Opinion

Is cutting taxes immoral?

Photo of Penny Nance
Penny Nance
Contributor
  • See All Articles
  • Subscribe to RSS
  • Bio

      Penny Nance

      Penny Nance is the CEO of Concerned Women for America, which is the nation’s largest public policy women’s organization with chapters in every state.

Is cutting taxes immoral? Some people are arguing that extending tax cuts to the wealthy is just that. Was supporting Obamacare and taxpayer-funded abortion moral then?

Please, get off your high horse and don’t fall on the way down. Senator Mary Landrieu (D-Louisiana), who was bought off by the Obama Administration with a $300 million Medicaid deal, voted for Obamacare and is now railing against the proposed compromise with the GOP on tax cuts, calling the plan “almost morally corrupt.” Kirsten Powers, who formerly served in the Clinton administration, went a step further and called the deal “absolutely morally corrupt.”

For good reason, Republicans stood their ground and forced President Obama to extend the Bush tax cuts. Now all the liberals are crying foul, apparently unaware they got shellacked in the last election by the American people, who obviously are sick of how they are running the country into the ground.

It is certainly moral to help get our country back on the right track in this dire economy. The wealthy, small businesses and entrepreneurs create jobs and hire the rest of us. If taxes rise for “the rich” (although I know many small businesses that are just struggling to survive), then everyone feels the repercussions. Businesses invest money and create jobs, which trickles down all the way through society. This is a radical idea embraced by such conservative firebrands as John F. Kennedy.

It was JFK who influenced Arthur Laffer of the famous Laffer Curve while he was a student at Yale. The Laffer Curve demonstrates that obscene tax increases can actually hurt tax revenue; at a certain level they just hurt economic growth and cost jobs — all of which can cut tax revenue. Of course, this is a very simplistic explanation, but it’s important to note that not all Democrats have always believed that raising taxes on successful people is a good idea.

Why do today’s Democrats despise the wealthy so much? A survey of Census data in 2009 found that Democrats represent 57 percent of those 4.8 million households making over $200,000 a year, which would be classified as very well-off. Democratic members of Congress aren’t doing so poorly either. Seven out of the top ten richest members of Congress in 2010 were Democrats, with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) herself estimated at a net worth of nearly $22 million.

Maybe they just don’t care if their taxes go up because they have so much money to begin with. I wouldn’t know.

But, let’s face it. The bottom line of the current tax debate is this: If the liberals let the Bush tax cuts expire for everyone, then President Obama and the Democrats will be responsible for one the largest tax increases in history. The child tax credit will be cut in half, and the death tax and marriage penalty will be re-instituted. Almost everyone’s taxes will increase. Notice that real women and real families will be hit the hardest. Ann Hettinger, State Director for CWA of Texas, said that if the tax cuts are not reinstated, then her family’s bill will be about one-third higher next year. She said that her daughter and son-in-law have a business that the tax increase will hit hard.

  • Citizen Jerry

    Cutting taxes immoral? What would you call someone who, by threat, takes money from one person and gives it to another person? I’d call that someone a thief.

  • http://www.natereport.blogspot.com Nate Report

    The most important thing that needs to happen is for the government to stop over spending. A trillion over here a trillion over there. Until we stop the over spending we are just chasing our own tail. You can raise taxes to 100% of everyone’s salary and if the spending doesn’t stop we’ll still be in debt. This Obama “compromise” is a joke because it allows the massive spending to continue.

  • sas

    These are not business tax breaks, but personal tax cuts. Anyway, see how well the Bush tax cuts have worked on unemployment? Oh yeah, wrecked the economy and put unemployment right up there in the 9-10 percent range when he left office. Oh yeah they worked allright.

    The same Republicans who love this deficit exploder (900 billion) just voted against giving social security recipients a lousy one-time $250. (14 billion).

    THAT is morally corrupt.

    • mapletree

      The Bush tax cuts were around for nearly a decade and you’re selectively applying the data of just the past two years after the housing bubble burst. If there is no relation between taxes and jobs created, let’s set the tax rate at 90 percent, the government will be flush with money and everyone will have a job.

  • bigsigh

    “Why do today’s Democrats hate the wealthy so much?”

    Because too many of them are not from the elite class. The extreme hatred from the left of anyone from the working class that has made something of themselves has become hysterical. They will attack anyone who is successful that did not go to the “proper” schools. They choose not to recognize the difference between intelligence and education. They have set up this vast system to keep the unwashed masses in their place. How dare these people threaten their power? They just don’t know what’s good for them. The ruling class is feeling very vulnerable and they just won’t tolerate it!

    • mapletree

      You’re right on target. The left often promotes envy, and disdain for the wealthy. After all if someone is wealthy it is on the backs of the poor according to them. They fail to recognize that many wealthy people are generous with their wealth and subsidize all kinds of charities and also create jobs for millions of people.

  • NeoKong

    It’s a simple choice.
    Do we want employers paying unemployment benefits or do we want them paying salaries….?
    It couldn’t be any friggin’ simpler.
    If the govt. takes an extra $40,000 in taxes away from an employer with 25 employees the first thing he is going to do is cut back his costs by reducing payroll.
    That means that either several people will have their hours reduced or somebody will lose their job.
    Either way the tax increase will be paid by the employees.