Do you remember grade school? Those times the teacher punished everyone in the classroom for Johnny’s bad behavior? You remember, I am sure. Johnny gets caught cheating on a test, and the teacher says that everyone has to stay after school or do an essay or whatever because Johnny needs to learn their lesson. Or is it they need to learn Johnny’s lesson? Hmmmm. It is a peer pressure tactic to make the class hate Johnny.
We had teachers that used this common peer pressure tactic. We thought it was unfair and showed a general lack of intellect on the teacher’s part. In society, it would be like finding a sexual offender in a neighborhood and putting the entire neighborhood on the offender list. It would be like catching Son of Sam in the park murdering a young couple and sending everyone that went to the park that day to prison for life. It would be like catching a thief robbing a bank and arresting the customers of the bank as accomplices. It is stupid on its face.
So, what did the Democratic Congress do in response to the bonuses given to AIG executives today? They overwhelmingly passed a bill to impose an across the board 90% tax on all officers of the company that make more than the Obama magic number, $250,000. The employees did not even have to have worked at AIG during the period that led to the need for the bail-out. And the government wants to apply it to all bailed out companies that received more than 5 billion in bail out money, but exclude those receiving smaller amounts no matter how criminal their officers may have been.
So, let’s see if we get this straight. A complete criminal making less than 250K in salary is exempt and can receive billion dollar bonuses without the law impacting him. However, a completely innocent executive making $250,000 pays 90% of any bonus to the IRS? Banks that used less bail-out money, regardless of how much they earned or their overall size, get a “Get Out Of Jail Free” card.
What is most pathetic about this response to the bonuses is that government is not standing up and accepting the blame for the current financial crisis. Congress is just as responsible for the problems we face as any financial institution, but they blame and penalize others while they dine on Wagyu beef, spend a trillion bucks on a “spendulus” package and receive sizable paychecks and government benefits. Shoot, many of Obama’s nominees for the administration evaded taxes. We don’t see government reducing their own paychecks or benefits for their hand in destroying our economy.
Obama is now lying about his own administration to distance himself from the debacle. When it was indicated that Richard Holbrooke, Obama’s appointed envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan, was an executive at AIG from 2001-2008, during the very time the bonuses were approved, Obama and his point men asserted their AIG crony didn’t know about the bonuses. Well, does that mean that any executive that says he didn’t know about the bonus get to keep it? Or even better, maybe he can instead get appointed to the Obama staff.
How can you take a broad tax swipe at these people? Not everyone in every bailed out company was at fault. In fact, the federal government was equally if not more at fault. The government is assigning guilt to everyone except themselves, and, if this bill is passed into law through the Senate and Obama, is stealing bonuses that the companies had contractually agreed upon. You are guilty as charged if you work for the wrong bank and you made more than the guilty number, $250,000. Government is using the tax as a diversionary tactic to placate the electorate infuriated over bonuses they don’t understand and that were exaggerated by the media. All the while, they are attempting to rob many innocent people blind. Can you say Robin Hood?
And don’t think the Democrats won’t find some way to take the stipulations off and apply the “theft tax” to other executives going forward. Taxes have a way of being spread around.
Some people believe that the tax is morally just. But the government doesn’t care about morality folks. They only care about your vote. They are patronizing you at others expense.
As a primary example of a morally unjust tax, one has to wonder about a government that for years has preached family values, and yet imposes a marriage tax on married couples. The reason this tax exists is because the government cannot afford to lose it. It is immoral, contradicts the governments own doctrine, and is completely unfair to working families. Just as any other unjust tax, once that tax is instated, goverment finds a way to make it grow and negatively impact as many people as possible. If the “theft tax” is imposed, we expect it to be no different.