Obama’s Moral Crusade

Daniel Henninger points out in his WSJ column on March 12th (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123681860305802821.html) that that President Obama’s intent to raise taxes on the “rich” has much less to do with finding a way to pay for the stimulus package than with righting the alleged moral wrong of “inequality.” Here are a few representative quotes from the budget statement that make Henninger’s point:

"While middle-class families have been playing by the rules, living up to their responsibilities as neighbors and citizens, those at the commanding heights of our economy have not. They have taken risks and piled on debts that while seemingly profitable in the short-term, have now proven to be dangerous not only for their individual firms but for the economy as a whole."

"There’s nothing wrong with making money, but there is something wrong when we allow the playing field to be tilted so far in the favor of so few."

"For the better part of three decades, a disproportionate share of the Nation’s wealth has been accumulated by the very wealthy. Technological advances and growing global competition, while transforming whole industries—and birthing new ones—has accentuated the trend toward rising inequality. Yet, instead of using the tax code to lessen these increasing wage disparities, changes in the tax code over the past eight years exacerbated them."

"By 2004, the wealthiest 10 percent of households held 70 percent of total wealth, and the combined net worth of the top 1 percent of families was larger than that of the bottom 90 percent. In fact, the top 1 percent took home more than 22 percent of total national income, up from 10 percent in 1980."

Got that? No one really earns their income or creates wealth, they merely take a share of the “national income” and the “Nation’s wealth.” The middle class have allegedly “played by the rules” and taken only their fair share, but the rich have not. They have somehow gamed the system—perhaps by causing too many “technological advances” and “birthing” too many new industries, which allow them to create—oops, earn—oops, how about “appropriate”—even more of the nation’s wealth, thereby increasing inequality. The tax system has contributed to this inequality, presumably by failing to apportion enough of the “national income” to the middle class. The solution, of course, is for the government to tax the rich at a higher rate, so the middle class can enjoy more of the loot—oops, spoils—oops, umm, how about “largess.”

None of this has anything to do with solving America’s economic problems, unless you believe that the problem is capitalism itself, which Obama and his ilk obviously do. Capitalism is based on the fact that humans must think, work, and create things in order to survive. Capitalism recognizes that wealth is limited only by the capacity of individuals to think and to devise new ways to solve problems, and it ensures them the freedom to do so—to live, work, enjoy the fruits of their labor, trade, be creative, and lead happy, fulfilling lives. Obama’s budget envisions a very different system, one in which wealth simply exists and the primary purpose of government is to distribute it among the various social classes according to whether they have “played by the rules.” If the “playing field” tilts too far in favor the rich and they acquire too much wealth, the government must tilt it back by confiscating that wealth for the benefit of the poor and middle class.

In short, those who think President Obama wants to raise taxes to solve America’s economic problems are only half right. He does want to solve a “problem” as he sees it, but that “problem” is the principle on which America was founded—that individuals have the moral right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and that government is instituted among men to protect those rights. Obama would like to replace it with some variant of the Marxist principle, from each according to his ability, to each according to his need. In fairness to Obama, most other politicians and intellectuals in this country share his essential views, including, unfortunately, many conservatives. To paraphrase Ayn Rand, the dirty little secret of the American left is that it wants a dictatorship. Judging by their tepid opposition to President Obama’s budget and his economic policies, the republicans seem content to stand by and urge caution as we journey down the road to serfdom. Obama is giving us the next great leap toward that goal. The question is whether Americans will recognize that in time.