I literally laughed out loud when I read this Google News Headline from Forbes ... allow me to recap its high low points ...
Obama Embraces Another Class-Warfare Proposal
Business in The Beltway - Forbes
Posted by Daniel J. Mitchell, blogs.forbes.com -- Apr. 22 2011
[...] It appears that President Obama wants to radically change this [Social Security Cap] system so that it is based on a class-warfare model. During the 2008 campaign, for instance, then-Senator Obama suggested that the programs giant long-run deficit could be addressed by busting the wage-base cap and imposing the payroll tax on a larger amount of income.
And the President reiterated his support for a class-warfare approach earlier this week, leading the Wall Street Journal to opine.
Speaking Tuesday in Annandale, Virginia, Mr. Obama came out for lifting the cap on income on which the Social Security payroll tax is applied. Currently, the employer and employee each pay 6.2% up to $106,800, a level that rises with inflation each year. …Mr. Obama didn’t hint at specifics, though he did run in 2008 on a plan to raise the “tax max” by somewhere between two to eight percentage points for the top 3% of earners. …most of the increase could be paid by the middle class or modestly affluent [...]
If the cap is removed entirely, it will also mean a huge increase in the marginal tax rates that affect decisions to work, invest and save. In a recent paper for the American Enterprise Institute, Andrew Biggs calculates that this and other tax increases Mr. Obama favors would bring the top marginal rate to somewhere between 57% and 68% when factoring in state taxes. Tax levels like these haven’t been seen since the 1970s. [...]
That's rich. Increasing the Social Security Ceiling, will hurt the middle class, or so the WSJ asserted, and this Forbes Bobblehead, just repeated. They got keep repeating this stuff, until it finally sticks ...
All numbers based on the research of Andrew Biggs, with the American Enterprise Institute -- hmmm, this should make for some fun reading ....
First off, who or what is behind the Front Group: American Enterprise Institute?
Where do their allegiances lie?
SourceWatch:
The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI) is an extremely influential, pro-business, conservative think tank founded in 1943 by Lewis H. Brown. It promotes the advancement of free enterprise capitalism[1], and succeeds in placing its people in influential governmental positions. It is the center base for many neo-conservatives.
[...]
Casting Doubt on Global Warming
In February 2007, The Guardian (UK) reported that AEI was offering scientists and economists $10,000 each, "to undermine a major climate change report" from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
[...]
The Guardian reported further that AEI "has received more than $1.6m from ExxonMobil, and more than 20 of its staff have worked as consultants to the Bush administration.
[...]
Funding
In 2006 AEI reported that its income was $28.4 million. Of this it states on its website that "individual contributions of more than $10 million provided the largest share of the revenue base, followed by $6 million in corporate support, and $4.7 million from foundations."[18]
Corporate donations
While the AEI acknowledges that it received over $6 million in corporate contributions in 2006, the donors are not identified in either its annual report or on its website. However, it is known that during 1997, Philip Morris contributed $100,000 to the Institute[19]. During 2007, ExxonMobil contributed $240,000 [...]
OK, that should tell you a lot about the AEI motives and their "pro business" agenda.
And what about this author in AEI's employ -- Andrew Biggs -- the guy attacking Obama, because Obama is "attacking the Middle Class" with all his new Tax Proposals?
Well check out Andrew Biggs' Blog -- to get an inkling of his of where he stands sits, as he keeps cranking out the "Defend the Rich" Talking Points, on a routine basis ... (I suspect the gig must pay pretty well) ...
Just Say It, Mr. President
By Andrew Biggs -- blog.american.com
April 20, 2011
[...] Reuters reports that “Obama backs lifting income cap for Social Security,” referencing proposals to increase the $106,800 earnings cap on which Social Security taxes are applied and (although rarely mentioned) Social Security benefits are calculated. At an event on Tuesday in Annandale, Virginia, the president said:
For the vast majority of Americans, every dime you earn, you’re paying some in Social Security. But for (billionaire investor) Warren Buffett, he stops paying at a little bit over $100,000 and then the next $50 billion he’s not paying a dime in Social Security taxes.
[...] But at some point I can’t blame Congressional Republicans -- and Democrats, too, for that matter -- if they yell out, “Just say it!” Increasing the tax max would constitute a tax increase for the “middle class,” defined in the president’s terms as those with incomes less than $250,000. Everyone knows that if he wants to balance the budget without significant reductions in the programs the president cares about, he’s going to need to increase taxes on people with more modest incomes. If so, there’s no time like the present.
Mr. President, just say it.
Say What? That the Middle Class is really the target of any plans to raise the Social Security Ceiling, to repair its long-term stability?
Yeah right! $250K a year, yep that's just the struggling-to-get-by average middle-of-the-road Americans!
After citing that 'Rhodes Scholar', Daniel Mitchell, "the Kettle doing the calling ..." ends his Obama 'Class Warfare' accusations, with his own sunny version of "how Job Creation" really happens in America ...
This video from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, narrated by yours truly [Daniel Mitchell], elaborates on why this is the wrong approach.
[Diarist Warning: serious Conservative Talking Points given ahead, concerning how Taxing the Rich hurts "all of us who don't make make anywhere near $250,000" by creating a "sluggish economy", etc. PS. this video appears to be making the rounds in the conservative blogosphere.]
Senator Obama's Social Security Tax Plan
Here's a sampling [Time Mark 1:40]:
Daniel Mitchell:
"Now a lot of people are already worried about the economic impact of Obama's proposal to kill the 2001 and 2003 income rate reduction. That would increase the top tax rate on 'productive behavior' by about 4.6% points.
Well Heck, that is small potatoes compared to a Social Security scheme which would boost the Top Tax rate by approximately 12% points. In one fell swoop America's Top Tax rate would be a French and German levels. This would be bad news -- even for all of us who don't make make anywhere near $250,000
-- high tax rates on 'investors and entrepreneurs', slow economic growth. And it's 'regular people' -- not the Donald Trumps and Warren Buffets of the world -- who lose out when the economy is 'sluggish' ..."
That was about as much "Defend the Rich" Talking Points as I could stomach from Dan J. Mitchell, with my morning coffee. He drones on like this for another nine minutes, I presume.
Who is Dan J. Mitchell the person leading Reverse Robin Hood charge on Forbes site today, posted in my intro?
Well Heck, that would be the Dan J. Mitchell "of the Cato Institute" on loan to the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, to share his "insights" {cough} ...
Let me give you a quick refresher on WHO and what Cato represents ...
SourceWatch:
The Cato Institute is a libertarian think tank headquartered in Washington, D.C. The Institute states that it favors policies "that are consistent with the traditional American principles of limited government, individual liberty, and peace." [1]
[...]
Cato was founded in 1977 by Edward H. Crane and Charles Koch, [2] the billionaire co-owner of Koch Industries known for its financing of the Tea Party and various extreme right front groups. David Koch is currently on Cato's Board of Directors. "According to the Center for Public Integrity, between 1986 and 1993 the Koch family gave eleven million dollars to the [Cato] institute.
Today, Cato has more than a hundred full-time employees, and its experts and policy papers are widely quoted and respected by the mainstream media. It describes itself as nonpartisan, and its scholars have at times been critical of both parties. It has consistently pushed for corporate tax cuts, reductions in social services, and laissez-faire environmental policies."[3]
So Cato is Koch.
And Koch is leading this "Defend the Wealthy" from Obama's Class Warfare rhetoric.
Big surprise, eh -- Koch Brothers defending their fortunes, under the guise of "protecting the Middle Class".
(you knew, I was leading to somewhere, right? )
Knowledge is Power. Stay informed, my friends.
You never know where this new "Class Warfare" meme might lead, as the Wealthy continue to "protect their assets".
Apparently THAT is the only Patriotic Duty they know, "Get theirs -- and Keeping it -- while the Gettin's good."
And Pay your "Front Groups" Millions, to make it all look "legit".
Priceless!