Off The Teleprompter

President Obama did it again while off the teleprompter yesterday saying “[P]eople like me can afford to pay a little bit more,” the president said. "Now understand, we’re talking about the top 1, 2 percent of people at the very top of the income scales. And we can afford it. We don’t need a tax cut. We didn’t ask for a tax break. You got corporations who are getting special deals on their tax codes. They don’t need a special deal. Let’s give a good deal to hardworking men and women who are out there struggling to make ends meet.

O.K. just who are the top 1 or 2% of people? According to the IRS, the top 1% of households begin at $380,000 per year and is very bottom heavy. A very quick check for statistics shows that the top 5% of households begins at $160,000 per year. Assuming that the top 2% of households is somewhere in the middle, you are right back to aggressively talking about raising taxes on households in the area of $200,000 per year, who apparently are not hardworking men and women. In fact, I would venture to say that many in professions not usually associated with affluence will fall into this category when household income is considered. Is "we" a proper pronoun for this claim? Now I am neither a billionaire, millionaire, upper class nor upper middle class. I am right smack in the middle of middle class, so why should I care? A breech of liberty for anyone is a loss of liberty for everyone.

Pastor Martin Niemoller:
First they came for the Communists but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists but I was not one of them, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews but I was not Jewish so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.

LinkedIn question for the President's Town Hall

Given that approximately 14% of drivers in the U.S. are uninsured (vs. 16% w/o health insurance), what is you administration's plan to create a publicly funded auto insurance program?

Those with auto insurance must currently pay an additional premium to subsidize those who choose or can not afford auto insurance. At its core, any insurance contract is the result of a premium received in return for an obligation to pay for a statistically predictable probability of loss. It matters not the nature of the risk. If the government should take over one form of insurance, why not all? Or dare I say none.