Wednesday, 1 June 2005
Taxing our Social Security Problems Away
USA Today has a bizarre article today on Social Security. The whole article is dedicated to the idea of raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans to help float Social Security.
Besides pointing out how much revenue a tax raise would generate, it fairly points out the economic downside of stealing from the rich and giving to the government.
Of course it wouldn't be a USA Today article without quoting some poll of theirs showing how people support taxing the rich.
More than two-thirds support cutting benefits for the affluent and applying the Social Security tax to all income, not just the first $90,000 earned, according to a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll in February.
I wonder what the poll results of the question would be if you asked "Would you support higher Social Security taxes on the wealthiest if it caused wide spread unemployment that would directly effect family and friends?" or even less subtle "Would you support higher Social Security taxes on the wealthiest if in turn it caused you to lose your job?"
The amusing part of the article is how it slants Republicans so they appear to favor increasing taxes on the wealthiest while liberal Democrats oppose the idea.
What I wonder is why was the article written if the basic premise, as the author proposes, is a bad idea? First off, I don't believe for a second that the liberals think tax increases are a bad idea. Especially on the rich. Currently, the Democrats are getting pummeled for being nattering naybobs of negativism. I believe this taxing the rich story is a trial balloon for the Democrats as they desperately search for an alternative plan to the Republican's plan for partial privatization of social security.
Personally, I don't think that dog will hunt.
