Saturday, July 11, 2009

Paying for it

Well this is not at all surprising:
House Democrats agreed yesterday to raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for a sweeping expansion of the nation's health-care system, proposing a surtax on the highest earners that could send the top federal tax rate toward 45 percent.

...The top federal tax rate currently stands at 35 percent, but Democrats have vowed to raise it to 39.6 percent next year, when cuts enacted during the Bush administration expire. Combined with other federal tax adjustments, the surtax could leave most taxpayers with annual incomes more than $350,000 facing top federal rates of at least 45 percent, said Robert Carroll, a senior fellow at the nonprofit Tax Foundation.
Now you see where the label "tax and spend liberals" comes from. In fairness, at least they are willing to pay for what they want to spend money on, which is a change from Republican borrow and spend policies.

This bit, however, made me crack up:
Though wealthier families would face larger tax bills, Rep. Allyson Y. Schwartz (D-Pa.) said health reform, "if this works right," should significantly lower their insurance premiums.

Schwartz said that Democrats on the House Ways and Means Committee, who had been haggling for days over how to pay for Obama's signature domestic initiative, are concerned about imposing such high taxes on income. She said Democrats hope eventually to rework the tax code, a task "we left for another day."
This is priceless. Just out of curiosity, when is the last time the government created a massive program that resulted in net cost savings to society? My guess is never.

The second paragraph is just laughable. Democrats are raising taxes, but are concerned about doing so. Not concerned enough to, you know, not do it, but still concerned. In any case they hope to get around to reworking the tax code at some undefined point in the future. Even if that occurs what does anyone expect them to accomplish? That Democrats will then cut taxes? That they will raise the taxes of the middle and lower income brackets and cut the upper brackets to make the code more equitable? Give me a break.

Update: It's the Mikulski principle in action!

No comments: