Quick Links to Posts By Category

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
, , , , , ,
, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Toe to Toe with The One

Anyone who has ever dealt with a politician in full BS mode knows how stressful it can be, particularly when you are already predisposed to disagree with said politician. These politicos are professional operators with a ready line of bunk pre-loaded to buffalo all but the most astute questioners. This is one reason why I admire Joe "The Plumber" Wurzelbacher. He stood in there with Obama and withstood the tsunami of hot air from The One.

Everyone wants, justifiably, to focus on the "spread the wealth" line. But there was a bunch of nonsense preceeding that statement that caught my attention when I first watched the exchange:
BO: Over the last 15 yrs, when you weren’t making 250, you would’ve been getting a tax cut from me, so you’d actually have more money, which means you would’ve saved more, which means you would’ve gotten to the point where you could build your small business quicker than under the current tax code. So, there are two ways of looking at it. I mean, one way of looking at it is, now that you’ve become more successful…

JW: ...through hard work...

BO: ...through hard work, you don’t want to be taxed as much...

JW: ...exactly.

BO: ... ah, which I understand.But another way of looking at it is, 95% of folks who are making less than 250, they may be working hard, too, but they’re being taxed at a higher rate than they would be under my mine.So, so what I’m doing is, you know, put yourself back 10 yrs ago when you were only making, whatever, 60 or 70, under my tax plan, you would be keeping more of your paycheck, you would be paying lower taxes, which means that you would have saved and gotten to the point where you are faster.
This has the veneer of plausibility at first blush, and if you were standing there listening to it, you might think Obama was making a decent point. On the spot, you might not have an argument against this point.

But what Obama indicates in this statement is that he fundamentally doesn't understand business and how jobs are actually created. If Obama's tax plan had been in place 10-15 years ago, Joe The Plumber's employer would have been paying higher taxes, with the result being lower wages for Joe and his coworkers and perhaps even the loss of a job for Joe. His dream of being a business owner may have, in fact, been delayed, or even ruined, by Obama's tax policy.

Obama seems to think that this or that tax policy can be examined in a vacuum - he doesn't recognize that business entities respond to incentives, be they positive or negative. But what would you expect from a Harvard lawyer, street agitator? This guy doesn't have a clue about the economy.

Thanks, Joe, for standing in there against the gale force BS.


Blogger G-Man said...

A vacuum indeed. Cause and affect, Democrats don't get it. Great observation, you should bold your money paragraph, the third one from the end.

10/16/2008 11:56 PM  
Blogger Thrifty Scot said...

bolding --> done.

There was so much nonsense in Obama's answer - I empathized with Joe, having to stand there and sort of nod and mumble "uh huh". Obama says that guys like himself making $250K+ are lucky? People at lower income levels didn't get a tax cut under Bush? A flat tax would have to be 40% to be revenue neutral? Huh, huh, huh? No wonder Joe was sweating so much - his brain was on fire.

And then there were the moments when Obama insisted on filibustering Joe, not letting him get in a word edgewise. And the touching - oh, the touching, again and again on the arm and shoulder in order to create a false sense of connection. In any other setting, I think Joe might have told ol' Barack in a polite but manly way to keep his hands to himself.

10/18/2008 4:47 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


MOB Logo

Powered by Blogger