In recent days, Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK), has begun referring to Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) as “Barack the Wealth Spreader,” referring to his proposed tax plan that would provide greater tax relief for lower income individuals than those with higher incomes. Obama recently explained his support for progressive taxation, saying, “I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.” Palin contends that Obama’s characterization of his tax plan revealed him to be a “socialist” who wants to “redistribute” American wealth. Palin argues that the Obama tax plan “discourages productivity,” will “punish hardwork,” and will “stifle the entrepreneurial spirit.”
Conservatives in the media have echoed Palin’s sentiments, insinuating that Obama is a “Marxist” and referring to his tax plan as “welfare.”
But Palin’s criticisms of Obama’s “spread the wealth” remarks are ironic, as she recently characterized Alaska’s tax code in a very similar way. Just last month, in an interview with Philip Gourevitch of the New Yorker, Palin explained the windfall profits tax that she imposed on the oil industry in Alaska as a mechanism for ensuring that Alaskans “share in the wealth” generated by oil companies:
And Alaska—we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs. … It’s to maximize benefits for Alaskans, not an individual company, not some multinational somewhere, but for Alaskans.
In fact, Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share (ACES) program, which manages the redistribution of oil wealth in Alaska, brings in so much money that the state needs no income or sales tax. In addition, this year ACES will provide every Alaskan with a check for an estimated $3,200.
As Hendrick Hertzberg notes, “Perhaps there is some meaningful distinction between spreading the wealth and sharing it…but finding it would require the analytic skills of Karl the Marxist.”
I find it strange most people that are complaining about Obama's tax plan are worried about it taking part of their wealth and giving it to someone else. Most of these people have no hope of ever earning $250,000 a year (as 98% of small businesses do not) and quiet frankly have no wealth at all to lose. The only wealth most of these people had was in their homes or 401K earnings and this puts most of them in the red.
The people fueling this backlash are the wealthy that did not include you in sharing the wealth as they raked in Billions, but forced you to share the pain in the form of a Trillion Dollar Wall Street bailout. Don't help them rob you again by parroting their talking points.
Americans must be suffering from mass hypnosis to not only vote against her own best interest, but fight long and hard destroy herself. I'm embarrassed as the world views in disbelief.
6 comments:
There is a difference in citizen ownership of public resources and government distribution of private wealth.
Wall Street was just given one trillion dollars of government money to be used as they see fit (salaries, bonuses, trips and everything else). Wake up, the government takes taxes and spreads the wealth. It's been going on for over 200 years.
Nice try, libby...
It's a HUGE difference when the Government SAVES MONEY by cutting costs (and taxes) and then sharing the SAVED MONEY WITH THE TAXPAYERS!
Alaska does NOT take from the hard working wealthy people and give to the poor, Alaska takes FROM ALASKA and gives TO EVERYONE!
OCDMan
www.ocdman.blogspot.com
Hey OCDMan. As you people say "The Company will just raise the prices on the rest of us or cut jobs to pay the taxes". That means Alaska's SOCIALIST behavior cost all of us hard working people if I follow your logic.
I'm with OCDman on this one. The oil companies leased the land and the resources from the people of Alaska. The revenue derived via the Alaska Oil Trust is the equivalent of a lease payment. It's not socialism, it's capitalism.
Socialism would be if Alaskans had to share those lease payments with the residents of the other 49 states.
Why in some cases when a business are charged extra taxes and expenses it's capitalism that causes not harm. They do not raise prices and no one gets laid off. In other cases businesses are said to raise prices, lay off workers and life ends as we know it.
The only reason Alaskans do not have to share the the Petroleum Profits Tax (PPT) with the lower 48 is because the lower 48 are the ones paying the tax in the form of higher prices. I believe that all Americans pay for (PPT) the Alaskan citizens enjoy. This is the logic that is used when Obama is called a socialist.
Post a Comment