Joe "the Plumber" is a turd

So someone please flush him. Please!! He is just an ordinary Joe from Ohio trying to do right by his family. Fine, kudos to Joe! But, his claim to fame is that he is the one that Barack Obama told that "spreading the wealth around" is good. Now all I hear are words like: socialism, communism, marxism, redistribute and so on, so lets examine this all in further detail. So flush Joe and see if he can unclog himself - lets talk.



First, no more everyman first names paired with quasi blue-collar job last names, its lame. Tito "the Builder" is full of shit too. Nobody is calling McCain John "the POW / Senator" or Obama Barack "the Lawyer and community organizer". These clowns all have last names so lets start using them.



Secondly, when examining the validity of each candidate's economic policy lets stick to what they propose rather than what you think they conspire to do. We don't know for sure what actually will pass through congress so apples to apples is always the best comparison.



Lets look at the question from Joe; to paraphrase he asked why Obama's plan would tax him more if he bought a business that had annual revenues in excess of 250k. Obama said this and that about why he believes its good and then uttered something about spreading wealth. My problem with all of this is that the proposed tax rollback is on personal income tax in excess of 250k; so unless Joe making all of his business revenue and claiming it as personal income this argument would not apply. He would be talking about corporate and capital gains tax which, unless I am mistaken, both candidates are talking about relaxing those taxes. Even if it is his personal revenue the tax rate would go from 36% to 39.6% which is what is was in the 90's under Clinton. Joe has also lost all of his everyman credibility and appeal because he now has a publicist and a book deal in the works. I don't know any plumbers with such things. Also, he agreed with a statement that basically said that Barack Obama is an anti-semite and is in favor of the destruction of Isreal. He is now Joe "the Clown".



Lets also examine "spreading the wealth". First of all Obama has had the same tax plan for months now and only after his little exchange with Joe do people starting calling him a socialist. Where were all of these people during the primaries? Where were all the Joe "the McCarthys" in the past months? The package hasn't changed but the wrapping paper has. The phrase "spreading the wealth" is perfect fodder for conservative mouthpieces (yeah, you Hannity) to go on attack and start using scare words like: socialism and communism.

Socialism is the idea that the government collectively owns the means of production and distribution, let me reassure you an Obama administration will not come and take what is already yours (your wealth). In fact, I'll make the case that the recent nationalization of some of the largest banks by Secretary Paulson and President Bush is more socialist or communist than any parts of the Obama economic policy. There is no part of his tax policy that says the government will take ownership of private companies; for the most part private companies and lobbies have owned our government under Republican rule (a debate for another time). Anyway the plan Obama proposed is not spreading wealth, it has nothing to do with wealth, the plan is one that shifts the progressive tax burden. All income tax brackets will remain unchanged with the exception of the highest bracket. Barack will not sneak into your house at night and take your wallet or raid your bank account. Lets make sure that we properly identify everything before we attack it. Arguing the merits of his proposal are only good when the idea is correctly defined. When evaluated under the same terms the Bush tax cuts would be considered "spreading the wealth" too. The only difference is when you favor the richest few people call it capitalism and when the masses benefit from economic policy its called socialism.

I think that our entire tax system is up for debate - I'm not choosing a partisan view I'm just saying that we need call it what it is. There are two contrasting ideologies out there and neither is superior they have both worked with varying degrees of success. Top down or bottom up, it just depends on who you are. This whole thing is not about policy, its about Politics. Buzzwords are used to try and scare off or sway potential voters and these are being blasted through the media by a party that is behind in the polls. You know what, I don't really have a problem with that because it is how our system works. Propaganda is used by both red and blue politicos, I just like to look at the facts. You guys know me and know that I am fairly liberal but I am lukewarm about both of their economic policies. I truly believe that either of them could succeed or fall flat, but the reality is that both would probably struggle because we are in a deep hole and it is a steep climb out. I have my views but I will really root for whomever takes office in January because we will have no choice - the decision will already be made. So fight your fights til Tuesday and then applaud our new President-elect. We will have a chance reinforce or change what they do soon enough.