Posts Tagged ‘$1.9 trillion’

Obama Says ‘Rich’ Really WANT To Pay More In Taxes – So Let’s Make It Voluntary

April 14, 2011

Obama said one of those things that Big Brother-style totalitarian demagogues always say in his speech yesterday:

Of course, there will be those who disagree with my approach.  Some will argue we shouldn’t even consider raising taxes, even if only on the wealthiest Americans.  It’s just an article of faith for them.  I say that at a time when the tax burden on the wealthy is at its lowest level in half a century, the most fortunate among us can afford to pay a little more.  I don’t need another tax cut.  Warren Buffett doesn’t need another tax cut.  Not if we have to pay for it by making seniors pay more for Medicare.  Or by cutting kids from Head Start.  Or by taking away college scholarships that I wouldn’t be here without.  That some of you wouldn’t be here without.  And I believe that most wealthy Americans would agree with me.  They want to give back to the country that’s done so much for them.  Washington just hasn’t asked them to.

These fascist rodents are always the same.  I think of Joe Biden a few years ago:

“We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people,” Biden said in an interview on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

Noting that wealthier Americans would indeed pay more, Biden said: “It’s time to be patriotic … time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.”

It’s the patriotic thing to do to help your Führer make your country an even better Utopia.  Of course, you WANT to help your Führer make your country a better Utopia, he tells you.

Just try not doing what the Führer wants and see how long it takes Dear Leader to come after you.  The correct answer is “not very.”

It’s your patriotic duty to pay your “fair share” of taxes, all ye rich people.

“Patriotic doodie,” more like.

Allow me to quote from my article yesterday to point out a little itty bitty problem with that colossal load of crap:

We need to balance our insane budget deficit, Democrats say.  And it’s time the rich paid their fair share.

All the top 10% of earners paid is 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government.  That’s nothing.  It’s those poor poor who suffer the most.  The bottom 50% have to pay a whole bunch of nothing.  It’s just brutal for them every April.  They want to write a check to the government, but only the rich get to do stuff like that.  And the bottom 40% are so screwed by our federal income tax system that they actually are forced to accept free money in addition to paying a whole bunch of nothing.  Unless the Associated Press is lying about it.

The bottom fifty percent aren’t paying any federal income taxes at all.  Damn traitors, every single rat bastard one of them, by Joe Biden’s view.  And then think of the stinkhole useless treasonous cockroaches who constitute the even more bottom forty percent who not only don’t pay federal income taxes, but actually get money redistributed to them from the taxes of those “patriotic” rich people who are paying their fair share and yours as well.

This wagon train full of fecal matter riding around and around in a dusty circle is like Hitler ranting that every good Nazi had a patriotic duty to go to the Russian front to fight to the death, because no “patriotic” Nazi would ever surrender.  Or that Jews really like going to Auschwitz because, after all, it’s a camp, and who doesn’t like going to camp?

You’ve got to be stark raving mad to believe idiocy like this.  Or a tyrant bureaucrat from hell, which is the same thing except it pays a lot better and provides much better benefits.

This is just another example of Obama being a cynical, manipulative liar without shame.

But let’s give Obama the benefit of the doubt.  Let’s give him a chance to demonstrate that he actually believes his own bullturd statements.  All Obama has to do, given that he believes the rich want to pay more in taxes – “want to give back to the country that’s done so much for them” – is to make paying taxes voluntary for them.

You can pay as much as you want to the government for how wonderful they’ve been to you, as a matter of fact.  It’s called a “Gift To Reduce Debt Held by the Public.”  Liberals can write the government a check for as much as they want on their tax forms.  And the fact that they DON’T pay more in taxes when they easily COULD if they really wanted to is the proof in the pudding that liberals are hypocrites.  But since Obama truly believes – because he’s not a cynical lying weasel at all – that the rich really, truly want to pay more and more and more in taxes if they’re only asked, let him make taxes voluntary for the rich.

I’m sure Republicans would agree to that.

And think of what a bonanza we’ll get.

Obama’s got poisonous fangs.  Don’t believe him when he folds them up and tells you that you really like getting screwed just before he rapes you.

Then there’s another little thing Obama said at least twice in his speech that should set your “fascist alert” antenna twitching:

Worst of all, this is a vision that says even though America can’t afford to invest in education or clean energy; even though we can’t afford to care for seniors and poor children, we can somehow afford more than $1 trillion in new tax breaks for the wealthy Think about it.

and

In December, I agreed to extend the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans because it was the only way I could prevent a tax hike on middle-class Americans.  But we cannot afford $1 trillion worth of tax cuts for every millionaire and billionaire in our society.  And I refuse to renew them again.

I am thinking about it, Barry Hussein.  And it seems to me as though you are telling me that you think you own all our money, and are just letting us keep as much as you can “afford” to let us keep.

Brit Hume knocked this one out of the park when Obama was demagoguing taxes last year:

But the very language used in discussing these issues tells you something as well. In Washington, letting people keep more of their own money is considered a cost. As if all the money really belongs to the government in the first place in which what you get to keep is an expenditure.

This sense of the primacy of government is reflected in the high percentage of stimulus funds used to bail out broke localities and protect the jobs of government workers. Democrats are proving once again that they are indeed the party of government.

Understand that when Obama says the kind of crap that he’s saying, it comes from a thoroughly Marxist view that you and everything you produce is in reality government property, and he can simply decide to take it as “the people” need it.

Another way to put this is to simply demand that a liberal show you the part of the Constitution that allows the government to demand that 5 percent of the population be compelled to pay for half of a massive out-of-control federal bureaucracy whether or not they like the party that’s running it or the way it’s being run, while 50 percent of the population (that tends to vote overwhelmingly for the party that is redistributing the wealth) doesn’t have to bear any costs in running that government at all.

And not caring if the rich are forced to pay even more just because you’re not rich has the stink of not caring about what happened to the Jews just because you weren’t a Jew.  Which is all the more appropriate to point out given that the Nazis confiscated the Jews’ wealth after demagoguing them, too.

Progressivism is just another dangerous radical “ism,” just like Nazism or facism or Marxism or socialism or communism.

Obama’s central premise in his incredibly demagogic speech was that, for America to be America, we need to make one group of people pay more so that another group of people can keep on avoiding responsibility.  That’s a lie.

America doesn’t need more taxes to remain America; it desperately needs less out-of-control federal spending.

The Fiscal Year 2000 federal budget was $1.9 trillion.  It was Bill Clinton’s budget.  Was America an evil place when Bill Clinton ran it, liberals?  So just why is it that Obama needs $3.8 trillion to make America a good place now?  How does trillion upon trillion upon trillions of dollars in deficit spending make America a good place?  How is it that cursing our children with staggering, back-breaking interest payments on the debt we racked up for them ends up being defined as “caring for our children’s future”?

Do you know that the interest payment alone on our debt is exected to be $800 billion a year by 2020?  That’s just over eight years away.  As you consider Obama’s speech, ask yourself if that’s showing your kids love.  I would argue that it is the most hateful and cynical thing imaginable.

Our founding fathers understood this.  That’s why Thomas Jefferson said that, “It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes.”  That’s why Benjamin Franklin – who also said “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote” – warned us that “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”

And, with $3.8 trillion budgets with more than forty cents of every dollar of it adding to our deficit, adding to the $200 trillion in debt that we’ve already accumulated, the end of the republic is very much at hand.

Advertisements

Spending Demon Democrats Demand Another $1.9 TRILLION In Debt Ceiling

January 21, 2010

Would you mind giving me a small loan?  All I need is two trillion dollars.

I’m good for it.  Seriously.

Democrats seek to up debt ceiling by $1.9 trillion
By DAVID ROGERS | 1/20/10 8:47 PM EST

Upping the ante just a day after losing their 60th Senate seat, Democrats moved Wednesday to seek a $1.9 trillion increase in the federal debt ceiling and give the Treasury adequate borrowing authority past November’s elections and into next year.

Republicans were caught off guard by the scale of the increase which follows a $290 billion short-term debt increase approved prior to Christmas. “That’s just escapism of the worst sort,” Sen. Judd Gregg (R.,N.H.) told POLITICO. But Democrats countered that their only alternative would be to give-in to a Republican strategy of forcing multiple smaller debt ceiling increases, designed to bleed them politically before November.

This perception was reinforced by a meeting Tuesday between Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). By going now with the higher $1.9 trillion target, Democrats are making a high-stakes gamble that the party can pull together once more to put the debt ceiling issue behind them for this election year.

“We have to do this. The alternative is worse,” said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D—Mont.) in a brief interview.

Why can’t the Democrats do their “high-stakes gamble” with their own $2 trillion?

So the Democrats are clearly playing politics – wanting a massive and risky debt ceiling increase of nearly $2 trillion so that people will forget before the November elections.

And Republicans are being depicted as playing politics by making Democrats pass smaller, more incremental increases that would make Democrats look bad.

But Democrats look bad all by themselves.  And the incremental increases have never been anything even close to such a massive sum.  From Bloomberg:

The debt limit increase, raising the legal cap on government borrowing to about $14 trillion, would be the fourth in 18 months. A $1.8 trillion boost would probably be enough to prevent lawmakers from having to raise the limit again before next year’s midterm elections.

Such an increase would be more than twice the size of each of the past three debt limit increases, each of which lifted the cap by $800 billion or less.

So it’s really just political demagoguery to accuse the Republicans of pursuing a purely political agenda.  And this is how the leftwing political establishment and the leftwing media present a narrative instead of just presenting the facts.

There are actually more than a few people who think that the government is irresponsible, and shouldn’t have so much money to spend all at once, lest they piss it away and waste it.  I’m one of those people.

If your next door neighbors aren’t massively in debt, they’re probably such people, too.

Even Democrats were reluctant to vote for the last debt ceiling increase (of $290 billion) just before Christmas without a significant effort to reduce spending.

So to solve this problem – or at least go through the motions of pretending to solve it – “the Obama administration reached a tentative accord with congressional Democrats to create a version of the panel by executive order.  Obama’s proposal “would require Congress to vote on the commission’s recommendations without making any changes.”  And “with a commission created by presidential order, congressional leaders would promise to bring its proposals to a vote although such a vote wouldn’t be required by law.”

And that kind of crap-sandwich is what’s making Republicans roll their eyeballs about 180 degrees:

[Republican Senator Judd] Gregg told reporters that the proposal to create a commission by executive order was “a very cynical act by the administration” that “is by definition partisan and the whole purpose” is to have a bipartisan body.

“There is no way you can require a vote” by Congress so “it’s a nothing-burger,” Gregg said.

Which is to say that Obama wants to get a blank check of $1.9 trillion, which he hopes will tidy him over until AFTER the November midterms so Democrats won’t look bad coming for mere hundreds of billions in dribs and drabs.  And Republicans are supposed to go along with that, because they obviously should make the Democrats’ political fortunes the center of their world.  In exchange for this fools’ bargain, Republicans (and the fiscally responsible Democrats who don’t want to vote for it either) would get a commission that would have the power to impose nothing — the nothing burger.

I bet a nice, big, juicy nothing burger sounds pretty good to you.  Just don’t try to count on actually ever being able to eat it.

And by Obama’s demagoguery narrative, the Republicans will be evil if they don’t go along with this stupidity.

Note to Congress: try spending less.

I know one place you could start: the Obama White House averaged one party every three days during Obama’s first year.

Back in January 2009, before he signed his failed $787 billion stimulus bill into law, Barack Obama told America that everyone must sacrifice for the greater good. Everyone must have “some skin in the game.”

What he meant, of course, was that everyone would have to sacrifice to lift American out of the worst recession since the Great Depression except for Barack and Michelle Obama.

A party every three days, and nothing but the finest at the White House.  That’s a lot of Black Sea caviar and French truffles.

So you can see why Obama wants that $1.9 trillion.