Obama will tax the ‘blackest/whitest” 2%?
Feb0
Imagine if President Obama proposed taxing the blackest or whitest or gayest or straightest or most religious 2% of all citizens at a higher rate than the rest of the population. Would anyone stand for picking on a minority like that? Would anyone stand for singling people out like that?
Now replace blackest/whitest/gayest/straightest/most religious with something like “most talented” or “most successful” and no one has a problem with it.
So much for the concept of equal treatment under the law. So much for equality.
Freedom is endowed by our creator, every person’s right, and results in the most efficient system available. Increased government control limits your freedom and eventually it will limit it enough that you have none left and it will be too late to respond.
Obama, Geithner, and Daschle’s rules for the IRS
Feb0
No one making less than $250,000 under Barack Obama’s plan will see one single penny of their tax raised
Oct0
No one making less than $250,000 under Barack Obama’s plan will see one single penny of their tax raised, whether it’s their capital gains tax, their income tax, investment tax, any tax.
Joe Biden during Vice Presidential Debate, October 2, 2008
Obama Advisors want higher gas taxes…
May0
“If anything, we need higher gas taxes.” – Alice Rivlin, former Clinton White House budget office, now Barack Obama supporter, May 6, 2008
Hillary Clinton and John McCain agree that the Federal gas tax should be eliminated for the summer. Barack Obama advisors argue for a higher gas taxes. Experience shows that one who is willing to raise one tax or not cut taxes is much more likely to raise others.
Hey Rivlin, it is our money. Donate more if you wish yourself. Put your money where your mouth is, or is that too much to ask?
Patrick Henry needs a bit of revision today!
Feb0
My liberal cousin ends his emails with this wonderful Patrick Henry quotation:
” . . . I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death! – March 23, 1775″
All the while he supports policies such as these:
1. Government run health care. So much for the freedom of doctors and patients to work together on their fees and treatments. You’ll be told what health care you can have and the doctor will be told how much he or she will be paid for it. Patrick Henry would want freedom for both. (Yes, insurance needs to be reformed, but again, the answer is freedom – freedom for insurance companies and people to buy from each other instead of having the government stand between the two. And freedom to take your insurance with you if you change jobs.)
2. Minimum wages – there is no freedom to negotiate your own wage. Both the employer and employee are restricted by government. Patrick Henry would not like this.
3. Redistribution of earnings. Let us say exactly what this means instead of using double-talk: you take some money from someone who works and give it to someone who needs it, supposedly, more than you do. Instead of you owning the products of your labors by right, you own them by sufferance of the majority. Patrick Henry would not like that and neither would the Constitution.
So, Patrick Henry needs a little revision today because although Patrick wanted liberty for everyone, today’s liberals only seem to want it for approved people and approved areas:
. . . I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me AND EVERYONE ELSE liberty, or give me death!
The liberal version seems to be:
. . . I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me AND NO ONE ELSE unless I approve of them liberty, or give me death!
The only answer is freedom and that implies an economic system that is based on freedom. There is no debate between capitalism and statism, it is a debate between freedom and statism. And statism is any philosophy that uses the state to greatly restrict your freedom to live your life as you please.
Remember that ‘business’ does not pay taxes, they merely collect them from the consumers and pass them along to Washington. Businesses pass along any taxes to you. The rhetoric behind “tax business” is obfuscation to get more money for Washington to spend in trying to buy your vote.
Barack Obama-’I deserve a tax increase’
Nov0
“And [Buffett] has said, and I think a lot of us who have been fortunate are willing to pay a little bit more to make sure that a senior citizen who is struggling to deal with rising property taxes or rising heating bills, that they’ve got the coverage that they need.” Barack Obama, November 11, 2007 (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/11/11/obama-i-deserve-a-tax-increase/)
Barack, just as we said to Warren Buffett – if you really believe what you say about paying more in taxes, why haven’t you been doing so? No one is stopping you. So, why haven’t you paid more for the past 2 or 10 years? Why aren’t you starting to pay more today? The Social (In)Security System would love it. The hypocrisy continues.Just remember that Congress’ retirement does NOT come from Social Security, Senator Obama. What does Congress know that they don’t want the rest of us to know?
AMT, Republicans and Socialist Charles Rangel
Oct0
With all the grousing about the AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax) and the plans to ?¢‚Ǩ?ìdo something?¢‚Ǩ¬ù about it, the following factors must be considered. Charles Rangel, Democratic Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s plan is to raise taxes (don?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t worry, you won?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t be left out) elsewhere to ?¢‚Ǩ?ìpay for?¢‚Ǩ¬ù reducing the AMT. First, Charles, you don?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t have to borrow money to ?¢‚Ǩ?ìpay for?¢‚Ǩ¬ù a tax cut. You borrow money to spend. Everything else is just dissembling and an attempt to confuse people. Power-hungry politicians love to use words like that
Buffett says taxes are too low, but doesn’t pay more himself
Oct0
Echoing his comments in June, Warren Buffett is complaining about tax rates as being too low. The relevant question is: has he done anything about it or is he just being a hypocrite, again?
Let?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s see what Buffett has actually done instead of said: Buffett is giving away is fortune (http://money.cnn.com/2006/06/25/magazines/fortune/charity1.fortune/). Good for him, great choice, it is nice that he has the right and freedom to do as he sees fit with the money he has earned. Too bad Buffett doesn’t think that others should have that same freedom.
What precisely is Buffett doing? He is giving his fortune to tax-exempt foundations. So, if you REALLY want to pay more taxes, Warren, why do this?
Warren Buffett attacks tax rates as being too low?
Jun1
“Mr Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent.” (see Times Online article)
Sounds like Warren Buffett has a perfect argument to lower his secretary’s tax rate to 17.7% (or lower). How about that Warren? Of course, that is unlikely to happen since Buffett has made his stance clear – that he wants everyone to pay MORE taxes, not less.
Brian Lamb of C-SPAN and the meaning of “give”
Jun0
Brian Lamb of CSPAN obviously has no idea what the meaning of the word ?¢‚Ǩ?ìgive?¢‚Ǩ¬ù is.
Politico.com quotes him as stating:
?¢‚Ǩ?ìWe are not a taxpayer organization ?¢‚Ǩ¬¶ We get no federal funds, state funds, local funds. We get our money from you. You give us a nickel a month when you pay your bills, and that’s how we operate here.?¢‚Ǩ¬ù
(See the original article here.)
Brian, to ?¢‚Ǩ?ìgive?¢‚Ǩ¬ù means FREELY transfer. Somehow I missed where I could opt out of my monthly ?¢‚Ǩ?ìgift?¢‚Ǩ¬ù to you. We may pay it in return for supposedly unbiased coverage, but we don’t “give” it. Please consider this a request to opt out and for a refund of my previous “gifts.”