Maybe actors and other Hollywood types are only acting when they embrace statism?
But the most shocking news is that even Bill Maher is getting irked that he’s being treated like a pinata.
Take a look at this short video. Ignore the first 2/3rds, which is Rachel Maddow making inane comments about the Ryan budget, and notice what Maher says in the final part.
Wow. He notes that the rich pay the overwhelming share of the federal tax burden (hmmm…I wonder if he watched this video).
And he’s not overly happy about California raping him with a new top tax rate of 13.3 percent.
So now he’s saying he may move out of the state, just like Phil Mickelson. I won’t believe it ’til I see it, but for every well-known celebrity who publicly speculates about migrating to a zero-income tax state, there are probably dozens of investors, entrepreneurs, and small business owners who actually take that step.
And this, folks, is one of the reasons why class-warfare tax policy is so pointlessly destructive.
Reagan showed us in the 1980s that lower tax rates on upper-income taxpayers can generate more tax revenue. California is doing the same experiment, but in reverse.
Magnitudes matter, so we’ll have to wait and see before determining the net impact of Jerry Brown’s tax hike on California tax revenue. But I will blindly assert with confidence that revenues will be far below what politicians are hoping to collect.
In other words, we will see the revenge of the Laffer Curve, regardless of what Bill Maher decides.
P.S. I can’t help adding that Rachel Maddow doesn’t know what she’s talking about. The Ryan budget does not propose a net tax cut, so it’s absurd to claim – or even imply – that there will be “tax cuts for the rich” financed by changes to healthcare. That budget does propose reforms to Medicare and Medicaid, but those changes are to salvage the programs by making them sustainable.