web analytics
Your Independent Alternative!

America Becomes a Two-Class Society

phyllisIncome tax day, April 15, 2010, now divides Americans into two almost equal classes: those who pay for the services provided by government and the freeloaders. The percentage of Americans who will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009 has risen to 47 percent.

That isn't the worst of it. The bottom 40 percent not only pay no income tax, but the government sends them cash or benefits financed by the taxes dutifully paid by those who do pay income tax.

The outright cash handouts include the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), which can amount to as much as $5,657 a year to low-income families. Other financial benefits can include child tax credits, welfare, food stamps, WIC (Women, Infants, Children), housing subsidies, unemployment benefits, Medicaid, S-CHIP and other programs.

This is both a massive transfer of wealth and a soak-the-rich racket. The top 10 percent pay 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government.

Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., has become the congressional leader in explaining details of the recently passed Health Control Law. He says that, based on Congressional Budget Office figures, taxes to pay for Obamacare will have to skyrocket to an 88 percent income tax rate within 30 years.

Although all wage-earners help fund their own Social Security and Medicare benefits, only federal income taxpayers pay the costs of running the federal government, and are responsible for paying off our $12.8 trillion national debt and for bailing out Social Security, Medicare, and Fannie and Freddie when they collapse.

Even the recently passed Health Control Law contains financial subsidies to unmarried couples that are denied to married couples. This rewards the unmarried women who were the second largest demographic constituency that voted for Barack Obama for president in 2008.

When Obama told Joe the Plumber he wanted to "spread the wealth around," Obama wasn't kidding. That's exactly what he is now doing: taking money from taxpayers and spreading it around to non-taxpayers.

Nor was Obama kidding when, on the eve of his election, he threatened, "We are going to fundamentally transform the United States of America." Converting the earnings of American workers into handouts for those who voted for Obama in 2008 is certainly a fundamental transformation.

Obama's promise not to raise taxes on middle-Americans is already down the drain. Obama brought former Federal Reserve Board Chairman Paul Volcker out of obscurity to serve as chairman of an Economic Recovery Advisory Board and announce that we need to raise taxes.

Volcker was blunt in predicting that the new tax increase will be a Value-Added Tax (VAT). That's the tax European socialists love because its rates can be hidden and frequently raised, while producing rivers of revenue for the bureaucrats.

Volcker claimed that a VAT is "not a toxic idea." It really is — Charles Krauthammer called it "the ultimate cash cow" because it transfers so much money from individuals to the government.

Having already co-opted the executive and legislative branches of government for his fundamental transformation, Obama now wants to use the judiciary, too. The retirement of Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens gives him this opportunity.

On Jan. 18, 2001 on Public Radio WBEZ-FM, Chicago, Obama complained that the Earl Warren Court "wasn't that radical" because "it didn't break free from the essential constraints placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution. ... The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and serve more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society."

Calling for the Supreme Court to participate in the "redistribution of wealth" is shockingly revolutionary. Any judicial nominee who agrees with Obama's theory should be rejected.

Obama's game plan to "fundamentally transform" America is based on both Saul Alinsky's modus operandi for community organizing and on the Cloward-Piven spending strategy. Saul Alinsky was a famous Chicago radical, and Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven were less-well-known Columbia University sociologists.

The goal of all three of these agitators was the overthrow of the private enterprise system. The Alinsky strategy is to use community organizing and mass demonstrations by those he labeled the "Have Nots," and the Cloward-Piven strategy is to overload the bureaucracy with enormous demands for entitlements, thereby causing a financial crisis.

Obama used Alinsky methods by taxpayer financing of ACORN and subprime mortgages. Obama used Cloward-Piven methods by massive deficit spending for entitlements for more and more millions of people.

Fortunately, hardworking, taxpaying Americans are beginning to understand how they are being ripped off and rushed into bankruptcy. The one way to save ourselves and our country is to elect a Congress in November pledged to stop the spending.

Phyllis Schlafly is a lawyer, conservative political analyst and the author of the newly revised and expanded "Supremacists." She can be contacted by e-mail at phyllis@eagleforum.org. To find out more about Phyllis Schlafly and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Website at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM

3 Responses »

  1. I appreciate that Mz Schlafly prides herself in being conservative, it is a smart financial position in these times. However I think the statement, "those who pay for the services provided by government and the freeloaders." defining her opinion of taxpayers is a bit strong and misguided. The tax code has provided for lesser-paid, working class to be excluded from the liability of income tax. She should know, with her education, that the identification of people with low incomes and inability to pay have always been an effort in fairness. Just because someone falls into one of those defined categories, doesn't mean that they are a freeloader, a term of insult, or a put-down.

    I'm not in favor of the EITC providing for money that wasn't first paid in either, but is it Freeloading? How many people consciously do not have jobs and do not have money just so that they can get "free" govt. money?

    Well salaried people find loopholes to avoid taxes and even those may be legally proper. A lawyer should recognize that a true free loader is one avoiding a responsibility when they are capable and mandated to honor it. Would it improve Mz. Schlafly's view of the lesser paid if they were to donate money to the government, even if they weren't required and couldn't afford it? How many multi-millionaires would donate their multi-million dollar salary or ignore their tax write-offs and loopholes?

    The problems are sufficient enough, in this country, without succumbing to a temptation to call people who earn less than you, freeloaders, cheats, bums and other non community type insults I've heard.

  2. Tom C, I commend you on the comment you put forth, it was well written, I completely agree with. I think that Ms. Schlafly is out of touch with the middle class and I would guess that she has never had to financially struggle or survive on a teacher's salary. As for unemployment, unfortunately it has become the only way for many people, who had worked very hard for years, to survive in this economy, which Obama did not create but inherited. I believe it is totally wrong and ignorant of her to say that those people are freeloaders, they paid unemployment insurance for many years and now should receive it. There are millions of people searching for work and as Tom, mentioned it is completely out of line to call them freeloaders.
    I hope she never finds herself in position where she needs help. As for only two classes, I think special interest groups have a bigger hand in that than the government. I guess she forgot to mention how much big corporations pay in taxes, as she points out that the single mom that earns 24,000 a year is sucking the us dry because she received a child tax credit.
    Thank you Tom for your thoughtful comments

  3. DO YOU PEOPLE really WANT Republicans back in power? I regularly have to ask Republicans/Conservatives what is IT they WANT!

    1) You do not like big government but government grows under Republican rule.
    2) You do not want government in your lives but you like the “show me your papers” law in AZ.
    3) You do not like Wall St. but you want to keep them unregulated so they can FINISH the job of ruining our economy.
    4) You chant “Drill Baby Drill” but think Oil Companies should NOT be responsible for SPILLS and let the government take care of the environmental disasters.
    5) Conservatives despise illegal aliens but hire them on a regular basis. Right-wing chicken hawks get off on WAR but you let your children/grandchildren PAY FOR IT.
    5 and a half, lol) You people demonize gays but Larry Craig’s men’s room was the most popular attraction of the 2008 Republican National Convention and gay porn sells best in Red States.
    6) You hate taxes but love Reagan even though Reagan/Bush RAISED taxes. On & on & on…

    What the #*~/? Can you blame Progressives for thinking Republicans/Conservatives are corrupt, mental deficient hypocrites?

    Not since the WWII has a population been so damn messed up. The Germans and Italians had an excuse for embracing corporate, police state Fascism. They didn’t have any history of such political abominations to learn from. However the Republicans/Conservatives have the examples of Mussolini/Hitler to examine. SO TELL ME PLEASE WHY you’d put SO much wealth and power in a Corporate owned police state?

    (Ask John McCain why the Energy Department is involved with so many military projects in AZ instead of working on new tech and alternative sources)

    Funny how the news media jumped on this Arizona immigration law story but completely IGNORED the following: John McCain and the Republicans seem to be leading the charge toward a police state:

    S.3081 - Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention and Prosecution Act of 2010 proposed by Senators Lieberman and McCain “…removes the right to trial for American Citizens and gives government the AUTHORITY to detain Americans INDEFINITELY for SUSPECTED TERRORIST ACTIVITY…”
    WHAT?

    The really IMPORTANT thing about this Act is just WHO defines SUSPECTED ACTIVITY? I’m sure the CRIMINALS and CONS who oversaw the recent economic meltdown (or what I like to call greatest looting of a nation’s wealth and resources in the history of mankind) FEEL THREATENED by the ACTIVITY involved with calls for JUSTICE.

    Republicans know DEMANDS for ethics, responsibility and accountability are going to come down HARD on them. Especially McCain/Lieberman who’ve been covering up Banking/Financial/Wall St SCANDALS since the 80’s. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out what comes next…

    consciousmc.blogspot.com

    QUOTE OF THE DAY:
    “THE Devil knew not what he did when he made man politic…”
    Shakespeare