Showing posts with label Taxes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Taxes. Show all posts

Make Voluntary Sterilization A Requirement for Welfare

So this judge in Tennessee got in big trouble last year for offering inmates in his county a 30 day reduction in their jail sentence if they volunteered for a sterilization procedure:

“When Judge Sam Benningfield of White County, Tenn., offered to shave off jail time for inmates who volunteered for sterilization, a chorus of attorneys, advocates and public officials reacted with horror.”

Horror? Why?

“Benningfield said his goal was to break a ‘vicious cycle’ of repeat drug offenders with children. But many argued that the proposal, outlined in a May order, was nothing short of eugenics.”

Psssh. What’s so horrible about eugenics?

Having more physically and mentally healthy people?

Don’t get me wrong, I am not supporting forced sterilization of anyone, which would be an intolerable violation of their life and liberty, but this program was completely voluntary.

No one was being threatened with 30 additional days in confinement if they didn’t comply.

They were already sentenced to those 30 days for a crime they had committed. These inmates were being offered 30 days off their sentence and a free contraceptive procedure if they wanted it. They were free to say no and serve out the sentence they were already sentenced to serve out regardless.

This judge just gave inmates more options.

“Civil rights lawyers brought legal actions and a local prosecutor told his staff to avoid the judge’s program at all costs.

Now, after the wave of backlash and amid multiple lawsuits, state judicial regulators have formally reprimanded Benningfield for promising 30-day sentence reductions to inmates who agreed to receive vasectomies or birth control implants.”

Everybody was worried that offering a 30 day reduction in their sentence would be unduly coercing them, but it’s not coercion.

It’s offering an additional incentive to get a free health care procedure that most people have to pay good money for and that Sandra Fluke wishes she could have gotten as a student at Georgetown University Law School.

Democrats mobilized to ThreatCon1 over Sandra Fluke’s right to get a private university to cover her contraceptive costs, then a judge in Tennessee offers it to prison inmates for free plus reducing their sentences and everybody loses their minds.

This guy should have been like the Bernie Sanders style socialism movement’s hero or something.

Maybe some of those inmates actually don’t want to have any kids in the future, and would have been happy to have their sentence reduced plus free permanent contraption.

Any of them who do want to have kids were free to decline and serve out their sentence, not as a punishment for declining the sterilization procedure, but because they were already sentenced to serve those days in confinement anyway.

That doesn’t look like coercion to me.

There is a clear distinction between coercive, tyrannical eugenics that violates people’s liberty, and a libertarian eugenics that would actually decrease the amount of coercion and tyranny in our society while also promoting a more healthy population.

An example of the latter kind would be making voluntary sterilization a requirement to receive welfare benefits.

My argument is simple:

Read the rest at The Humble Libertarian.

Xavier Seen Such a Dishonest California Politician?

Californians aren’t braindead, although you’d never know it from the quality of public officials they send to Sacramento year after year. And here’s proof of it: liberal California politicians have to lie constantly to maintain their power, lest the common people they so disdain rise up against them. Case in point:

There is a ballot initiative coming up for a vote soon to repeal the onerous added gasoline tax to be added in November. The tax would add an additional twelve cents a gallon to gasoline that is already the highest priced in the nation. Fine. Let the voters decide. That’s the democratic way isn’t it? Let informed voters made the decision. It’s that whole “informed” part that Democrat pols don’t trust you with.

The office of the top law enforcement official in the state, Attorney General Xavier Becerra, D-Ishonest, is responsible for writing the official summary of the ballot measure, which is supposed to be an impartial description of the measure. (Stop laughing!) Becerra, who, had he been around when the saying “Crooked as a dog’s hind leg”was written, might have been the maxim maker’s model.

AG Becerra wrote the summary of a repeal of a regressive tax measure (minorities and poor hardest hit) without managing to use either the word “tax” or “fee” to describe it. In fact, it is so egregious that he is being sued because of it. Republican Travis Allen, remarkably a Republican, is suing Becerra for misrepresenting the initiative, casting it as an effort to, and I quote, “eliminate recently enacted road repair and transportation funding”. The bastards!! The money fairies brought Californians cash to repair their roads, and some big meanies are trying to take it away from us!

And by “us”, of course, he means the State Government, and the magic money fairies are you, every time you fill up your gas tank.

The stakes are high. The 43%, twelve cent a gallon hike in taxes, and the twenty cent a gallon hike in diesel fuel are expected to bring in $5 Billion (with a “B”) a year. And as far as regressive taxes on the poor, this one has a double whammy, because everything you buy in the stores comes in on a truck. Your groceries, hardware, clothing, shoes, even your Amazon order, is transported at least in part by a truck or series of trucks. If the cost of fuel goes up, the prices of all those goods must go up at least incrementally. So in addition to paying more in gas to go to work, or to the store, or on vacation, you’ll be paying more for everything you buy. Everything. You’ll then find it harder to make ends meet and put food on the table and all the Democrat politicians will tell you it’s those evil corporations that are stealing you blind. Right.

So, even though most of California’s reputation is well deserved, remember this: we’re not all braindead out here, and the politicians even have to lie to the ones who are to keep themselves in power. .

Obama: Class warfare charge is ‘Badge of Honor’

By the Full Metal Patriot

On Monday, President Obama disingenuously claimed that raising taxes on the wealthy is “not class warfare, it’s math.”

By Tuesday evening, he was admitting at a DNC fundraiser that he’s all about class warfare.

…Nobody wants to punish success — that’s what you here when they try to respond to what should be some pretty obvious logic. Nobody wants to punish success in America.  That’s what’s great about America — our belief that anybody can make if you try.  Anybody can open a business, have a great idea, go out there and make millions, make billions.  This is the land of opportunity.  It’s why people came to New York.  All I’m saying is that those who have done well, including the majority of people here tonight, we should pay our fair share in taxes.  (Applause.)  Contribute to the nation that made our success possible.  Pass it on — pass on opportunity.

And I think most wealthy Americans would agree if they knew that this would help us grow the economy and deal with the debt that threatens our future, and put people back to work.

See, I got some Amen’s right here.


THE PRESIDENT:  This is a completely unbiased sampling.  (Laughter.)

Now, you’re already hearing the Republicans in Congress dusting off the old talking points.  You can write their press releases.  “Class warfare,” they say.  You know what, if asking a billionaire to pay the same rate as a plumber or a teacher makes me a warrior for the middle class, I wear that charge as a badge of honor. (Applause.)  I wear it as a badge of honor.  (Applause.)  Because the only class warfare I’ve seen is the battle that’s been waged against middle-class folks in this country for a decade now.
Sorry, Dear Leader. You’re completely wrong about billionaires paying less than a plumber or teacher. You’re distorting the truth and you damn well know it. Comparing investment taxes with income taxes is apples and oranges. And your lie is so odious, even the Associated Press had to fact-check you on it.
President Barack Obama says he wants to make sure millionaires are taxed at higher rates than their secretaries. The data say they already are.

“Warren Buffett’s secretary shouldn’t pay a higher tax rate than Warren Buffett. There is no justification for it,” Obama said as he announced his deficit-reduction plan this week. “It is wrong that in the United States of America, a teacher or a nurse or a construction worker who earns $50,000 should pay higher tax rates than somebody pulling in $50 million.”

On average, the wealthiest people in America pay a lot more taxes than the middle class or the poor, according to private and government data. They pay at a higher rate, and as a group, they contribute a much larger share of the overall taxes collected by the federal government.

The 10 percent of households with the highest incomes pay more than half of all federal taxes. They pay more than 70 percent of federal income taxes, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

…This year, households making more than $1 million will pay an average of 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes, including income taxes, payroll taxes and other taxes, according to the Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank.

Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will pay an average of 15 percent of their income in federal taxes.

Lower-income households will pay less. For example, households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will pay an average of 12.5 percent of their income in federal taxes. Households making between $20,000 and $30,000 will pay 5.7 percent.

The latest IRS figures are a few years older — and limited to federal income taxes — but show much the same thing. In 2009, taxpayers who made $1 million or more paid on average 24.4 percent of their income in federal income taxes, according to the IRS.

Those making $100,000 to $125,000 paid on average 9.9 percent in federal income taxes. Those making $50,000 to $60,000 paid an average of 6.3 percent.

Obama’s claim hinges on the fact that, for high-income families and individuals, investment income is often taxed at a lower rate than wages. The top tax rate for dividends and capital gains is 15 percent. The top marginal tax rate for wages is 35 percent, though that is reserved for taxable income above $379,150.
This whole class warfare thing is a limp distraction from Obama’s inept performance in office. He has no new ideas. And the ideas he’s implemented have failed miserably. All he can do now is try to distract people with the canard that someone has more than they do, and as president he will take more from them and spread it around.

Obama is spreading something, all right. But it’s certainly not fairness.

Cross-posted at Full Metal Patriot

On International Talk Like A Pirate Day, Captain Obama seeks more plunder (a.k.a. higher taxes)

By the Full Metal Patriot

How fitting that President Obama chose to give his latest “tax the wealthy” speech on International Talk Like A Pirate Day, because like any good pirate, he’s all about plundering!

President Obama, drawing immediate condemnation from congressional Republicans, unveiled a new deficit reduction plan Monday anchored by $1.5 trillion in new taxes, including an end to Bush-era rates for upper income earners making $250,000 or more and additional taxes on millionaires.

Keying in on a populist message that millionaires and billionaires should pay more in taxes than their secretaries, the president announced a plan in the Rose Garden that includes more than $2 trillion total in entitlement cuts and tax increases over the next decade.

Together with spending cuts enacted last month and projected savings from interest payments, the savings in the president’s plan total more than $3 trillion. The Obama administration is also adding on another $1 trillion in savings over 10 years from winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, though that kind of accounting has been dismissed in past debates as a gimmick.

The $4 trillion effort is tied to his American Jobs Act, aimed at putting nearly 14 million unemployed back to work. Critics have stated that targeting job creators — the top 1 percent pays 38 percent of the tax burden, according to 2008 estimates — won’t help the jobless find employment.

In a combative set of remarks, the president vowed to veto any package that cuts into Medicare without raising “serious revenues” from wealthy Americans and corporations. He effectively dared Republicans to follow through on their no-tax-hike pledge as the deficit committee works under a strict timeline to find at least $1.2 trillion in deficit savings by Thanksgiving.

“We can’t just cut our way out of this hole. It’s going to take a balanced approach,” Obama said. “It’s only right that we ask everyone to pay their fair share.”

The most controversial part of the plan was already shaping up to be the proposed tax increases.
Once again, Obama completely denies that his proposal to increase taxes on the wealthy is class warfare. But what he’s doing is a textbook exercise in it. His speeches are peppered with Democrat boilerplate language such as “pay their fair share,” as if the wealthy don’t already shoulder a disproportionate share of income taxes. And as if the rich don’t “need” everything they’ve earned, so that makes it ok to continually go back and force them to pay an increasingly greater percentage of their income.

The solution to America’s stalled economy is NOT to extract an additional $1.5 trillion dollars from it! In 2009, Obama clearly stated, “You don’t raise taxes in a recession”:

So what has changed since 2009 to cause Obama to change his mind? In a word: re-election.

Today’s speech, and the ones that have followed his Jobs Speech grandstanding before a joint session of Congress, are intended to do nothing more than anger Liberals with the notion that someone, somewhere, has more than they do. And to assure them that Cap’n Hopenchange will raid the coffers of the wealthy, make ‘em walk the plank, and redistribute the loot to all faithful Democrats. Today’s so-called “Plan for Economic Growth and Deficit Reduction” is just another election campaign maneuver, designed to placate Obama’s angry voter base with some “fairness” red meat. It’s not as though this form of economic fail hasn’t been seen before:
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess of the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.” (This quote has been attributed to both Alexis de Tocqueville and Sir Alex Fraser Tytler)
It’s a good thing America is a representative republic, not a democracy. Still, all this class warfare rhetoric from the Democrat Party leans us dangerously in the direction of the latter. Republican candidate Herman Cain immediately keelhauled Obama’s tax & spend bilge:
Today, the Obama Administration’s assault on the private sector continued. In yet another speech, he called for America’s job creators to shoulder an even heavier burden than they must already. President Obama promised that his efforts were not “class warfare,” but instead “math.”

Perhaps he could learn a lesson or two on math from me. I have a degree in mathematics and spent the earlier days of my career as a supervisory mathematician for the Department of the Navy. Then, I worked for 40 years as an executive in the private sector where I balanced budgets, saved failing companies and created jobs. Both obviously demanded a command of advanced mathematics.

Here’s what I can tell him about math: raising taxes on anyone, no matter their income level, will do nothing to stimulate our economy, create jobs or balance our federal budget. Increasing taxes on the private sector will destroy jobs, further damaging our economy and sending even less revenue to the federal government.

His eagerness to punish the private sector indicates he doesn’t understand the most important truth of basic economics: the private sector creates jobs. These are the jobs that pay for the food for our families, the roofs over our heads, the heat for our homes, the clothes on our backs, the schools for our kids and the plans for our retirement.

Perhaps his ignorance of basic economics is due to the fact that both he and more than 90 percent of his Administration have no private sector experience at all. Thus, they are all too willing to continually punish America’s job creators, all in the name of “fairness.”

President Obama’s once said, “You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.” I agree. It doesn’t matter that he calls it “paying your fair share.” It’s still class warfare.
Leslie Carbone penned an excellent piece which makes the a moral case against spreading the wealth:
There are two principal reasons why the federal government should not be in the business of wealth redistribution.

First, government imposed wealth redistribution doesn’t work:  It doesn’t create, or even spread prosperity, it dampens it.  Second, redistribution is not the legitimate purpose of government. Governments are not instituted to spread the wealth around, to make life “fair” or easy or comfortable, to synthesize equality of opportunity, or even to create jobs or growth or prosperity.

As the Declaration of Independence famously declares, governments are instituted among men to insure the preservation of the inalienable rights given to men by their creator. Those rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Once these rights are secure, American history demonstrates that the free market does a magnificent job of providing jobs, economic growth and prosperity.

The American Government exists to protect free people from theft, harm or another violation of their rights. We have given our government the power of the sword to exercise this important function and the power of the purse to pay for it.

But progressive taxation, and redistributionary spending, actually violate our rights.  When government engages in wealth redistribution–when it seizes from some citizens, simply because they have acquired more than others–it becomes a thing quite monstrous, perverting its own function and abusing the power that it has been granted to maintain.  It also ends up suppressing prosperity, diverting resources from where they do the most good, adding unnecessary transaction costs, and diminishing capital, business, job, and wage growth.

Government imposed redistribution does moral harm as well.  First, wealth redistribution discourages the virtuous behavior that creates wealth:  hard work, saving, investment, personal responsibility.  In the natural order, virtue and vice carry their own consequences. Virtue yields largely positive results. Hard work, patience, and orderliness, for example, tend to generate prosperity. Vice, on the other hand, brings negative consequences. Sloth, impatience, and recklessness lead to suffering.  By taxing the fruits of the virtuous behavior that creates wealth, government redistribution discourages that behavior.

Our progressive tax system also takes too much money—not just from the so-called rich but also from the middle class—diminishing their economic, and thus their moral, freedom.  When government seizes from a family or individual more than is necessary to protect their rights, it diminishes their economic freedom, their capacity to act as responsible moral agents, and to do what they believe is right, including giving to those in need.
She makes an excellent case. The notion of “fairness” as espoused by Democrats is rarely tackled on a moral level, but Ms. Carbone does it well. Read the whole thing.

Cross-posted at Full Metal Patriot

US Taxpayers Kick In $780 Million To Bail Out Greece

By Chris W
The Libertarian Patriot

That’s right, as part of the bailout of Greece, the IMF will borrow $780M from the Fed at the bargain basement price of 0.25% and which is probably considerably less than what we are paying China to buy Treasuries.

So while Leviathan quibbles over the debt ceiling, unemployment rises and more and more Americans are relying on government handouts, those of us who are still contributing to the system are being asked to give our hard earned money to a country that couldn’t manage it’s own affair and is on the verge of collapse.

Once again, the real winners of this are the hedge funds that have been buying Greek debt at 40 cents on the dollar and will be paid the interest on their notes from the bailout. Yes these are the same hedge funds that made out big when Lehman collapsed and Wall Street got bailed out.

So for those of you keeping score at home, we are borrowing money from China to lone to the IMF (at a loss) to bailout Greece so that they can pay the hedge funds that own their debt, on the backs of the US taxpayer.

What a great country we are.

Zero Hedge
The IMF is delighted to announce that it just approved a €3.2 billion disbursement of cash for Greece, its fifth, as part of the €12 billion in money that Greece needs in order to continue operating in the months f July and August. And just for what purpose will this money be used, one may ask? Well, as explained a few weeks ago, in Greek Math: €12 Billion In, €18.2 Billion Out the entire amount will be promptly recycled by global financial institutions in the form of debt maturities and interest payments, which amount to €18.2 billion in the months of July and August. Simply said ECB, EU and IMF money in, money owed to bankers out. The kicker: 17.09% of the money coming from the IMF, comes from, that’s right dear US taxpayer, you (and since 21% of the quota contributions allocated to the IMF are deemed “non-usable”, the actual number funded by the US is likely much higher). But this plot has a bonus kicker: as we reported on Wednesday, the actual Greek debt is no longer owed by European banks to the extent it had been previously expected: a development that threatens to scuttle the entire second Greek bailout plan as currently proposed. So as the banks have been selling Greek debt, who has been buying? Mostly hedge funds, such as everyone’s favorite John Paulson. So to recap: US taxpayers have just paid out about $780 million of the $4.6 billion in order to fund interest owed to… hedge funds.

Tax the Rich… Classic Class Envy

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism

And the class warfare goes on, and on, and on. The progressive Moonbattery {following} continues.

You can tell something’s happening in the economic policy debate when you start reading more things like AEI’s Arthur Brooks explaining that it would simply be unfair to raise taxes on the rich. Harvard economics professor and former Council of Economics Advisor chairman Greg Mankiw has said the same thing. And of course Representative Paul Ryan is both a fan of Brooks and a fan of the works of Ayn Rand. Which is just to say that we used to have a debate in which the left said redistributive taxation might be a good idea and then the right replied that it might sound good, but actually the consequences would be bad. Lower taxes on the rich would lead to more growth and faster increase in incomes.

Now that idea seems to be so unsupportable that the talking point is switched. It’s not that higher taxes on our Galtian Overlords would backfire and make us worse off. It’s just that it would be immoral of us to ask them to pay more taxes even if doing so would, in fact, improve overall human welfare.

If that sounds remotely plausible to you, you might have a lucrative career ahead of you working as an apologist for said Galtian Overlords. If not, then congratulations for possessing a modicum of common sense.

The idea that the wealthy ought to pay more in taxes, IE: a higher marginal rate, is simply morally wrong. The belief that those who are more successful economical should be taxed at a much higher rate {in other words punished for their success) defies objective logic. It is the product of class envy and is the rallying cry of the progressive socialists and neo Marxist in our society.

Each individual is entitled to reap the maximum benefit of their labor and industry. The fruits of that labor ought to be taxed at the same marginal rate regardless of income generated or received. Lets, for the sake of argument use the following example using a 15% rate to keep it simple.
  • Income earner #1 – $50,000 income @ 15% = $7,500 income tax
  • Income earner #2 – $250,000 income @ 15% = 37,500 income tax
  • Income earner #3 – $1,000,000 income @ 15% = $150,000 income tax
  • Income earner # 4 -$2,500,000 income @ 15% = $375,000 income tax 
What is needed is a reformed tax code where everyone is taxed at a reasonable {and same} marginal rate. Loopholes that benefit the wealthy and businesses should be closed. This would generate significant revenue that is now lost through loopholes and government subsidies. And yes, with respect to businesses, the idiotic argument of to big to fail needs to be removed from our lexicon.

The real issue, the one progressive conveniently chose to ignore is this, it is indeed immoral for the governemnt to extract a greater share of the labor and industry of the very successful at the point of a gun held to their head just because they have achieved greater financial success.

Simplify the tax code and close the loopholes. And by the way, cut unnecessary and duplicative spending, cut the defense budget, reduce foreign welfare, and restructure entitlements. It’s that simple, yet remains complicated for some.

More at Modeled Behavior.

Cross posted to Rational Nation USA

Via: Memeorandum

Tea Party Ignored, Maligned and now Exaggerated?


by the Left Coast Rebel

The Left Coast Rebel‘s inception into the conservative blogging hall of fame (or shame) was a post about the “Boston Tea Party, 2009.” It was my first post. Crude, cut and pasted, with a teeny amount of analysis. I wrote this:

(Rick Santelli’s ‘Boston Tea Party’) – I like this theme, can we mobilize enough people to stop this madness? Can we make enough noise to keep the mainstream media from talking down our efforts? Could we start a new ‘Sons of Liberty Movement‘?

In the ensuing 1 year + 2 months I have witnessed the ascendancy of the Tea Party, limited government-tax revolt movement. The answer to the query above is a simple Yes.

Along the way the national press ignored, mis-underestimated, then when that stopped working – maligned, smeared and attacked the nascent movement. Now there are those in the political class that complain of the press’ ‘exaggerated importance’ of the Tea Party movement.

I prefer the ignore and mis-underestimate approach.

However, I do like this from the Politico article, “The Tea Party’s Exaggerated Importance“:

The coverage began, notes Republican consultant Alex Castellanos, with not much more than bemused mockery: “’How amusing, the peasants are revolting’”

Now it has reached a level of worried fascination. Or, as Castellanos put it, “The peasants actually are revolting!”

This peasant raises a cup of tea in cheer of the Revolt.

Discussion at Memeorandum.

Ben Benen at Washington Monthly and the latest in leftist Gotcha Politics

by Conservative Generation for Left Coast Rebel

Behold, the latest in gotcha politics via Steve Benen! I had long been wondering what would happen to Bush Derangement Syndrome once Bush left office. I had hoped, though doubted, that those affected would merely go catatonic without their favorite object to scorn. Instead, BDS morphed into Palin Derangement Syndrome and more recently, Tea Party Derangement Syndrome. David Barstow marginalized the Tea Party, so did the LA Times, now Steve Benen is writing about a poll conducted by David Frum regarding the Tea Party’s knowledge of taxes.

Steve Benen writes of the results:

“Bruce added that “it’s a bad idea for so many participants to operate on the basis of false notions.” It is, indeed. We’re talking about a reasonably large group of people who seem to have no idea what they’re talking about, revel in their own ignorance, and nevertheless seek an active role in the process.”

Really Steve? Most of the questions were about general tax knowledge, which biases the results since they were administered to a group of people protesting tax policy. Below is a list of the questions:

1) In approximate percentage terms, how much is the U.S. (federal) government currently taking out of the U.S. economy in taxation?

2) Do you think this is more or less than before Obama?

3) How much federal income tax do you think a typical family earning $50,000 pays dollars)?

4) How many years of US oil consumption do you think we could extract by opening entire Alaska wildlife reserve (based on present rates of consumption)?

5) Compared to other countries, how do you think the U.S. ranks in the world for life expectancy?

6) Do you think the general economic situation in the country is improving or deteriorating as compared to one year ago?
7) Is your personal economic situation, better, worse or the same as two years ago?

First of all, Steve Benen was too busy writing up his derisive piece about taxes to actually read the results of the survey:

“There were no questions in the survey about health care policy, but it stands to reason that these same folks are basing their opposition to the Democratic plan based on little more than confusion.”

Question number 5 in the survey was about health care, which according to Benen is the same as policy. So, by Steve’s own logic, we shouldn’t be listening to him since he is clearly not knowledgeable about the survey.

The first two questions are essentially gotcha questions, since the answers for the last two years are skewed lower because of the recession. They have nothing to do with what the everyday taxpayer is paying and little to do with Bush or Obama’s tax policies, which makes question #2 particularly biased since it is looking for a comparison. The bias is blatantly evident when you read Bruce Bartlett’s write up on the same survey in Forbes magazine:

Not everyone follows these numbers closely, and Tea Partiers may have been thinking of figures from a few years ago, before the recession when taxes were higher.

Bartlett himself is confused about taxes, since taxes were not “higher” over the last few years. Instead, the taxes were lower than they had been in 30 years. Since we are in a recession and tax revenue is based primarily on income and many people are not working and receiving an income, tax revenue as a percentage of GDP is lower. Barlett also refers to Obama’s tax credits as the same as tax cuts. They are not synonymous!

Great gotcha piece Steve, but who cares? You’ve proven that most of the Tea Partiers will not make it on jeopardy. Most American’s can relate; including yourself and your pal Bruce Bartlett.

As far as actual differences in tax policy between Bush and Obama? This is what the Tea Party is protesting and they are far from imaginary:

Obama’s budget was recently passed in Washington, which shows plans to massively increase taxes

We are on the eve of a Health Care Vote that will dramatically increase taxes and fees

Obama has already increased taxes for all income levels despite his campaign pledges

On a side note: I think a similar survey should be given to and SEIU protesters, but with questions about profit margins of health insurance companies, percent of denied health care claims of private versus public insurance plans, and percent of taxes paid by the top ten percent of wage earners as a percentage of overall income tax inlays.

Via Memeorandum


For the left that doesn’t understand how the senate health care bill works, here is a fairly honest assessment from the left leaning blog Firedoglake. As you will see, the bill is hardly everything the Democratic leadership is heralding and probably way less than you were informed.

Fire Dog Lake – Health Care Bill Myths

Atlas Shrugging: IRS Commissioner Can’t File His Own Taxes – Code ‘Too Complex’

by the Left Coast Rebel

How’s that for a 1984 headline? Via The Hill I’m reading that the IRS commissioner has to rely on the expertise of a ‘professional’ to get his taxes done for him. Oh the irony. The reason that Mr. commish points to for this? The tax code’s complexity. Duh, and the Vatican sees rampant earth worship replacing christianity. Anyway it’s interesting:

IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman does not file his own taxes in part because he believes the tax code is complex.

During an interview on C-SPAN’sNewsmakers” program that aired on Sunday, Shulman said he uses a tax preparer for his own returns. “I’ve used one for years. I find it convenient. I find the tax code complex so I use a preparer,” Shulman said.

Pressed on how he would make the tax code simpler, Shulman responded, “I don’t write the tax laws. Congress writes the tax laws so that’s a whole different discussion.”

Well of course the IRS commissioner doesn’t recommend simplification in our coercive, liberty-crushing, prosperity-killing tax code. Can you say job security. I however have an option that make for a better country for all individuals.

Of course the flat tax system, (or any alternative to simplify), actually would return power to the individual in this country and since our power elite are doing everything possible to achieve the precise opposite…..well, you know.