Democrats Still Want to Tax the Rich
Dec 14, 2007 Political
The Democrats are looking for ways to raise taxes and their favorite target, as always, is the rich. The Democrats have this misguided idea that the rich should pay more because they make more. This is an idea based in lunacy and cultured in class warfare, something the Democrats are very good at. Assuming that all citizens receive the same benefits from government (which is not the case), why should the rich pay more for the same benefits? Why is it fair to make those who make more pay more?
Vin Suprynowicz wrote an excellent piece where he asks that very question. His piece is designed to disprove teacher’s complaints about his assertion that schools indoctrinate students but the analogies he uses are spot on.
Tell them that to defend our country, the Congress has decided we need a new fleet of aircraft carriers that will cost $500 per American. This is to be funded by an income tax which requires one multi-millionaire like Bill Gates to pay $2,500, five average Joes earning better that the national median paycheck to pay $500 apiece, and thus allows four guys whose incomes are way below average to pay nothing at all. Does this represent “everyone paying his fair share”?
The question posed in this scenario is how Democrats view our country. They believe it is absolutely fair to charge Gates more, five guys above the median the $500 and four guys nothing. This is how the progressive tax system works and it is what Democrats are suggesting each time they say they want to raise taxes on the rich. They want the rich to pay more, the above median folks to pay the actual cost and the poor to pay nothing at all.
The problems is, as pointed out by Suprynowicz, everyone in the country would benefit equally from the fleet of aircraft carriers. The fleet does not offer Bill Gates any more protection than the guy who did not have to pay anything at all because we all receive equal protection. As Suprynowicz also points out, our income tax system is run differently than the way we pay for other things:
We pay for most things this way, after all. If a bridge has a $1 toll, everyone pays a dollar – the toll-takers don’t demand more from the guy in the Mercedes and less from the poor fellow in the rattletrap.
Buying a can of beans at the store? No one contends it would be “fair” to charge the well-dressed lady many times the price marked on the can. We also pay for our highways this way – the excise tax on a gallon of gasoline is the same for Mr. Gates as it is for you or me, on the theory that all our cars wear down the pavement about the same.
My first reaction when I read this was that he has it right and it is so easy that anyone should understand it. My second was complete fear that some idiot in government would read it and figure it would be a good idea to charge for everything based on income. In any event, the fact is we do not have to pay for the goods and services we use based upon income levels so why is it fair to make those in higher income brackets pay more in taxes (as a percent, of course they will always pay more in actual dollars)?
The interesting thing here is that while we all receive the same benefit from the protection afforded by aircraft carriers or roads or food we do not receive the same or equal benefits from government. Remember I said assuming we all received the same benefit from government? Well the fact is those in the lower income brackets use far more in government services than those in the higher income brackets. The lower income folks actually receive more from the government than they pay in while those in the higher end receive less than they pay in. Some people pay nothing and receive a lot from the government. The lower three quintiles consume much more than the upper two even though the upper two pay for nearly all the costs of government.
If we wanted to have a fair tax system, those who make less should pay more because they consume more. No one is suggesting that and it certainly would not be reasonable to do so. What would be fair is for government to charge everyone the same rate on their income. We would all be paying equally for the supposed equal benefits of government.
Congress does not want this because they love to take our money and waste it. I have done better investing my money than they have with the money they take from me for Social Security. I know how to better handle my money than they do. Congress has abused the Alternative Minimum Tax and reaped billions of dollars they were not entitled to because they collected it in violation of the rules governing why the AMT was established. Now they are crying that to fix the AMT they need to raise taxes to offset the revenue loss.
The AMT was designed to make millionaires pay a minimum amount in taxes. For years, people who are by no means millionaires have been paying the AMT which means the government has been taking money that it was not entitled to. They should be refunding money to all the people who were forced to pay taxes as if they were millionaires.
In any event, the fact is Congress is incapable of spending money with any amount of responsibility. They have the IRS mob to enforce their extortion racket and they jail those who do not pay taxes to deter the rest of us from deciding not to pay. We need to get rid of all of them and start fresh.
Congress needs an enema.
Source of Vin Suprynowicz’s article:
Indoctrination? What Indoctrination?
Source of Democrat’s Tax the rich
Tags: Democrats, fiscal irresponsibility, rich people, taxes
Piling on Hillary, Now That is Fun
Dec 14, 2007 Political
I have never been shy about my dislike for Hillary Clinton. She is a manipulative liar who has been planning to be president for decades after making a pact with her equally dishonest husband. He was to be first and then it was her turn, as if people get turns at leading this country. That idea in and of itself shows that she feels entitled to the job and that it is rightfully hers. She has been the front runner for a long time and was dubbed the inevitable winner of the nomination. Now it appears that her inevitable run is in jeopardy and people are piling on her after a bad month or so.
Hillary promised not to go negative and that she was focusing on the issues. In a debate, Bill Richardson (hoping to be selected as Hillary’s VP) came to her defense and said that they should stop picking on her. She indicated that if people were going to throw mud they should get their facts straight. She had been sliding in the polls and after the debate she slid even farther and all of the sudden she was going to get dirty, something she called “fun.”
Hillary went into open attack mode (she and surrogates had been attacking in secret all along) and she picked on what Obama wrote in kindergarten. This was not exactly a smart move. Remember Hillary wanted to be a number of things when she was a child and I don’t think those ideas should be used against her, unless of course, she lied about them so she would look more human. Then one of her staff sent out the Obama is a Muslim email and Hillary had to deny it. Polls dropping. Then one of her people questioned Obama’s admitted past drug use. I predicted that would haunt her especially given her husband’s lame lie about his own. Polls dropped further and Obama becomes tied or is slightly ahead. Campaign workers resign (or were fired) over the incidents.
Hillary started last January as the heir apparent and is now in position to be an also ran. She is in danger of losing the first four primaries which would likely be a death blow to her campaign. She went into this week’s debate in an unfamiliar position, as a person trying to catch up. For once, she was not the front runner. Her husband is in a tizzy and her campaign, despite what she says, is in a shambles. Bill is so worked up his ailing heart might explode before this thing is over and it appears as if the recent influx of campaign workers has some concerned that some caucus tampering might be forthcoming. I know the Clintons have denied this but they deny everything. Does anyone actually think they will ever admit to any wrong doing? They have been caught a number of times and yet they deny, deny, deny and then when there is evidence they blame someone or something else. The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy comes to mind.
Hillary continues to say she is the best to fend off the Republican “attack machine” (as if the Democrats do not have their own) because she has been under scrutiny for 16 years and has nothing to hide. This is only partly true. She has been under scrutiny but she has plenty to hide. The truth is still out there with regard to the many scandals they have both been involved in. Someone with hard evidence could show up and really blow her out of the water. I know a lot of the people with evidence are dead but that does not mean there are no others. One bimbo eruption with video or DNA evidence with respect to Bill during the general election and she is toast. She presses on but there are many sources now doubting if she can win the primary or, if she does, the general.
- The notion that she has a post-Iowa “firewall†in New Hampshire is a fantasy, and she is in danger of losing all four early contests, including Nevada and South Carolina – probably to Sen. Barack Obama, who is now, in momentum terms, the Democratic front runner. [MSNBC]
- Barack Obama has come from behind to turn the Democratic presidential race in New Hampshire into a toss-up, according to a new Monitor opinion poll. The results – which show Obama with a one-point edge over Hillary Clinton – mirror other polls released this week, indicating that Clinton’s once-imposing lead has evaporated in the run-up to New Hampshire’s Jan. 8 primary. [Concord Monitor]
- Hillary precinct captain now supports Obama (Video) [You Tube]
- The Democratic Party chairman in Wyoming is predicting that Democratic candidates throughout the Rocky Mountain region will be damaged if his party selects Hillary Clinton for president. [Denver Post]
- This thought occurs that Hillary Clinton’s entire campaign is, and always was, a Potemkin village, a giant head fake, a haughty facade hollow at the core. That she is disorganized on the ground in Iowa, taken aback by a challenge to her invincibility, that she doesn’t actually have an A team, that her advisers have always been chosen more for proven loyalty than talent, that her supporters don’t feel deep affection for her. [WSJ Opinion Journal]
- “If I had listened to … the Washington chattering class, I would not be standing here would I?” Clinton told reporters, as controversy and reports of campaign turmoil swirled around her 2008 presidential bid.
“I believe in trusting my own instincts. I feel very, very good about the case that I am making.” [Breitbart]
The last quote is from Hillary and I expect that all candidates feel they are the best so this is no surprise. The problem is, she did listen to the DC chattering class. A lot of them told her to run and she has more endorsements from Democrats in Congress than any other candidate. She wanted to run and they knew it so they encouraged her to run though she would have done it anyway. She believes it is her destiny.
As far as trusting her instincts, how did that work out with her and Bill with regard to his rape and sexual assaults? Did she have any instincts telling her something was amiss? Did she ignore them in order to pursue her dream of being president? She did say there are worse things than the infidelity (and there are). Did she mean losing her chance at the White House.
Remember, without Bill she would be an unknown and she would never have been elected to office. She only has his last name as a plus to the electorate, otherwise no one would know her and they certainly would not vote for her.
It will be fun over the next few weeks. I predict that there will be more dirt despite Hillary’s claim that it will not happen again. She is desperate and she sees her destiny slipping away. The compact primary season makes recovery very difficult and she will be on the ropes if Obama can pull off wins in Iowa and New Hampshire.
I can’t wait for the fun if she loses. I think she might have a nervous breakdown and start accusing all kinds of people of incompetence.
One last thing. There are very important votes taking place in Congress this week. The federal government needs a budget and our troops need money. Why are all the people running for office not in Congress doing the work of the people?
Tags: caucus, Hillary, iowa, new hampshire, obama. clinton
They Do Work Most Americans Won’t
Dec 14, 2007 Military
I feel it is necessary for me to say that I show sympathy for those who do the jobs most Americans will not do. Let us look at the facts, something I always try to do:
- They travel miles in the heat.
- They risk their lives crossing a border.
- They don’t get paid enough wages.
- They do jobs that others won’t do or are afraid to do.
- They live in crowded conditions among a people who speak a different language.
- They rarely see their families, and they face adversity all day every day.
These are certainly tough considerations and to top it off there are many in this country who do not think these people are worth anything and that they are law breakers. I have heard them called murderers, rapists, criminals and all kinds of other names by members of our very own Congress. All these people want is freedom and they are willing to give their lives for it.
I am not talking about ILLEGALS who cross our borders because they are criminals. The people described above are the members of our military and they endure more hardship than anyone in this country and they certainly provide more for us than any ILLEGAL ever will.
This Christmas Season, take time to thank the members of our military and remember them in your prayers.
Big Dog Salute to my friend Raven.
Others with similar posts:
Outside the Beltway, nuke’s, Rosemary’s Thoughts, Allie is Wired, Woman Honor Thyself, Adam’s Blog, The World According to Carl, Shadowscope, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Celebrity Smack, Leaning Straight Up, Chuck Adkins, Dumb Ox Daily News, High Desert Wanderer, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
The Gratitude Campaign, Say Thanks to the Troops
Dec 12, 2007 Military
I travel quite a bit for work and when I am in the airports I see a lot of men and women in uniform. I go up to them, shake their hands, and thank them for their service to our country. They always say “your welcome” or “no problem” but I can see in some of their faces that they are a bit embarrassed by it. I also know people who want to say thanks but are timid about approaching the troops.
There is a new campaign underway called the Gratitude Campaign and it uses the sign language sign for saying thank you as a way to communicate thanks to the troops. I think this is a great idea and and though I will continue to shake hands and give a verbal thanks, for those times I cannot do so I will use this sign as a way of communicating my gratitude to our brave men and women.
May God bless them and this country.
For more information please visit The Gratitude Campaign.
Tags: gratitude campaign, thank you, troops
Clinton Hypocrisy Part of the Fun
Dec 12, 2007 Political
When Bill Clinton was running for the presidency he made a now famous statement when he responded to questions about his drug use. He said that he smoked marijuana but that he did not inhale. This is a stupid answer and anyone with brains knew he was lying. Not that Bill has issues completing tasks (that is why the blue dress was stained) but this is just absolutely unreal and it insults the intelligence of the people to whom he directed it. He was elected to office as the Democrats were willing to overlook his drug use and believe his “did not inhale” line as well as his draft dodging. In any event, one would assume that the Clintons would be the last people to bring up the subject of drug use. That would be a wrong assumption.
Billy Shaheen, the co-chairman of Hillary Clinton’s campaign in New Hampshire, brought up the subject of B. Hussein Obama’s past drug use. Yes, Obama admitted (a long time ago) that he used marijuana and cocaine when he was a teen. I don’t condone drug use but I respect the fact that this guy was honest about it and that he told the truth. He did not say he didn’t inhale or that he used cocaine but did not snort it, he just said that he used it in the past. All candidates have issues from their past that show they are human beings. The ability to atone for those indiscretions and to grow from them is what makes a better person. A lot of people have used drugs in the past and they are functioning members of our society.
As an aside, the very same people who excused Clinton for his use and those who see it as no issue with Obama were critical of George Bush and stories of past cocaine use and his DUI. I guess it is expected that Democrats will be drug users because it fits their liberal views. Besides, one would have to get high to actually believe in liberalism.
Shaheen said that Obama’s background is unknown and that the Republicans would have a field day with him. He cited Obama’s admission of drug use as an example and said that the Republicans would attack him on it. His basic statement was that the admission leaves him open to other probing statements like did he sell it or when was the last time he used it. He said that voters should select a candidate who is tested, like Hillary.
I have discussed before about Hillary. She is not tested and has a very short political career, one which has been unremarkable. She has not authored any major legislation and she has played down the middle in order to prepare herself for the run for the Oval Office. Shaheen seems to think that honesty is not really the best policy and that would explain why he supports Clinton.
Neither of the Clintons has ever been honest about anything. Bill raped a number of women and he denied several of his affairs only to have them exposed by the media and while he testified under oath. Hillary lies about everything and it is said that it was she who told bill to say he did not inhale. Hillary and Bill are incapable of telling the truth. Bill has been rewriting the history of his presidency since he left office and how he felt or what he supported depends on the mood today, not what he actually did.
I think this idea of bringing up Obama’s drug use is going to backfire in a big way. How can anyone hear this and not think of Bill and his did not inhale? How can anyone think this will be an issue now for Obama when it was not for Clinton? At least Obama was up front about it which is more than anyone can say about Bill.
I do not agree with Obama’s politics and he would not be my choice for president but I can respect the fact that he told the truth about his past. Americans are pretty forgiving of past indiscretions and can look past these kinds of things, especially if the candidates are honest about them. That is where the problem lies for Hillary, she does not know how to be honest.
I do however, find it interesting that people can run for the presidency with a history of drug use but that some jobs in the federal government (and some law enforcement agencies) will not allow anyone with such a past to be hired. I think we need to look at the people now and use their past as a point of reference.
I only wish the people on the left who excuse this kind of behavior for Democrats would be consistent and excuse past indiscretions of Republicans.
That would be asking too much.
Big Dog’s prediction; This will come back to bite Hillary in her rear.
Remember, Hillary was going to focus on the issues and Bill Richardson defended her in a debate asking for the attacks to stop. Hillary then decided to go dirty (at least to publicly go dirty, she has been dirty all along). She said the fun was going to begin. I wonder how fun it is to see her numbers plummeting and to have a loser issue like this as a main line of attack. What next, Obama said the word drug in kindergarten?
Source:
Washington Post
Others with similar posts:
Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Rosemary’s Thoughts, guerrilla radio, Adam’s Blog, The Pink Flamingo, Celebrity Smack, The Amboy Times, The Bullwinkle Blog, Leaning Straight Up, Chuck Adkins, CORSARI D’ITALIA, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Adeline and Hazel, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: Clinton, didn't inhale, dirty campaign, drug use, hypocrisy, Obama