Rich People Who Want to Pay More Taxes

Joel flags us to this Dana Milbank piece about rich people who want to pay more taxes.

"I'm in favor of higher taxes on people like me," declared Eric Schoenberg, who is sitting on an investment banking fortune. He complained about "my absurdly low tax rates."

"We're calling on other wealthy taxpayers to join us," said paper-mill heir Mike Lapham, "to send the message to Congress and President Obama that it's time to roll back the tax cuts on upper-income taxpayers."

"I would with pleasure sacrifice the income," agreed millionaire entrepreneur Jeffrey Hollender.

The rich are different.

In another era, the millionaires on Tuesday's conference call might have been called "limousine liberals." But that label no longer applies. Now any wealthy liberal worth his certified-organic sea salt is driving a Prius.

It's a fine piece in its own right but it might be fun to put it in a larger context. It is possible to identify other instances in other times and places when people willingly queue up to make a private sacrifice for a larger social good. I'm working from memory here so I'll get the details wrong but I think I have the essence right, so consider:

I think it is John Lukacs who tells the story of the old Philadelphia lawyer who said that in paying taxes he liked to err on the side of overpayment because it was part of the privilege of living in a civilized society.

Wasn't it Rousseau who said that people ought to pay for the opportunity to join the army because it was such an honor to serve the community in that way? And isn't my memory correct that subalterns in the British Army in WWI died at a higher rate than enlisted men? [I guess I'm drifting now but I'm similarly fascinated with the data on how in the sinking of the Titanic, it really was a case of women and children first--see link].

More: as I remember Ed Banfield and James Q. Wilson in their seminal studies of cities, pointed out that upper class voters were more likely to vote in favor of bond issues than lower; even if for, say, parks in lower class neighborhoods (I'll bet there are other studies on point, they just don't come to mind at the moment).

I suppose a crude Benthamism would find this implausible; would believe that anyone would be a shirker or a holdout if he could. But I don't think the evidence points that way. I suspect it is rather a matter of whom we feel deserves our loyalty. I'd certainly begrudge every penny of taxes I paid to Kim Yong-il. By contrast the Scandinavians don't seem to mind p-- well, of course they mind, but not all that much. Meanwhile, there is a segment of the population that will tithe to the church even while avoiding every penny of "Caesar's" tax they can. And I suppose there are places where, when you come home after serving your sentence in prison for tax evasion, they'll hold a parade.

Does my government deserve my loyalty? Sure. But there are lots of times and places when I would cheerfully wring their collective neck. And I must say I admire--not the generosity so much as the clear-headedness--of people like Schoenberg and Lapham who recognize that they've got a pretty good deal.

Afterthought: Joel tosses in:

Never let the revenooers know anything. Pay cash, keep your lips closed, put nothing through banks that does not appear later in tax returns - pay taxes greater than your apparent standard of living and declare income accordingly. We had been audited three times since Mama died; each time the government returned a small 'overpayment' - I was building a reputation of being stupid and honest.

That's Robert A. Heinlein, The Number of the Beast 78 (1980).