In an interview with CNBC's Maria Bartiromo, Presidential candidate Barack Obama started to spell out his economic plan. Obama said that he would raise capital gains taxes, "Well, you know, I haven't given a firm number. Here's my belief, that we can't go back to some of the, you know, confiscatory rates that existed in the past that distorted sound economics. And I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton, which was the 28 percent. I would--and my guess would be it would be significantly lower than that. I think that we can have a capital gains rate that is higher than 15 percent."
Just because the Senator got rich from his book doesn't mean that the rest of us should be punished for trying to grow our savings and our investments. Why should the middle-class have to pay higher capital gains tax so that Obama can bailout irresponsible home buyers?
Hasn't he learned economics? It's pretty clear that if you punish and make it harder for wealth creation and investment, that there won't be as much, and as a result the economy will get much worse.
As reported in the transcript on Ben Smith's blog, Obama continued, "What it will also do, I think, is allow us to make investments in basic scientific research, in infrastructure, in broadband lines, in green energy and will allow us to give us--give some relief to middle class and working class families who have been driving this economy as consumers but have been doing it through credit cards and home equity loans. They're not going to be able to do that. And if we want the economy to continue to go strong, then we've got to make sure that they're getting a little relief as well."
If you want to give the middle class relief how about cutting taxes and not raising them. Let the middle class keep more of what they make and incentivize them to invest that money to grow their wealth. Why would you want to discourage that?
Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. DISCLOSURE: Writer's fund has no position in any stock mentioned, as of 3/27/08











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
3-27-2008 @ 6:58PM
Brad Kirkland said...
This kinda says it all.people work hard to grow savings,investments for retirement.Now he wants to take that away,so does Hillary.They will give to people on welfare(some deserve it,others dont) and the "poor" downtrodden illegals(what part of ILLEGAL don't you understand?) So again,the hard working American tax payer will foot the bill with LESS by working 80 hour weeks to pay for all this.God help us if Hillary and pelosi are a team.I vote to NOT vote.We have no leaqders,merely politicians,and look at the mess they got us in.Just remember the founding fathers were NOT politicians,just people with common sense.We are the only nation that taxes savings,others(like Japan) give you a tax credit for saving.There is no real growth with no savings and we are at less than zero.
3-27-2008 @ 7:31PM
Mike said...
I never have understood the intellectual or moral arguments for taxing human capital at a higher rate than monetary capital. Cut government spending and drop everyone's tax rates to the same levels.
3-27-2008 @ 7:43PM
nancy meek said...
what a bad plan attack the rich who feed the poor. there should be a 90% tax rate on those who make less than one million per year and no tax on the rest. that will provide real tax incentive to become wealthy. it's so simple why can't he see that.
3-27-2008 @ 8:14PM
rachel said...
I am not saying that I agreed with everything that Huckabee said, but I do believe in his tax solution...Have a 10% flat tax all around & do away with yearly taxes. I believe that it would work, because EVERYONE would be paying taxes. If you were an illegal, and you bought a t.v. then you would automatically be paying 10% taxes toward Uncle Sam...If you were a spoiled rich kid who wanted a fancy car, then you too would pay 10% as well. I for one would enjoy getting all of my paycheck minus health care & medicare.
3-27-2008 @ 9:22PM
Tom said...
What I can't understand is the people who
interview Obama/Hillary on economic policy
never challenge their positions. When will someone
tell them what will really happen if their policy is
ever implemented. We need a debate with common sense not just between two Liberals who
favor redistribution of hard earned wealth.
3-27-2008 @ 10:01PM
laiconna said...
The rich automatically pay more taxes simply because they pay taxes on more money. The problem is that the richer a person is, the more tax shelters they know how to invent. If everyone was taxed at the same rate and some of the loopholes were cut out, this country could get on sure footing.
I know that there are some people who deserve and need public assistance. The disabled need help. But lazy, noisy baby machines need to get off their lazy butts and go to work. The first thing they need to do is stop having babies and giving the responsibility for caring for them over to the federal, and local governments. Or they could start some kind of home business as I have and make extra money that way. Visit us at http://www.magnumshops.org/intimateapparel.aspx
3-27-2008 @ 10:14PM
ihmdsm85 said...
WOW! I can't believe Bear Stearn Ceo received 60
million or more in stocks from Hard working middle class tax payers and Clear Channel will milk
the hard working tax payers out of 4 million with the help from the Texas courts ( isn't our president George Bush from Texas? ) And you are freaking out about paying a few extra dollars you will have to pay to help the housing market. America has to bite the bullet sometime in the near future. Boo Hoo! I waited 20 years for the State of WI to get me child support. While I worked hard and saved and built a business, He partied and had five other children. I was promised $40,000. I asked them every three years to put his sorry behind in jail. Brown Co child support was over worked they told me. But I will get every penny owed to me. Well I didn't! But I was able to raise my daughter without help and she is wonderful and in college. Now hopefully he will have the money to raise for the other children. I was screwed but Oh well! Now the other children may have a future.
3-27-2008 @ 11:21PM
shelby said...
I understand the pandering of the presidential candidates on raising capital gains taxes, but wouldn't it be better to talk about the money the government already has and how to use it more appropriately? We are in recession and Hil/Obama are talking about raising taxes on working capital?
3-27-2008 @ 11:29PM
Susan said...
Is anyone confused about how rich people get rich? They don't buy their own products and services. Those are bought by us...the middle class. Meanwhile these rich people make exhorbitant salaries plus bonuses and cry about minimum wage being bumped up for the first time in ten years. Hello?
3-28-2008 @ 2:12AM
fred said...
remember what happened in cuba, venezuela, etc.
people got tired of the government always taxing the middle class. tax the wealthy because they steal enough.
3-28-2008 @ 3:06AM
Hod said...
There will always be Greedy people who will do what ever it takes to become rich and that is fine. No need to feel sorry for them and give them any tax breaks. The more you make the more tax you pay. It is only fair.
3-28-2008 @ 7:08AM
al coholic said...
Mike in comment #2.
You have hit the nail on the head. There is absolutely no justification for capital gains to be taxed at a lower rate except that those who are privilidged have the finest lobyists their (lower taxed) money can buy.
3-28-2008 @ 8:59PM
joseph becker said...
The rich get rich by investment, management, profession and work or some combination therof. It also takes planning, foresight, persistence and pragmatism. We absolutely consume the goods we produce, sure it is often a greater amount and generally the most up market variants of the same products (xps dell vs. dell, 8 buck a cup coffee instead of starbucks, etc etc etc), but as any rich person will tell you, you need the rich hard working entrepreneurs to provide all of the goods and services to all market segments. Just because some xx millions of dollars SEEMS exorbitant doesn't remotely make it so. CEO pay at large companies has soared over the last decades, but largely for one reason, there aren't enough good CEO's to go around and their prices get bid up. As for minimum wage there's two things that are disturbing about minimum wage, the first is that it acts as a labor quality ceiling making it completely unprofitable to hire unskilled/unfavorable workers because you have to pay them a greater amount than they provide in output effectively cutting off every person in the labor market below a certain level of competence, which given our socialized school system is a disturbing percent of society. Additionally the rich balk at minimum wage because it's arbitrary, random and prone to inflationary outcomes. Finally susan the middle class aren't a real thing, before wwII they were essentially the rich-lite (think bourgeoisie capitalist pigs), but after a continuing series of unsustainable subsidies and social programs created a highly protected incredibly lazy workforce (gm, ford, ge back in the bad old 70's) which helmed by equally lazy executives and a craven disregard for the rest of the world we americans have managed to borrow 3 centuries worth of debt to finance 60 years of middle class consumption and subsidizing. So if im not mistaken the middle class has alot of room for a correction in incomes as they continue to borrow money for unsustainable social and private spending. But yeah thats about the tip of the iceberg on our side to your views.
4-10-2008 @ 12:35PM
Azhot1 said...
I am late reading this interesting article & comments but thought I would add some input on the subject. In the 1990's when the rest of the country was reeling in high tech portfolio's and spread out wealth, my husband and I were not. It was slow & steady. Work, work, and work. Guess what? By 9-11 (Yes, the nine eleven all of us has come to know so well) My husband & I was opened for business after aquirring the land and building to do so. I was late getting to work, that first day, too absorbed in watching tall buildings in New York City, implode. And now? Now, I can say that I am so proud of our "little business" which has created a lot of wealth, for us, and for our employees over the years. I am also happy, espeacially in the political climate, knowing that we are getting ready to retire the business in the next year, or two. They (the Government) can only tax us once. God help the new small business's coming up into their own if the Democrats get in!
4-10-2008 @ 6:48PM
Clark Mixon said...
Hillary and Obama are both Socialists bordering on being Fascists. In case you've forgotten, Adolf Hitler was a Fascist. Fascism controls corporations and dictates what they can and cannot do. Socialism takes over ownership of corporations and ineptly runs them. Both rob your pocket book and neither gives any incentive to do much.................Look at government now. Where did all the Cigarette money and State Lotto monies go??????????????????????????
5-16-2008 @ 11:07AM
Rob Diego said...
The fact is Obama is nothing more than a tax and spend liberal and not a change agent as he says. Raising the capital gains tax is raising the tax on the middle class because they pay a large portion of capital gains taxes. That will only discourage the middle class from investing in the economy. All he is trying to do is pander to the middle class by promising that he won't raise their income taxes. This is an example of how liberals will change any position that will gain votes. Nothing new in that. The Clintons have been doing it for decades.
5-16-2008 @ 11:08AM
Rob Diego said...
The fact is Obama is nothing more than a tax and spend liberal and not a change agent as he says. Raising the capital gains tax is raising the tax on the middle class because they pay a large portion of capital gains taxes. That will only discourage the middle class from investing in the economy. All he is trying to do is pander to the middle class by promising that he won't raise their income taxes. This is an example of how liberals will change any position that will gain votes. Nothing new in that. The Clintons have been doing it for decades.
5-22-2008 @ 5:35PM
laiconna said...
I think that what people are not realizing is that the government cannot continually give tax cuts and keep spending at the current rate. This will cause the next person in the white house to be forced to raise taxes in order to pay down some of the liabilities the current administration has saddled us with. Only a fool could believe that cutting taxes, spending billions in Iraq, and giving large allotments to business would not cause a huge deficit that will have to be dealt with by the next administration. Are people daft?