-
From the Obama Ministry of Truth
May 21, 2013 | 68 comments
-
Alan Abelson, RIP
May 10, 2013 | 20 comments
-
South Carolina on My Mind
April 30, 2013 | 31 comments
-
Dream Sequences
April 26, 2013 | 62 comments
-
Just Like a Woman
April 25, 2013 | 35 comments
Ben Stein's Diary
Diving Off the Fiscal Cliff
Even with hugely higher taxes we’ll still be marching toward default — and the military cuts will make war more likely.
On or about the end of this year, some big things will be happening with federal government income and outlays. These are commonly referred to as “the fiscal cliff.” Although these changes are complicated, I can simplify them a bit by leaving some small items out.
Basically, the substantial tax cuts George Bush put through on personal income, on dividends, on estates, on capital gains, will expire. That means taxes, especially for upper income persons and for those with large holdings of stocks, and with large estates, will go up quite dramatically. Some estimates put the total increase in the neighborhood of eight to nine percentage points for a high income earner.
The effect on stocks will be large, since the rate in dividends — a large part of the return on stocks — will more than double. That will make stocks less valuable by a goodly margin. Look out below.
The total intake from these tax increases is likely to be in the range of very roughly $250 billion (and I emphasize that this is a rough number) in 2013. There will also, slightly later, be the Obamacare tax hikes on high earners, which will add about 3.5 percentage points to the income tax rate for those with what the Obama regime dubs high income earners.
This abrupt drop off of the Bush tax cuts came because the legislative branch and Mr. Obama could not agree on a more nuanced and gradual way to raise taxes following the expiration of the Bush era tax cuts.
At the same moment, the federal government will begin what it calls “the sequester,” in which very roughly another $300 billion will be lopped from federal spending. The slight majority will be from defense and the rest from “discretionary” federal spending, i.e., not interest on the debt or pensions.
The “sequester” came about because Congress and Mr. Obama could not agree on a plan to more selectively decrease federal spending than the meat axe approach. It troubles me very much because in this challenging world, I do not see the value of cutting defense spending. The principle at work here seems to be one that my father used to describe as, “We’ll do something good for the country — civilian cuts—as long as we can also do something bad for the country — defense cuts.” While China raises its war fighting spending rapidly, we will be hammering ours down. To me, this makes no sense.
In fact, in a nation where there are still so many out of work, I don’t see the point of the civilian cuts right now, either.
But, here come a few points:
The point of the “fiscal cliff” and the sequester is to cut the deficit and attack the immense federal debt. But our spending and debt problems are so large that even with the tax hikes and the budget cuts, our deficit will still be roughly $500 billion in the next fiscal year — one of the five largest deficits on record — and our national debt will be racing towards $20 trillion.
That is how deep a hole we are in. The combination of Bush era tax cuts plus wars plus the stupendous deficits of the first Obama term have put us into a fiscal swamp. Even with these terrible cuts, we will still be marching towards default.
But it gets worse. There will be similar, perhaps larger cuts to spending in the next nine years. At the end of that time, there is some question as to whether we will be able to defend ourselves as a nation — and our national debt will still be rocketing upwards as Obamacare kicks in.
How did this happen? The responsibility, in my mind, largely rests with a well meaning but mistaken idea: that drastic cuts in income taxes would raise economic activity so much that we would collect more federal revenue. There never was any data proving this. There never was meaningful theory proving this — i.e., that large tax cuts would raise productivity and labor force participation dramatically. In fact, the data showed otherwise. Nevertheless, the tax cuts went through under Bush 43, and spending exploded under Obama, and now we are in for it.
The chickens have come home to roost, as the old saying goes.
To coin another old saying, taxes, especially for the high income earners here in California, where I live, are going “sky high.” Instead of a roughly 35% top federal rate, we will have a roughly 43% top federal rate. At the state level, with Jerry Brown’s new taxes in effect retroactively, we will have a top state income tax rate of roughly 15%. Then, we get the Obamacare hike and we are — whaam — over 50% and more on the way, because we will still be running big deficits.
About the Author
Ben Stein is a writer, actor, economist, and lawyer living in Beverly Hills and Malibu. He writes “Ben Stein’s Diary” for every issue of The American Spectator.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (68) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Ben Stein
More Articles From Ben Stein's Diary
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/13/diving-off-the-fiscal-cliff
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Hannah and Her Friends
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
- Boys and Girls
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Kitty | 11.13.12 @ 6:42AM
You're blaming Bush?
TLP| 11.13.12 @ 7:58AM
Let me get this straight..........After Months of trying to make a case for the need for HIGHER TAXES, Boring Ben is now saying that Higher Taxes will at best - Do NOTHING - and worst case - Do far more Damage than anyone can imagine?
He doesn't wanna Cut any Government Workers (Who Produce NOTHING, unless you count Democrat Campaign Contributions) because Unemployment is already High. He's worried about our Military, because they are looking at the Exact Same Budget Slash and Burn Scenario, that they always look at when there's a Democrat in the White House. (Just don't you dare question their PATRIOTISM. And, don't you dare call them WEAK ON DEFENSE)
Every Focal Point of EVIL in the World, is Arming themselves to the teeth. A Major War in the Middle East is as sure as is Our Young Muslim Pharaoh rushing off to play Golf, or to FUNDRAISE, or to a Party at his Homie's Crib, while our Embassies are being Sacked, and our People are being Murdered.
So, what are we supposed to do?
How can we find a Compromise that will Save The Country from the last 4 Years, before the Next 4 Years FINISHES US, once and for all?
What Half measures can we take? What can we COMPROMISE ON, to get a Deal, and Save Face at the same time?
Nothing. Do nothing. Go get one of those Books with The Jumbles in it, and figure out the words.
Jack in Wi| 11.13.12 @ 8:37AM
Bush is too blame. It is because of him we are stuck with Obama. He should of never invaded Iraq or made a small police action in Afganistan into nation building. Then he cut taxes at the same time, instead of paying for it. Greenspan printed money to carry all this mess and the country headed for the the cliff. Obama has carried on with wars and massive welfare programs. The military should be cut 50% and the troops brought home from all over the world. End foreign aid, it only ends up in the pockets of criminals and kleptocrats. Except for Social Security and Medicare the rest of the domestic budget needs to be slashed 50% or better as well. I won't touch Social Security or Medicare because these 2 programs are the life blood of too many Americans. They should be phased out for the young. The last thing this country needs right now is more taxes on the productive. It is time to cut with a meat axe. Think Warren Harding in 1921. He slashed gvoernment and taxes by over 50% in a year and the Depression of that year was over in a year. We are headed for a 20 year cycle of war, depression, and mass inflation otherwise. It is good that Ben lives in California. He loves high taxes. Maybe he should move to his house in Idaho.
OP4| 11.13.12 @ 8:43AM
The Bush tax cuts were passed in the summer of 2001 - before 9-11.
TLP| 11.13.12 @ 8:48AM
I apologize for this Stupid Bast*rd mucking up my post.
And for what?
"Bush is to blame."
Unfckingbelievable.
Jack in Wi| 11.13.12 @ 8:59AM
Your posts always stink. If you want wars pay for them with taxes. Then maybe you won't start them. Bush was a disaster for the conservative movemnet and the Republican Party. He lost his veto pen and refused to find it. He always wanted to play pattycake with the Democrats. There is nothing good to say about any Bush, Dole, McCain, or Romney. They are all a bunch of losers. We need a real opposition party in this country.
TLP| 11.13.12 @ 9:07AM
Like I told ya, before: Put the MFing Gun in your mouth, and Squeeze The Trigger.
Obviously, your life SUCKS, and like All Losers, you're living Proof that Misery loves Company.
Put it in your Mouth, and SQUEEZE.
Frank Drackman| 11.13.12 @ 9:11AM
thats what HE said!!!!!HAHAHAHAHA
Lyneuss Fields | 11.13.12 @ 9:14AM
Hey, if you want to cut down on warmongering, start drafting children of the wealthy like those of your scumbag Willard Mitt Romney. Leave us po' folk the hell alone!
http://lyneussfields.blogspot......rowds.html
John Navratil| 11.13.12 @ 1:57PM
Lyneuss Fields,
Do you prefer a draft to a volunteer force? Think of the poor sods who will be displaced by those fat-cat conscripts.
TLP| 11.13.12 @ 2:53PM
Contest on Friday.
Lyneuss Fields | 11.13.12 @ 4:03PM
Absolutely, as a veteran, I prefer a draft. And cut their f'n pay. When I served, the Air Force paid dog meat. In 1978 West Germany, officers were sending their wives home. It's also too easy for America's Military Industrial Complex to provoke wars. Let the children of Bush, Chicken-hawk Cheney, Romney and their young-cock brood all serve. Then, they will think twice before they squawk!
TLP| 11.13.12 @ 8:40AM
The worst thing we can do, at this point, is to Drag This Out over the long haul.
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN!
I say - Give the people what they want, IN SPADES.
If any of you have Kids? Then you know that, for the most part, you can't tell'em anything once they hit the Tweens and the Teens. Because they're your Kids, you Love Them. Because you love them, you try to make their Life's Journey a little less Rocky, by imbuing them with the knowledge you've gleaned from every Wrong Decision that you've ever made in your life. And, they NEVER listen. So you stand by, and suffer through it, as they learn one Hard Lesson after another.
Unfortunately.......This Country can't afford that. We don't have the time.
This Country needs an INTERVENTION.
The Muslim wants Higher Taxes on the Wealthy. The People knew this, when they cast their Votes. Give the People what they want. Step Aside and let the Tax Hammer fall.
He desires Higher Gas Prices, Higher Food Prices, and More Regulations. He has Promised since 2008 that: "My Policies will make Electricity Prices, necessarily SKYROCKET". Everyone who voted for him, knew that going in.
He Promised that he would: "BANKRUPT the Coal Industry".
He still got Reelected.
TLP| 11.13.12 @ 9:03AM
I say - Give the MFer what he wants, cause he's gonna get it, anyway. To Negotiate with him, knowing that he holds all the Cards while you have No Spines, is tantamount to Pissing Your Pants up on the stage, while you're stammering through your lines in your 4th Grade Thanksgiving Play.
I say that we give him everything he wants.
Like with our Kids? This bunch of Americans will never believe that they can get burned, by touching the Stove, until they touch the Stove and get burned.
It's time to let Nature take its course.
It's time to SETTLE THIS.
Once and for all.
Let him FINISH what he has Started. And, let him do it all by himself.
Do nothing, and remember what Paul Neuman's character said in the Uber Classic - Cool Hand Luke - "Sometimes NOTHING, can be a Real Cool Hand."
Indeed.
mike 3/505| 11.13.12 @ 9:32AM
Everything except "permanent" stuff. Let him have his way on taxes and spending....Vote "present." On the other hand, allow no, repeat NO lifetime appointments to any court, board or regulating agency. Filibuster those for 4 years if necessary.
That way, when we do regain control, we can fix both the short term (taxes/budget) and the long term, courts and other lifetime appointments.
TLP| 11.13.12 @ 1:27PM
Agreed.
And you can throw TREATIES in there, as well.
mike 3/505| 11.13.12 @ 5:06PM
Sorry...I forgot about those...yep...throw them in too.
pogybait| 11.13.12 @ 10:08AM
I think the Republicans should step back and vote present, they might as well since nothing is going to stop the nightmare that is before us....these policies and plans are about to be shoved on us anyway.....give it to them gift wrapped. What could they possibly complain about when it all falls .....they own it! Do the rope a dope thing to them.....
nathan| 11.13.12 @ 9:04AM
Shiities and Sunnis are going at each other and focusing on themselves more than us. We can either inject ourselves into that like neocon imperialists interventionists want to do (anyone we know around here?) or we can mind our own business and sit back and watch. Not every conflict is our business. The southern Philippines is not our concern. Most of what happens in Africa is local and equally not our concern.
This is a carry over of the Cold War mentality. In Angola for example, we got involved on Savimbi's side even though he was ghastly horrible and no doubt worse than the other guys simply because he said he was "anti-communist". Like so what?
Same thing in Vietnam. We saw this in terms of the global conflict when it was local in nature and we literally had no reason to be there. We note that the two "communists" Vietnam and China, despite being "communists" fought all the time similar to the shias and sunnis now. You think maybe we can go to school on that?
Why make enemies we don't have to? Why get American soldiers killed in conflicts that don't directly affect American security?
The neocons have been wrong for 60 years starting with Korea, going to our intervention in Iran in 1953 and onwards. Time to tell them to get lost once and for all.
Alan Brooks | 11.13.12 @ 9:06AM
"While China raises its war fighting spending rapidly, we will be hammering ours down. To me, this makes no sense."
Learn Chinese, guys. That way, when they buy up everything you own at discount prices, you can dicker with them. Rather than getting $5 million by selling the Statue of Liberty, you can get $10 million, say. Instead of getting $4 million for the Washington Monument, you can get $8 million or so.
Rhoetus| 11.13.12 @ 9:30PM
Rules for Conservatives @
http://www.saveamericanow.us.com
Appleby| 11.13.12 @ 6:44AM
Ben, you'd better sign over your entire fortune to the government right away. I'm sure you're willing to do this because you continue to demand that taxes go up up up for rich people, and you have told us quite often that you are rich, rich, rich. So when can they expect your wire transfer?
Alan Brooks | 11.13.12 @ 9:08AM
Now we're getting somewhere- when Ben writes the chickens are coming home to roost, he may end up as a chicken McNugget himself.
pogybait| 11.13.12 @ 10:30AM
Yes, what is the price is he willing to pay for all this stupidity. Please Ben, post a copy of the check after all it's all in the name of fairness....
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 11.13.12 @ 6:50AM
An article in Forbes points out the problem. Contrary to Mr. Stein's assertion, cuts in taxes led to significant increases in revenue. In fact, Obama benefited from continuing the Bush era tax cuts by collecting 815 billion more during his first three years than Bush did. Spending is the problem. Here are the facts:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/be.....increased/
Compare this outcome to the first three years of the Obama Presidency where the cumulative deficit was over ten times as high at $4.35 trillion (almost twice the cumulative deficits of the previous 16 years of the combined Clinton and Bush Presidencies). This is despite the fact that tax revenues in the first three years of the Obama Presidency were $815 billion greater than tax revenues during the first three years of the Bush Presidency.
The second, and more critical conclusion from Table 1 is that the next four years of the Bush Presidency after the 2003 reduction in tax rates saw a 44% increase in Federal tax revenues from $1.782 trillion to $2.568 trillion. That’s correct – a 44% increase in revenues after the so-called “tax break for the wealthy.”
ata777| 11.13.12 @ 8:00AM
rather amazing how stein chose to literally re-write history in order to make his point. glad someone else noticed.
OP4| 11.13.12 @ 8:40AM
I thought I was having some kind of episode as I read Ben's nonsense.
Everything in the article is backwards. The rich - as Ben accurately points out - are already paying almost half their income in taxes. They are over the top of the Laffer Curve. Raising their taxes will lower revenue.
What Obama is proposing is a formula for reducing revenue and going off Greek cliff faster. Spending is the problem, spending cuts are the only way to solve the problem.
aquanomics| 11.13.12 @ 10:42AM
Mr. Stein is not an economist, he just plays one on TV. He's a lawyer; his daddy was the economist (and a damned fine one for the times). In his dotage it looks like Ben confuses the two careers at times and makes a mess of things.
Occam's Tool| 11.13.12 @ 11:01AM
Stein is a fool about taxes; he sounds incoherent because he IS incoherent.
As to weakness inviting assault; yes, that's true.
Warrior| 11.13.12 @ 9:48PM
Could you please mail him a prescription of some kind.
JP| 11.13.12 @ 10:30AM
Ben's has had a problem with supply-siders for decades.
Dodd2| 11.13.12 @ 7:25AM
So, Stein blame tax cuts, not reckless spending for the fiscal mess we're in.
Brother, is guy ever lost.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 11.13.12 @ 7:34AM
More from Forbes. The Bush tax cuts led to a significant increase in taxes for the wealthy and significant revenues for the Obama administration:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/be.....increased/
So, if the top 0.1% of earners saw their tax bill increase 1,887 times more than the top 25-50% of earners (the income bracket that includes the average household income) and almost 14,000 times more than the bottom 50% of earners and if the top 1% of earners saw their tax bill increase 58 times more than the top 25-50% of earners and 414 times more than the bottom 50% of earners, where is the evidence that the wealthy were preferentially favored by the Bush tax policy changes? Despite the fact that politicians and the media repeatedly make this claim, the truth is they are simply wrong. What happened after the Bush tax cuts was accelerated growth of our economy (GDP) and a significant reduction in unemployment (See: Tax Rates, Tax Revenues and the GDP). Higher income earners earned more during the four years after the Bush tax cuts but also disproportionately increased their already disproportionate share of taxes paid.
nathan| 11.13.12 @ 7:43AM
So cuts in defense will make war more likely.
Again, we spend 40+ percent of the world's total spending on defense and even with the cuts it will still be 40+. We outspend the next 10 countries, China/Russia included and that will not change.
Mr. Stein, make a "convincing" case that we need to be involved in what are clearly local conflicts in places like the southern Philippines, Africa and elsewhere. Defend the need for the 800 military bases around the world. Tell the readers here why we simply "must" have a military presence in more than half the countries in the world. Defend if you will why decades after the wall fell, we simply must be in Europe which has a combined GNP bigger than ours. Tell your readers why you are not demanding as Tom Coburn, a leading senate conservative, that DOD pass an audit before we throw more money at them. Tell your readers what national security interest is served by our continued presence in Korea.
Do I need to go on? I can. Defend the continued constuction of the litoral combat ship, grossly over budget and doesn't meet design specs. Defend DOD budgets driven by neocon imperialist interventionism that as we saw in Iraq, leads to failure and a lot of dead Americans. Go ahead. I can't . . . .
Bob K| 11.13.12 @ 9:42AM
Good points. We have been fighting in the Near East and Afghanistan with supposedly state of the art weaponry costing the american tax payer billions of dollars while the people opposing us have been using AK47s built in cottage industry machine shops and jury rigged road bombs and holding us at bay with them.
How could we do any worse by doing some well thought out cutting of ineffective weaponry from our Military budget? And by saying "well thought out," I mean looking hard at the politics involved in the issuing government contracts for these items.
Bob K| 11.13.12 @ 9:47AM
That is "issuing OF government contracts."
Bill8472| 11.13.12 @ 10:18AM
How come WE don't build reusable rocket launchers like the very inexpensive RPG?
Is there some advantage to having throwaway rocket launchers? Are ours better in some way?
Alej| 11.13.12 @ 4:32PM
We do. The LAW. Slide out barrel, fire rocket, throw away tube (after stomping it so it can't be used by the enemy).
Bill8472| 11.13.12 @ 4:44PM
I was under the impression that the LAW rockets were one-use, disposable units, and not reusable, similar in that regard to AT-4s.
Are you aware of any advantage to a throw-away rocket launcher as opposed to one that can be re-used, other than the potential problem of having to lug around the the launcher when it doesn't have any rockets for it?
CrackerHound| 11.13.12 @ 10:39AM
Don't worry nathan, all of that will be gone with the coming crash and fall of the U.S. It is all playing out in front of our eyes. I predict it will happen during Obama's current term or shortly thereafter. By the way, you are right. US military spending and financial support (bribery) of foreign governments will be viewed as an obvious mistake when the history is written. Similar to when we look at Germany going after Russia in WW2. It's sort of a no brainer in hindsight.
Frank Drackman| 11.13.12 @ 8:28AM
Good, let the Bush Error Tax Cuts go the way of Kid n' Play, something you only see on late night BET, or in the dollar DVD bin...
Sure it'll cost me some, it'll be worth it to see that loser 10% bracket go to 15%, a 100% increase BTW, like that nappy-haided Colon Powel said,
"You Voted for it, You bought it"
Frank
OP4| 11.13.12 @ 8:41AM
I agree - let ALL those tax cuts expire so all the Obama voters get a nice taste of a tax hike.
SUBVET| 11.13.12 @ 10:46AM
OP4...obama's voters #1 don't pay taxes remember 47% and #2 the rest are dead.
Lyneuss Fields | 11.13.12 @ 9:52AM
Everybody who's spewing your right wing media machine’s crap on this blog thread should read David Frum's E-book "Why Romney Lost". His bottom line is that Conservatives are being hoodwinked by a right-wing media machine that is not subject to elections. Do you, or can you get that! As you move farther and farther to their "extreme right" dogma, as evidenced in some of your posts, you are alienating your party as a viable alternative to liberalism, and therefore as Conservatives, you are a non-electable product.
http://lyneussfields.blogspot......hy-in.html
JP| 11.13.12 @ 10:28AM
The "extreme" right won 49% of the vote. Only has-beens and losers read David Frum. Not sure what your point is other than to troll.
pogybait| 11.13.12 @ 10:39AM
So we will be welcomed with open arms by the Democrats/media and they are going to allow the Republicans to take some of their voting block simply because we have given up our principles and look and sound like they do?....
Lyneuss Fields | 11.13.12 @ 11:06AM
My point, "again" to both of you boneheads, is this. Entertainment media doesn't run for election, get it? When you direct the N-word toward an American President, threaten to self-deport Hispanics and/or propagate attacks towards women--unlike the Extreme Media Complex that continues to generate mindless crap--Conservative continue to be thrown out of elected office. God, how stupid can you two be?
CrackerHound| 11.13.12 @ 1:47PM
Lyneuss.. Conservatives do not direct the N-word towards the president any more than Democrats...this is a fact. There are people like that in all walks of life. The media/democrat machine engineered the so called "war on women" from whole cloth. If you believe that conservatives "propagate attacks on women", demonstrate such. Other than Sandra Fluke wanting free birth control and liberals trapping a couple of stupid republicans to say something outlandish, it doesn't exist.
Democrats and liberals are THE WORST violators of women (OWS, the Obama admin underrepresentation and Billdo Clinton anyone?) Abortion is just a word to describe no child support payments for liberals and democrat cretins. Hell, rape and abandonment are a liberal staple for sure.
Real conservatives support and cherish women. Liberals (or what statist-progressives/marxist call themselves these days) on the other hand absolutely HATE mothers and conservative women.
On another note: I detest your air of superiority and righteousness that is so prevalent with your kind. It's like listening to a spoiled rotten fifth grader expound on the meaning of life
eloris| 11.13.12 @ 10:43PM
1) How does one "threaten to self-deport" somebody? Is that like threatening to suicide them?
2) Can you point to one single person who suggested they wanted "Hispanics" to self-deport? Or are you your basic leftist racist?
gene| 11.13.12 @ 10:12AM
History repeating itself.
People point the finger of blame all over. However, when things get really bad, people will go after the same scapegoat they have used for thousands of years.
They will blame Israel and the Jews.
Occam's Tool| 11.13.12 @ 11:02AM
As Jack already does.
Bill8472| 11.13.12 @ 10:14AM
So, there IS the fact that $250 billion a year from the ending of the Bush tax rates, plus $300 billion a year from sequestration, adds up to $5.5 trillion over ten years.
We won't like it, and our military will be reduced to a shell, so we'd better hope we don't have a need for our warriors during the next 15 years or so, but otherwise we'll be well on our way toward paying off our huge debt.
Denver Todd| 11.13.12 @ 10:20AM
Maybe for Obama, raising taxes has nothing to do with revenue, and everything to do with rallying the victim class. The sorry thing is that after attempting to make the wealthy pay their "fair share," Obama will be forced to come after the middle class, where the real money is, and also the absence of the means to protect it from taxation.
CrackerHound| 11.13.12 @ 1:54PM
You're correct Denver, Obama is probably attempting a proletarian revolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_revolution
It would not surprise me. He is a marxist after all.
JP| 11.13.12 @ 10:27AM
Ben,
The House GOP passed 2 budgets since 2011. Obama refuses to look at any cuts outside of DOD. And believe me, Obama wants the Bush Tax Cuts gone more than you can believe. It is he who is determined to get everything he wants. And he will.
Houdini| 11.13.12 @ 11:32AM
I agree with a number of post here....give the idiots that voted for Obama what they want and let the tax cuts expire, it will hurt, but more importantly, it will bring a lot more folks into the tax paying arena. Let's see how they like the deal when all the Atlas' decide to opt out and sit on the sidelines.
CrackerHound| 11.13.12 @ 1:57PM
And you will be living under a marxist regime Houdini. Do you not have a fighting spirit? Historically America has.
Bill8472| 11.14.12 @ 12:27PM
I always chuckle inwardly when I see a person question another person about that second person's fighting spirit.
Look to your own, please.
JP Jones| 11.13.12 @ 12:10PM
well actually Houdini has a point:
The best thing may be to simply let the tax cuts expire.
Yes the middle class will be hurt along with everyone else
but by 2014--the stock market will be toast
the new recession will have unemployment at 10 plus percent
and as long as there are good candidates the senate will flip back to Reps.
The key is to pray that no conservative supreme court justices leave in the next two years.
That's the key folks...the Supreme Court.
Those rules stay in place for better or for worse
all of the rest is childs play and can be wiped out by a presidential order.
CrackerHound| 11.13.12 @ 4:30PM
Just like the politicians, any SC Justice that our RINOs appoint end up being defacto liberals.
John Roberts hit one of the final nails into our demise by sealing the deal on individual mandates as constitutional when in fact it is unconstitutional. He declared the mandate as just another tax without rationalizing the fact that the government is forcing individuals to purchase a product. Bush appointed that justice and he sided with the progressives on the most critical issue of our times.
My point is we cannot roll over to tyranny, even a tyranny of the majority. Just because the statist have legalized theft, we as the victims do not have to accept it. I would like to see a massive tax revolt and disobedience. Make it impossible for progressives to govern.
Starky1177| 11.13.12 @ 12:22PM
Didn't read any of the comments yet, but Mr. Stein the most revenue ever taken in by the Government was in 2007 after the Bush Tax cuts have been in full effect, get your facts straight
http://cnsnews.com/news/articl.....under-bush
And lowering taxes have always spurred great economic growth, under Reagan, Kennedy and Coolidge...Clinton got lucky with the tech/.com boom, in spite of his high taxes
RCV| 11.13.12 @ 1:51PM
You got the root cause of this whole problem exactly right, Mr. Stein.
Paul A'Barge | 11.13.12 @ 3:00PM
Ben Stein is determined to be the last mortal standing who refuses to learn/admit that tax cuts spur economic activity.
dgrimes99 | 11.13.12 @ 3:18PM
Ben:
Am I wrong? When Reagan was elected the top marginal tax rate was somewhere in the 70s. When he left office it was in the 30s. When he took office the take to the government was roughly $500,000,000. When he left office the take to the government was roughly $1,000,000,000. How is this NOT evidence that the lowering of the top marginal rates (and all rates for that matter) resulted in an increase of revenues to the government.
The Laffer Curve is right. The only question is which side of it are we on.
Dave
Rhoetus| 11.13.12 @ 9:33PM
Ben: We all know that you are smart enough to know that there isn't enough cash/ wealth in the private economy to fix this. Write your own check to the US Treasury- I think that it is a waste of money as Congress/ US Senate are only going to piss it away. I am not responsible for any debts but my own.
Beach Brutus| 11.13.12 @ 10:59PM
Since these are the "Bush" tax cuts and are supposed to be so unfairly favorable to the rich -- then that should mean that the old "Clinton" tax rates we will be reverting to will be fair to everyone else. We should stop speaking of the cliff as the "expiration of the Bush tax cuts" and start referring to it as the "reversion to the Clinton tax rates."
Stevemmn| 11.14.12 @ 12:02AM
Stein doesn't know what he is talking about. In 2007, the last year Republicans set the budget, the deficit was a mere $160 billion. That was well past the time when the tax cuts had taken effect. Under Obama the deficit has gone up by a factor of 10. Taxes are not the problem. Reckless government spending is the problem.
WaffenSS| 11.15.12 @ 7:31AM
The " tax" cuts that are so important, do not affect me one iota. These were for a select group of people who contributed to his failure as a leader. As a middle class income earner these "taxcuts" mean nothing. Congress will continue them as the mongrels in DC will never let themselves be taxed.