The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions." --American Statesman Daniel Webster (1782-1852)

Friday, January 27, 2012

"There are not enough Warren Buffett's"

Republican Senator Jim DeMint had a good line in response to Obunglers State of the Union address.campaign speech and class warfare rhetoric. He says that there “are not enough Warren Buffetts in the world that we could take all their money” in order to solve our debt crisis.
     Something to think about,  According to an article by Walter Williams
If Congress imposed a 100 percent tax, taking all earnings above $250,000 per year, it would yield the princely sum of $1.4 trillion. That would keep the government running for 141 days, but there's a problem because there are 224 more days left in the year.
How about corporate profits to fill the gap? Fortune 500 companies earn nearly $400 billion in profits. Since leftists think profits are little less than theft and greed, Congress might confiscate these ill-gotten gains so that they can be returned to their rightful owners. Taking corporate profits would keep the government running for another 40 days, but that along with confiscating all income above $250,000 would only get us to the end of June. Congress must search elsewhere.
According to Forbes 400, America has 400 billionaires with a combined net worth of $1.3 trillion. Congress could confiscate their stocks and bonds, and force them to sell their businesses, yachts, airplanes, mansions and jewelry. The problem is that after fleecing the rich of their income and net worth, and the Fortune 500 corporations of their profits, it would only get us to mid-August. The fact of the matter is there are not enough rich people to come anywhere close to satisfying Congress' voracious spending appetite.
       Rich people didn't get rich by being stupid.  They will move or hide their money.  If the government seizes all their property, it will cause 2 problems, one: if you seize everything in the name of "fairness"  to redistribute to the "less fortunate" you will still have people that will not have anything, the poor with few exceptions are poor for a reason.  Also there will be no rich people, this would be a one time thing, once their money is gone, who pays the taxes?   The poor?  yeah right.  The top 50% pay about 97% of all the taxes.  There will be 2 classes of people, the "hoi patoi" and the political elite.  Kinda like the old Soviet Union.  Maybe that is what Obungler has in mind.   The second problem,  is we still have a spending problem, when taxes go up, there is less revenue collected and there will still be a deficit, now it will be acerbated by the seizures of the rich people assets.   We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem and unless COngress ans the president get a grip on it, it will get worse.


1 comment:

  1. Oh so true, and when you REALLY look at the numbers, NONE of his spiel makes sense!


I had to activate Verification because of the spammers piling up on my blog and now I had to block Anonymous users.