David

Karki

Read David's bio and previous columns here

August 25, 2008

Obama’s Unconstitutional Assault on ‘The Rich’

At the recent Saddleback Civil Forum – their only joint appearance other than the presidential debates – Barack Obama and John McCain were asked a variety of questions by moderator Pastor Rick Warren. Some were serious and some stupid. Among the sillier questions was what their respective definitions of “rich” were.

Neither answered it properly, by saying that it was irrelevant to the presidency how “rich” anyone is, that the premise itself was inherently preposterous as it treated the word as a pejorative when it isn't, and that government has no earthly business assuming the unfounded authority to dictate how much money and how many possessions each of us is allowed to have, seizing from those it deems “too rich” and throwing at those it deems more worthy. (Which, in a nutshell, is why the 16^th Amendment and the income tax should never have been passed and ought to be repealed.)

That said, McCain answered it better than Obama did, which I grant you is not a big accomplishment. McCain threw out a figure of $5 million a year, in a light-hearted way. Obama was a good deal lower, around $250,000, which is something an upper-middle class man and woman could reach simply by getting married and combining their incomes.

I'm not going to spend time arguing statistics and numbers. To me, Obama's answer and tax proposals raise a more fundamental question: Why do he and his fellow liberals hate success and wish to punish it so?

That may seem strong to some of you, but when they incessantly harp about “fairness,” it strongly suggests that Obama and the far left view success as a crime. Further, it intimates that they honestly believe anyone who has been successful could only have become so by cheating others. And that there is a limited, finite amount of wealth in the economy, which ought to be parceled out evenly regardless of effort or merit, and if anyone has more than another, it must have been stolen by the former from the latter. And finally, that government has a moral obligation to right this “wrong.”

This is simply certifiable Marxist nonsense. And if Obama believes it, he belongs not in the Oval Office but in a rubber-walled room clad in a jacket with wraparound sleeves. It's the sort of pap that could only be spewed by those who live not in the real world but in the ivory towers of government and academia and the like.

If Obama had any clue, he would know that most Americans work their tails off to honestly earn their keep, strive to be successful and become rich – and do not begrudge anyone else the fruits of their labors. And that most differences in income are the direct result of personal behaviors – industriousness versus sloth, education and intelligence versus stupidity, responsibility versus recklessness.

To the extent there is any systemic screwing going on, it's government perpetrating it by the perverse incentives it sets up while illegitimately authorizing itself to right an “injustice” that never happened, effectively punishing the constructive, rewarding the destructive and obliterating any semblance of private property in the process.

And that's what we must keep in mind – while Obama's worldview is a Marxist fantasy, the consequences of attempting to implement it would be very real and very disastrous. For example:

“Windfall profit” tax on oil companies.  Oil companies already pay a mind-boggling amount in taxes, thanks to the second-highest corporate income tax in the world (the highest in a few liberal states that have their own corporate tax levied on top of the federal one). And there is no such thing as a “windfall profit.” Even if there were, what makes government a more deserving recipient of the proceeds than stockholders or employees or new investments? Does Obama even understand how many average folks have oil stocks in their 401(k) funds and IRAs, work for oil companies or get slammed by high gas prices that are a result of artificially high taxes and low supply?

“Punishing companies that move jobs abroad.” Prepared to flagellate yourself and the rest of Congress, Senator Obama? The aforementioned corporate income tax, at 38.4 percent, is giving companies little choice but to move to stay competitive with those who pay much less most everywhere else. If you really wanted companies to stay, you'd cut the tax to a level matching other nations, which would be in the 10-to-15 percent range. Better yet, abolish it altogether, as any corporate tax is passed on to shareholders (lower dividends), employees (lower pay) and customers (higher prices) as much as possible. It will never hit the intended target, not that a company should be one in the first place.

Anyone with an ounce of humility ought to be able to see when he is causing the very thing he claims to be stopping. But when you've assumed the authority of self-appointed wealth redistributor and private-property exterminator, you've made it clear that no humility resides within. This arrogance and the power of the White House stand to be a very dangerous combination, for it knows no limits.

The Founders birthed the American Revolution largely due to oppressive British taxation, which was at a level far lower than that which we tolerate today. For them, it was the principle tha mattered. If they were around now, they would be aghast at how far from that principle we have allowed government to depart. And they would be ready to take up arms once more to stop what Obama proposes to do (if not a great many things already done by both parties over the years).

If we cannot even manage to find the courage to at least call this what it is, a direct violation of the Constitution, and hold Obama accountable at the ballot box for all but openly announcing his intention to ignore the oath the president takes to uphold it as written, then we don't deserve to follow in their enormous footsteps. 

© 2008 North Star Writers Group. May not be republished without permission.

Click here to talk to our writers and editors about this column and others in our discussion forum.

To e-mail feedback about this column, click here. If you enjoy this writer's work, please contact your local newspapers editors and ask them to carry it.

This is Column # DKK138. Request permission to publish here.