No One Likes To Pay More Taxes, Even Liberals
Jan 24, 2011 Political
For all the talk that we get from liberals about how it is patriotic to pay our “fair share” of taxes and how the wealthy need to step up and bear some more of the burden, there sure are enough of them who do what they can to avoid taxes. We already know that many liberals claim that they do not pay enough in taxes and that they believe they should be paying more. Bill Clinton has stated this several times but there is no indication that he ever sent a check to the Treasury to help retire the debt. Anyone can do it.
There was a group of liberal college professors (redundant alert) who decided that they were mad because the government extended the Bush tax cuts for everyone. They have started to give their money to charity and are encouraging the wealthy to donate so it can go to help the peeps. They seem to have discovered that the individual and private entities are better at charity than the government and, in a bit of irony, they also get a tax write off to avoid paying more of what they think the rich should be paying…
Now it looks like the city of New York is going after people who they think might be cheating on taxes. If a person lives in New York City for more than 183 days then that person must pay NYC taxes. Being in the city for any part of the day counts as a day. Many wealthy people who have business in the city and own a place to live there “claim” they are not in the city for 183 days thus avoiding the tax which is quite high. The taxing authority audits these folks to see and scours for parking violations and other evidence that the people were in the city just to make the folks pay their taxes. Of course, most of these people are in the city for 183 days or more but they lie to avoid the taxes.
Now those folks, which includes Alec Baldwin, will have to attest to the fact that they are not in the city more than 183 days and if they are caught in a lie they will be committing another crime. Yes, Alec Baldwin, the big time liberal tells New York that he is not in the city enough to pay the taxes. What with a place in the Hamptons and all…
Liberals love to talk about tax increases as long as those increases are put upon someone else and not them. Taxes are for the riff-raff and not the elite of the liberal establishment.
So typical of liberals, do as I say and not as I do.
Rush Limbaugh and Derek Jeter moved out of the city (Limbaugh out of the state) to keep from being harassed. Before people say Limbaugh was avoiding taxes, he was audited every year for more than a dozen and they never found he was in the city for more than the 183 days (he paid the proper amount of taxes). He spent most of his time in Florida so he just moved there completely. Seems like a lot of rich people are migrating to states where the taxes are lower (or there are no taxes at all).
Source:
New York Daily News
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: alec baldwin, Clinton, liberals, new york city, rich, taxes
Then Why Should The Rich Pay Social Security?
Dec 1, 2010 Political
Social Security is a bad program that has gotten worse over the years. It is designed to keep people enslaved to the government by taking money from them while they earn and then giving them a small retirement when they end their working careers. This deprives them of the opportunity to save and invest the money on their own, a step that would actually allow them to earn much more money and allow them to say what is done with it.
The Supreme Court has ruled that no one has a legal right to Social Security benefits. This is a bad decision but it looks like it will play out that way in the long run. Social Security is broke and there is no reasonable way to fix it. There will be no money left for those who are paying today.
A Democrat Policy Group is recommending that Social Security be fixed by denying payments to those who are wealthy when they retire. If you have the brains to put money away and save for retirement and happen to do well then you might not get the benefit that you paid into for all of your working career.
In what world is this fair?
Why should the rich pay into Social Security (or a person who is not particularly wealthy during his working career but saves a lot) only to be denied the money when they retire? What rule allows for the confiscation of a person’s money and then the redistribution of that money to others?
Why should the rich pay into Social Security? To top it off, the plan calls for higher Social Security taxes and raising the income level (the cap) on which it is collected. Why would people pay into this knowing full well that they would not get anything when they retire?
Most Democrats oppose this plan while some Republicans favor it or some variation of it. Who the hell do these people think they are?
As for me, I don’t need them to pay me Social Security. All I want is for them to send me a check for the money I have paid in (and I don’t even need any interest on it) and for them to stop taking Social Security out of my check. I will be more than happy to invest the money myself and I will live quite well in retirement. I am also sure the people who are actually rich (and even those considered rich by the government) would be happy to do the same.
I am not rich by any stretch of the imagination. I just work hard for my money and I save some of it for the future.
Others would do well to follow that example.
The members of Congress would do well to learn from that as well.
Class warfare is here and they are stoking the fire. Keep it up and things will get ugly as the rich find other things to do with their money.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: benefits, Congress, lies, rich, social security, supreme court
Taxes Explained With Beer
Oct 10, 2010 Political
I got this in an email and it seems to sum things up nicely.
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would …pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.” Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so: The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings and his dollar was added to the wealthiest man’s bill).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $50 instead of $59 (15% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
“I only got a dollar out of the $20,”declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,” but he got $9!”
“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got nine times more than I got”
“That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $9 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!”
“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!”
The nine men surrounded the tenth man and beat the hell out of him…
The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier…and who could blame them?
For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
Big Dog salute to JP.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Who Are The Super Rich?
Oct 1, 2010 Political
Congress adjourned before getting to the Bush tax cuts because it is particularly volatile and these cretins have no spines so they could not take a chance on something that might cost them their jobs. Of course, if they did what their constituents wanted they might actually get reelected.
The Democrats had time for a Comedian to come in and waste time and money but had no time to work on the tax cut issue OR to even pass a budget.
The tax cut issue is contentious not only because of the Democrat definition of rich but also because of their idea that the rich can and should pay more. If you are an individual who makes more than $200,000 or a family that makes more than $250,000 congratulations, you are rich. Even though your largest single expense is likely to be your tax bill, they still want more from you. Even though you are nowhere near rich, they want to treat you as rich to get your money.
One of Obama’s neighbors explains it:
The biggest expense for us is financing government. Last year, my wife and I paid nearly $100,000 in federal and state taxes, not even including sales and other taxes. This amount is so high because we can’t afford fancy accountants and lawyers to help us evade taxes and we are penalized by the tax code because we choose to be married and we both work outside the home. (If my wife and I divorced or were never married, the government would write us a check for tens of thousands of dollars. Talk about perverse incentives.)
The piece is a good read and explains how people in this income bracket are not rich and how they cannot afford to pay more to the government, particularly when government is their single biggest expense.
The Democrats want to tax you to death and they want to run everything. Despite what the moron Robert Shrum says, Democrats will pay for this and will lose at least the House.
People are tired of being abused by government and they are going to make someone pay for this.
Many once safe Democrats are looking at dwindling poll numbers and many surprises could come in November’s election.
And that would be just fine.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
The Democrats’ Tax Dilemma
Aug 4, 2010 Political
The Democrats are between Barack and a hard place during this election season. Many of them are likely to lose their jobs and if the Republicans gain the majority in one chamber then Obama will essentially be cut off at the knees. For years Democrats have been strong proponents for tax increases. While they claim that tax increases are on the rich they eventually end up taxing many more people, particularly those in the middle class.
Democrats like Obama preached about targeted tax cuts for the middle class. Remember, it was he who said that 95% of us would not see a tax increase. That has gone by the wayside as taxes have risen and will continue to rise. In 2011 we are set for a huge tax increase when the tax cuts that George Bush pushed through expire.
Now for years the Democrats have told us that these were tax cuts for the rich. In any debate the Democrats will frame the argument in those terms. The tax cuts were for George Bush’s rich friends. Tax cuts do not stimulate the economy and you have to find a way to pay for the money the government “lost” as if government actually has any money. Taxpayers have money that government extorts.
So we find ourselves in the middle of a heated election season and Democrats are running for cover. They are trying to convince the people back home that they were looking out for their best interests. Despite voting for things that the majority of Americans opposed, Democrats are running as if they fulfilled the will of the people. Funny, when the polls indicated that the American public had stopped supporting the war effort the Democrats said we needed to end the war (and they made up stories about being tricked into voting for it) because it was the will of the people. These same Democrats ignored the will of the people when they pushed through the Socialist agenda of Barack Hussein Obama (mmm, mmm, mmm).
In any event, the Bush tax cuts are causing heartburn for Democrats. Democrats will tell you that tax cuts hurt the economy and they will raise taxes every chance they get. It is how they feed the ever growing beast that is government. But now that the economy is in the dumper and is not recovering they are worried about raising taxes. They realize that allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire will result in a tax increase. Many of them have had to admit that this is not the smartest thing to do because it will stifle an already stagnant economy. They say we need the tax cuts to help STIMULATE the economy. Got that? Tax cuts stimulate the economy.
But why worry? The Bush tax cuts were only for the rich, at least that is what the Democrats have told us for nearly a decade. If the tax cuts were only for the rich and the Democrats were discussing raising taxes on the rich anyway, why does it matter? Those evil rich people can afford a tax increase so just let the Bush tax cuts expire. According to Democrat mythology the only people who will be affected are the rich because tax cuts were only for Bush’s rich friends.
Therein lies one of the problems for Democrats. The Bush tax cuts helped the middle class the most. That’s right, no matter what your liberal friends and the Democrat politicians have been telling you, the Bush tax cuts provided the greatest benefit for the middle class. If the Democrats allow the tax cuts to expire the middle class will get socked the hardest.
Therein lies a few more problems. Since Democrats are talking about only letting the tax cuts for the rich expire and extending the tax cuts for the middle class, they are admitting that the Bush tax cuts affected the middle class. In order to save their rear ends they have had to admit that tax cuts stimulate the economy and that the middle class received tax cuts from George Bush.
And it gets trickier. Barack Obama is not receptive to the idea of extending the tax cuts. He wants to end them especially for the rich. But in doing so he will be admitting that Bush gave the middle class tax cuts and that Obama just extended them. This will go against everything Obama has said about Bush and tax cuts as Obama is one of the loudest voices in proclaiming that Bush gave tax cuts to the rich.
And maybe even trickier. If Obama decides not to extend the tax cuts for the middle class January 2011 will provide a rude awakening to many middle class people who have been duped by Democrats into believing that the Bush tax cuts were for the rich. This is a potential disaster for Democrats. They have bamboozled a lot of people about tax cuts for the rich so much so that many people in the middle class who actually benefited from tax cuts do not know or understand that they were helped.
If Obama allows the tax cuts on them to expire a lot of people will have less money in their paychecks and when they go to their HR department to ask why and are informed that the tax cuts expired so their rate went up the little light bulb will go on and they will realize that they actually benefited from the Bush tax cuts after all. They will know that they were lied to by Democrats who harped on the same lie for a decade and they will know that Obama lied because he raised their taxes.
The Democrats are in a tough spot. There is only one choice that will provide the least amount of damage and that is extending the cuts for all Americans. The problem with that is their base, the morons who believe that tax cuts were only for the rich, will be forced to admit that the Democrats either lied or extended tax cuts for the rich. The Democrats would love to just allow the cuts for the rich to expire but by their own words they admit that doing so will not help the economy (tax cuts stimulate and the rich pay the most taxes).
The Democrats are really in a bad way on this issue. They are debating tax cuts vs allowing them to expire and they are conflicted. They are always conflicted in an election year because during election years Democrats pretend to be moderates who are in favor of tax cuts and reigning in spending. Once they get elected or reelected they go right back to tax and spend. If this were not an election year the issue would not matter and even though no harm will be done until 2011 Democrats must act now to keep the increases from coming. This is why they are having the debate in the first place.
As for Obama, I think he would be fairly happy to see his majority go away. He has gotten a lot of his agenda through and it is unlikely that it will be repealed until we are rid of him (he can veto any legislation). The only thing Republicans can do is not fund any of it. The power of the purse is still in the realm of Congress. I think Obama would be happy having Republicans in the majority.
What? How could that be? Obama is floundering and he will not be reelected in 2012 if things stay as they are. Democrats and their agenda will not fix the economy and this will spell disaster for Obama. He knows that Bill Clinton was in a similar spot when he was in his first term but once Republicans took over they straightened things out. Balanced budgets, the imaginary surplus, welfare reform, and many other items were part of the Republican agenda that Clinton was forced to go along with and for which he later took credit. This helped him get reelected.
Obama is looking at a similar situation. He might figure having Republicans in to clean things up will make him look good and if they screw things up even worse (unlikely) he will have them to blame and if there is one thing this guy is good at it is the blame game. Either way he will be on more sound footing when asking people to give him four more years.
As for his party, they are running from him and backing an extension of tax cuts.
That just about says it all…
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: democratsm bush tax cuts, lies, middle class, Obama, rich