1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
People who call Obama a Socialist can only be referring to the third definition, because Obama is certainly not an advocate of state ownership. Well, I say that . . . but what politician isn't an advocate of state ownership these days given the recent nationalization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? That point aside (and hopefully that decision will turn a profit for the federal government), here is the issue: Anyone who supports a progressive tax system is a Socialist according to the third definition above. Even John McCain.
Here is the difference between McCain and Obama: Obama wants to reinstitute the 39% tax bracket immediately as opposed to waiting for 2010 when the Bush tax cuts expire. McCain would probably push to make 35% the top tax bracket permanently. So if you want to call Obama a Socialist, it would be nice if you could acknowledge that by the same standard, i.e. Merriam-Webster's definition number three, John McCain is a Socialist too.
There is a wonderful New Yorker article that highlights John McCain in the following exchange back in 2000 on the show Hardball:
YOUNG WOMAN: "Are we getting closer and closer to, like, socialism and stuff?. . . ."
MCCAIN: "Here’s what I really believe: That when you reach a certain level of comfort, there’s nothing wrong with paying somewhat more."
SKYWAYNE (ME): "Ummm, isn't that, like, the same thing as 'spreading the wealth?"
You can read the entire article, which is very good, HERE.
The tax policy differences between the candidates can be read in this report by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.
A very smart person recently told me that reducing capital gains taxes results in more revenue to the federal government, since a lower rate incentivizes "churning." That turns out to be correct. For that reason, I am for a lower capital gains rate, but the same logic does not seem to apply to ordinary income. As a result, I would personally support finding the optimal capital gains rate that produces the highest marginal revenue and at the same time reverting to the higher top income bracket for ordinary income . . . that is, until we figure out a way to drastically cut spending. But the cardinal rule of governmental fiscal responsibility is to pay as you go.
As for higher taxes and the progressive tax system, if you have more, you have more to lose. As the great John Locke said, the main purpose of government is to protect the wealth we produce by our labour. I am not necessarily pro progressive tax system, but we need it until the government stops doing things like lowering taxes during a time when we are financing a war. Just my two cents!
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
People who call Obama a Socialist can only be referring to the third definition, because Obama is certainly not an advocate of state ownership. Well, I say that . . . but what politician isn't an advocate of state ownership these days given the recent nationalization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? That point aside (and hopefully that decision will turn a profit for the federal government), here is the issue: Anyone who supports a progressive tax system is a Socialist according to the third definition above. Even John McCain.
Here is the difference between McCain and Obama: Obama wants to reinstitute the 39% tax bracket immediately as opposed to waiting for 2010 when the Bush tax cuts expire. McCain would probably push to make 35% the top tax bracket permanently. So if you want to call Obama a Socialist, it would be nice if you could acknowledge that by the same standard, i.e. Merriam-Webster's definition number three, John McCain is a Socialist too.
There is a wonderful New Yorker article that highlights John McCain in the following exchange back in 2000 on the show Hardball:
YOUNG WOMAN: "Are we getting closer and closer to, like, socialism and stuff?. . . ."
MCCAIN: "Here’s what I really believe: That when you reach a certain level of comfort, there’s nothing wrong with paying somewhat more."
SKYWAYNE (ME): "Ummm, isn't that, like, the same thing as 'spreading the wealth?"
You can read the entire article, which is very good, HERE.
The tax policy differences between the candidates can be read in this report by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.
A very smart person recently told me that reducing capital gains taxes results in more revenue to the federal government, since a lower rate incentivizes "churning." That turns out to be correct. For that reason, I am for a lower capital gains rate, but the same logic does not seem to apply to ordinary income. As a result, I would personally support finding the optimal capital gains rate that produces the highest marginal revenue and at the same time reverting to the higher top income bracket for ordinary income . . . that is, until we figure out a way to drastically cut spending. But the cardinal rule of governmental fiscal responsibility is to pay as you go.
As for higher taxes and the progressive tax system, if you have more, you have more to lose. As the great John Locke said, the main purpose of government is to protect the wealth we produce by our labour. I am not necessarily pro progressive tax system, but we need it until the government stops doing things like lowering taxes during a time when we are financing a war. Just my two cents!
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment