Obama-Nomics

Taxes, we all abhor them, but we absolutely love to hear the words “Tax Cut.” Government, we shake in our boots at the thought of it growing even larger in our lives, but we love to hear the words “Universal Health Care, Social Security, and yes, even Welfare.” Rights, we love the idea that our Constitution and Bill of Rights protect our basic rights of freedom, but there are those among us who love to hear the words “Gun Control.” Barack Obama, the Democratic Presidential hopeful has interesting stances on each of these issues just to name a few.

Throughout the current Presidential campaign, Obama has criticized the Bush sponsored tax cuts enacted during his tenure as President. Primarily, Obama believes that decreasing taxes upon the wealthier individuals is wrong. Wealthy is a subjective term by the way, we’ll just leave it at that. To the point, graduated taxes are generally bad for everyone except government. As Americans, we are subject to a graduated tax system. Any idea what theory graduated taxes comes from? Try the Communist Manifesto as put forth by the creator of Communism himself, Karl Marx. Displaying how important graduated taxation is, it is plank number two of ten in his Manifesto.

Obama wants to allow the Bush tax cuts to lapse so he can sponsor a tax bill that “cuts taxes” for the “working class” and raises them for the “wealthy.” Great idea, if you’re politicians looking for ways to cover rising costs by creating government sponsored universal health care among various other government growing policies. It doesn’t take a mathematical genius to figure out that taxing the “rich” can effectively generate more revenue than taxing a bunch of pennies from those who earn less. However, something occurred in the last several decades, the economy has become globalized. Global economics are our concern, not closed border strategies. If we tax our wealth, our wealth will leave our borders along with the jobs they have created. Our banks will no longer have wealth in their vaults to generate loans against and in the end, our economy will self destruct as business leaves our shores to be done in foreign countries. Money has no loyalty, and neither do taxes.

You may argue that taxes are necessary. Yes, our government depends on taxes or we would not have any military to protect us, no judicial system to protect the innocent, and our ability to live as free men and women would be jeopardized. However, there are ways to create a tax system that is fair amongst us all and that is of course paying taxes on what we purchase. No more deductions from our check without our consent. The taxes we pay are paid when we buy something. Our tax burden is within our control based upon our purchase decisions. Check out the FairTax for a representation of exactly this idea in concrete form.

Outside of arguing against Bush’s tax cuts, Obama has recently changed his stance regarding them. He has placated the worried audiences by saying that he would “delay” revoking the Bush tax cuts if we were in a “recession” when he assumes office, if elected. Until this statement, Obama has been guns blazing against the “rich getting richer” tax cuts. However, he has now changed his tune and realizes that increasing taxes does present negative consequences. These negative consequences are exacerbated when the economy is slow and less noticeable when things are humming along. However, it appears that he believes “less noticeable” is an agreeable outcome. He and his economists are not thinking globally. Increased taxes upon wealth will in fact deter investing within our borders and we all know the outcome of that policy choice.

The problem for Obama is this, how can he grow government without coming up with extra money in the form of taxes? The answer is he cannot. Outside of printing money or decreasing the size of government, his proposed policy changes cannot be accomplished. Democrats choosing to decrease the size of government isn’t necessarily on the party’s agenda… printing money is not the answer either, even they know that. So, the only answer is to tax the “wealthy.” Increasing the taxes on the “working class” is not an election winner so the key is to make those who can afford it, foot the bill.

Pay your fair share, we’ve all heard it. But is asking the rich people to pay for the less rich fair? Of course it isn’t. The problem is the graduated tax, not the tax itself. However, if we remove graduated taxes, power derived from our current tax law is removed. What in the world would the Democrats have to run a campaign on then? Since I was a child, every Democrat running for office has decreed that he/she will lower taxes for the hard working blue collar workers. They will make those elitists with the money pay their way even if it takes 50% tax rates to do it. Great idea, if you’re a Communist.

After many months on the campaign trail, at least Obama has shown the ability to publicly state that he understands increased taxes will in fact create economic heartache. However, we all still know his underlying agenda and in the end, increased taxes are the only way to pay for it. Beware when you ask the government to do things for you. The money has to come from somewhere. That somewhere is your wallet and mine.