# ObamaMath 101

## A class for the numerically challenged

Since Obama does not have to worry about re-election ever again, the real Obama is going to show up and state what he is really thinking. With the looming “fiscal cliff”, Obama has put out his starting point:

\$1.6 trillion in tax hikes

And those individuals making more than \$250,000 would have to pay — which would include himself.

So, let’s do the math and see what is needed to generate \$1.6 trillion in new tax revenues –

• At a 100% tax rate (that’s right take it all) — You would need 6,400,000 making \$250,000 a year every year.
• At a 50% tax rate — 12,800,000 people would have to make \$250,000 a year every year.
• At a 42% tax rate (which is the common figure I have heard thrown out there) — You would need 15,238,095 people making \$250,000 a year every year.

The problem is that if you listen to the liberal rhetoric — we are in this mess because of the greedy 1%. The 99% is suffering because of the 1%. Well, just how many people are in the 1%?

Let’s do the math again –

According to the U.S. Census, there are approximately 311 million people living in the United States. (I am rounding for ease of calculations.) 10% of that is 31.1 million people and 10% of 31.1 million is 3.1 million. So, at 3.1 million people falling into the category of the 1% — Obama is going to have to tax them at a rate of roughly 220% a year every year in order to generate \$1.6 trillion in new tax revenue.

But wait!! That 311 million number includes children, seniors, and a whole lot of people who DO NOT work for a living. So, there cannot be 3.1 million people in the 1%.

It would have to be based on the total number of people in the workforce — which is at a 30-year low — and has been hovering in the neighborhood of 150 million people. (I am rounding off for ease of calculation.)

Again, if you use that 1% liberal talking point, you would be talking about 1.5 million people who would have to be taxed at a rate of over 400% to get anywhere near \$1.6 trillion.

But using ObamaMath, you can make those numbers add up!!

According to the Social Security Administration, the average salary of the American worker in 2011 was \$42,979.61. I will do a 10% hike fun and then round it up to \$48,000 for 2012 — just  for fun. If Obama then taxed all 150 million working Americans at a 42% rate and assuming they were all paid \$48,000, he would be able to raise \$3,024,000,000,000. (Yes, that is \$3 trillion.)

See, I told you!! With ObamaMath, it is possible to raise taxes on just the rich (wink, wink) and raise all of the needed tax revenue. The fact that it would be at a rate over 100% doesn’t mean anything.

Too bad reality is going to set in…it ruins a good liberal pipe dream!!

• norris

The reason tax and spending are a year or two in the future is to place the blame for disasters on the next guy.

• chrisinva

Exactly.

• libertarius

Completely missing from the discussion of the fiscal cliff is the fact that taxes are already going to increase anyway via obamacare. So obama already got his precious tax increases (on the middle class), but he’s still out there pretending that the problem facing America is that we don’t pay enough taxes.

• chrisinva

As Ronald Reagan said — “There you go again” — spreading the truth about middle class tax increases.

• rustyoldgarand

I’m pretty sure that the 1.6 trillion number is the revenue that his plan expects to generate over the next ten years, not yearly. You are right that if that were a yearly number, it would be monstrous, but I don’t believe that’s the case. It’s high enough, as is (though I am not a Norquist tax absolutist), but it’s not as suicidally high as you’re making it out to be here.

• chrisinva

Probably is a ten year number — but the reality is that Obama would need 1/10 of the total numbers listed above, and I am feeling confident that they are not enough “rich people” to tax to generate an additional \$160 billion a year. (This is also assuming that incomes remain constant over this period of time as well.)

• Pingback: Gilberto Curcuru