Republicans say that taxing the rich is like, "Punishing success"

[yesthattom]

(This makes a lot more sense if you've read Robert Reich's NPR commentary and a lot of Paul Krugman and mix t with Geoge Lakoff's framing technique.)

Republicans say that taxing the rich is like, "Punishing success".

People buy into this because they all dream that someday they'll be rich, and even though it is a pipe dream, they don't want to be taxed when the achieve their goal. They are greedy about a future that doesn't exist.

How can we feed off the middleclass's belief that they'll be rich some day? I'm thinking along the lines of "Our economic plan is an effort to create more rich people!" or the longer, more descriptive "Lower taxes for the middle class; a moderate tax on the rich; and use the money to create opportunities for the middle class to become rich: better education, etc."

Maybe a George Lakoff analysis would come up with something better, but my point is that if people really believe that they'll be rich someday and that's why they vote Republican (i.e. vote for policies that hurt them) then we should speak in ways that play to their greed, but are honest about how our policies are better for them.

Comments

[kimuchi.livejournal.com]

The main problem I have discussing taxes with people who hold the "taxes punish the rich" opinion is that I have a hard time thinking of taxes as punishment. Taxes are a financial obligation towards the continued upkeep of your country, and Republicans sure are patriotic so why do they grudge that?

[marmota.livejournal.com]

Ideally, taxes aren't a punishment, they're what you sow for reaping the benefits of the services provided by our government.
That said, it isn't what people are thinking when April 15 comes around, no matter how much they make.
The bitter pill that this country will never swallow is that there is a line past "Success" labeled "Excess". Perhaps by highlighting that it is excess which is being punished and not success?
Or would it be more productive to not pursue the punishment angle?

As someone with more than a few socialist tendencies, I'm a firm believer that any "no one left behind" policies must be accompanied by a corollary "no one too far ahead" policy to succeed. Good luck selling THAT to someone fed the American Dream rhetoric their whole lives. :/

Eat the Poor?

[(Anonymous)]

Ahh yes, the American dream. Where someone who grew up with almost nothing can own the world by the time they are 40. In my case, it's taking place at 32.

I'm the son of a high-school graduate divorcee. I don't have a college degree, I didn't attend some expensive college-prep school, and I lived on Pell Grants when I was 18 and 19 (which was wasted since I failed out of college quickly). We did visit the food bank more than once in my lifetime when I was young.

Thirteen years ago, I was broke and couldn't pay my rent or child support. I worked my ass off for those thirteen years and now live in a great house with three kids and my wife. Not ONCE during that entire time did I take advantage of any federal/state/local programs that provided "entitlements" or "incentives" for the poor to becoming part of the working class. I worked my ass off, stayed at my job for years and years, and when money got tight I worked even harder.

This year, because of new tax laws regarding special needs adoptions and other breaks, I am paying almost no Federal Income tax. This money is not being scurried away under a mattress. It is going to my kids teacher to pay for her tuition for this year and next year at a private school that she runs from her basement. It's going to pay off bills to credit unions and other local vendors, so they can close their books, realize their profits, and pass that money onto bigger and better ideas.

Maybe I am "rich", but to think that the son of a gas station attendant and a donut shop clerk is going to just dream about owning a house and never actually see it happen is a load of crap.

Re: Eat the Poor?

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

And, as you know, I disagree with what you are saying so much that it isn't worth debating.

[sierra-nevada.livejournal.com]

Regressive taxation is immoral.

Progressive taxation is immoral.

Social security is a generational Ponzi scheme.

Government should endeavor to be as small as possible, and meddle as little as possible in the free market. This means correcting for externalities (e.g. pollution, monopolies) but should not attempt to enforce an "equality of outcome."

All fines in the penal code should be expressed as percentages of gross receipts/income, rather than as flat dollar amounts. Otherwise, violations of the law fade into a noise-level cost of doing business instead of a proper penalty, as inflation decreases the value of the dollar over time.

[dballing.livejournal.com]

"All fines in the penal code should be expressed as percentages of gross receipts/income, rather than as flat dollar amounts."

they have this in some parts of Europe. There was a story a couple years ago about some guy who got what amounted to a $75,000 fine for going 30mph over the limit or something, because he's like mondo-rich.

So well and truly past the point of "punishment fitting the crime" when it's like that. :-)

[kimuchi.livejournal.com]

Uh, the only story I've heard about someone getting a fine like that was a Gumball racer who was going -far- faster than 30mph over, and recklessly besides.

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

And, as you know, I disagree with what you are saying so much that it isn't worth debating.

[grendelgongon.livejournal.com]

Awesome page on framing. Thanks!

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

Glad you enjoyed it! I think it's an amazing way of looking at the world!