Re:The Angry Rich
by kenjackson on Monday September 20, 2010 @06:55PM
(#1710787)
I don't disagree that a rate increase _might_ be a bad thing (although I don't think it is). But I do think, that as Krugman points out, this is not the current argument.
In Reagan's era they would pitch trickle down as how everyone benefits from these tax cuts. The actual stated goal was to make life better for everyone, but starting from the top.
The current stated goal from the right is that the rich deserve the money, and the poor do NOT deserve. Not that the tax cuts will have some side benefit to the poor. Rather that we need to keep the money out of the hands of the poor. This is why the constantly use the code word "welfare" when talking to their base.
Again, there is a very rational argument to be had here. In fact, I think a rational argument would be a very boring one for most people in the US. But I think the reason that everyone is up in arms is not due to their passion for capitalism. But rather I think there's a fundamental belief that there are certain groups of people unworthy of _their_ money.
In Reagan's era they would pitch trickle down as how everyone benefits from these tax cuts. The actual stated goal was to make life better for everyone, but starting from the top.
The current stated goal from the right is that the rich deserve the money, and the poor do NOT deserve. Not that the tax cuts will have some side benefit to the poor. Rather that we need to keep the money out of the hands of the poor. This is why the constantly use the code word "welfare" when talking to their base.
Again, there is a very rational argument to be had here. In fact, I think a rational argument would be a very boring one for most people in the US. But I think the reason that everyone is up in arms is not due to their passion for capitalism. But rather I think there's a fundamental belief that there are certain groups of people unworthy of _their_ money.