Evil Tax Cuts
I just saw John Kerry on TV criticizing Bush’s tax cuts for the “wealthiest Americans.” Now, I’m just guess here, but it seems to me that any reasonable definition of “wealthiest Americans” would include Te-RAY-za Heinz Kerry. I wonder what Mr. and Mrs. Heinz Kerry did with their tax cut? I’m sure he gave it back.
In fact, last year there were 18 millionaire Democrats in the Senate. I’d be interested to see what each of them did with THEIR tax cuts. I’m sure they refused the money on principle, what with tax cuts for the wealthy being so wrong and all.
March 15th, 2004 at 3:26 pm
And just to play devil’s advocate with myself, isn’t it MORE courageous and principled to support a position that brings a negative result to oneself?
March 15th, 2004 at 3:38 pm
The senate has a pretty good stock market record too. Us unsophisticated investors aren’t doing so well.
March 15th, 2004 at 4:16 pm
Attacking the Person
(argumentum ad hominem)
There are three major forms of Attacking the Person:
(1) ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion, the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.
(2) ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an assertion the author points to the relationship between the person making the assertion and the person’s circumstances.
(3) ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the person notes that a person does not practise what he
preaches.
March 15th, 2004 at 5:14 pm
I think I’m missing the point of your comment, Chris.
March 15th, 2004 at 5:36 pm
My point is: are you implying that Kerry’s criticism isn’t apt because he himself is rich? If so, that’s fallacious. If not, well.. what’s your point?
March 15th, 2004 at 6:03 pm
I’m mainly being snarky. Complaining that a cut in income tax rates favors “the rich” strikes me as either wildly stupid or incredibly dishonest, neither of which makes Kerry look good to me.
But I would like to know, given that he considers it “unfair” for rich people to get tax cuts, what he did with his cut.
If he pocketed it and said, “Hey, it’s not fair, but there’s no reason for me not to benefit from it,” I have no problem with that.
If he gave it to charity or sent it back to the government, I applaud him for sticking to his principles. But I won’t vote for him.
March 15th, 2004 at 6:35 pm
If it’s bad policy, it’s bad policy. What difference does it make what he did with his refund?
And the cut “favors” the rich because they receive the greatest benefit from the change.
March 15th, 2004 at 6:44 pm
I want to know if he was willing to make a personal sacrifice in order to protest the cuts. Kerry is part of “the rich.” If he thinks “the rich” don’t pay enough taxes, I want to see him put his money where his mouth is.
March 16th, 2004 at 11:42 am
Thibodeaux:
But here’s the gaping hole in your logic: Is Kerry proposing that he repeal tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans except for Kerry? If he’s not excluding himself from the group that will have their tax cuts rolled back, then there is no hypocrisy here, regardless of what he (and/or his wife) “did with their tax cut money.”
March 16th, 2004 at 12:33 pm
Lookit, all of you: I’m not accusing him of hypocrisy. I’m very impressed with your knowledge of the rules of logic and debate—all of you.
But I’m not making creating an inferential chain or applying modus ponens or any of that sort, so there are no “holes in my logic” or fallacies of any kind. I’m not making an argument. I am not debating.
I AM SEEKING INFORMATION. John Kerry obviously thinks that “the rich” don’t pay enough taxes. John Kerry wants to force “the rich” to contribute more money to the government kitty. John Kerry is very generous with other people’s money. I want to know if he’s generous with his own.
March 17th, 2004 at 11:27 am
Thibodeaux:
Sorry, Charlie, but that’s not an effective dodge. When you say:
…how is that not accusing him of hypocrisy? And if that’s not where you’re going, then you haven’t even begun to establish relevance. I’ve already firmly established why it’s not hypocrisy, and that leaves you without a leg to stand on here.
So WHY, then, are you seeking this information? Why do you care? What difference does it make what Kerry does with his money?
Sorry, but your attempt to back off and frame this as anything other than an accusation of hypocrisy rings exceptionally hollow.
March 17th, 2004 at 11:29 am
By the way, Thib, in this very thread you said:
Well, if he’s including himself in his proposed tax increase, then how does that not constitute him “putting his money where his mouth is?”
March 17th, 2004 at 11:39 am
What difference does it make why I want to know? Do you think I’m being unfair here? Or are you just trying to show off your debating skills?
Oh, I guess now I’m attacking YOU, right?
March 17th, 2004 at 12:13 pm
You know, I realized I’m going about this all wrong. TG, you are a loyal reader, and I just want you to tell me: what can I do to make YOU happy?
March 17th, 2004 at 1:48 pm
Thibodeaux:
What difference does it make why I want to know?
Here’s why it makes a difference: Because the way you’ve presented this makes it appear as though you’re accusing Kerry of hypocrisy, and I’m not the only one who thought so. Virtually everything you’ve said here accuses him of hypocrisy on the issue, except that you don’t actually use the word “hypocrisy.”
You then claim that this wasn’t your intent, but don’t specify what your intent actually was. It’s rather like throwing out an accusation and then pretending you never made it when that accusation fails to stick. It’s disingenuous.
what can I do to make YOU happy?
You can concede that Kerry isn’t being hypocritical on this issue (and by extension, the “18 millionaire Democrats”). Or you can present evidence that they are being hypocritical (evidence that withstands scrutiny, I might add).
Or, alternatively, you can explain why you brought this up, if not to expose perceived hypocrisy. Sorry, but I don’t buy the “I’m just curious” line for even a second.
Let’s give a counterexample: Suppose my city needs a new road, one that can be paid for by a half-cent sales tax increase. Suppose further that I support this increase. Because I have voiced such support, do you now expect me to set aside an extra half-cent on everything I purchase? Do you further expect me to keep doing that, even if my efforts to get the road funding fail? It’s absurd to think that I should do that.
That’s precisely the same argument. What I do with that half-cent isn’t relevant to anything. The only thing that’s relevant is whether or not I’m willing to go along with my own plan to implement the half-cent increase, should that plan ever pass.
What Kerry did with his tax cut money is not even remotely relevant to his stance on undoing them, and you’re clearly implying that it is relevant. I don’t know how else you could possibly read your statements here.
So if you want to make me happy, either demonstrate why I’m wrong, and why it is relevant, or openly admit that it isn’t relevant.
March 17th, 2004 at 1:53 pm
Thibodeaux:
John Kerry is very generous with other people’s money. I want to know if he’s generous with his own.
*raises hand*
Ooh, ooh, ooh! I know this one!
“Yes!”
Since he would be including himself in the group that would have their tax cuts rolled back, yes, he’s just as generous with his own money as he is with “other people’s” money.
March 17th, 2004 at 2:04 pm
So if you want to make me happy, either demonstrate why I’m wrong, and why it is relevant, or openly admit that it isn’t relevant.
Well, I don’t really want to make you happy. I was just curious.
March 17th, 2004 at 4:01 pm
Thibodeaux:
Well, I don’t really want to make you happy.
Fair enough. But at least now you know the standard for doing so isn’t impossible or even unreasonable. 😉
April 20th, 2004 at 2:00 pm
Actually, you are both missing something. Kerry is a public servant, and his salary is paid with taxpayer dollars. On top of that, Kerry is in the unique position of being able to give himself a raise. In fact, as a member of Congress, Kerry’s raises come automatically unless he votes them down.
That said, whether or not Kerry himself is paying the higher rate or not is immaterial, because he can simply use the police power of the government to give himself a pay raise.