AN ARMY OF JOHN GALTS?

I really do not want to be that “greedy” guy whom Obama so hates. “Greedy,” loosely defined in Obamanomics, is 49 percent of voters. For the record, if you make $249,000 per year or less you are fine; somewhere around $250,000 and above, you are officially evil and he is coming after you.

I want to appease the new administration and not be too productive. So, upon Obama’s passing his new redistribution plan, I will slow my work schedule, lay off a few people (Obama’s got their back) and let someone else bust his tail since I will now be able to get “redistributed wealth” from those poor fools who are ambitious, energetic, work hard and have made good decisions.

I cannot wait, as I need a break. And it will be nice to not be vilified by politicians. It will feel good to be liked again.

Wish me luck for the next few years. I am looking forward to a respite from hard work, taxes and creating jobs.

You sure hear a lot of people saying this kind of thing. So what happens if this stops being a joke and becomes a trend?

UPDATE: A reader emails:

Count me among the ones seriously considering this. I’m in my mid-forties and run a company employing 124 people. Yes, I make more than 250K a year and pay out more than a million in salary and benefits. If my tax burden increases any more it simply isn’t worth it anymore and I’m seriously considering cashing out and semi-retiring. I won’t be able to live as well I once did, but that’s ok because I’d get by. It’s simply isn’t worth it if I don’t have the option of growing my business and just seeing the extra effort go to taxes to a wasteful government. I know it would result in at least half my people losing their jobs, but I couldn’t guarantee they could stay even if I did. Frankly, I’m just tired and if there is no reward for the extra effort why should I bother?

On the other hand, reader Dave Holsclaw is less positive:

Trouble is – when the evil folk who earn more than $250K fail to provide the necessary dollars to fulfill the dreams of The One, the sliding scale of evil will appear. Soon, those who earn $175K and then those who earn $105K will be identified as evil and have their property confiscated.

The story is always the same. The socialist/communist/fascist state destroys the productivity of the middle class, confiscates the fruit of their labor and enforces a two class system – the many (who labor to support the State), and the few – The One, his family and his chosen disciples (who enjoy the power, status and wealth that the State provides).

There is no such thing as simply slowing down and enjoying the dole.

The thief comes to kill and steal and destroy. That’s it.

Well, that’s a cheerful take.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Scott Brooke writes:

I’ve been reading with great interest your theories on “going John Galt”. I’ve not read Atlas Shrugged yet, it’s sitting on my nightstand with a bookmark about 5 pages in, but I think I get the general gist of it. Perhaps there’s more reality in the book but the idea seems preposterous, no matter how appealing it might be to join such a quiet revolution. Successful people can’t just turn off their success DNA. They need it beaten out of them. And while I agree that Obama’s policies will begin the slow turning of the screws, we’re far from getting the beatings. No, successful people crave success, not money, although that often comes along with it. It’s part of their “being” to be successful. To think that people can shut that off is as silly as thinking poor people will stop being lazy if the government provides for them.

The tide works its magic over time but almost nothing happens to stop the slow erosion. People only “act” when there’s a hurricane. Obama and his “Hope” are a tide, not a hurricane. The best we can wish for is a slow retreat of the tide because without a hurricane, people will continue to be what they are at the core. Successful or lazy but no real change in action.

On the other hand, reader Jeff Stevenson writes:

You think that it hasn’t already started to become a trend? Please don’t forget that the very people who are saying these sort of things are *not* the sort that just talks. These are the folks who are action-oriented, start businesses and create jobs. They are not the sort to spout off and create “manifestos” and issue propaganda statements, they take action.

I do technology consulting in a high demand field and I have the ability to raise or lower my income, depending on how hard I feel like working. I am setup perfectly to react to the Obama/John Galt issue. I have read Atlas Shrugged and I am already *executing* a plan to work much less next year. Notice that I did not say that I was considering, or talking about, or thinking of. I have already shed customers and lined up a few reliable ones for the next year (and perhaps the one after that) to enable this plan.

I had initially targeted 2009 as an expansion year, hiring new people and growing the business. Now, maybe not so much.

See ya’ on the other side.

And Prof. Joe Olson writes: “FWIW, I turned down 3 consulting jobs this Fall (during which I’m not teaching) because the net return wasn’t enough for me to disrupt my travel and recreation plans.” Presumably it won’t get better under Obama’s plan.

MORE: Reader Kartik Gada writes:

For many years (especially the last 130 years), people came to America because the goverments of their home countries did not reward hard work or entrepreneurship. America attracted the best and brightest, and benefitted greatly. We drained the brains out of governments too foolish to nurture the full potential of their best people.

Now if America itself becomes a place that is tough for the best and brightest, not only will new immigrants stop coming here, but many US-born people may leave to find a new country with lower tax rates. People can leave America for much the same reason they came.

What if, say, China sets up a ‘special economic zone’ that attracts branches of major US corporations, and where US expats are courted, and offered a life of low or even zero income tax, good schools, etc. all while working at the same US corporations, just out of the China division? Some Americans would go. A marginal tax rate of 0=12% vs. 50% in California or New York is hard to turn down.

Furthermore, remember that the top 1% of Americans pay 40% of taxes. If that 1% leaves for a greener pasture, won’t revenue from income tax drop by 40%? What then?

Some smart country, somewhere in the world, will offer big incentives to over-taxed US private-sector people. Some will go. Many could go. That country will reap the biggest windfall ever. The US will effectively have scared away the geese that lay the golden eggs.

It could be an opportunity for someone.

STILL MORE: Reader Jim May writes: “Kartik Gada hits the nail on the head. I left Canada for the greater opportunity and freedom in America. I never expected Canada to follow me here.”

MORE STILL: Reader Rahul Biljani emails:

‘Going John Galt’ is not that easy – Congress quietly passed an ‘exit tax’ earlier this year to penalize any (somewhat) high net worth US resident that decides to vote with their feet.

As quoted in the links below, the U.S. government , through the Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Act of 2008 (the HEART bill, for short, and I am not making this up), effective June 17, 2008, imposes an “exit tax” on certain citizens and long-term residents who expatriate or terminate their long-term residency. Such individuals, called covered expatriates, will be deemed to have sold all of their worldwide property for its fair market value on the day before expatriating or terminating U.S. residency, and will be liable for U.S. tax on the amount deemed realized in excess of $600,000 (subject to cost of living adjustments).

Covered expatriates are: citizens and long-term residents who (a) have an average annual U.S. tax liability for the previous five years of $139,000 (adjusted for inflation), (b) have a net worth of at least $2,000,000 on the expatriation date, or (c) fail to certify compliance with all U.S. federal tax obligations for the previous five years.

Link

Link

Maybe the government has thought this out more than we think.

Ouch.

FINALLY: Reader Michael Hauk writes:

I’m sure you are getting boatloads of emails on this subject, but here is one more data point:

I am a physician in a highly paid and understaffed specialty. Many of my colleagues are openly discussing going part-time to lower our tax exposure, should Obama get his socialist wish-list through Congress. I did my medical training in the military, and had frugality instilled in my make-up by parents and grandparents who lived through the (real) Depression. My family and I already live well below our means, and we can live just as well on less. Much, much less.

Obama believes healthcare is a right. Well, good luck fulfilling that promise when those of us who provide it decide it’s not worth it anymore…

They’ll be going after slackers, hoarders, and wreckers . . . . More seriously, I don’t think the government would see a shortage of doctors as a problem. Instead, it’s an excuse to cut costs with wait-based rationing.