Not just because we both write for these pages, I generally
enjoy Ben Stein’s work. It’s personable, obviously sincere, and
conveys actual human emotion extraordinarily well.
But with increasing frequency, Ben’s bombast regarding
Republicans and tax policy is driving me up a wall. And since I
have the privilege of being able to post my thoughts about this in
a separate blog note where it might be seen by more people than a
comment to Ben’s note would be, I’m going to use that
privilege.
In particular, I’d like to respond to these thoughts of Ben’s
from his American Spectator article
today. I quote his tax-related paragraphs in full, to prevent any
question of my taking his words out of context:
How did we ever get into the position of fighting like madmen to
keep taxes low on billionaires? How can we possibly win if our
position is to sacrifice the welfare of poor and lower middle class
people to make sure we keep the taxes of very wealthy people low?
Let’s see: Obama is for keeping almost all entitlements and raising
taxes on the rich (his definition of rich is insane but that’s
another story). Our GOP position is low taxes on the rich and cut
entitlements and medical care for the poor. Hmmm, which is a
winning position?
My old boss, Mr. Nixon, used to say, “Honesty may not be the
best policy but it’s worth trying once in a while.”
So, Let’s be honest: the ultra-rich do not need ultra-low taxes.
The poor have a moral claim on the generosity of the nation if they
are genuinely in need. Might we just try to align ourselves with
the morally right position for fiscal policy?
Yes, government spends insanely too much. Yes, government is
criminally wasteful. But the nation is racing towards bankruptcy.
Do we right the course by taking from the very rich — while
searching like Sherlock Holmes for waste to cut? Why not? I’d like
to see the party win the next election and being the party of the
billionaires does not help us.
Wow, I was really enjoying the article until I got to this
leftist muddle.
What part of “the taxes of the rich are not low” does Ben not
get?
What part of “the top 1% pay nearly 40% of all federal income
taxes” does Ben not get?
What part of “the top 1% pay more than the bottom 90%” does Ben
not get?
What part of “need for ultra-low taxes” being not just the wrong
standard, but a horrifyingly dangerous one, does Ben not get?
What part of “we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem”
does Ben not get?
What part of “from the inception of the War on Poverty,
increased government spending has never substantially decreased
poverty because welfare encourages the disease it purports to
treat” does Ben not get?
I do have to thank Ben for distilling his deep errors down to
one fundamental claim, that “the poor have a moral claim on the
generosity of the nation…”
But “the nation” is not and cannot be generous since “the
nation” does not have its own resources. It only has what it takes
from its citizens. This means, therefore, that Ben believes the
poor have a moral claim on the earnings of every non-poor
individual in this country. Such an argument is morally
false, but it’s more than that. It is also the basis on which many
regimes have not only failed to improve their citizens’ well-being
but have resorted to the worst atrocities imaginable to further
their goals. It is a stance which gives moral sanction to almost
any government action which claims to redistribute wealth.
Ben, you may be trying to cover the true nature of your views on
taxation by harping on billionaires, for whom few have economic
sympathy, and by repeating in capital letters that you are NOT
RICH. But your statements about tax policy, about who “needs” low
taxes, and about a “moral claim to generosity” are not just drivel;
they are evil.
