Many Americans unaware that they are 'rich'

Joe Herring
Come January 1, the average household earning between $20 and $80 thousand dollars annually will see their Federal tax bill increase by roughly $175 a month.  An average of a $2100 a year in reduced income for hundreds of millions of Americans, all because the Obama administration and a leftist Congress intend to allow the Bush-era "tax cuts for the rich" to expire on December 31st.

I may be an ordinary sort of fellow, but even I can state with certainty that a household earning less than $80,000 falls far short of my definition of "rich."  For a family with a household income of say, $30k, they can expect to see their paychecks reduced by about $120 a month.  For the upper end of the scale, we are talking the equivalent of a payment for an average new car, about $450 a month.  Under any circumstances, it is wildly irresponsible to burden families that are already struggling.

We were assured repeatedly by then-candidate Obama that he wouldn't raise taxes on anyone earning less than $250k a year.  That is technically a true statement.  The administration is not raising taxes per se; they are simply allowing tax cuts to expire.  Of course, the hit to our incomes is still the same, but at least the semantically minded in the administration have clear consciences. 

Consumer spending accounts for about 70% of all spending.  The idea that the economy will be in some way bolstered by the wholesale diminishment of purchasing power is intellectually negligent.  But, we must remember, this is not about the economy, or even about consumers.  It is about the fuel that runs the government.  Money and power, and the greater accumulation of both.  The expiration of the tax cuts will deliver more of each to the narcissistic gluttons on Capitol Hill, providing another means for yet further control of our personal decisions.  It is a round-robin game, take money from the public, then offer to give some back in return for votes.  The Mafia has a similar system, known as a "protection racket", except they go to jail for running it.

The Democrats in Congress refused to address the renewal of the tax cuts before the election recess.  Already facing angry, motivated opposition, the last thing Democrats wanted was to provide another issue for surging Republican and conservative candidates.  The fact that they refused to address the issue before the election is a clear indication that they do not intend to renew the cuts. 

So what is a family to do?  How many of us can absorb an unexpected expense equivalent to the purchase of a new car, or a houseful of furniture?  Either purchase represents the functional equivalent of the tax increase we are staring in the face, thanks to our Democrat friends in Congress.  November 2nd, we have our chance to respond.  Vote them out, and deny them the fruits of their corrupt behavior.

But don't forget the good news here, whether you knew it or not, you must be "rich." 

The author writes from Omaha, NE and can be reached at readmorejoe@gmail
Come January 1, the average household earning between $20 and $80 thousand dollars annually will see their Federal tax bill increase by roughly $175 a month.  An average of a $2100 a year in reduced income for hundreds of millions of Americans, all because the Obama administration and a leftist Congress intend to allow the Bush-era "tax cuts for the rich" to expire on December 31st.

I may be an ordinary sort of fellow, but even I can state with certainty that a household earning less than $80,000 falls far short of my definition of "rich."  For a family with a household income of say, $30k, they can expect to see their paychecks reduced by about $120 a month.  For the upper end of the scale, we are talking the equivalent of a payment for an average new car, about $450 a month.  Under any circumstances, it is wildly irresponsible to burden families that are already struggling.

We were assured repeatedly by then-candidate Obama that he wouldn't raise taxes on anyone earning less than $250k a year.  That is technically a true statement.  The administration is not raising taxes per se; they are simply allowing tax cuts to expire.  Of course, the hit to our incomes is still the same, but at least the semantically minded in the administration have clear consciences. 

Consumer spending accounts for about 70% of all spending.  The idea that the economy will be in some way bolstered by the wholesale diminishment of purchasing power is intellectually negligent.  But, we must remember, this is not about the economy, or even about consumers.  It is about the fuel that runs the government.  Money and power, and the greater accumulation of both.  The expiration of the tax cuts will deliver more of each to the narcissistic gluttons on Capitol Hill, providing another means for yet further control of our personal decisions.  It is a round-robin game, take money from the public, then offer to give some back in return for votes.  The Mafia has a similar system, known as a "protection racket", except they go to jail for running it.

The Democrats in Congress refused to address the renewal of the tax cuts before the election recess.  Already facing angry, motivated opposition, the last thing Democrats wanted was to provide another issue for surging Republican and conservative candidates.  The fact that they refused to address the issue before the election is a clear indication that they do not intend to renew the cuts. 

So what is a family to do?  How many of us can absorb an unexpected expense equivalent to the purchase of a new car, or a houseful of furniture?  Either purchase represents the functional equivalent of the tax increase we are staring in the face, thanks to our Democrat friends in Congress.  November 2nd, we have our chance to respond.  Vote them out, and deny them the fruits of their corrupt behavior.

But don't forget the good news here, whether you knew it or not, you must be "rich." 

The author writes from Omaha, NE and can be reached at readmorejoe@gmail