by Robert M. Traxler

Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is running for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination in 2020, unveiled his plan to tax the assets of the nation’s wealthiest individuals. Senator Sanders has also called for the publication of a “national wealth registry.”

According to Mr. Sanders, the registry in combination with “significant additional third-party reporting requirements,” whatever in the world that is who knows, would help ensure the country’s rich are not able to shelter assets from the tax collectors.

As opposed to taxes levied on income and payrolls, a wealth tax would target the value of accumulated assets owned by very rich Americans – or their net worth. It would require the determination of the value of things like art, jewelry, real estate holdings, business ownership stocks, etc., on a continual basis. And how would you determine the value of stocks that may fluctuate wildly day to day?

The tax person would need access to your home and safety deposit box, even the jewelry box in your bedroom. Just how that squares with the fourth amendment will surely come up. It appears the socialists are saying, “the Constitution? We don’t need no stinking Constitution. We are the government and we are punishing the evil rich.” The Bill of Rights attached to the Constitution protects us from the government; damn the Constitution, full speed ahead with more taxes is the radical left’s mantra.

My leftist/socialist friends, be careful — the federal government has never kept a register generated by the law of the land to list your wealth. Income yes, in detail, very invasive detail, but not total assets. This hit list of private citizens’ assets and confiscation of savings and assets would plow new ground and be a giant leap into socialism. If the federals tax your worth, the states and other taxing bodies will surely follow.

Let’s look at the tax the highest rate. It would be 8% of your total assets, not counting state and local taxes; in five years the 8% would go down to 7%, as the tax has made you less affluent. A few years more it goes down even more as you have less to tax. Senator Sanders has maintained that his wealth tax will pay for a socialist utopia: free health care, education, electric vehicles, universal basic income and a few more freebies. Just how he will pay for the trillions in free stuff over time is the question.

The 8% top wealth tax rate along with the 13.3% top state income tax (California) and the top federal income tax rate of 37%, not including state/local wealth tax if they pass one, is 58.3%. Toss in sales tax, property tax and several others and it will not pay to be successful.

As the rich become less affluent, the revenue generated over time will decrease, so who pays now? Who cares? We live for today and tomorrow be damned. Our nation has existed longer than any socialist nation because of our Constitution. Senator Sanders’ wealth tax would violate the first, fourth and perhaps the fifth amendments. Who cares?

The rich are guilty of something, or else how did they get rich? Punishing the rich for being successful is social justice, right? The historical problem with social justice in income is that after taking from the rich and giving to the poor, eventually you run out of rich people to take from.

Ever notice how Senator Sanders has changed his call for taxes from one on millionaires and billionaires to a tax on only billionaires, as his net worth is currently in the multiple millions? Maybe millionaires are not so evil after all? Quite frankly I am disappointed in him; he used to practice what he preached. Many will say Senator Sanders is still middle class, as he only made $560,000 in income last year, and it is his wife who is rich, not him. Come on now folks, really?

The next presidential election will be a referendum on the very Constitution many of us took an oath to support and defend, an oath that never expires.

6 Comments

Harry Smit
October 4, 2019
Army Bob Another excellent article...sadly many will never believe this is entirely bad if it should happen. We have developed into a society where successful people are despised, just because they are successful. Even " Robin Hood " who robbed the rich , giving to the poor, used this tactic to his advantage. Society just never seems to grasp " nothing is free". The freedom we now enjoy was paid for by the maiming and death of so many just so those like Sanders and his followers have the opportunity to destroy what so many gave their all. Many who took the oath of which you speak feel it no longer applies. Why, is the pledge of allegiance to our flag disappearing from our schools ? Few today believe in oaths or allegiance....that was for us old people..not this new generation.
Robert M Traxler
October 4, 2019
Mr. Smit, Harry, Well said. Today's Veterans are as good if not better Americans than my generation but we have so few, less than one half of one percent are in the military today, most are mid-westerners. Veterans are less than ten percent of our population and going down rapidly. Thanks for the comment.
Couchman
October 4, 2019
Unlike you and others who support these views, I believe a major motivation for Senator Sander's ideas is how the Tax Act of 2017 has furthered the gap between the top 10%, especially the top 1%, from the the bottom 90% and especially the bottom three quintiles of American incomes. I don't see any of Senator Sander's ideas ever being fully adopted. I don't see Senator Sanders winning the Democratic nomination, and if he would somehow secure the nomination and win the November 2020 Presidential election, the sky won't fall. When I enlisted in the USN my oath was: "I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." The US Army (and Air National Guard) oath differs where it includes allegiance to your state. "I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the State of (STATE NAME) against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of (STATE NAME) and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations. So help me God." I took the oath and still consider important part of the oath is "against all enemies, foreign and domestic." I consider the POTUS calling foreign leaders like the Ukrainian president where The White House inexplicably blocked an already congressionally-approved military aid package and asking for an investigation of a possible political opponent (former VP Joe Biden) and in another call asked President Xi about investigating former VP Biden and Senator Warren while in a tariff war with China as threats to U.S. democracy. Had I or any USN enlisted, regardless of rank, contacted a foreign national from a country our military considered an adversary, the non-commissioned officer assigned to lead my unit would have written me up as soon as he was aware. That would have been followed by an arrest then interrogation(s) from NCIS, maybe the CIA. Then I would have been hoping for a general discharge with no extended time in the brig or federal prison. Now we have a POTUS doing those things and recently encouraging China's interference publicly. While others will quickly point out the portion of the oath "I will obey the orders of the President of the United States,” the POTUS is inviting foreign interference in his re-election I see as a violation of his Presidential oath. In my opinion, wringing one's hands about a candidate with long odds of winning the nomination to be POTUS and his proposals that face even longer odds becoming tax law is a lot less important than the here and now with our current President trying to enlist foreign interference in our November 2020 Presidential election. And so it goes
Robert M Traxler
October 5, 2019
Mr. Couchman, Sir, Having spent the better part of a decade in the Army CID, the Army equivalent to the Navy's NCIS I think I am on firm ground in this. It is not a violation of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) to speak with a person from a belligerent nation, the contact by an Officer or Enlisted Person would need to be reported but the contact is not illegal. If you reported the contact you would not have been apprehended by NCIS, imprisoned or less than honorably discharged from the Navy. The President needs to talk with the leaders of nations that do not agree with us, if he did not speak with them, he would not be doing his job. If plans for the nation do not matter in Senator Sanders case than do the words of a small time no one ever herd of a Neo-Nazi group matter? Senator Sanders has pulled the Democrats to the left and he is a major factor in that Party. Remember Senator Sanders won the Democratic Primary in Michigan, and he has an anti-capitalist following and a bank account in the tens of millions. You stated, "I took the oath and still consider important part of the oath is “against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Please note the sentence includes supporting and defending the Constitution. It is always good and only fair and proper to quote full sentences to keep things in proper context. Thanks for the comment.
Basura
October 4, 2019
Would not the Commander in Chief also have an obligation to support and defend the U.S. Constitution? Does Trump even have a clue what that might mean?
Robert M Traxler
October 5, 2019
Mr. Basura, Sir, Yes and yes. Thanks for the comment

Post your comment

Discover more from

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading