Jasmine Crockett Won’t Endorse Talarico — So a Fellow Democrat Told Her to...
Kat Rosenfield Reminds Everyone the Cornell 7 Haven’t Been Proven Guilty — and...
Here's Abdul El-Sayed Getting the Money Out of Politics by Raking It in...
A Manlet and His Girlfriend Busted After Lighting an Abandoned House on Fire...
Flydubai Co-Pilot Stabs Captain Midair — Israeli Passengers Subdue Him Before the Plane...
Stephen Miller Blasts CNN's Propaganda Effort About Children at Immigration Court
No Cash Bail Leaves a Pittsburgh Doctor Dead and a Growing Scandal Over...
The Supreme Court Rules on Deportations to Third-Party Countries (LAWSPLAINING)
UK Home Secretary Reopening Resettlement Schemes for Palestinians Who Have Fled the Horror...
Sen. Mark Warner Says 100,000 Virginians Have Been Kicked Off of SNAP Because...
Sunny Hostin Defended the Cornell 7 — and, Painfully, She’s Right
Rev. Suggests Lazarus Was Gay Because Jesus Called for Him to ‘Come Out’
Rep. LaMonica McIver Is Facing Prison for Touching ICE Officers — She Just...
Mamdani the Pied-À-Terrible: NYC Mayor Loses in Court on Tax-The-Rich Rollout
The Bulwark’s Focus Group Says Abdul El-Sayed Is Over-Performing With Trump Voters

The Buffett Rule: Is there anything it can't do?

The Obama administration seems to think the Buffett Rule is the Swiss Army knife of policy proposals. It can do almost anything! Last year, when the President first proposed the rule that would slap an additional tax on the wealthiest 400 households in America, he claimed it would pay for his jobs bill and “stabilize” the debt for a decade. Last week, the White House brazenly claimed that no one ever said it would have a “significant” impact on the debt but that the rule was all about “tax fairness”.

Advertisement

Now, there’s a new spin on the President’s pet proposal. Yesterday, in his weekend address, the President claimed the Buffett Rule isn’t about “tax fairness” so much as it’s about economic growth. He reinforced the new claim while in Cartagena, Colombia today.

“That is not an argument about redistribution. That is an argument about growth,” Obama said in response to a reporter’s question at a news conference in Colombia. “In the history of the United States, we grow best when our growth is broad based.”
…
“This is not an argument about taking from A to give to B. This is not a redistributionist argument that we’re making. We’re making an argument about how do we grow the economy in a 21st century environment,” Obama said.

In reality, the President has not made an argument at all, but a claim. Like the other two rationales for the Buffett Rule, which is a textbook example of redistribution, there is nothing behind it but an army of strawmen and a sternly stated “Nuh uh!”

Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement