Four associations representing wealthy New Zealanders are saying tax cuts should be in the form of making the top tax rate 30 cents in the dollar. Wouldn’t that mean that their wealthy members get huge tax cuts while the 85% of us earning less than $60,000 will get none or very little? Why, what a coincidence, yes it would.
This reminds me of what Warren Buffet, the legendary investor known as the “Oracle of Omaha’ who is one of the richest people in America and a thoroughly decent man, said of George W Bush’s tax cuts for the rich:
“When you listen to tax-cut rhetoric, remember that giving one class of taxpayer a “break” requires — now or down the line — that an equivalent burden be imposed on other parties. In other words, if I get a break, someone else pays. Government can’t deliver a free lunch to the country as a whole. It can, however, determine who pays for lunch”*
“I see nothing wrong with those who have been blessed by this society to give a larger portion of their income to the society than somebody that’s working very, very hard to make ends meet,”*
“There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.’*
Not only does Buffett argue that tax cuts should go to those most in need, he also points out that lower bracket tax cuts are more economically stimulating.
“tax cuts should go to lower-income people or others “who both need and will spend the money gained.”* “Putting $1,000 in the pockets of 310,000 families with urgent needs is going to provide far more stimulus to the economy than putting the same $310 million in my pockets,”*
UPDATE: No Right Turn has crunched some numbers, and it turns out “the total cost is over $2 billion a year, and more than 60% of it flows straight into the pockets of the 3% who make more than $100K a year”. Somehow I’m not surprised – Tane.