although, the class warfare warriors know that they can get away with this tact because most people are too ignorant to know what the truth really is, or research it for themselves. People buy into the wealth envy rhetoric because it makes them feel better about their life choices … for many it justifies their moocher existence.
And just what is the truth? Well, it turns out that the rich are paying nine times as much as the poor when you take income into account. Another great article from the American Thinker has the numbers – Deconstructing the Left’s Argument for Increasing Tax Rates on the Rich:
Let’s examine the numbers a little more closely, looking at the tax share relative to income share for the two groups between 1980 and 2008. The share of income tax paid by the rich in proportion to the share of their total income went from 2.25 to 1.9 between 1980 and 2008, while the same ratio for the poor went from .40 to .21. The effective tax burden (tax share in relation to income share) was 5.62 times higher for the rich than for the poor in 1980 and 9.0 times higher in 2008. Thus, the relative tax burden on the rich — relative to income — compared to the poor nearly doubled from 1980 to 2008 — from 5.62 to 9.0.
The sad fact here is that it is going to take something more than a basic government school education to understand what you’ve just read. This means that those numbers are lost on the vast majority of Americans, and pretty much all of the people who love to prance around demanding that their politicians make the rich pay “their fair share.” We can’t tax the producers into prosperity.
There are times when irony is like a warm, sudsy bath, deliciously satisfying and causing one to revel in the glorious feeling of contentment it offers.
Medai Matters for America featured this headline in January:
Right-Wing Media Revive Myth That Health Care Waivers Are Political Favors
I’m afraid we’re going to have to revive that “myth” all over again. Of the 204 waivers to Obamacare granted by HHS in April, “38 are for fancy eateries, hip nightclubs and decadent hotels in House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s Northern California district,” according to the Daily Caller.
That’s in addition to the 27 new waivers for health care or drug companies and the 31 new union waivers Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services approved.
Pelosi’s district secured almost 20 percent of the latest issuance of waivers nationwide, and the companies that won them didn’t have much in common with companies throughout the rest of the country that have received Obamacare waivers.
Other common waiver recipients were labor union chapters, large corporations, financial firms and local governments. But Pelosi’s district’s waivers are the first major examples of luxurious, gourmet restaurants and hotels getting a year-long pass from Obamacare.
Barack Obama on December 15,2009:
“We agree on reforms that will finally reduce the costs of health care. Families will save on their premiums; businesses that will see their costs rise if we do nothing will save money now and in the future. This plan will strengthen Medicare and extend the life of that program. And because it gets rid of the waste and inefficiencies in our health care system, this will be the largest deficit reduction plan in over a decade.”
The Medicare Board of Trustees on May 13, 2011:
The 2011 annual report from the Medicare Board of Trustees casts doubt on the ability of the ObamaCare health reform law to achieve significant health care costs a reduction, stating it is “very uncertain” whether the sweeping reform will succeed in reducing health care costs.
The report, released Friday, said that an improved financial outlook reported for Medicare depended on the ability of ObamaCare’s cost-savings experiments to bear fruit – an outcome the Trustees found unlikely.