Cramer and Scarborough out of touch with Americans' views on taxing wealthy to finance health care
SUMMARY: Joe Scarborough and Jim Cramer both claimed that because Americans aspire to being rich themselves, they would not support proposals to finance health care reform by raising the taxes of upper-income people. But recent polls do not support their thesis.
On the July 23 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe, host Joe Scarborough and CNBC host Jim Cramer both claimed that because Americans aspire to being rich themselves, they would not support proposals to finance health care reform by raising the taxes of upper-income people. In fact, several recent polls indicate that such a provision is supported by a majority of respondents.
The House Tri-Committee legislation, America's Affordable Health Choices Act, would establish a 1 percent tax on taxpayers filing joint returns with income exceeding $350,000 but not exceeding $500,000 per year, a 1.5 percent tax on income exceeding $500,000 but not exceeding $1 million per year, and a 5.4 percent tax on income exceeding $1 million per year, with married individual filings and other filings subject to a surtax of 50 percent and 80 percent of those amounts, respectively.
During the segment, Cramer claimed that President Obama is "short the votes" on health care because "[e]verybody in this country" wants "to be a millionaire" and doesn't "want to hear when I get there I'm gonna be taxed heavily." He added: "You can't go out with the millionaire's tax." Scarborough agreed, stating in part: "That's what a lot of people don't get about why the class warfare game doesn't work. Because -- who wants to be a millionaire? Who wants to be successful? Who believes they can do it? Just about everybody." Cramer concluded: "I am telling you that the American people who are not millionaires are the people who are gonna defeat this, because they really believe in what Joe just described."
In fact, several recent polls indicate that Americans do support paying for health care reform through taxes on the wealthy:
- A USA Today/Gallup poll conducted July 10-12 found that 58 percent of respondents support "[i]ncreasing income taxes on upper-income Americans" as a way to pay for health care reform.
- A Washington Post/ABC News poll conducted June 18-21 found that 60 percent of respondents support paying for health care reform by "raising income taxes on Americans with household incomes over 250-thousand dollars."
- A NBC/Wall Street Journal poll conducted June 12-15 found that 62 percent of respondents say that it would be "acceptable" to "[r]aise taxes for people with incomes over two hundred fifty thousand dollars a year" to fund health care reform.
- A Kaiser Family Foundation poll conducted June 1-8 found that 68 percent of respondents "strongly" or "somewhat favor" "[i]ncreasing income taxes for people from families making more that [sic] $250,000 a year" in order to "help pay for health care reform and provide coverage for more of the uninsured."
From the July 23 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe:
SCARBOROUGH: Talk about the president's performance last night, Jim. What did you think?
CRAMER: I think the president is still short the votes. I think that when you appeal for -- on the 47 million who don't have health care, and then you mention millionaire, I am always inclined to think about my friend Meredith Vieira. Who wants to be a millionaire? Everybody in this country. I don't want to hear when I get there I'm gonna be taxed heavily. It just is simple as that. It doesn't work. You can't go out with the millionaire's tax.
SCARBOROUGH: You know, that is so interesting that you say that because my parents, when we were growing up, would always drive past this really nice house -- and my dad worked for Lockheed in Meridian -- and would pass all these houses on Country Club Drive going to First Baptist Church in Meridian, and my mom always said -- we were about as middle class -- my dad was unemployed for two years -- and would pass, and she goes, if you go to school, if you study hard, if you work hard, if that's what you want, you can do that, too.
CRAMER: Absolutely.
SCARBOROUGH: 'Cause I would be like, "Who lives in those houses? Who has those cars?"
CRAMER: Maybe you. Maybe you.
SCARBOROUGH: Who -- there they had a country club that I, seriously, I couldn't step foot on but my mom and dad always said, "Work hard." And you're so right. That's what a lot of people don't get about why the class warfare game doesn't work.
CRAMER: Right.
SCARBOROUGH: Because -- who wants to be a millionaire?
CRAMER: Look --
SCARBOROUGH: Who wants to be successful? Who believes they can do it? Just about everybody.
CRAMER: Right. Now let me be very clear: I like the idea of universal health. I'm not as addicted to the idea that the government's going to get involved. I would put -- I am a millionaire, all right. I pay my tax, boom, why not? I've got an unbelievable skate over the last eight years under Bush.
If this is why I voted for Obama, this is what I voted for. I am telling you that the American people who are not millionaires are the people who are gonna defeat this, because they really believe in what Joe just described.
I don't want to hear when I get there (become a millionaire) I'm gonna be taxed heavily
It was back about the time he was in trouble, around the election. He also all but endorsed Obama.
And, under Obama's plan, you'll be free to keep your over-priced restrictive corporate health care driven not by quality of care but by profit motive.
Profits Over People!! That's the sign you should be hold up on the street corner, Tommy.
So, Obama has cut middle-class taxes, and the Dems are using committees and the CBO to make sure the plan is cost-neutral.
But not good enough for Repubs, is it?
Well, just proves that nothing is good enough for you because you are not serious about governing and treat everything as political football.
People should be worried about THEIR costs. The current system doesn't work. Just becuase the gov't isn't paying it now, doesn't mean that it's not being paid, or that there's no cost.
As to that $2500 per year? Honestly I'll have to get back to you on that. I don't really remember that whole exchange, but I'll need to look it up.
As to your question though, I think it's irrelevant. Health care reform is needed, whether he does what you say he said he'd do or not. The status is not, and has never been sustainable. And the "free market" (which has really never exsisted in health care anyway) ain't gonna fix it. If the fact that the trend has been getting worse for going on forty+ years now doesn't convince you of that, let me know. I'll happily take you to school.
Since the plan hasn't even been passed yet, why don't you try waiting and seeing how it works out?
My motivation is not to punish them, and you are making yourself out to be a fool by trying to tell me what my motivation is. John Dillinger was asked why he robbed banks. His reply? "Because that's where the money is."
If the government is doing something that will cost money, tax the rich. Because that's where the money is. As for what's rightfully theirs, I will allow that Bill Gates actually earned most of his money, though he stole the basis of that wealth from Xerox. The head of GM, making 15 million dollars a year for running the country into the ground? There is no way to legitimately claim he earned that money. That works out to $7500 an hour. Who are we kidding, here? That's completely shameful. Did he start the company? Did he work his way up? No. Can he keep enough to live on? Sure. I'd say 70% is a fair tax rate, which is what it was under the beginning of Reagan's term.
As for earning the money, I cannot accept the billions in salary that the hedge fund managers have made as well earned. Especially when things go bad there is no getting back all the money these managers skimmed from the top.
Well caught, puttforever4682, the burden was shifted to the middle class. A bit of unnecessary hyperbole on my part :) Thanks for the correction.
Making $15 million per year and paying 70% tax rate, that leaves just $86,500 a week for the millionaire to squeak by on. The current tax rate on that much income is less than 30%.
That's more after taxes in a week than over half the country makes in a whole year. Do the rich pay more in taxes? Yes. They were paying 70% at the beginning of Reagan's eight years, and less than 25% by the end. Yet President Reagan continued to spend. Remember Star Wars defense systems? So, who made up the difference, right ON? Since it wasn't the wealthy, whose taxes went -down-, must've been the middle class, right?
Of course you are not entitled to anyone else's money, but the government is entitled to levy taxes. I see two choices: You are extremely ignorant, or extremely obtuse. Which?
And who benefits the most from the stability of this country? Who makes the most from the infrastructure of this country?
The rich benefit the most from this country. They should have a vested interest in keeping this country stable, because instability is bad for their profits.
I would also like to point out that the majority of the tax burden did not fall on the middle class, but was added to the national debt. What did the Bush tax cuts cost? What has the Iraq war cost so far? What has the prescription drug plan cost so far? Nothing, because it was added to the national debt.
Jim R.
What Obama and other Democrats are suggesting is to add a tax that is less than the payroll tax (between 1 and 1.5% in the case of people earning less than $1 million a year, 5.4% for those earning above 1 million a year) to the high earners. What is not reasonable about this tax? People who earn less than $106,000 (which amounts to over 80% of the population) are forced to pay a 6.2% payroll tax on the entirety of their earnings while the people making more than that are only subjected to the tax up to $106k. We are asking the rich people to pay a small fraction of what we already are forced to pay (we meaning those who want this legislation passed) with regard to our earnings.
If payroll tax was fair then they would be paying 6.2% of their entire salaries like those earning 106k or less are now paying (but of course getting much more from social security in the end). Ask them to pay 1% or 1.5% and they freak out. Even the 5.4% for the millionaires is less than 6.2%. Give me a break. We are paying that 6.2% for social security right now and it isn't even certain that we'll ever see a dime of that money in the future. What is certain is that if universal healthcare was a reality in America, should we lose our jobs we'd still have healthcare and we wouldn't be screwed should we have a pre-existing condition and are looking for coverage. That is benefit that you are certain to see in your lifetime. Even the millionaires of today can be on the streets tomorrow when they least expect it.
insulated the MSM is from the real world. Truly removed.
Cramer reminiscing about his walks around Harvard,
Scarborough reliving his Sunday drives around the country
club—so removed from how the rest of us live.
And they are given this bully pulpit every day to spout
their right wing views upon the suffering masses.
I look with askance on Mr. Pearlstein since he blamed the economic collapse of the credit system on ordinary people living beyond their means. He did not believe that the fraudulent behavior by the Banks, mortgage companies and insurance companies were to blame.
Look what's happened in the recession. Companies are posting solid profits with lower revenues. How did they do it? The got rid of people and cut costs.
tion on dollars and cents which is not a very fun way to live.
I know several millionaires and they seem to be scared all the time. "What if my stocks go down? What if my company loses 2% profit this year? What if my CPA is ripping me off? What if my wife leaves me for that multi-millionaire? Do my kids really love me or just their possible inheritance?
Think about it.