The Endless Taxing Argument Or How To Create Misdirection

The mainstream media spends, what seems like at times, 24 hours per day having guests on discussing the benefits and drawbacks of the tax rate that we should apply to the rich. Then they discuss the tax rates we should apply to the middle class, and then they move on to the poor. They will show fancy info graphs provided by ivy league graduates and bring in both sides of the argument to debate.

Imagine a family with monthly expenses close to $4,000 per month (very common in a middle class family) that spends four hours every night after work arguing over which brand of bananas they buy at the store. The husband wants to purchase the brand that costs 30 cents less. The wife would like her family to enjoy name brand bananas and wants to pay the 30 cents more. The husband refuses to budge on this additional "tax" on the family's income every month. Some would look at this family and argue that it may be more important to focus on reducing the $4,000 in monthly expenses. Hold that thought.

Rick Santelli takes this simple analogy and applies it to real life. The video below demonstrates the benefit of having or not having tax increases on the rich (buying the cheap or inexpensive banana) and its impact on the total federal budget deficit (the $4,000 per month in expenses).

Santelli describes the endless tax discussing perfectly as a "bait and switch," otherwise known as "misdirection" or what a magician uses to fool the audience into paying attention to the wrong object.

This misdirection through endless fancy graphics and emotional arguments on television makes it difficult for the audience to clearly see that we have a spending problem not a taxing problem.