We received the following letter on Tax Day from the owner of a local business:
It comes as no coincidence that today I will be signing my tax return and thus feel compelled to write this letter to you.
As I read the total income received, I see that I am included as a target of those “take over Wall Street” protesters and the Obama administration as a “One Percenter.”
The president has been on quite a campaign lately promoting his so-called “Buffett rule” and virtually attacking the 1% of Americans who allegedly are not paying their fair share.
One problem I have is what has been glossed over by the mainstream media, and of course, the Obama administration as well. My company is a subchapter “S” corporation, which means my personal income — which is well below $ 1 million — is combined with the company’s net income for the year.
This past year, because of the great work of my company’s employees, we made a profit of $1.5 million. President Obama would now like for me to pay the combined personal and company income at more than 30%.
It should also be noted, however, that we also face several state-tax obligations because we do business in nine other states, which would bring the total tax higher.
Another important point that cannot be forgotten is that because of federal withholding, my personal income already has been taxed at a rate greater than the 20% tax rate Obama has recently disclosed he paid. But because of my employees’ fine work ethic and success, I now must pay an additional 25% to 30% on top of what I already have paid!
I am at a loss as to how I can expect to be able to give back to my employees more benefits and bonuses, health-care improvements and try to find ways to invest in growth to employ more people if the administration has its way.
I will have very little left over to handle the day-to-day fiscal obligations, including the cost of the significant governmental regulations in place.
Yes, I am a One Percenter. But please let me know, Mr. Obama, how this is working out for me!
Dear Mr. One Percenter:
But alas, as Barack Obama sees it, your concerns of having to pay more than 50% of what your labors earned (i.e., your income, your property) to “the state” are misplaced. As noted in his speech last week to the roomful of his allies, America’s daily newspaper editors, we “as a country” cannot succeed if you do well and others struggle.
As the president told the editors (see box): “Everyone” must get “a fair shot” and “everyone” must do “their (sic) fair share.”
Surely you note, however, that Mr. Obama is never specific on what he means by “fair shot” and “fair share.” He cleverly and connivingly avoids explicit definitions. But you know full well if you read his words and listen, there is little ambiguity. “Fair” means “the state” will decide what is yours and what unearned benefits must be given — by the force of a gun, mind you — to others deemed deserving by him and “the state.”
In Obama’s speech to editors, he said in one breath: “I believe deeply that the free market is the greatest force for economic progress in human history.” And yet, he didn’t really mean that, because he followed that statement one sentence later by saying what he really believes: “… through government we should do together what we cannot do as well for ourselves.”
Through government. Through “the state.” Through the force of law, the force of a gun. Through central planning in Washington. Through collectivism, communism and socialism, the state will decide what is “fair” and “just” and how your private property will be conficscated and distributed to others.
As you have found out, in Mr. Obama’s beliefs, you and all Americans acting in your day-to-day self-interests apparently are not morally driven or capable of taking care of those in need — in spite of the historical record to the contrary (i.e. Americans are the most charitable and generous people in the world).
To be sure, in Mr. Obama’s beliefs, you One Percenters are not paying your “fair share” — even though, as the table shows, Americans who earn $343,927 or more a year pay 37% of all federal income taxes.
Altogether, there are 1.4 million Americans in the Internal Revenue Service’s top 1% of earners. Because of your company’s earnings, you are among these. And even though you and your fellow One Percenters comprise only 0.6% of all Americans of tax-paying age, and even though all of you combined paid a whopping $318 billion in income taxes, Mr. Obama says that is not enough.
What makes more sense, Mr. Obama asked in another speech last week: To extend existing tax rates — or, as he derisively said, give another tax break to “the rich,” or raise taxes on you and “invest in” schools, teachers, more police officers and alternative energy sources?
Once again, he couched the choice in his conniving cleverness — as if there is a direct connection between your specific tax rates and the government services that pull at the heart strings of invincibly ignorant American voters. Unless we tax you more, he infers, there won’t be enough teachers, schools and cops. In his vision, government spending is untouchable and its growth should be unstoppable.
This is scary for Americans — Obama’s vision of what it required to “succeed as a country.” As you see, Mr. One Percenter, his is a vision that shows disdain for you, the efforts and fruits of your labor, your ingenuity and success.
While you believe in the self-evident truths that all Americans are created equal and endowed by their Creator with the unalienable rights of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, unfortunately our incumbent president does not.
We cannot let him have a second term.
RARE IS THE FACT TO BACK WHAT HE SAYS
OBAMA’S ASNE SPEECH: “They keep telling us that if we just … let businesses pollute more and treat workers and consumers with impunity, that somehow we’d all be better off. We’re told that when the wealthy become even wealthier and corporations are allowed to maximize their profits by whatever means necessary, it’s good for America …”
Who are “they”? When and where did anyone say any of that? Obama gave no citations.
This is his habit: deliberate, incessant, egregious distortions.
A ‘FAIR SHOT’ AND ‘FAIR SHARE’
“ … In the face of all these challenges, we’re going to have to answer a central question as a nation.
“What, if anything, can we do to restore a sense of security for people who are willing to work hard and act responsibly in this country? Can we succeed as a country where a shrinking number of people do exceedingly well while a growing number struggle to get by, or are we better off when everyone gets a fair shot?
“And everyone does their (sic) fair share. And everyone plays by the same rules. This is not just another run-of-the-mill political debate. I’ve said it’s the defining issue of our time, and I believe it. That’s why I ran in 2008. It’s what my presidency has been about. It’s why I’m running again.” …
April 13 speech to American
Society of Newspaper Editors