Dan Mitchell discusses taxing the rich on CNN's Your Money

[gobgoble]

I like how the CNN guys pick on the conservative dude with lots of questions.

GO MEDIA!!

[madmark61]

Why not take the money his d-bag wants to have the Government collect in takes and pool it together and open up new ventures that hire more people?

[robertquentincobb]

Daniel Mitchell for President!

The man has the greatest delivery and insight of what is wrong with the country , but yet most importantly HOW TO FIX our economy! I am on the very of complete despair! Revolution NOW!

Daniel Mitchell for President!

[judd73]

If the "silent Majority" of wealthy want this, then why have the tax at all? Why not make it non-profit and give people the choice of giving, and encourage all their wealthy friends to give too- since they all want it anyway...?

[steinbeck1805]

funny how vocal cato's dan mitchell can become about inherited wealth as soon as the heirs don't agree with his agenda...

[stevan1934]

Taxsing rich and famous is not big deal,the qustion is, if not ordinary tax payers, who is paying health care insurance for the USA and local officials/workers with health care covered upto the tooth?.

[stevan1934]

Taxsing rich is not hate crime, if they did become rich on expence of the USA citizens, why then souldn't be obligate contributing in health care plane obama is talking about!

[actonbath]

Stoned? 'health care plane..? 'Taxsing...' ? 'souldn't....'?

'obligate...' ?

Go back to school, pay attention to the teachers this time, graduate, get 2 jobs, save your money, buy or start a business and work 80hr a week for a few years to get into the "rich" bracket and then pay for my healthcare....until then, keep your grubby fingers off my wallet.

[stevan1934]

actonbath! What you recomend was already done but $hungry lawyer and bad people like Mafia all i have snutch from me,thus I have a reason to ask, or tell what is wrong in this countri.

#1) see web site justiceforbozidar them judge for yoursef what is wrong in this sociaty.Being poor in writting is not problem, problem is when some one is poor in spirid the way Holy Bible calls.

[TOL1488]

Funny how they don't want to simply give their own money as much as they want to take it away from others. Why not just give what they feel comfortable with and mind their own business.

[scottsway]

dan mitchell can go fuck himself! slimmy piece of shit! And France asshole is the size of texas you moron! Your comparing an apple to a fucking watermelon! Fucking prick!

[snake2006]

Why not tax the rich? It's about fucking time people said it. They have more money than they ever need, people like Miley Cyrus,George Lucas,Steven Spielberg,politicians and other such, including the fuckheads anchoring CNN.

They don't need all that money,and they are so fucking greedy that they want even more.

[scottsway]

Yeah if you even talk of a tax hike ohhh my god it is the end of the world! Think about it back in the 50's there was a 91% top marginal tax rate, now these rich pricks thanks to Reagon and bush they are now at 33%. What a fucking joke and what is even a bigger joke is the right has working class idiots buying into their shit! They dont know what side their bread is buttered on!

[ntn1987]

Those monies are responsible for creating jobs and keeping us alive.

[eshnajizzle]

Those monies could be used more ethically. They could also be used in more complete entirety. Now they are being used into all sorts of luxury items, that aren't needed in any case. Think of all the people living in huge mansions and then having 10 properties apart from that.. Each stacked with 5 cars in the parking-lot. You think the money used to buy them couldn't be used into something more useful, practical, efficient.

[johnnydlux]

You don't have to give to charity. I don't think there is a law that says you can't pay more on your taxes if you think the government can spend your money better than you can.

[mctarmac10]

You want to pay extra tax, give to charity, much more bang for buck then the government can offer.

[randy25rhoads]

Chuck is a fucking twat. He needs to quit speaking for others.

[Wormtail81]

Simple question: Is it really true that the government and the Congress have the integrity and knowledge to redistribute wealth. Why are the people belonging to the other guy's organization want the government to take their money and administer it with a bureaucracy? Is that preferable to voluntary contributions to private charity?

[eshnajizzle]

It is better than private charity, because of quantity. Look at the amounts of charity and look at how much the donators are still left with.

No one is giving enough charity to cover necessary expenses. And another part of the charity is the social feeling of inferiority, which is much greater if you have to depend on charity from "celebrities"

[Wormtail81]

Whereas depending on the state preserves your feeling of independence and motivation to work for yourself. Please note that when you take rich peoples' money out of banks, loans are harder to get, the economy grows more slowly, and the least skilled people are hurt the most. If government was not involved in these areas, more people would indeed give to charity. People who view this as government's role have been documented to give less to charity, since they think paying taxes is enough.

[eshnajizzle]

People find motivation mostly in social status. It has only converged into monetary glamour because of choices in our society. If everyone worked for the state, people would find other values to boost their morale, besides money.

Money for investment can be found even with equal wealth distribution. E.g. joint company collective funds, with company profits&worker donations enjoined. It's the same money the banks now use to gain profits from in between.

Out of space.. Ask for more if you want..

[Wormtail81]

People who do not have to work for themselves will not be motivated. Also, you neglect that individual liberty would greatly suffer if everything were controlled by the state. People have a lower quality of life under systems similar to the one you described. I believe that people are individuals, and that class warfare will not help them better themselves.

[eshnajizzle]

I'm not saying people should work for the government. I'm stating that IF they did so, they would find other reasons to motivat themselves than money i.e. social respect. The possibility of lowering the income-gap is much more plausable. If the difference of income is smaller, the "I earn more than my neighbor"-feeling will be enough to keep people striving to improve their status.

People have had lower individual liberties in previous systems of the type, but that doesn't mean it has to be so.

[eshnajizzle]

The only addition of mine for the govenment's role, would be income redistribution. As a carry-on, hightened labor-union activities might follow. Only to ensure a fair living for all.

The motivatory aspect of capitalism is commendable, but it WILL NOT be significantly diminished by limiting the upper limit of earnings. The amounts today are preposterous.

I hope I never said that people aren't individual entities. But freedom from everyday income will enable all people to better themselves.

[Wormtail81]

You are right, just because something has never been achieved does not mean it is impossible. However, I am respectfully doubtful. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

You seem to be saying that people are only motivated by money if they have more of it than someone else. Income inequality and poverty are two different things. How much more or less money other people make is far less import than how much real wealth an individual has. Income inequality is of no practical consequence.

[eshnajizzle]

We've hit a common cord here. =)

I've perhaps been talking mistakenly about income inequality, but in effect poverty is a hightened case of it. Yes, it's far more important, how much money one has, than how it compares with other people. But the solution, despite the ambiguity of which issue is to be solved, is the same: income redistribution.

The motivatory aspect of my message was, that people are motivated by money, because it is a simple way to prove your worth over others.

[Wormtail81]

I am not an objectivity. I don't think money is moral. I think it is amoral. As in many other areas of life, virtue is often rewarded when it comes to earning money.

Also, your solution for poverty assumes that certain people will never be able to make their own lives better. I completely disagree. The vast majority of the world's poor are capable people who lack opportunities, including education and property rights. Income redistribution destroys wealth and undermines the incentive to excel.

[Truthpolice9698]

Dan kicked some ass.

Well done.

[voskresene]

Limousine liberals)))) Gotta love Dan Mitchell. As always, right on.

[CountArtha]

I like that one even better than "Champagne Socialists."

[johnisfun]

the male moderator is an ignorant cunt, he keeps interrupting the speakers.

[a4finger]

Its only common sence, u REALLY think the rich r gonna wanna give up their money?

[torresut]

I have a solution. Since the gentleman is willing to pay more taxes, people should be allowed to volunteer to pay taxes. But I'm opposed to mandatory taxes for everyone.

[cnerd2025]

Dan's a good guy. I met him drinking a beer at CPAC.

[Surhotchaperchlorome]

I suppose the host also forgot about the average 1 year waiting period in France for healthcare....

[Surhotchaperchlorome]

@Collins: Because charity (which is far more efficient than government taxation and spending) is completely out of your desires, right?

How lazy can you get...

[soundmoneyfan]

haha, Dan Mitchell owns another statist. No government or media spin can hang with a well read libertarian. Add Mitchell's speaking skills and you get owned!

[mikheii]

Great work from Cato. I'm just upset about CNN's "Breaking News Update: Elizabeth Taylor tweets about sadness of losing Jackson" in the news ticker. Talk about a "sick joke." This country is doomed no matter what if that's the kind of news that keeps getting reported on.

[carolyncriss]

Limousine liberals. LOL. I was sitting here wondering how in God's name Dan was going to win this fencing match in the public opinion against the "sympathetic" wimp. And then, lunge, straight for the heart. Good show!

[mcgrawtim123]

Money is fungible. The tax surcharge could go to the wars overseas, pensions for legislators, junkets, who the hell knows? "Tax the rich for health care." Moronic.

[diffidatio]

Can someone tell me why the Cato guy's claim that a 1% tax on people making more that 350,000 will prevent the middle class from entering that bracket? It MAKES NO SENSE. He will keep saying it and saying it, because he knows 90% of Americans think of themselves as middle class, although about 2/3 of this 90% are below the middle class. Total Garbage. Tax the rich... or eat them.

[carolyncriss]

First, it is not difficult to reach the 350K bracket if you own a small business even if you DON'T spend 350K and - instead - invest that money into business growth and jobs. Second, high taxes decrease motivation to push it to the next level. Let go of the emotional outlook and look at the facts. When taxes are high, "rich" people either hold back or find tax loopholes. It's a no-gain for everyone. If that still doesn't make sense, look at history. Redistribution never worked. Ever. Anywhere.

[cnerd2025]

This is how marginal tax rates work: you earn X amount of dollars, but your marginal tax rate is the percentage on the next dollar you earn. Thus, in this case, if you earn over 350K a year, you'll 57¢ of your next dollar will go to the government. What happens is that people often feel that 57¢ is too much, so they'll purposely be less productive than otherwise. That's what Dan's saying here about France - because of perverse fiscal policy, their growth has been lower than US growth.

[toluca56]

Let the inheritor, and people like him, voluntarily pay for health-care for others less fortunate, if that's their goal. Nothing wrong with that at all. But it is VERY unethical to forcibly confiscate people's livelihood through taxation to achieve this. Taxation is theft on a grand scale. It is immoral to use force (taxation backed by threat of confiscation of your earned private property, and imprisonment) as a means for achieving personal, social, political, or economic goals.

[openedskittles]

A bunch of rich people who have more money than they know what to do with shouldn't be encouraging taxes on people making 280k/year, they should make a PRIVATE CHARITY! WOW!

[sniper6081]

I don't want your fucking money Chuck.

[youneverheard]

The obvious question, which should not have gone unasked, is why, if the "silent majority" of rich folks agree that they should be responsible for the costs, don't they get together, pool as money together as the "surtax" would represent, and simply buy the health insurance for as many people as they are able? Why must they wait for Congress to appropriate the funds from them? Granted it would not solve the problem, which is largely cause by too much health insurance.

[RMMHS4RP]

I hear you. The reason they don't is because that makes way too much sense.

It would be so easy for these rich statists to be charitable, but it seems they lack imagination. Apparently, the only "charity" they can conceive of is distributed out of funds that have been gathered at gunpoint.

[ForTehNguyen]

man wtf "Wealth for the Common Good" Freaking closet commies

[ForTehNguyen]

if healthcare is a cost cutting measure it shouldnt freaking cost money, thats the first BS flag that should go off that this program is crap

[youneverheard]

I think Dan Mitchell had an off day... he wasn't as good as usual

[return135]

those common good rich people should just give their money to charity... problem solved.

[viehe69]

The American people are some of the most generous in the world. If the people were not robbed at gunpoint by the government they might be more inclined to give more, yes, problem solved.

[Scoforever]

Dan Mitchell and Peter Schiff should be economic advisors to the president who should be Ron Paul.

[NekoMouser]

Why doesn't Chuck just donate the amount he wants to pay above and beyond what he is paying now to any of the many, far more efficient charities that provide medical services to the poor or just overpay his taxes to the amount he wants to pay.

Why exactly must everyone else give up their hard-earned gains for causes he cares about? He's free to give away his own money as he pleases and it sounds like he won't without a tax to make him do so.

[picapauengracado]

As Mitchell points out these millionaires don't care because the tax is on income not wealth. In fact, they like the idea of pulling up the social ladder now.

As economists say, actions follow values. These people don't really believe what they're saying.

[hapspir]

Oscar Mayer must be rolling in his grave. To know that this is the fate of his fortune. Disturbing.

[JohnJ2427]

People are always free to pay more taxes if they want to. "Wealth for the Common Good" just wants to force other people to pay more taxes. Taxing income is not the same thing as taxing wealth.

[Snowflake70]

Will someone audit the Federal Reserve AND the US Treasury so we can stop the tabloid reporting of how America is sinking! Talking about the house burning is not going to put the fire out. It's time for a national STRIKE. Stop EVERYTHING. Stop making money. Stop paying money we don't have. Bring everything to a halt and call for the surrender of Washington DC - unconditionally !

[MagnusIan]

I agree completely. Its time to end the tyranny coming out of D.C.

ITS 24 TRILLION DOLLARS, AMERICA! WE COULDNT EVEN PAY OFF THE NATIONAL DEBT WHEN IT WAS LESS THAN HALF OF THAT! WHEN WILL THIS INSANE SPENDING BULLSHIT?!?!?!

America is doomed unless D.C. burns to the ground.

[Snowflake70]

Actually I remember hearing of a more pleasant solution - Switch Wachington CD over to Washington STATE. The fresh air and wide open spaces can't do anything but good to those old stuffy politicians...