The Founding Fathers thought it was desirable to spread the wealth, so what's McCain's problem?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

As the presidential election draws to a close, the campaign trail has come alive with allegations that Barack Obama is a “socialist” because he proposes to raise taxes on the wealthy while lowering them for the poor and middle class.

“Barack Obama calls it spreading the wealth,” Republican vice presidential hopeful Sarah Palin said last week. “But Joe the plumber and Ed the dairyman, I believe that they think that it sounds more like socialism. Friends, now is no time to experiment with socialism.”

But is it really socialism to talk of “spreading the wealth”?

Actually, it has been part of the American economic system since its founding.

In a letter to James Madison in 1785, for instance, Thomas Jefferson suggested that taxes could be used to reduce “the enormous inequality” between rich and poor. He wrote that one way of “silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise.”

Madison later spoke in favor of using laws to “reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity (meaning the middle) and raise extreme indigence towards a state of comfort.”

During the early days of the republic, the government relied mostly on tariffs to collect revenue, under the theory that since the rich bought most of the imports, they would pay most of the taxes.

“The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the general government are levied,” Jefferson wrote in 1811. “The poor man, who uses nothing but what is made in his own farm or family, will pay nothing. (With) our revenues applied to canals, roads, schools, etc., the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone, without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings.”

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/busines...9-1b26dean.html

[mawilson 2,133]

Thomas Jefferson thought slavery was okay too. What's your point?

[akdiver 3]

Thomas Jefferson thought slavery was okay too. What's your point?

Yeah - I was gonna say - and black people were counted as 3/5ths of a person. So, if you wanna run the country according to the FF, it's more likely that Obama would be McCain's slave, rather than his presidential opponent.

[Dr. A ♥ O 203]

Ok.... so this ones a stretch A.J.

[MrsCat 6]

Thomas Jefferson thought slavery was okay too.

Exactly why he'll be remembered as the greatest president of all time. That and his popularization of french vanilla ice cream.

[rebeccajo 14]

Why is it a stretch to point out that this subject has been discussed since our country began?

Instead some of you would rather turn the point to a discussion of Jefferson's 'character'.

No wonder mud-slinging is so effective in politics. It's so much more fun.

[Fandango 1,440]

Their point seems to be that we've evolved as a nation as just because it was done then doesn't dictate it being done now. As pointed out by the slavery issue...

[NickD 203]

In my dealings with corporations, you don't get to be a CEO by being a nice guy, have to be a cut throat, a liar that knows how not to get caught, and really suck up to the right people. To get a greater share of the market or even all of it, sure helped in killing the anti-trust act. But even if you did before it was killed, never had to make things right, just had to pay a $5,000.00 fine. People with unearned income sure get one hell of a tax break, but to be really good at it, have to have insider knowledge. Very few are caught at this, think Martha Stewart was the last one, she wasn't very smart.

Have about half a dozen state senators in jail, all with very light sentences, like a month for taking bribes, but never hear anything about making things right, like returning the money to the tax payers. Hey, isn't being forced to resign punishment enough? A kid that steals an old broken down car not only has to give it back but can expect to spend the next two years in jail. A slight imbalance here on justice.

The likes of Willy Nelson and Joe Louis sure took a beating from the IRS by sharing their wealth with the needy. Not the way to do it, should have given their money to the United Way, or the Red Cross as recognized by the IRS as being legal charitable institutions. Both have way over paid CEO's and sure took a beating during 9/11 for what little of what they take in they give to charity. But they are still around.

Are members of congress getting a piece of that action? Since they are a self regulating group, would never find out. The American Bar Association is also a self regulating group, and besides controlling attorney's control judges as well, that are also attorneys.

Just feel if these little things were cleaned up, the sharing of wealth would not be an issue, we have some pretty deep holes in our justice system, and already shown, if you have money, can get away with murder.

Already feel I have been ripped off my Microsoft, no place else to go, friends suggested using Linux, I don't have enough hours in the day to fool around with that. And I sure do not have any choice with my utility companies. With other laws, every gas station in town has exactly the same price. Where is the competition?

The real competition is from overseas, they don't have property taxes, the IRS, the EPA, OSHA, the ERA, and a bunch of other government agencies to deal with, plus some pretty stiff liability insurance. Try and file a liability suit against a foreign own company, spread so thin, it's a nightmare. Have to go there to file it and don't stand a chance in their court system.

I blame our government, or lack of it.

[Cassie 8]

When did Ed the dairyman enter the picture?? Missed that one!

[Ban Hammer 14,585]

When did Ed the dairyman enter the picture?? Missed that one!

they're milking that one for all it's worth.

[SpiritAlight 1]

Yup, poor Joe Louis and Willie Nelson....sad, so sad.

The IRS is a scary beast...out of control.

Hey! Like the government.

No one is accountable to the people.

Your tax dollars at work.

Try and ask for the law that tells you you have to pay income tax.

Try and ask for a statement from the IRS as to where the money goes.

Aaron Russo has a movie online about all this stuff.

And the results are frightening.

What do you think it means to "spread the wealth"?

Do you believe that people like Trump and Gates are going to share their $$??

Bah!

1% make 90-95% of the money and the rest of us get the bones.

There is no "spread the wealth".

Period.

[IAMX 3,055]

When did Ed the dairyman enter the picture?? Missed that one!

they're milking that one for all it's worth.

Can't blame them.

The analogy sounded like it came from the outhouse anyways.

Edited October 30, 2008 by SRVT

[rebeccajo 14]

Their point seems to be that we've evolved as a nation as just because it was done then doesn't dictate it being done now. As pointed out by the slavery issue...

Keeping the discussion apples to apples would be helpful. A social issue such as slavery isn't the same as an economic issue. Math is math and the numbers don't change.

Insofar as the video, real Economics 101 doesn't leave out convenient details. Math is math, after all. Again and again we hear the rhetoric about 5% of the tax base controlling 80% of the wealth, and that they are paying 'most' of the taxes. Define 'most'. You can't take the dollars someone has and use that argument as a leveler in a progressive tax system based upon percentages. Especially when the percentages decline as the dollar amount to be taxed declines, which is what happens when deductions and expenses are applied.

[HAL 9000 96]

Yup, poor Joe Louis and Willie Nelson....sad, so sad.

The IRS is a scary beast...out of control.

Hey! Like the government.

No one is accountable to the people.

Your tax dollars at work.

Try and ask for the law that tells you you have to pay income tax.

Try and ask for a statement from the IRS as to where the money goes.

Aaron Russo has a movie online about all this stuff.

And the results are frightening.

What do you think it means to "spread the wealth"?

Do you believe that people like Trump and Gates are going to share their $??

Bah!

1% make 90-95% of the money and the rest of us get the bones.

There is no "spread the wealth".

Period.

That is correct. There is no spread of any wealth in any proposal. There already exists a spread of wealth and it favors that top tier of the population.

[almaty 19]

i say spread the wealth and let everyone get f##ked instead of just the middle class