Tag Archives: bush tax cuts

The fiscal cliff could be the country’s cure

imagesCAH96SOT-Harry, Obama, and Nancy2

According to Wikipedia’s definition of the fiscal cliff Americans could suffer a little more short term pain for a lot more long term gain. Americans are used to suffering these last four years so what’s another few more?

The fiscal cliff by their definition is a number of different laws which if left unchanged could lead to tax increases, spending cuts, and a deficit reduction. Two out of the three are just what the doctor ordered. It is only the first one that could create a problem.

According to the United States Treasury Department the George W. Bush Tax Cuts are a major part of the solution not the problem. These tax cuts have become the political football for the Democrats to play with. They rail against them because they don’t fit their narrative however when push comes to shove they always vote to renew them. The Democrats never seem to suffer politically because the propagandist’s in the media always provide cover for them.

The Democrats treat the middle class like their red headed stepchildren. They use scare tactics like the fiscal cliff in order to keep voters on edge and loyal to their party. Then when the time is right they trash Republicans as being obstructionists and play the role of savior by saving the middle class from inevitable ruin by renewing the tax cuts. The best actors and actresses are not in Hollywood. They are in the Democratic Party.

The Bush Tax Cuts are not just a political football for Republicans to kick around; they are sound fiscal policy. They are proven job creators and have been tremendously beneficial to the middle class by shifting a larger share of the individual income taxes paid from lower income earners to higher income earners. These tax cuts have actually helped and in some cases even eliminated the tax burden on lower and middle income Americans. It is for this reason that these tax cuts need to be made permanent and a mandatory part of the negotiations. For more on this see this article. http://www.examiner.com/article/how-to-end-the-class-warfare-argument?cid=db_articles

The second part of the fiscal cliff is spending cuts. Do you hear the crickets? Of course spending cuts! The last time I check our deficit was almost 17 trillion with a capital T. Our government has been spending more than it has been taking in for years and it needs to stop. We need to cut all the wasteful programs out of our government and the ones we keep should be returned to the states where they could be run more efficiently.

Another thing we can do is to immediately restore the work requirement for welfare. Ronald Reagan once famously said, “Welfare’s purpose should be to eliminate, as far as possible, the need for its own existence. He then goes on to say, “The best and most effective social program the government can help create is a job.” Reagan left no ambiguity as to how he felt towards big government when he famously quipped, “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”

Being on welfare should never be a permanent financial solution for anyone. Removing the work requirement just adds to more government dependency which is exactly what most in the Democratic Party want. This policy is bad for the economy because it dramatically increases spending and allows recipients to become more complacent and ultimately makes it that much harder for people to get off of welfare. When government can’t solve a problem, they throw taxpayer’s money at it. Unfortunately for us it doesn’t provide solutions; it only exacerbates the problem.

The third part is deficit reduction. A constitutional amendment for a balanced budget would be a great start. If the Republicans were smart they would be bringing this up as a mandatory part of the negotiations. This is a winning issue and right now the Democrats are winning the fiscal cliff argument.

A balanced budget amendment to the Constitution will make future battles over fiscal policy much more transparent and opaque. The Democrats will not be able to move the goal posts like they do now and Republicans will be able to restore some resemblance of fiscal sanity. In addition, Republicans ought to be exposing all the horrible taxes that are just around the corner from the health care bill. If the Republican Party uses what little left they have in political capitol correctly than they can bypass the media and get the public on their side. A minority in Congress and a majority in America can create a majority in Congress.

Rather than raising taxes on job creators Republicans would be better off just letting the Democrats drive us over the fiscal cliff. By allowing this to happen maybe the American people will finally wake up and realize that liberal policies do not work. Republicans could than be in a stronger position to win in 2014 and beyond. The Republican Party and more importantly the country would benefit in the long run.

Republicans need to stand firm and call the Democrat’s bluff on the fiscal cliff. The Democrats will not allow the Bush tax cuts to expire. They know that if that happened the economy would go into an immediate recession. For political reasons if nothing else they won’t let that happen. However if it did happen along with spending cuts and a deficit reduction you would have the makings of a real recovery. And as the famous Meat Loaf song goes two out of three ain’t bad.
..

Suggested by the author:
Are we still a center right country?
Welcome to the dependent states of America
Obamacare is bad for business and your health
What the word forward means in Obama’s America
An armed society is a polite society

11 Deceptions About the Tax Debate

Below are the Whitehouse.gov’s “11 Facts About the Tax Debate.”  As usual, they are out of context, disproportioned, deceptive, and out right false briefing points.  Here are just a few reasons why they are nothing more than election year red herrings.  (A fitting expression for such socialist ideals.) WH.gov points are in italics.

1.     Nearly $1 Trillion would be added to our deficit over 10 years under the Republicans’ proposal to continue tax cuts exclusively to households making more than $250,000 a year and to the wealthiest estates.

Only 1 Trillion in 10 years?  That sure is a better than Obama’s plan strapping us with over 10 Trillion more debt in the past 4 years, and much more in the next 10.  Republican tax cuts to those who are producing jobs realistically stimulate the economy.  History tells us that lower tax rates produce greater employment thus greater tax revenue 100% of the time!  Are 100% to 0% not good enough odds?

2.     Only 2 percent of American households will benefit from the Republicans’ proposal to extend tax cuts for those with incomes higher than $250,00 a year.

Actually 100% of Americans will benefit.  Those 2% are the ones investing in America and want to do more so more people can be employed, pay taxes, spend and invest.  All studies of history and economic models show that the sweet spot is about 17% across the board.  I.e. a flat tax of 17% produces the maximum revenue by allowing maximum employment and investment.  Thus we’re killing our selves by trying to squeeze more money than we can afford, which kills our ability to earn more.

3.     Under President Obama’s proposal, only the wealthiest 3 in 1,000 estates would owe any estate tax.

So only the wealthiest 0.3% will pay estate taxes?  He’s bragging about this?  Notice he doesn’t compare it to a Republican plan; a sure sign they have a better idea.

4.     Over the past 4 years, a typical family making $50,000 a year has received tax cuts totaling $3,600 – more if they are putting a child through college.

The White House fails to mention that our average income decreased 3.02% from 2008 to 2010.  For a $50K household, a loss of 3.2% is $1,600.

Inflation due to the Fed creating money, “monetizing the debt,” “QE3,” “printing money,” “digitizing money,” you name it.  Inflation was 4.46% in 2011 alone.  That has lowered the value of $50K by $2,238.

Those two factors alone add up to $3,830.  So even if your “tax decrease” was real, your average $50K family lost $283 per year.  Does the WH call these bragging rights?

They also fail to mention that he’s just Nationalized ALL student loans, (so he can forgive a great proportion of them).  That will cost “average” taxpayers more money.  So there are several ways we all pay for other people’s children to go to school.  Obama said, “those making under $250,000 won’t see a tax increase.”  Yup, they just won’t see it.

5.     5 million families would no longer be eligible for the child tax credit under the Republicans’ tax proposal.

Truth be known, both parties support a modification to the Child Tax Credit.  It is due to expire, so the debate is only which plan to adopt.

Additionally, the Treasury Department reports that illegal immigrants filing tax returns using the Individual Tax Identification Number are receiving more than $1.5 billion each year from the federal government through the Child Tax Credit and the Additional Child Tax Credit.  Need a fix?

6.     Because Republican proposals cut the Earned Income Tax Credit, nearly 6 million working families with children would see their taxes increase – averaging $500 apiece.

The WH has cherry picked only the most conservative of many Republican plans.  Many, if not most, do not affect this Credit.  In support of those that do, this Credit pays able people for not working.  We have enough of that.  What is not mentioned is that this proposal also abolishes tax code exemptions and credits for the rich and big business.  Everyone who is able needs to pay something.  It keeps us all responsibly involved in government.

7.     The President’s plan includes almost $700 billion in tax credits to help middle class families pay for health insurance over the next 10 years through the Affordable Care Act.

Somehow we’re to believe we aren’t going to pay the $700 billion.  That $700,000,000,000 comes from taxes.  How many will loose jobs because companies are forced to cut employment or go bankrupt because they have to pay fines, (oops “taxes,” oh no “fees,” wait “taxes,” whatever)?  They’ll have to pay much more just to employ people.  That isn’t going to help employment or the tax base.

Thus Obama Care will increase the number of folks relying on taxes to support them and pay for their healthcare, thus driving that 700 billion estimate off the scale.  This is a “Cloward and Piven” plan, plain and simple.  “Overload the economic system through escalating the need for entitlements by the increased tax load to fund them.  Mr. Obama once taught the Cloward and Piven’s strategy to collapse capitalism.  Now he’s implementing it.

It has become common to name a Law the opposite of its worst feature to mask its true identity, i.e. ”The Federal Reserve” which is private and has no reserves.  Would you vote for the “Unaffordable but Compassionate Care Act”?

8.     The top 2 percent of households, with and average of $800,000, would see additional tax cuts under the Republican plan.

… as would most income brackets.  These wealthy people are already in the highest tax bracket.  This misleading information only mentions the cuts and not the main part of the plan that drastically removes tax exemptions in the first place.  Most Republican restructuring is designed not only to simplify taxes and reduce exemptions, but also to incite job creators.  Read the bills!

9.     Under the President’s plan, income tax rates for high income households would return to the same tax rates as in the ‘90s.  During that period, the United States created 23 million jobs and ran a budget surplus.

Remember the 17% rule?  Higher tax rates actually produce less revenue than lower rates above 17%.  When Bush lowered the tax rate in 2003, the tax revenue actually increased due to greater employment and higher wages.  Even Obama agreed to extend them for that reason.

It isn’t trickle down, it is flow down, and the government needs to be at the bottom of the flow, not the top.  Under the Republican plan everyone’s effective tax rate would be reduced, causing greater employment thus more tax revenue.  Businesses would be incented to locate and operate here in the US rather than overseas.

The government doesn’t create jobs, the people do.  Even government jobs are created out of the people’s tax dollars.  The government doesn’t build anything; we do, to include the government.  When the government uses our money to build inefficient, ineffective, failing, or just plain fraudulent institutions, we pay the price.

For example, the 90s is when the Liberals were most influential at inflating the housing bubble by incentives to lend to those who couldn’t afford those loans and eventually penalizing lenders that did not.  That escalated inflated prices that eventually had to burst.

10.     The President’s plan would continue the 10 percent tax bracket, which allows everyone to pay a 10 percent tax rate on their first $8,900 in income (or $17,800 for married couples).

Notice there is no mention of a Republican plan here, because under the Republican plan, middle-income families of four pay no taxes on the first $39,000 of its income.

So the President is bragging about doing nothing?  I have to admit, doing nothing has been one of his least problematic qualities.

11.     The Republicans plan eliminates the American Opportunity Tax Credit, meaning 11 million families and students paying for college would see an average tax increase of $1,000 each.

Actually there is no tax increase involved.  It means that the $1,000 credit for having a child in college expires December 31st 2012.  Both parties have competing plans for an amended version.  Reality always sounds a little different than WH talking points.

So shall we talk about unemployment?  How about why businesses move jobs overseas?  How about Agenda 21, (disguised as “Sustainable Development)?  Can we discuss how many more doctors will be created under Obama care?  How about illegal aliens; Homeland Security that considers “we the people” a greater threat than rife illegal boarder crossings?  Let’s discuss why the US prosecutes innocent supporters of the GOP (i.e. Gibson guitar), while allowing anything black, or Muslim, or alien, or Occupy movements go unprosecuted, (per stated administration policy).  How ‘bout that Medicare?  Social Security?  Where do those fit in your list to debate?

Barack Obama was right about “Hope & Change.”  Never has America hoped for change more than now.

God bless America.

Before the Dawn

A national poll showing a 59/35 percent disapproval rating demonstrates how declining confidence in American economic performance has led business owners to turn on the White House.  With the Oval Office insisting that the country cannot afford to continue the current tax rates for individuals making over $200,000 and couples making more than $250,000, aka the Bush tax cuts for the rich, it is not surprising that investor confidence is lagging.  Evidence indicates that the White House and their “progressive” allies have been repeatedly assailing small business owners, not “standing behind them” as their campaign rhetoric now insists.

Attacks originating from the White House such as the “You didn’t build that” remark are certainly not instilling confidence among entrepreneurs.  2010 Census figures reveal that from 2008-2010 200,000 small businesses shut their doors.  Three million jobs were lost when those companies closed up shop.

Americans cut spending as U.S. economic growth from April through June slowed to a crawl at an annual rate of 1.5 percent.  The slowdown indicates that the economy may be stalling three years into a sluggish, mostly jobless recovery that began when the last recession technically ended.

A growth rate of 2 percent or less does nothing to lower unemployment rates, which remained stuck at 8.2 percent last month.  According to most economic experts, growth is not expected to increase much in the second half of 2012, spurring fears of another recession.  Few economists believe the U.S. economy will strengthen anytime soon.

A less than glowing corporate earnings report, continued financial troubles in Europe and a looming budget crisis in the U.S. are all expected to contribute to further reductions in business investment and contribute to a possible economic downturn.

Drawing upon his business experience, presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney has plans to restore jobs in America within the private sector.  He is in favor of increased domestic energy production, a policy that will stimulate economic growth and reduce energy costs for all Americans.  Romney also favors taking a stronger stance towards China on matters of trade and currency manipulation.  He has repeatedly pledged to repeal and replace obamatax, also known by the misnomer: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; a reversal of that policy will disperse the clouds of doubt and uncertainty currently inhibiting job creation, business growth and capital investment.

With a successful businessman in the White House and a legislature composed of business friendly Representatives and Senators, prospects for an American economic recovery will brighten immediately.  Investors in America and especially Europe, where socialist tax assaults continue, will once again be inclined and incentivized to invest in America.

If you are one of the millions of American workers who have suffered long term unemployment or underemployment as a result of the failed “progressive” economic policies of the current administration and its “progressive” cohorts take heart, the first rays of the new dawn are just over the horizon.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/07/27/before-the-dawn/

Romney Is Not Reagan, But Is The Best Option

While it was definitely one of the elements, Ronald Reagan did more to help defeat the Soviet Union than conduct financial warfare via economic pressures.  U.S. defense spending increased during his administration.  Having faced the brunt of Adolf Hitler’s blitzkrieg, which was built post WWI in violation of the Treaty of Versailles, the Soviet Union’s Politburo watched this spending increase and knew its meaning.  That understanding and their fear of SDI made them respect Reagan and convinced them that Reagan was willing AND READY to protect, defend and advance American influence and power around the globe.  Reagan saw the USA as a force for good around the world.  Had he been merely interested in protecting the territorial landmass of the United States he would not have lifted a finger to help free Eastern Europe from Soviet oppression.

This increase in defense spending was an underlying cause of budget deficits that “progressives” still use to smear Reagan’s name and justify tax hikes under the misperception/misinterpretation/misrepresentation/outright lie that “Reagan’s tax cuts led to huge deficits”.  That lie is currently being recycled for the George W. Bush tax cuts.  It was also the “justification” behind a “progressive” offer to “compromise” with Reagan: Spending cuts (which never happened) in exchange for tax increases (that did).  A dishonest tactic they also employed on Bush the elder.  To this day, “progressive” Democrats love to harp about how “Reagan raised taxes…Reagan raised taxes”.

…*squawk*…Polly want a cracker.

“progressives” refuse to even think about thinking about addressing the true cause of America’s exploding debt: Big government “progressive” socialist “entitlement” programs which make people less self-reliant and more government dependent.  Worse yet, today, in the name of “social justice” and/or “economic justice” “progressives” use the emotional argument that “we need to take care of the less fortunate” by enacting additional “entitlement” programs (obamacare, massive increase in food stamps usage, etc.) and further hocking America’s future by giving boatloads of freebies to illegal aliens.

To balance the budget and follow the Constitution, the United States needs to defund and disassemble all the central planning, control “the masses”, big spending, socialist programs and dismantle entire Cabinet Departments that over-spend taxpayer’s money while stifling business and indoctrinating America’s children into hating America, free market Capitalism and believing Socialism and Communism are not so bad (Viva Che!).  There is no Constitutional authority for Social Security, Medicare or obamacare.  You can thank “progressive” FDR’s willingness to bully and threaten the Supreme Court into submission for their existence.  Likewise, there is no Constitutional authority for the Department of Energy or the Department of Education, the EPA and other unaccountable bureaucracies.

There is Constitutional authority for defense.

There are calls for cuts in defense as part of plans to balance the budget.  Peace through strength does not mean unilateral disarmament through cuts in defense.

Peace through strength means that you have, and your enemies KNOW that you have the military capability and the willingness, even if reluctantly, to do the following:

If attacked, the United States will declare war on its attackers and turn where they live into a crater filled parking lot that looks more like the moon than part of planet earth.  Then the U.S. will bring its troops home and leave the attackers to rebuild their lives without any help from the United States.  Anytime they or anyone else chooses to attack the U.S, it is guaranteed this process will be repeated.  That goes for Communist China, Imperialist Russia, Fascist Islam, their surrogates and everyone else.

For so long as there are enemies to the United States, this readiness must be maintained.

If the rest of the world wants to live in peace, they will keep peace with the United States.  We will be happy to engage in international commerce and mutually beneficial interactions.  If they choose to fight, they are toast.

This conclusion is reached by studying history and independent of the influence of America’s corrupt “mainstream media”.  Oh so lovingly referred to as the “progressive” Party Pravda.  It was blatantly obvious from day one that “Conservative” FOX News was in the tank for Romney.  Romney was nowhere near the top of many lists for the GOP nomination.

True Reagan Conservatives who voted for and lived in America during his Presidency, and witnessed that President Reagan’s winning coalition was based on fiscal responsibility, American security and the championing of America’s traditional moral values and principles, Conservatives will rally around Mitt Romney.

Given a choice between a peace through strength Romney, cut defense to balance the budget Ron Paul and gut defense to have more money to spend on socialist programs obama, Romney is clearly the best option.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/06/21/romney-is-not-reagan-but-is-the-best-option/

The 2013 Tax Increase obama Pledged Would Never Happen

If the White House and Congress don’t act this year, a huge, unprecedented tax increase described by Ben Bernanke as a “massive fiscal cliff” will slam American taxpayers. This looming tax hike will result mostly from letting long-standing tax policies expire at the end of 2012.

Instead of waiting until after November’s election, obama should stop campaigning for a moment and start working with Congress to prevent this gargantuan tax increase from taking place. Not only would doing so give assurance to families, businesses, and investors that taxes won’t be rising while the economy is still staggering. It would also show that obama is capable of chewing gum and walking at the same time.

The tax increase, also known as “Taxmageddon” is a $494 billion hike. If action isn’t taken, current law dictates that seven different categories will witness expiring tax policies, while five new obamacare tax increases begin.

Approximately 34% of the tax increase come from letting the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 expire. Best known for cutting marginal income tax rates, the reductions also lowered the marriage penalty, increased the child and adoption tax credits, while increasing tax breaks for the costs of dependent care and education. Contrary to “progressive” rhetoric, these taxes have a direct effect on the lives of people in all income tax brackets, not just evil rich people who “don’t pay their fair share”.

Another 25% comes from the expiration of the highly debated payroll tax cut. The expiration of a patch on the Alternative Minimum Tax, which prevents middle-income families from paying a tax intended for “the rich” accounts for another 24% of the hike.

The obamacare tax increases, hidden from public view by “progressive” deceit and delay tactics, begin kicking in with one of the most damaging taxes in the law, a 3.8% Hospital Insurance surtax on wages, as well as on salaries and investment income over $250,000.

To top that off, the so-called death tax also expires in 2013. The rate will rise from 35 percent today to 55 percent and the exemption will fall from $5 million to $3.5 million. Then there’s the end of the tax cuts contained in the 2009 stimulus and the expiration of full write-offs for new business capital investments.

Since 2007 obama has had an ongoing, oft repeated mantra: “I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year…which includes a 98 percent of small-business owners, you will not see your taxes increase one single dime under my plan. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains tax, no tax. We don’t need to raise taxes on the middle class! You will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat, not one single dime.”

Never mind that he broke that pledge by signing a tax increase on tobacco in early 2009. As a mere voter, you’re too stupid to notice such minor, unimportant details. Move along, there’s nothing to see here.

Apparently the only one “smart” enough to realize that tobacco use in America is restricted to those with incomes exceeding $250,000 a year is the former community radicalizer from Chicago. You may know of him. He’s the one who’s entire college and medical history have been hidden from public view since the day he first infected the Oval Office with his faux transparency, un-kept promises, aggressively anti-American views, anti-business policies, war on religious liberties, attack on affordable energy, intentionally divisive identity politics rhetoric and non-stop campaigning for what would prove for America to be a disastrous second term.

If this is how he behaves while he’s politically obligated to mask his true intentions from undecided voters during an election year, the entire globe will live to regret an extended obama presidency for decades, in not for a century or more.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/05/21/the-2013-tax-increase-obama-pledged-would-never-happen/

Republicans Cave on Bush Tax Cut Extension, White House Wants More

Republican congressional leaders are indicating that they will allow the Bush tax cuts to be extended until the end of the year without requiring offset spending cuts to pay for it. The White House is demanding that the GOP give even more.

The leaders of congressional Republicans will present an extension of the Bush tax cuts to the rest of the House and Senate GOP tonight. The proposal has been stripped of the requirement that cuts be made to pay for the continuing tax cuts that continue to starve the Social Security fund of badly needed revenue.

Republicans are not willing to be responsible for a perceived tax increase on 160 million Americans in an election year and have therefor given up the fight on the tax holiday. Instead, they have de-coupled the unemployment insurance extension and the so-called “doc-fix” from the bill – a move that has irritated Democrats who seem only ready to accept everything they want while giving nothing in return.

Despite getting the payroll tax holiday extended until the end of the year without any concessions, the White House has indicated that they want everything and intend to give nothing. Jay Carney said that they believe that the unemployment extension and Medicare doc-fix should be included in this deal.

All that is left is for the White House to complain that Republicans are unwilling to negotiate despite them being the only ones at the table giving in on anything – at all.

Years of Stimulus Fails to Create Jobs; 8 Weeks of Tax Cuts Gets it Done

Stimulus after stimulus program has been put in place by the Obama administration. Cash for clunkers, the GM/Chrysler/Union bail-outs, the actual 2009 economic stimulus bill, and on and on and on. As the  New American posted, it didn’t create much of anything in the private sector.

Thomas Smith at Emory University, supported the stimulus package but he now finds that although the funds may have resulted in some people being employed, the stimulus spending in the construction area has not resulted in creating jobs. Another economist compared the impact of federal stimulus funds to employment in the construction industry to trying to move the Empire State Building by pushing it.

As recent as December of 2010, the employment outlook was gloomy which finally forced Obama to sign the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts into law on December 17th. In addition to extending the current tax rates, Democrats further cut taxes by slashing the Social Security tax by 2%. Obama and the Congressional liberals had found a new religion and it’s already proving fruitful.

Today, the unemployment report dropped to 8.9%, the lowest since 2009. It didn’t stay at 8.8% throughout the stimulus. It didn’t drop when Obama took over GM. It didn’t drop each time the government tried to be the solution to the problem. Only once the government removed some of it’s burdensome taxes did the economy react and it reacted within weeks, not years.

Let citizens keep their money and they will spend it. That creates true economic stimulus as businesses hire and expand to handle the increased demand. Demand which only consumers can drive. Capitalism 101 liberals, are they finally learning?

Takers and Makers: Class Division as a Weapon

Those selfish rich people.  They just take and take and take.. when will they have taken enough from America?  If we give credence to progressive leaders like Senator Bernie Sanders, this is the sentiment of America.  During a 8 1/2 hour rant.. er .. filibuster, Senator Sanders tore apart Conservatives and the successful in America.  Here, Bernie is assaulting the tax compromise as he believes that everyone except small businesses and the wealthy should have their tax rates remain the same as in 2010:

The rich have it all right now–the top 1 percent earns 23 1/2 percent of all income, more than the bottom 50 percent–and it is absurd that we continue to bail out people who do not need any help and who are doing just fine.

Don’t get me wrong. I do not like the tax compromise one bit, but since when is not raising ones taxes a bail out?  This bill does not decrease the amount that anyone will pay, it only says that they will not suffer a tax increase.  These highly-successful  Americans are not asking for a bail out, they are asking to be left alone.  They are asking for you, Senator Sanders, to get your grubby, greedy, selfish mitts off of their personal and private property.  That property protected by the Constitution you so easily disregard when convenient.

The Senator also points to a pillar of progressive philosophy to continue his assault on the biggest investors, job creators and producers in our society.

In 2007, the top 1 percent of all income earners made 23.5 percent of all income. Let me repeat that: The top 1 percent earned over 23 percent of all income; that is, more than the bottom 50 percent.

So Senator Sanders remakes the same point (one he uses repeatedly in the filibuster) but here is saying that 50% of Americans haven’t started their own businesses and been highly successful?  Why not?  Are the 50% being held back by the 1%?  Of course not.  Just because one person is savvy enough to create a business plan and execute it does not somehow make it harder for another person to create their own plan.  Why should the effective entrepreneur be held back by the ineffective one?  Sounds a lot like our lowest common denominator education system.  Coincidence?

So while Bernie makes the point that the top 1% make 23% of income (and pay an even higher percentage in income taxes), he then demonstrates the already highly-progressive tax system we have.

Let us be very clear: This tax applies only–only–to the top three-tenths of 1 percent of American families; 99.7 percent of American families will not pay one nickel in an estate tax. This is not a tax on the rich, this is a tax on the very, very, very rich.

If my Republican friends had been successful in doing what they want to do, which is eliminate this estate tax completely, it would have cost our Treasury–raised the national debt by $1 trillion over a 10-year period. Families such as the Walton family, of Wal-Mart fame, would have received, just this one family, about a $30 billion tax break.

That’s right, 3 tenths of one percent of tax payers are responsible for $1 trillion in tax revenue!!   That only takes into account the death tax.  The money used to purchase these assets was possibly once taxed as income and the asset purchase was probably taxed with sales tax (and an unknown number of federal fees, levies, and other taxes).  So this is possibly the third time those dollars were taxed.

So who are progressive liberals like Senator Sanders helping?  Who are those that need so much government because they cannot help themselves?  Oh, who could forget these takers of Obama stimulus money?

Now, how many jobs do you think those people are going to make with that stimulus cash?

Class warfare is a necessity if the liberal philosophy is to survive.  The most productive, the makers, must be constantly assaulted as if their gains have all been made on the backs of the poor.  The takers must be held on-high so that they can continue their dependence, and therefor allegiance, to the almighty government.

As if to add an exclamation point to the Senator’s diatribe, he made the clearly uninformed point that America supports his point-of-view.

The vast majority of people are behind us on this issue, but they have to make their voices heard to their Senators, to their Congressmen. When they do, I believe we can come forward with an agreement which protects the middle-class and working families and is not a boondoggle for the wealthiest people.

Really?  Polling data and the November election suggests otherwise oh tone deaf warrior for the far-left agenda.  This is their weapon.  Takers take more, makers give more.  If the makers won’t give, they must be evil.  If the takers don’t get more, the wealthy are being stingy.  The only winners in this are the political elite whose power arises on the backs of the poor and blaming their troubles on the successful in our society.  They have their weapon – a massive, ever-growing army of takers rushing headlong against the few remaining makers.  50% vs 1%, the numbers look bleak.

For Every Dollar of Tax Increases – Reagan Awaits His Just Deserts

Tax compromise is all win for progressivesThe tax hike vs. spending debate is getting much attention in the media, but the battle is nothing new.  The progressive Democrats are suddenly concerned about the reduction in revenue that keeping tax rates at their current levels represents – yeah, I know .. maintaining the current tax rates doesn’t reduce anything.  True Conservatives are concerned about the spending increases in the Omnibus bill.  Middle-of-the-road Republicans and Democrats aren’t concerned at all and have had a hay-day putting billions of dollars of earmarks in to the $1 trillion spending bill.

The RINO’s and DINO’s are all thrilled with the tax compromise that was made between the GOP and White House.  What compromise?  To figure that out, let’s first show what each side gave in order to mend the tax rate fence:

According to the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation’s December 10th report, Conservatives gave up:

  • A 35% increase in the “death tax” that will hit family businesses hardest and double-tax money that has already been taxed (increases revenues by an estimated $67 Billion/year)
  • Another 1 year increase in unemployment entitlement spending (increase in spending of an estimated $65 Billion)
  • Biodiesel subsidy continuation – estimated $2 Billion/year in spending
  • Energy efficient home subsidy – about $124 Million/year in spending
  • Alternative fuel subisidy (does not include ethanol) – $202 Million/year in spending
  • Ethanol subsidy – $4.8 Billion/year in spending
  • Energy efficient appliance subsidy – $596 Million/year in spending

Progressives gave up:

  • A tax increase  on everyone, especially on small businesses and the wealthy

What Conservatives picked-up

  • Status quo tax rates (including the marriage penalty)

What Progressives picked-up

  • Massive increase in the “death tax”
  • Status quo on Billions in government subsidies
  • $65 Billion increase in spending on unemployment benefits

Some compromise.  this agreement will cost the citizens of the United States of America an additional $892 Billion/year through 2015 due to run-away spending.  There is a tax increase in this bill and I there are absolutely no spending cuts.  If the left-wing extremists had actually given up something, subsidies on ethanol, biodiesel or other ineffective government spending would have been reduced.  A compromise might have been as simple as a one-for-one spending cut for tax increase.  To put it in historic terms, Reagan once agreed to tax increases only if each dollar of tax increase would be matched by three dollars in spending cuts.

Sometimes Reagan went along with a pragamatist like chief of staff James Baker, who persuaded the president to accept the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA), which turned out to be the great tax increase of 1982 — $98 billion over the next three years. That was too much for eighty-nine House Republicans (including second-term Congressman Newt Gingrich of Georgia) or for prominent conservative organizations from the American Conservative Union like the Conservative Caucus and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which all opposed the measure.

Baker assured his boss that Congress would approve three dollars in spending cuts for every dollar of tax increase. To Reagan, TEFRA looked like a pretty good “70 percent” deal. But Congress wound up cutting less than twenty-seven cents for every new tax dollar. What had seemed to be an acceptable 70-30 compromise turned out to be a 30-70 surrender. Ed Meese described TEFRA as “the greatest domestic error of the Reagan administration,” although it did leave untouched the individual tax rate reductions approved the previous year. (TEFRA was built on a series of business and excise taxes plus the removal of business tax deductions.)

Some things never change.  If we strip away the status quos, this “compromise” increases taxes by $67 Billion/year and increases (not decreases) spending by$65 Billion a year.  To be a Conservative win, this compromise should have resulted in $201 Billion in spending reductions ($3 spending cuts for each $1 of tax increases).  Does anyone really think that if we give Washington D.C. more money, it will somehow result in deficit relief?

Reagan would like his $3 dollars now.

John Boehner’s ‘Chicken Crap’ Congress

We’ve heard of lame ducks, blue dogs, elephants and donkeys in the American version of Animal Farm – Congress.  According to House Speaker-in-Wait John Boehner (R-OH), now the chickens have come to roost .. and poop.

On Thursday, Boehner was remarking on a political maneuver by Current Speaker Nancy Pelosi to push  through a vote on a bill that would raise taxes on small businesses and families making more than $250,000 per year.  His exact response?

I’m trying to catch my breath so I don’t refer to this maneuver that’s going on today as chicken crap. But this is nonsense, right?  The election was one month ago. We’re 23 months from the next election and the games have already started to set up the next election.

This vote is coming while the President and other Democrats are supposedly working in good faith to find a compromise and is direct conflict with what Americans said at the ballot box just last month.  Even worse, 31 House democrats even signed a letter saying that no one’s taxes should be raised at this point in the recovery

Some liberals are trying to make the case that there is no need to bundle a vote on upper tax brackets with those on the lower rates.  They want to vote on some tax hikes now, and the upper-brackets later. After six years of cramming all sorts of unrelated progressive crap into single bills, now they don’t think it’s the way to go?

The takeover of education loans was stufffed into .. health care reform.  Don’t ask, don’t tell was bundled with .. the defense spending authorization.  Those things clearly should have had separate votes.  Here, it’s all about income tax.  All of it.

Leaving the upper-bracket tax decision until a later date will leave uncertainly in precisely the part of the economy that can not tolerate any more ambiguity – small business owners.  Tax tables are already formulated with everyone experiencing the Obama-Reid-Pelosi tax hike of 2011.  Kicking one bracket of taxes down the road, just to serve the far-left progressive agenda will mean that everyone would be forced to eat the liberal’s tax increase.

To the rescue .. Senate Republicans.  Just a few days ago, 41 Senate GOP members signed a letter saying that legislation such as this would be struck down.  So when Pelosi’s sheeple in the House pass this mess, it will die in the Senate, if not in committee.  Nancy should certainly realize this, so with 435 members all making $174,000 per year.  This waste of a day on Congress cost Americans an estimated $320,000 dollars.  More importantly it cost a Congress with precious few days left – one day.

Thanks for concentrating on what Americans need Speaker Pelosi.  Just Thanks for not only a lame “lame duck” session, but also one quite full of “chicken crap”.

Get ready for Obama’s Taxes

“Spectacles, testicles, watch and wallet.” – Yeah, that’s it! That’s a pretty good interpretation of the opening verse of Michelle Obama’s prayer to the spirits as she is busy cleaning them up. I can’t argue with that verbiage – it expresses the very essence of redistributive change. They cover it all; up top, down below, up front, and backside. They’ve got you coming and going. Talk about a pickpocket’s prayer!

No wonder Obama considers himself a Christian. Uncle Sam - Pay your taxes!Yes, it is true, and he specifically proclaims allegiance to the First United Church of the Kingdom – Youth Outreach Universal. Think about it – a lot. Services begin January 1, 2011. A special dedicatory prayer circle is planned for April 15th with special high Holy days scheduled throughout the year.

Speaking of Michelle, something Wiccan this way comes! And I’m not talking Christine O’Donnell! No, this is better. Personal income tax rates are scheduled to rise in 2011. Why, you ask? Simple, Nancy Pelosi just couldn’t bring herself to bring up a vote on extending the Bush tax cuts. Therefore, personal income tax rates will rise come January 1, 2011. Now, I seem to remember Barack Obama claiming that nobody earning less than $250,000 a year was going to see any tax increases at all. And I believed that? Sheesh! Here’s the lowdown:

  • The 10% bracket rises to an expanded 15%
  • The 25% bracket rises to 28%
  • The 28% bracket rises to 31%
  • The 33% bracket rises to 36%
  • The 35% bracket rises to 39.6%

This next one is something both gays and straights will come to appreciate. There are going to be higher taxes on marriage and families.  The “marriage penalty” (narrower tax brackets for married couples) is set to return from the first dollar of income. What’s more, the child tax credit will be cut in half from $1,000 to $500 per child. Compounding the fun is that the standard deduction will no longer be doubled for married couples relative to the single level. Finally, both the dependent care and adoption tax credits will be cut. Feel better now?

You think the Democrats got you by the cajones while you are alive? Try death, instead. Beginning January 1, 2011 a 55 percent top death tax rate will be assessed on all estates valued in excess of $1 million. Leave behind too large of an estate and instead of your heirs receiving your estate they will instead inherit a tax bill. Thanks Barack! Halleluiah!

They even carved out the Charlie Crist Memorial Tax Increase for those orange people who prefer to catch some rays down at the local tanning salon. What, pray tell is that? I’ll tell you! It is a brand spanking new 10% excise tax on getting your hide tanned at your local salon. Sure to make sure you share in the experience, there is no exemption from this tax for those unfortunate crispy critters earning less than $250,000 per year. And just to make sure you felt the love, this tax is already in effect. You’re been paying for it since last July 1st. We’re not worthy, Obama! Our legs are all tingly and stuff. Must be Christ Matthews syndrome.

Still feel left out? No need to worry! If you save or invest part of your income you’re going to be slapped with yet another tax – This time for being thrifty. Obama, in his wisdom, has decreed that the capital gains tax will rise from 15 percent in 2010 to 20 percent in 2011. And just in time for the recession, how thoughtful of our glorious leader, all blessings are upon his name! And not to be outdone, the dividends tax is zooming all the way from 15 percent in 2010 to 39.6 percent in 2011. But wait, there’s more! Those rates aren’t high enough. In 2013 they are scheduled to increase yet another 3.8 percent. Oh, blessed art thou, most benevolent and wise Barry. May the very angels in Heaven shout for joy at the mere thought of your graciousness!

Thanks to the good folks over at ObamaCare come January 1, 2011 you will no longer be able to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except for insulin) without a prescription (makes sense, huh?) and pay for it with your Health Savings Account (HSA), Flexible Spending Account (FSA), or Health Reimbursement Account (HRA) pre-tax dollars. Thank you Barry!

But wait, there’s more! Don’t get the idea that you can withdraw funds early from an HSA account because the tax penalty for doing that is being doubled from 10 percent to 20 percent. This puts HSA accounts at a disadvantage to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which will remain at 10 percent.

Think you’re getting off easy? Think again! Starting January 1, 2011 ObamaCare imposes a Brand Name Drug Tax. This will be a multi-billion dollar tax assessment imposed on name-brand drug manufacturers. Hope you don’t need prescriptions next year, because you are going to pay through the nose for each and every pill.

And let us not think that the IRS has to play by the same rules you do. The IRS is being empowered to disallow legal tax deductions simply on the basis that your claim to a deduction lacks “economic substance.” Think of it as redistribution of wealth. Now the government, via the IRS, is going to ensure you get screwed, even if you follow their rules to the letter. How thoughtful!

And, yet another little goodie has been slipped into your 2011 tax year W-2 form just for giggles. There will be a new box on that form in which employers will be required to report their costs incurred in providing you with your health insurance. Okay, this isn’t a tax…drum roll please…yet! It will be extremely easy for the IRS to slam you with a health insurance benefit tax now that they have the numbers. Oh, yeah, remember the “economic substance” policy. They are going to get you one way or another.

Think we’re done listing all the new taxes yet? Au Contraire! Here are a few more precious little gems awaiting you in 2011:

  • You will no longer be allowed to make charitable contributions from your IRA.
  • Tax benefits for Education and Teaching will be trimmed. The deduction for tuition and fees will not be available. Tax credits for education will be limited. Teachers won’t be able to deduct classroom expenses. The Coverdell Education Savings Accounts will be cut. Employer-provided education assistance is curtailed. And the student loan interest deduction will be disallowed for hundreds of thousands of families.
  • Business taxes are going up. There are scads of new taxes being levied on businesses. The biggest hit is in the loss of the Research and Experimentation Tax Credit – but there are a lot of other ones too.
  • Small business expensing will be slashed and 50% expensing will disappear. Small businesses currently can expense equipment purchases up to $250,000. Not any more – the new limit in 2011 is only $25,000.  For larger businesses, they will no longer be able to expense anything…they will have no choice but to depreciate those types of expenses.
  • The Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) is going to ensnare a lot more families. Last year it trapped 4 million families. The estimate for 2011 (estimate provided by the left-leaning Tax Policy Center) is that 28 million families will now be subjected to the AMT.

A certain congressman seems to have gotten it right earlier this year at the State of the Union address. Obama, you lie! The only consolation is that when these new taxes smack the taxpayers upside the head that the Tea Party Movement is going to gather steam and roll right into the 2012 elections. Then it will be time for the taxpayers to get even with Obama and his socialist henchmen and slap THEM upside the head. Amen to that!

New Video Debunks Claim that Tax Hikes are Required to Balance the Budget

First we have to deal with this absolute mis-information campaign from the White House Blog.  Where they try to show that they really aren’t that evil for considering enacting the largest tax increase in American history: Obama’s Tax Hike of January 1st, 2011.

One of the major points that they try to make with the blog entry is that we can’t afford to not tax the wealthy .. double negatives are even harder to prove than negatives.

We simply can’t afford to give the wealthiest Americans these big tax cuts that would add to our deficit and, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, be just about the least effective way to grow our economy and help create jobs.

Thankfully, we have the folks at the Center for Freedom and Proseperity to answer with reason and logic.  CF&P today released a video that dispels the myth that only tax increases can reduce deficits.

Progressive Economics – An Oxymoron

The wealthy should pay a much larger share of taxes than the poor – the election year mantra for the extreme left.  Unfortunately for them .. it’s all they have.

Turning the most-successful members of our society into voodoo dolls is silly, but effective.  Certainly those that make more should pay more, but it should not be so ridiculously over-weighted against the top workers in our economy.

I’m not running for office, so I can say it straight – quit turning successful Americans into monsters – EVERYONE should pay their fair share.  That’s just common sense, but is it the right fight?

What really gets my goat (no I don’t actually have a goat) is that the right isn’t fighting the good fight.  Yes, fight the tax increases the left is proposing, but make a much stronger and publicly-visible statement on spending.  I don’t want to see another balanced-budget amendment – it’s far too late for that.  Now we need a positive cash-flow amendment.  Why aren’t the Republicans proposing that every budget approved by Congress MUST be 10%+ under projected revenues.  That forces the government to have a 10% savings rate.  That’s 10% that will go to pay back the debt or pay back Social Security (because these morons have already stolen every dollar that it managed to save up).

If the GOP can’t absolutely commit to ZERO earmarks and a positively-funded budget amendment, talking about tax cuts is of limited value.  If they can change the conversation to spending, it’s the spendocrats that will be on their heels – even more so than now.  Take the fight to them!

The reasons the extremist left focuses on tax cuts for the rich is to make it palatable to raise taxes on the smallest group of tax payers – the wealthy.  Once they’ve raised their taxes, the next wealthiest will find themselves in the cross-hairs of government revenue – then the next lowest group, and the next, and the next – until no one is left.  Each progressive tax hike takes one more group out of the fight.  “Don’t tax me and don’t tax thee, tax the man behind the tree” – Senator Russel Long had it right all along.

This is the progressive economic strategy – tax and spend.  It’s Keynesian, authoritarian and proving to fail at every turn.  Proggies know they can’t just raise taxes on everyone at once, so they do it one little bunch at a time.  If any one group in America tolerates a tax increase on any other .. they will soon find themselves having a tax levied upon them that everyone else tolerates.

The liberals idea is that somehow stealing from the top earners to have the government pay to clean some silly statue or pay for a cow fart study does more to help our economy  than just letting that earner hire people to do more work – or even the same work – yup, silly.

If Americans want to get mad, how about the nearly half of all citizens that pay NOTHING?  According to an AP article published on Yahoo! Finance

About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability. That’s according to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research organization.

Why isn’t anyone mad at them?  A family that makes as much as $50,000/year paid ZERO income tax in 2009.  Why?  Progressive economics.

While I totally agree that someone making $50,000 (not chump change) should pay less than someone that makes $150,000, I think they should absolutely pay something.  There is a major issue with someone voting for representatives when they have no skin in the game.

Sure, our founding fathers had an issue with taxation without representation, but shouldn’t we have an equal issue of representation of the untaxed?  Having a voting population that may elect an official that pours on the spending and votes to tax groups that are not in his/her district is unconscionable .. and it’s being done today.

Low income districts tend to vote in anyone that promises them more government programs and federal assistance.  Those same candidates would never consider taxing anyone making under $50,000 – something for nothing, and your votes for free.

Everyone must pay something if we ever want our government to return to responsibility.  Which means they would have to pull back spending on ridiculous programs, like a 2 year long unemployment benefit. Joblessness will then drop.  If joblessness drops, tax revenue will increase.