Jewish World Review Nov. 17, 1999 /8 Kislev, 5760
Trump's tax on freedom
WHAT IS IT THAT CAUSES so many rich guys who acquired their wealth through the
capitalistic system to favor ideas hostile to that system? Could it be guilt? Vanity? The
thirst for power once they've conquered the material world?
In Donald Trump's case, I doubt that the first one applies. But a combination of the
other two is more than plausible. Many buildings are named after their charitable donors.
Well, perhaps Trump is expecting the nation to rename itself after him if he succeeds in
bringing his master plan to fruition. No one ever accused the Donald of thinking too small.
Trump was certainly quick to denigrate George Bush for failing to evade that irksome
reporter's pop quiz the other day. It's easy for him and others to say how they would have
reacted had they been blindsided by the likes of Andy Hiller.
Trump says he would never have participated in such a "history test." No, he wouldn't
have done anything so foolish. Yet, in the very same week, he unveiled his martyrdom-seeking,
federal-debt-erasing, soak-the-rich assets tax. And he and his supermodel girlfriend (and
potential first lady) engaged in graphic on-air discussions about their "exceptional" sex
life on shock-jock Howard Stern's radio program.
Trump, having announced his intention to seek the Reform Party presidential
nomination, has devised a plan that fits nicely within that party's non-platform platform.
Reformers claim to decry the national debt. In fact, that's one of the main reasons ol' Ross
decided to get under the country's hood in the first place.
The national debt is approximately $5.7 trillion. Trump proposed that the government
impose a one-time 14.25 percent tax on the assets of individuals and trusts worth $10 million
or more. He claims it would eliminate the debt and thereby save the nation $200 billion in
annual interest, which could be used for tax cuts and shoring up Social Security.
Many economists say this kind of tax would require an incredible asset sell-off and
most likely crash the stock market. I wonder if the greedy government would also double-dip
by taxing the capital gains on the asset sales necessary to obtain the liquidity to pay the
There is also a serious question as to whether the tax would be constitutional. But
most disturbing is that it clearly undermines the notion of private property -- even worse
than the estate and gift taxes because there is no transfer involved. It's just a tax on
the status of the property itself, property that has been acquired, in most cases, with
after-tax dollars. Are we supposed to close our eyes to the obviously anti-capitalistic
nature of this scheme because it is being proposed by a super-capitalist (after he's made and
inherited his wealth through the system)?
There's another equally troublesome aspect of this plan. It is based on the
assumption that deficit spending and accumulated debt by the government are wrong, or at
least ill advised and irresponsible. Yet, Trump's proposal rewards this behavior and
encourages it in the future. The government that created the mess gets off scot-free, and
those who had nothing to do with it are punished.
In other words, if all the government has to do to rectify the monstrous deficits it
creates is to confiscate private property from its citizens who had no complicity in the
wrongdoing, we are condoning and perpetuating this evil.
At least with bankruptcy law, the people who get burned are those (creditors) who had
some dealings with the bankrupt with respect to the debts being discharged. Here, the only
infraction committed by those being punished is that they have wealth. But considering
today's mores, I suppose being rich is indeed one of the most unforgivable crimes.
Of all people, Donald Trump should understand that the concept of private property is
essential to our economic liberties. How can an entrepreneur of his stature be oblivious to
the perilousness of such a plan to our freedoms?
Economist F. A. Hayek warned "what our generation has forgotten is that the system of
private property is the most important guarantee of freedom."
Of course, Karl Marx understood this well. That's why he proposed the abolition of
commentator. Send your comments to him by clicking here.
11/15/99: GOP caves again
11/10/99: Triangulation and 'The Third Way'
11/08/99: Sticks and stones
11/03/99: Keyes vs. media lapdogs
11/01/99: Signs of the times
10/27/99: The false charge of isolationism
10/25/99: A matter of freedom
10/20/99: Clinton's mini-meltdown
10/18/99: Senate GOP shows statesmanship
10/13/99: Senate must reject nuclear treaty
10/11/99: Bush bites feeding hand
10/06/99: Jesse accidentally opens door for Pat
10/04/99: Clinton and his media enablers
09/29/99: Reagan: Big-tent conservatism
09/27/99: The Clinton/Gore taint?
09/22/99: Have gun (tragedy), will travel
09/20/99: Hillary's blunders and bloopers
09/15/99: GOP must remain conservative
09/13/99:Time for Bush to take charge, please
09/10/99: Bush's education plan: Dubya confounds again
09/07/99: Pat, savior or spoiler?
09/02/99: Character doesn't matter?
08/30/99: Should we judge?
08/25/99: Dubyah's drug question: Not a hill to die on
08/23/99: Should Dubyah start buying soap ... for all that mud?
08/16/99: 'W' stands for 'winner'
08/11/99: The truth about tax cuts
08/09/99: Hillary: Threading the needle
08/04/99: What would you do?
08/02/99: No appeasement for China
07/30/99: Hate Crimes Bill: Cynical Symbolism
07/26/99: Itís the 'moderates', stupid
07/21/99: JFK Jr. and Diana: the pain of privilege
07/19/99: Smith, Bush and the GOP
07/14/99: GOP must be a party of ideas
07/12/99: Gore's gender gap
07/08/99: Clintonís faustian bargain: our justice
07/06/99: The key to Bush's $36 million
06/30/99: Gore: a soda in every fountain
06/28/99: 'Sacred wall' or religious barrier?
06/23/99: GOP must lead in foreign policy
06/21/99: Crumbs of compassion
06/16/99: Compassionate conservatism: face-lift or body transplant?
06/10/99: Victory in Kosovo? Now What?
©1999, CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.