Bad News for the Top 1%

Sullivan substitute blogger (Andrew's on assignment for two weeks) Conor Clarke comments on a NY Post piece about the proposed health-care surtax. Take a look at the graph that accompanies Conor's comments. Even with the surtax, the effective rates for the top 1% of income earners in the US (and excuse me, but that would mean about $348,000 or more in income), would be less than what the effective rates were under Bill Clinton.

Joe the "dumb ass" Plumber, who has been elevated to the level of a "Great American" simply for asking a "gotcha"-type question of President Obama during the 2008 campaign, may have to start thinking about that if he can parlay his dumbass-ness into speaking and appearance fees and book advances. For 99% of us, however, this is not an issue. Unless we buy into the crap fed to us by the right-wing press that makes it an issue for us. Oh, perhaps that extra couple of points the rich will have to pay might turn them into misers and keep their riches from trickling down! As if that trickling down were a deluge enriching the rest of us peons.

And by the way, the surtax could likely take shape as an elimination in the deduction for charitable donations. This might affect charities who count on their 501(c)(3) status to lure donors, but those who donate just for the tax deduction aren't really their type of benefactor now, are they?