Eat the rich

There was something I wanted to keyboard about a couple of weeks ago, but because I've got a good job in the city, working for the man every night and day, I didn't have time to get to it.

That's what happens with us salary types sometimes. Gotta punch the clock so you can bring home the Benjamins and, more importantly, pay the taxes without which everyone would get sick and die, starve and die, not have roads and die, or just generally freak the fuck out and die.

Ah, yes. That's what it was. I wanted to keyboard something about taxes. It was around April 15, Tax Day ... or as I call it, Pull Down My Pants and Slide On The Ice Day.

At the time there was a pretty concerted pro-tax increase public relations effort put forth by... well, who knows but the source was probably somewhere deep in the bowls of our bloated federal bureaucracy. Even a media avoider like me couldn't dodge the bevy of stories featuring "rich" people who want to pay more taxes. I first heard the NPR version of the story, but it was also pretty common in print and on blogs.

And I take the stories at face value. I mean, if the Washington Post reports …

"I'm in favor of higher taxes on people like me," declared Eric Schoenberg, who is sitting on an investment banking fortune. He complained about "my absurdly low tax rates."

… I'll take their word that this guy Schoenberg exists and that he wants to pay more taxes. According to the reporting, he's not alone.

But there's something fishy about such a sentiment. For one thing, what people like Schoenberg are saying (if they actually exist) is that they want the government to raise taxes on other people. This is a pretty common liberal viewpoint. And by liberal, I mean the current Democrats and Republicans who seem to think we can continue buying everything for everybody without having to eventually pay for it.

That's all well and good. I've pretty much started to come to grips with the fact that the battle is over and the forces of fiscal restraint have lost. Americans (those who bother to pay attention anymore) have discovered that it's easier to vote themselves other people's money and outsource their social responsibility for their neighbors to the government.

I just find it a bit silly that they feel like they have to wage a PR war to assuage their guilt. They're trying to convince me that raising taxes will be a good thing. That even the rich people want their taxes raised because they want to pay more taxes. Okay. Fine. Let the good times roll.

But here's the thing. If rich people want to pay more in taxes, they can. Now. Without any acts of congress or anything. If you're a rich bastard, you don't have to shelter all of your earnings. You don't have to hide your assets. You don't have to take the millions of deductions on your tax return.

Hell, I bet you could even write out a check for $50,000, take it to your local IRS office and just plain donate it to your government that is cash strapped because of its investments in General Motors and insane foreign wars. You'd probably even get a tax deduction for your donation.

So yeah rich people. If you're feeling guilty about not paying enough taxes, then by all means pay more. Just don't expect me to buy in to the BS that I'm getting a good value for my tax dollar.

tagged: Rich, income tax, policy, General Motors, government, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett

TEA P.O.'d

Maybe you guys can help me understand something here. (I doubt it. I'm pretty thick-skulled about a lot of things. But when you need enlightenment, what better place to turn to than the anonymous Inkernetz).

Hold on a sec while I finish listening to this Springsteen song on my iPod. (Ah yes, at some level everybody DOES have a hu-hu-hung-er-y heart). Okay, now back to our regularly scheduled blog post.

So Tax Day 2009 was quite the event this year. Finally after years of liberals and Democrats telling the country we're wasting money, some people from across the political aisle listened and came out to peacefully demonstrate and to agree and to say that, hey maybe we need to take a look at what we're spending our kids', grandkids' and great grandkids' and their great-great grandkids' money on.

Seems sensible to me. Seems like finally a lot of people are getting on the same page.

To be honest I was surprised by the demonstrations. It gave me the teeniest, tiniest ghost of a shred of hope that maybe our society might not go completely down the crapper.

(Of course, I still maintain that it's too late, that we've already passed the event horizon into the black hole of cultural decline. We already have achieved the critical mass of people in our country who have learned that it's easier to vote themselves somebody else's money that to take personal responsibility for themselves and their community.)

But a lot of the responses to the Taxed Enough Already demonstrations kind of surprised me when I read them. I'm not talking about the unclever, sophomoric sexual innuendos. I completely expected those from the Internet. Hell, I applaud them. I think that sort of thing is the highest calling of Internet self-publishing.

What I didn't expect was for people who for years complained about runaway spending when it comes to fake wars, have suddenly gone quiet when it comes to wasting an order of magnitude MORE money.

Did I say they've gone quiet? Let me correct myself. They're actually criticizing the very people who are agreeing with them.

Today, these selfish, greedy conservatives are overestimating the attendance of other selfish, greedy, brainless Fox-Zombies at their inherently racist "Tea Parties".

Ostensibly the parties protested the massive expansion of government, the accompanying growth of the federal budget and, not least, the use of taxpayer money to bail out private individuals and businesses in danger of financial collapse. These events may well be worthy of protest — and vigorous dissent is a vital, necessary part of the American tradition — but they were happening five months ago. Conservatives were not massing in the streets then, however.

My suspicion is that, as usual, this comes down to partisan politics. The partisans on one side are pissed at the partisans on the other side for doing the exact same thing they used to do. The sides are interchangeable.

It's noteworthy (but not surprising) that despite Mr. Obama's promises to "change the way things are done" and the blind faith placed in him by so many back in November of last year, nothing has changed except for the all-too predictable role reversal.

Anyway, I'm trying to figure out what is the point of people who ask "Where the fuck were these people eight years ago? Seriously, these tea-baggers are late to the party." (This seems to be a standard talking point for one side of the partisan coin).

My first response is "Who cares!" As long as they are now upset enough to say something...

The other answer I would suggest is that the issue might be one of scale. Perhaps the people who were only disgruntled at paying $670 billion for a war that accomplishes nothing have crossed into outrage at ponying up $11.6 Trillion for all of the various bailouts, kickbacks and scams that have come out of the last six or seven months.

FYI, that $11.6 Trillion is enough to pay for SEVENTEEN IRAQ WARS!

Ah yes. It all comes down to money for the partisans. Not how much there is, but who gets to spend it and from whom they take it.

Perhaps The Boss was right after all. Lay down your money and you'll play your part. Everybody's got a hungry heart.

tagged: Iraq, Tea Party, Tea bagger, tax, Obama, Bush, bailout

Proud to pay my taxes

I had this post planned for a couple of weeks, but that crafty Kansas Jackass kind of beat me to the mule kick. But I decided to go ahead and post it since it's so important.

As most of you fine citizens know, today is an important day for our country - in fact, I think it is probably THE most important day of the year. It's the day when all of the good people of our Republic can celebrate their participation in society by giving back to our Awesome Government the money that it so graciously allowed us to use over the previous year.

I know it has become kind of a fad recently in some circles to look at Tax Day in derogatory terms, to try to view taxation as a burden rather than the privilege that is.

As KJ rightly points out, it is an honor for us as citizens of a great nation to work so hard day in and day out for our Awesome Government's beneficent bureaucracy.

It's true that due to recent economic troubles, Tax Freedom Day came early this year. Unfortunately, this means that we worker bees only contributed everything we earned through April 13 to our Awesome Government. Luckily, as our Awesome Government commits more and more money to various projects, our children and grandchildren can look forward to the satisfaction of contributing much more of their earnings to our Awesome Government.

And even though only three and a half months of our hard work went to our Awesome Government this year, it's important to remember, comrades, everything that our hard work and effort pays for.

Think of all those poor, destitute investment bankers who, but for the support we give them through our Awesome Government, face the prospect of a harrowing life without multimillion dollar performance bonuses.

Or, consider the plight of the U.S. auto industry. Without government money provided by us, we might have to go without a source of overly priced, low-quality inefficient automobiles. My friends, that's not the America I want to live in.

And I hate to even consider where the citizens of less-fortunate countries would be without the good people of the U.S.A. and it's totally Awesome Government looking out for them. And closer to home, thanks to such a kind and caring Awesome Government, we don't have to worry about taking care of the poor and hungry people in our own community, because the Awesome Government has programs to take care of them as well.

There are many other examples of worthwhile contributions made by our Awesome Government on our behalf:

• $1.7 million sent to Iowa to determine why pigs stink
• $4.4 million for a military grade stereo (for the Army Center of Excellence in Acoustics)
• $2.4 for a vacuum packed life raft

When I think of all the great things our Awesome Government does with the money I earn for it, i get teary eyed. It may sound trite and platitudinous to say it, but I'm proud to live in a country where so much is taken from so many to pay for so little.


tagged: taxes, America, tax freedom, government, pork spending, satire

Sham? Wow.

Ganked this from El to the B.




tagged: economy, stimulus, Obama, Sham Wow, policy

Package deal

I don't know about you, but I have a huge economic stimulus package.

I was admiring it the other day after taking it out of its wrapping. If you’re single, and you don’t have kids, chances are your economic stimulus package is no where near as big as mine.

Don’t feel bad though. Not everyone is endowed with such a large economic stimulus package. If you happen to have a small economic stimulus package, I hear there a many programs out there that can help you make the most of it.

For example, I saw an ad on The Home Depot website a couple of days ago saying they could help you stretch your economic stimulus package. It probably means buying one of their cheap hoes, so I won’t be taking advantage of that (let’s face it, I’m too old and dignified for that sort of thing). But it might be an option for some of you.

You can also get your stimulus package to last longer by going to Branson, Mo. According to their website, they are offering a number of services to extend your economic stimulus package.

Personally, I'll be giving my full economic stimulus package to my Supermodel Wife. She is particularly talented at getting the most out of my economic stimulus package. I actually enjoy the experience of having her take hold of the economic stimulus package and putting it to good use.

Regardless of the size of your economic stimulus package, it's important to remember that it's there to be enjoyed. And don't forget, the entire country is counting on all of us making use our economic stimulus packages.

So even if you have a tiny economic stimulus package, don't just leave it tucked away in a dark place somewhere gathering dust. Take it out and enjoy it.

tagged: economy, economic, stimulus, package, tax, Home Depot, Branson

Friday Blogthing: KA-CHING!!!!!!

You may have heard that our infinitely magnanimous government has graciously decided to give us back some of the money it took from us to fund wars, bridges to nowhere and corporate executive retirement packages in the hope that we will spend our way out of a recession.

It's just the latest example of how great and just truly terrific the people we elect are.

Yesterday, the KCStar posted a little widget to help you calculate how much of your own money the gubmint is going to give to you. Kind of like when your parents used to give you an allowance when you were a kid.




tagged: Friday, test, taxes, meme, blog, recession, tax rebate

You want a border war? YOU GOT IT!!!!

I'm liking the tough words coming from some Kansas legislators regarding the backstabbing Missourians who aren't satisfied with the amount of money Kansans voluntarily bring into their state.

According to The Star, those sneaky bastards in the Missouri statehouse are trying to pick the pockets of innocent, well-meaning, upstanding Kansans who are forced by outrageous fortune to set foot across the state line for their jobs.

Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt signed a bill this month providing an income tax break for Missourians who receive Social Security. It contained a little-discussed provision eliminating a deduction for real estate taxes paid outside Missouri.

That’s a $190 ding for the typical Johnson County resident who works in Missouri.

"It's downright unneighborly," said Kansas Senate Majority Leader Derek Schmidt, an Independence Republican. "A little cross-border dialogue would be in order."

That's gratitude for you. We already have to pay that retardiculous 1-percent earnings tax in Kansas City, Mo., but the Show-Me State scumbags weren't satisfied with us Kansans saving their precious Union Station with the bi-tax revenue we provide.

It's not enough that we provide the lion-share of revenue to their mediocre (at best) sports teams. Now they have to try to pick our pockets by eliminating a property tax deduction?

Well, no more Mr. Nice Kansan. I say power to the good and right honorable men and women in the Kansas Legislator who are considering a like response to this effrontery.

One option is to enact a provision similar to Missouri’s, which would increase the tax on Missouri residents working in Kansas, said Joan Wagnon, Kansas secretary of revenue.

Based on commuting patterns, Johnson County’s Economic Research Institute estimates that more than 71,000 residents from eight nearby Missouri counties work in Johnson County. And at least 53,000 Johnson Countians work in those Missouri counties.

tagged: Kansas, Missouri, taxes, Union Station, Kansas City, Johnson County

Response to a response to a response

We've got a good discussion on the estate tax going, so I wanted to post a response to Dan's response to my response to his original post, and I wanted to do it in a new post to it wouldn't get buried.

First let me say that I know Dan doesn't hate rich people. I was trying to be tongue-in-cheek in a Kanye West kind of way. In actuality, I don't think Dan hates anybody, with the possible exception of Ann Coulter (but he wouldn't be alone in that).

Next, Dan asserts that money is the main thing in taxation discussion. I'm not so sure I agree with that. I think good tax policy and fairness as well as the impact of taxation on the general economy are very important. Money is important in the way it is spent by the government, and I think we both agree that spending has been pretty egregious for a long time.

Next, with all due respect to Dan, the comment that neither Bill Gates nor Warren Buffett opposes the estate tax seems to be a non sequitur. After all, Gates is in favor of spyware, but that doesn't make it right.

Dan says he doesn't care about the study cited. This is odd because, upon further reflection I think it might support the estate tax from his point of view. If the primary purpose of the estate tax is the redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor, this study would seem to indicate that this purpose is being achieved.

Next, I agree that taxation is applied to nearly all economic transactions. My concern is that we'll get to a point where taxation is being applied to non-economic transactions (i.e., dying).

And, Dan has an excellent point that putting tax money into a separate fund isn't workable. Much like the "social security trust fund" myth, all tax money is "fungible." So unless we could put the proceeds from all estate taxes into a super scholarship fund, my plan just wouldn't work. I hereby "take it back".

Dan is also right that we need to take a look at the current estate tax from a tax policy standpoint. My big objection to the current estate tax it that it is an attempt to shift the tax burden to fewer people -- and thus is not "fair."

In fact, I think it might be more fair to do away with the estate tax and institute some kind of inheritance tax (I read an article on this a few months ago, and if I could remember the source I would link it). In this plan, anyone who received inheritance income would be taxed according to their normal tax bracket.

The key difference between the estate tax and an inheritance tax is that with an estate tax, the tax owed is determined by the size of the estate when someone dies. The heirs are responsible for the entire tax bill. With an inheritance model, the heirs only pay taxes on the income that they receive from the estate.

And, if this were expanded to all estates (not just the richest), the rate could be lowered from 60% (or whatever the current level is), to the standard 0%-35%.

The bottom line is that class warfare shouldn't determine tax policy. Fairness and efficiency should.

tagged: death, tax, inheritance, fair, property rights, education, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, economy

Dan hates rich people

Dan and I had a pretty good discussion a few weeks ago regarding our differing views on the Death Tax.

Well, he's back on his soap box again. Dan hasn't changed his views (I wouldn't expect that from a political extremist like Dan). If anything, he is more hardened.

On the other hand, I have moderated my opinions somewhat after speaking with some very intelligent people whom I respect a great deal. (Of course, Dan's comments also had an effect, since I like and respect him as well.)

More on that in a sec. First I want to respond to a couple of Dan's points.

Dan said "Wealth may be earned, but real wealth is inherited"

This indicates to me that Dan is too young to have learned what real wealth is. Try watching It's A Wonderful Life a couple more times. More to Dan's point, however, Dan seems to think we're living in a time like the early 20th Century where Vanerbilts and Astors live off the dollars generated by accumulated fortunes.

To be sure, there are some superrich people out there. But unlike Dan's vision, most of the current day elite have earned their riches and actually are still working. They're more like Jay Gatsby than Tom Buchanaan. Think about Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, hell, even Ken Lay who built their fortunes on skill, talent and hard work (and in Lay's case, douchebaggery).

And the current superrich have a lower concentration of total wealth now [pdf] than they did in the early 20th century. In fact, contrary to what Dan seems to think, there hasn't really been an increase in wealth concentration since the mid-90s.

Dan said "It's not double taxation, etc."

I guess in theory this argument is true. But following Dan's logic, nothing should be sacred from taxation. And this is what worries me. Are we in a society like The Beatles imagined, where the taxman wants a cut of every little transaction you make? Am I going to eventually have to pay a "Taking a Dump" tax to help pay for sewage treatment? Come on...

Now, I mentioned earlier that I have moderated my view (that's what we moderates do). Don't get me wrong. I still believe that we all have the opportunity to start poor and end up well-to-do, even (dare I say it) rich.


It's not easy, it takes a long time and it certainly is more difficult at the bottom of the economic ladder than at the top. It's not popular to say it, but inequality can be a good thing. It provides an incentive to climb the ladder.

The important thing is to make sure the rungs on the ladder are solid. That means making sure there is access to the most important asset in climbing the economic ladder: Quality education and skills development.

The way to better your economic status is to acquire valuable skills. Flipping hamburgers, cleaning toilets and mowing lawns are not valuable skills. This is why an increasing the minimum wage is merely shooting at the flames. It won't be long before robots are performing these tasks.

All this is to say that I'm okay with stealing money from the rich when they die, as long as it isn't wasted on paying for enhanced cable television and cigarettes for the poor. Put all estate tax into funds for education, scholarships etc., and make access to those funds a competitive process.

tagged: death, tax, inheritance, fair, property rights, education, Astor, Vanderbilt, economy

Fair game

Blogger extraordinaire Dan at Gone Mild published a biting criticism of efforts to do away with the death tax.

In it, he gave an explanation about the inevitability of taxation. I'm here to agree with him, but I'll put a little more bluntly.

Taxes suck.

Yes, we all (well, okay, not all, actually an increasingly small number of us) have to pony up for the privilege of living in the best country on the planet.

It falls upon us to finance smooth roads (in Kansas that is, not Missouri), sewer systems and drinking water as well as the bloated, inefficient government and cable TV and telephones for the poor.

I get it. Taxes are a fact of life. And, as I said, I agree with Dan. They suck.

Where I disagree with Dan is this notion that our current system of taxation is fair. I've thought about it, and I can't really think of a way to make a fair tax system unless we institute some kind of voluntary mass user fee system.

But as Dan would say, even thinking about something so radical is for the simple minded. And, in fact, I've come to grips with taxation not being fair. After all, life isn't fair. Never has been never will be, so you'd better just get used to it.

Regarding the death tax specifically, Dan says

"I don't think that the joy of inheritance suffers unduly when the amount over $4,000,000 is subjected to a tax burden. My heart does not bleed for the rich kids who get only $4,000,000."

Very nice to be so cavalier with other peoples' money. We might not like was "rich" people do with their money, but it's still their money. Whatever happened to property rights?

I guess what vexes me most about the whole discussion is the self deception and sense of entitlement. We all know that it's not fair for the government to take from someone the result of their life's work and give it to someone else. We all know that it's not fair for me to get paid for 56 hours of work even though I worked 80 hours.

Why not a little honesty? Why not just say "Yeah, we know it's not fair, but you have money and other people need it, so we're going to take it from you and spend it on something else. Sorry mate."

tagged: death, tax, inheritance, fair, property rights

Harpooning a loophole

My supermodel wife and I were working on the 2005 tax return this weekend. The mere mention of the "T" word makes me shudder with nausea.

Most of the year, unless I'm drawn into a political discussion, I can exercise some mental gymnastics to at least convince myself not to think about all the money that I earn that the government takes from me to spend on things like buying cigarettes for homeless people or fighting wars against poverty, terrorism, drugs, hurricanes, wildfires, ozone, or whatever the cause du jour is.

But during tax time, I have to face it. The figures and dollar signs are all right there in black and white in triplicate. I have a theory that per-capita alcohol consumption increases during this time of year, and it's not because of the Super Bowl.

Luckily, I think I've found a loophole. All I have to do is change professions. As I was googling for information regarding the limits and processes for deductions on charitable contributions of property, I ran across this little chestnut in IRS Publication 526.

"Expenses of Whaling Captains

Beginning in 2005, you may be able to deduct as a charitable contribution the reasonable and necessary whaling expenses paid during the year in carrying out sanctioned whaling activities."

That's right. All I have to do is become a Whaling Captain, and I'll be able to deduct pretty much all of the "reasonable and necessary" expenses of doing my job.

Now, granted, it might be difficult to find a lot of whales in Kansas. I mean, the Missouri River and Tuttle Creek Reservoir are the largest bodies of water (not counting the Ogollala, which is drying up anyway.) But I didn't read in IRS Publication 526 that you had to be a successful whaling captain.

For once the government has passed a tax law that helps me.
tagged: tax, taxes, IRS, deduction, Kansas, whaling, government, humor