The Most Compelling Argument for Raising Taxes Yet

Bill O'Reilly, Professional Fuckhead: Here's the unintended consequence of Mr. Obama's revenue-enhancing plan—and, I must tell you, I want the feds to get more revenue. I don't want to starve them, as some people do. We need a robust military, a good transportation system, and protections all over the place. But if you tax achievement, some of the achievers are going to pack it in.

Again, let's take me: My corporations employ scores of people. They depend on me to do what I do, so they can make a nice salary. If Barack Obama begins taxing me more than 50%, which is very possible, I don't know how much longer I'm gonna do this.

I like my job, but there comes a point when taxation becomes oppressive. Is the country really entitled to half a person's income?

First of all, he is President Obama, O'Reilly, you execrable gob. Secondly, taxing someone's personal income does not affect their corporate earnings, so threatening to quit is out of spite, not the inability to continue to pay employees—which O'Reilly knows, and note his careful language. Finally, no, it's not "very possible" that O'Reilly will be paying a tax rate of more than 50%.

There are, however, self-employed people in this country paying close to that tax rate already—and I don't hear O'Reilly giving a fuck about them, because, of course, it's not about "taxing achievement," but about taxing millionaires.

[Via Media Matters.]