President Obama and other politicians are advocating higher taxes, with a particular emphasis on class-warfare taxes targeting the so-called rich. This Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation video explains why fiscal policy based on hate and envy is fundamentally misguided. For more information please visit our web page: www.freedomandprosperity.org.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

25 Responses to “Five Key Reasons to Reject Class-Warfare Tax Policy”

  1. MrTrilliondollarman says:

    I wonder if Dan Mitchell was aware at the time he made this video that Atlas Shrugged was becoming popular again.

  2. DAB3055 says:

    @AAL
    98% christian ??? You might want to check your faxts ..just a suggestion, of course.

  3. Kabukihomewood says:

    you dumbshit. HOW WELL ARE PUBLIC SCHOOLS WORKING TODAY. ANSWER: VERY VERY POORLY.

  4. brainiacgames says:

    @hiredgoons10 That would be pertinent if anyone were talking about getting rid of tax entirely. Which nobody is.

    And it’s even funnier that we have such incredibly high taxation, yet the roads, schools, and police departments are falling apart. Know why? Because the vast majority of state/federal income goes towards salary, pension, and benefits for government workers. The rest mostly goes to Medicare. This is why our bridges fall down. Dumbass.

  5. lordhighexecutioner says:

    Abject nonsense. Over the past 30 years, the wealth created by all has been divvied up more and more unfairly, a zero-sum game in which those in middle and lower class lose, and this has been compounded by tax policies that deepen this tendency. This is putting many western countries on the road to feudalism. The only way out is to reverse the policies, including tax policies, including ending policies for mass unemployment to depress wages, including increasing trade union power.

  6. lordhighexecutioner says:

    More taxes on the rich means that those who control the companies will have less incentive to milk their enterprises, as they do now, and more incentive to reinvest it in the business. The problem with the class warriors like this person is that they assume that the rich are born totally virtuous and will always do the right thing and are in no need of any regulation, whilst those below need coercion and the threat of starvation and prison to keep them in line.

  7. yellowkrux says:

    How does higher taxes on income, & investments decrease ones desire to have more income? How would being taxed less make one less likely to try & hide income or otherwise circumvent taxes, when the amount saved could be thousands, or hundreds of thousands of dollars? Globalization & American grain subsidization are causing america to lose jobs,while simultaneously making the wealthy wealthier, which brings me to my final question,Why is it class warfare only when the working class fights back?

  8. yellowkrux says:

    @brainiacgames I think the fact that 51cents out of every tax dollar goes to the military might be significant.

  9. v44forme1 says:

    Yes I agree with viehe69, the rich don’t work as hard as the working class. Who has the health problems, who lives over taxed, and just survive.
    Since 2009 billionaries increased from 700+ to over 1100, doubling wealth and destroying the poor. This is a lot of lies.

  10. TheNintendhoe says:

    @yellowkrux

    51? I heard it was more like 20.

  11. yellowkrux says:

    @TheNintendhoe Sorry that was hyperbole, there’s 23% fixed & another 7% from discretionary spending. That’s still nearly a third of our damn budget.

  12. anarksee says:

    Suck a dick,Dan,you pampered bitch!….Would you kill this fucker if you had the chance?I would!

  13. backreefoil says:

    Excellent Video!! more people should see it, i will spread it. problem is young people are mostly socialist because they are niave and easily led by left wing losers. Here in Australia, high taxes has always retarded growth and rewarded leeches / criminals. The 1 Person, 1 Vote system gives too much power to the leeches in society. We need a multiple votes per person voting system, based on what they “give” to or “take” from society, the more u give the more votes, the more u take, the less vote

  14. kyleds111 says:

    @brainiacgames We actually have a incredible low tax rate compared to Europe and most first world countries.

  15. lordhighexecutioner says:

    If you take the percentage of income paid in taxes, you’ll find that it’s about 30 percent across the board for most people and in fact the percentage drops for the top 1 per cent. Taxes are effectively flat already. So stop your complaining.

  16. lordhighexecutioner says:

    “High income taxes encourage income”. I never knew that income taxes rose to over 100%. So if you make an additional $20,000 you’re taxed at a marginal rate of 200% so you’ll have to pay $40,000 in taxes on top of that. That means you’ll forgo the $20,000 because you know that if you get that money you’ll actually be losing $20,000! If marginal tax rates are under 100%, you will always be guaranteed of more income when you make more income.

  17. Fuctmentality says:

    $3.5< million is a nest egg?
    Why would someone not want to make more money?
    Reality shows that while GDP has gone up in the 30 years, wages are the same(at best) & poverty has risen, doesn't that stand in the way of the "the best way to help the poor" argument?
    Doesn't the fact the swiss have a higher corporate tax, stand in the way of the argument that taxation outsources jobs?
    Don't we already have a class warfare tax policy as the top 1% pays lower taxes than the next 9%?

  18. s117godd says:

    @kyleds111
    I hate it when every little prick pulls out that point like it proves everything. Yes that’s true. European countries have exorbitant tax rates, usually claiming a large fraction or a majority of their constituents’ income…
    So what. What the fuck does that prove? Don’t just drop little terds like that, actually finish your thought.

  19. s117godd says:

    I have a sweet, sweet idea to shut all of the welfare-state types up. How about for all public programs beside the barebones (courts, police, military), there is an opt-in system. If you want to use public schools, medicare etc., you can choose to have the gov’t take your monies and you can use those programs. The rest of us can choose not to pay the taxes, but we don’t get to use public shools, USPS, ‘free’ medicare etc. We all get to choose. Any problem with that?

  20. tom6612 says:

    It’s obvious from the last 30 years and especially the Bush admin that republicans should be completely ignored when they talk about financial matters.

    Google the phrase “IMF Says Advanced Economies Already in Depression” and you will find the Bloomberg article that shows we ended up in a depression 2 weeks after Bush left office.

  21. Fuctmentality says:

    @s117godd Not so sweet, go no military, no police, & no courts & you got a deal, because truth be told the lower you are on the economic spectrum the less important these things are to you. If you want to use them, you pay for them. Good luck paying when I rob you & burn your house down to pay for my kid’s education.

  22. s117godd says:

    @Fuctmentality
    I don’t get what you mean. Listen again – I’m saying courts, military, and police are the only things that the consitution specifically said our government shoud be handling because they’re the first things you need to build a nation (security, law and order). I’m saying, if you want this other crap, allow the gov’t to take JUST YOUR money, build the staduim or park or whatever, but dont force the rest of us to pay for public projects that we don’t want/won’t ever use.

  23. s117godd says:

    @tom6612
    Agreed sort-of: The problems that fell apart with/directly after Bush have been brewing for a long time before him (not that he did anything to prevent them); That was a failure of economic mechanisms, no amount of tax cuts would’ve helped.
    People like the narrator only side w. Republicans because they’re the traditional pro-business party. But Republicans are in it for power just as much as the next guy – to build up their feifdom in office and then retire into big pillows of cash.

  24. tom6612 says:

    @s117godd wrote — “Agreed sort-of: The problems that fell apart with/directly after Bush have been brewing for a long time before him (not that he did anything to prevent them)”

    Yeah the problems began in 1980 when Raygun started this insane Raygunomics / Friedmanomics/supply-side BS. It was also tried down in South America and failed down there too. It has a long history of failure.

  25. tom6612 says:

    @s117godd (part 2) — Raygunomics specifically failed because it brutalized labor which is another way of saying it savaged domestic consumer markets and demand which is what makes it possible for business to remain viable. It was very simple to see this coming. The cons have been telegraphing their intentions ever since 1980. I’m surprised it didn’t happen sooner.

Leave a Reply

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

hide totop

Powered by WordPress Lab