More Revenue, But Far From Redistribution

So how much does that Commie redistributionist in the White House want to soak the rich?  Not so much, it turns out.

From “Tax Talks Raise Bar for Richest,” David Kocieniewski, NYT:

“If all Mr. Obama’s tax proposals for wealthy Americans were enacted [ain‘t gonna happen], they would raise $1.6 trillion over the next decade.  And an analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan research firm, found that the increases would be heavily weighted toward the wealthiest. … Those with adjusted gross incomes from $200,000 to $500,000 would face a tax increase averaging $4,446, with people toward the lower end having only a modest increase….

“A married couple with two children earning $300,000 would see its effective tax rate increase to 21.1 percent from 16.5 percent, ….  A married couple with two children earning $2 million would see its effective federal income tax rate rise to 26.8 percent from 21.6 percent.

“About four million of the 114 million American households face a possible tax increase.

“If all of Mr. Obama’s proposals are enacted, those with adjusted gross incomes of $200,000 to $500,000 would see their after-tax income drop an average of 1.3 percent.  Taxpayers with incomes over $1 million would face a decline in after-tax income of 8.8 percent….”

So we’re not talking Marxism-Leninism here, despite what Rush and Sean and Grover would have you believe.

Mitt Wants You to Pay More, So Rich Can Pay Less

The Brookings Institution and the Tax Policy Center have issued a report on Mitt’s tax plan.

The plan raises taxes on 95% of us by an average of $500.

But if you make $200,000 or more, then you’ll pay less, a lot less.  In fact, the plan would shift about $86 billion in tax burden from those earning over $200,000 to us “little people.”

Why is it evil “redistribution” when it goes from the rich to the rest of us, but economic genius when it goes from the rest of us to the rich, excuse me, the “job creators.”  I guess because Frank Luntz says so.