Tag Archives: Socialism

Commentary

Are the rich paying their fair share of taxes?

15 Comments
Do the rich pay their fair share of taxes?
Do the rich pay their fair share of taxes?

The Hoover Institute at Stanford University tweeted this article.

Excerpt:

The Democrats’ position in the negotiations to raise the debt limit and deal with runaway government debt can be summarized in one mantric phrase: the rich must “pay their fair share” in taxes. White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer, for example, said a day before the Obama’s Sunday summit with Congressmen that any deal requires a “balanced approach that asks the very wealthiest and special interests to pay their fair share.” Earlier this year, Illinois Congressman Jan Schakowsky introduced legislation called the Fairness in Taxation Act, which she justified by saying “It’s time for millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share.” Clearly, the Democrats think this is a winning formula going into the critical 2012 elections, despite the historically verified fact that raising tax rates on top earners will not over time generate more tax revenues.

Some political Socrates needs to challenge this formula by asking for a definition of “fair.” Clearly, having the top 10% of taxpayers pay 70% of all income taxes––while nearly half of taxpayers pay nothing––isn’t considered “fair” by those who want to increase taxes on high earners. So what would be fair? Having the top 10% pay 80%, or 90%, or 100%? The U.S. already has the most progressive tax system among 24 OECD countries, ahead of socialist heartthrobs like Sweden and Norway, so what more do Democrats want?

It might be a good idea to send this article to your friends, and bookmark it in case you get into a debate.

News

Social liberal Mitt Romney refuses to sign pro-marriage pledge

Leave a comment
Mitt Romney is a RINO - Republican In Name Only
Mitt Romney is a RINO - Republican In Name Only

Socially liberal, fiscally moderate Mitt Romney refuses to sign a pro-marriage pledge.

Excerpt:

Last week, the Family Leader, a conservative pro-family group in Iowa, asked Republican presidential candidates to sign a pledge endorsing traditional marriage and other social issues. Michele Bachmann was the first to say she would sign it. Mitt Romney has decided not to. Tim Pawlenty hasn’t announced his decision.

That tells you something important about the battle for the Republican presidential nomination and the box in which Pawlenty now finds himself. Two months ago, he believed he was in a strong position to break out and become the principal alternative to front-runner Romney. Today he is trying to figure out how to prevent Bachmann from blocking his path.

[…]The calculus for Romney was the opposite, but not necessarily more difficult. Neither winning Iowa nor becoming the favored candidate of social and religious conservatives is part of his strategy for capturing the nomination or the presidency. He wants support from those values voters, but, as with others who have won the GOP nomination, he is not willing to pay any price to get it.

Here’s the pledge.

Naturally, Michele Bachmann was the first to sign it – because she is actually a social conservative.

Is Mitt Romney a social conservative?

Here’s a video of Mitt Romney expressing his social conservative credentials: (H/T Robb)

Just to refresh you, Mitt Romney also refused to sign the pro-life pledge authored by the Susan B. Anthony List. Michele Bachmann signed it, of course. Because Michele Bachmann is solid on social issues, and is a pro-life and pro-marriage activist. She doesn’t just make speeches – she has acted. It’s in her public record.

And of course Mitt Romney was praised by Al Gore for his global warming views. Seriously.

And Mitt Romney passed the Massachusetts equivalent of Obamacare, which is now way over budget. He’s not even a solid fiscal conservative.

News

NHS refuses to treat woman who is starving to death

2 Comments

Here’s a sad news story from the UK, where they have a massive state-run health care system called the National Health Service. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

A young woman who is starving to death after being diagnosed with a paralysed stomach has been told that NHS bosses refuse to fund an operation to save her.

Rudi Hargreaves, 22, has shrunk from a healthy 10st to a skeletal 5st 10lb after being diagnosed with the crippling condition last year.

Within weeks of being diagnosed with gastroparesis, Rudi found her size 12 clothes were hanging off her – as her stomach became unable to digest food at a normal rate.

The condition can be treated with a £14,000 operation to fit a gastric pacemaker – although this is still considered to be an experimental treatment.

But health chiefs have refused to fund the surgery, saying ‘insufficient supporting information’ has been provided by her GP.

[…]A spokesperson for NHS Hull said: ‘To date, the application in question has not been agreed as, crucially, insufficient supporting information has been provided to allow due consideration to take place.

‘Any requested procedures must also fall in line with the provider trust’s priorities for service development and delivery.

‘The patient’s clinician has been invited to provide the necessary clarification, receipt of which should enable the patient’s case to be progressed within the PCT.’

What’s troubling is countries like Canada, where the government not only decides if you will be treated, but whether you can be treated. That’s because if they deny you treatment, you cannot pay for treatment out of pocket. You have to leave the country and pay someone else out of pocket for the treatment, even though you have have paid into the system for many years. So your money is good enough for them to collect over your life, but when you need treatment, you may not be allowed to get it, and you may not even have the money (after taxes) to go abroad for treatment.