As the fight continues over whether the Bush-era tax cuts should be allowed to expire now that President Obama has been elected to a second term, the rhetoric of America’s wealthiest is growing increasingly conflicted. Many of our country’s richest citizens believe that only those at the top have the right to demand something for nothing.
“Poor people lining up with their hands out, wanting food stamps and preventative care on the government’s dime? Disgraceful. Those who do that ought to be ashamed of themselves,” said Eric Lyles, a Seattle-area CEO worth over six million dollars.
“I should get an extra tax cut just for having to even think about people like that,” he added.
Lyles claimed that government assistance for the poor breeds dependence.
“People who receive food stamps will never stop depending on food to keep them alive,” he said. “It’s a vicious cycle.”
Although studies have shown that lower taxes on the rich have not proven to be economically beneficial to society, those in favor of extending the Bush-era tax cuts claim that higher tax levels for those at the top stifle job creation.
“The more tax cuts I get, the more staff I hire to keep the pool clean and the jet gassed up,” said financial consultant Bryan Nash. “That helps drive the economy and it creates jobs. All food stamps do is help people feed themselves and their children. Show me a child that creates jobs.”
When asked to clarify the difference between government assistance in the form of tax cuts vs. food stamps, Nash attempted to further explain his position.
“It’s not the government’s responsibility to make sure kids have enough to eat,” he said. “But it is the government’s responsibility to ensure that I can hoard my massive wealth so that I can travel the world, retire at 45, and hire enough waitstaff to evenly distribute trays of canapes among the guests at my summer garden parties.”
“Children growing up in poverty are already getting free lunches at school,” he added. “Do they need to eat at home, too?”