When Do Democrats Like The Idea Of A Flat Tax? After It Reaches 95%.
How many times have we heard Pres. Obama and most Democrats declare the wealthy should pay their "fair share?" The answer, of course, is countless times. And how many times have they defined what they mean by "fair share?" The answer, of course, is never. They purposely keep the phrase ambiguous.
As I pondered both questions, I kept being drawn to just one conclusion. It's really all about envy. The state of the nation be damned (how else can one explain no movement by Democrats regarding unemployment and recovery for almost two years while they obsessed on passing ObamaCare? During this period, unemployment reached double digits. This was also a period when they had control of the entire government including the House and Senate).
It's become increasingly clear many Democrats and most Progressives are resentful of those who are successful. Yet, at the same time, most of those same individuals are successful themselves. We've witnessed Warren Buffett, many Hollywood celebrities, wealthy politicians, progressive wealthy business men and women, etc. asserting the need for higher taxes especially among the wealthy (they too assert "fair share" without defining it. Being vague enables them to continue the charade).
The "Politics of Envy" makes very strange bedfellows. One has to wonder how they reconcile the dilemma of being successful and wealthy themselves but proclaiming the need for the wealthy to pay their "fair share" whatever that is.
And that's precisely my point. They don't define "fair share" because if they did; their position disintegrates (after all, most of them are wealthy themselves). The use of such an ambiguous phrase as "fair share" is aimed directly at their base. Those are the people who remain resentful at the good fortune of others. Those are the people who remain bitter at those who are successful and wealthy (bear in mind, they perceive all business men and women as wealthy).
As Pres. Obama presents a budget that targets more taxes upon the wealthy (so they can pay their "fair share"), it's easy for him to declare his approach is balanced as he adds over $2.5 trillion more in taxes. The reality is much of the middle class will be hit with these taxes too(ObamaCare and more). But when he panders to his base by claiming the rich will be paying their "fair share," he hopes his diversion and charade will work. After all, he was reelected.
How many times have we heard Pres. Obama and most Democrats declare the wealthy should pay their "fair share?" The answer, of course, is countless times. And how many times have they defined what they mean by "fair share?" The answer, of course, is never. They purposely keep the phrase ambiguous.
As I pondered both questions, I kept being drawn to just one conclusion. It's really all about envy. The state of the nation be damned (how else can one explain no movement by Democrats regarding unemployment and recovery for almost two years while they obsessed on passing ObamaCare? During this period, unemployment reached double digits. This was also a period when they had control of the entire government including the House and Senate).
It's become increasingly clear many Democrats and most Progressives are resentful of those who are successful. Yet, at the same time, most of those same individuals are successful themselves. We've witnessed Warren Buffett, many Hollywood celebrities, wealthy politicians, progressive wealthy business men and women, etc. asserting the need for higher taxes especially among the wealthy (they too assert "fair share" without defining it. Being vague enables them to continue the charade).
The "Politics of Envy" makes very strange bedfellows. One has to wonder how they reconcile the dilemma of being successful and wealthy themselves but proclaiming the need for the wealthy to pay their "fair share" whatever that is.
And that's precisely my point. They don't define "fair share" because if they did; their position disintegrates (after all, most of them are wealthy themselves). The use of such an ambiguous phrase as "fair share" is aimed directly at their base. Those are the people who remain resentful at the good fortune of others. Those are the people who remain bitter at those who are successful and wealthy (bear in mind, they perceive all business men and women as wealthy).
As Pres. Obama presents a budget that targets more taxes upon the wealthy (so they can pay their "fair share"), it's easy for him to declare his approach is balanced as he adds over $2.5 trillion more in taxes. The reality is much of the middle class will be hit with these taxes too(ObamaCare and more). But when he panders to his base by claiming the rich will be paying their "fair share," he hopes his diversion and charade will work. After all, he was reelected.
