U.S. Has Highest Corporate Tax Rate in the Industrialized World

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

worlds-highest-corporate-tax-rates

The U.S. Has the Highest Corporate Income Tax Rate in the Industrialized World

The next time some Obamabot tries to tell you American corporations aren’t paying their “fair share” in taxes, show them this chart.

xtax-rate-us-760w

See that bottom red line? The one that says “United States?”

Yeah, Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, and pretty much all Democrats believe a corporate tax rate of 39.1% is not high enough.

Sane people might disagree.

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Any day now the White House and Sen. Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.) will attempt to raise taxes on business, while making the U.S. tax code even more complex. The Obama and Schumer plans to punish businesses for moving their legal domicile overseas will arrive even as a new international ranking shows that the U.S. tax burden on business is close to the worst in the industrialized world. Way to go, Washington.

Can you see why Burger King wants to pay taxes in Canada? They’ll save 13% overnight!

The index takes into account more than 40 tax policy variables. And the inaugural ranking puts the U.S. at 32nd out of 34 industrialized countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

“With the developed world’s highest corporate tax rate at over 39% including state levies, plus a rare demand that money earned overseas should be taxed as if it were earned domestically, the U.S. is almost in a class by itself. It ranks just behind Spain and Italy, of all economic humiliations. America did beat Portugal and France, which is currently run by an avowed socialist.

Well, to be fair, America is currently being run by an avowed socialist, too.

And when I say “run,” I mean Into The Ground. Barack Obama is running America into the ground. He seems to be enjoying it, too.

Share

Obama Calls for Highest Sustained Taxation…Ever

Share

Last month, President Obama presented a budget to Congress. Immediately Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid asked what it was because it had been so many years since he’d seen an actual federal budget.

Okay, I’m not really sure if Harry Reid saw or even understood it, but it still calls for the highest sustained taxation in United States history. CNSNews did an excellent job of evaluating it.

In the budget proposal he presented to Congress last month, President Barack Obama called for what would be the highest level of sustained taxation ever imposed on the American people, according to the analysis published last week by the Congressional Budget Office.

Under Obama’s proposal, taxes would rise from 17.6 percent of Gross Domestic Product in 2014 to 19.2 percent in 2024. During the ten years from 2015 to 2024, federal taxation would average 18.7 percent GDP.

America has never been subjected to a ten-year stretch of taxation at that level.

HIGHEST SUSTAINED TAXES-NEW-CHART-1

I guess he just doesn’t think that his policies have driven this economy into the ground fast enough, so he wants to put the rate of decline in high gear. Let’s look back and compare, shall we?

In the twelve fiscal years preceding the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor (1930 through 1941), federal taxation averaged 5.3 percent of GDP.

In the five fiscal years encompassing U.S. involvement in World War II (1942 through 1946), federal taxation averaged 16.1 percent of GDP.

In the fiscal years since World War II (1947 through 2013), federal taxation has averaged 17.1 percent of GDP.

In the period from fiscal 1992 through 2001, federal taxes averaged 18.3 percent of GDP. But in the last four years of that period (1998 through 2001), the federal budget was in balance.

In the twelve fiscal years from 2002 through 2013, federal taxes averaged 16.1 percent of GDP—the same that they averaged during World War II. However, the federal government ran deficits in each of those twelve years.

In all ten years from 2015 through 2024, under Obama’s proposal, federal taxes would be higher than 18.3 percent of GDP. During the period of 1992 through 2011, there were only five straight years (1997-2001) when federal taxes were higher than 18.3 percent of GDP.

Despite this record amount of insane taxation, the CBO projects that the public debt will increase –

Under Obama’s budget proposal, according to the CBO, the budget will never balance. But over the next ten years, the federal government would add $7.183 trillion to its debt held by the public.

DEBT HELD BY PUBLIC-OBAMA BUDGET-CHART

Share

Using the Beer Summit to Explain Progressive Taxes

Share

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.

bucket beersThe 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 percent, 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).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).

The seventh now pay $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 $49 instead of $59 (16% 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 $10!”

“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got TEN times more than I!”

“That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 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 and beat him up.

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, boys and girls, men and women, liberals and Marxists and everyone else who keeps crying about “tax cuts for the rich,” is how the progressive income tax system in America 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 a lot friendlier.

Share

Asylum Watch Interprets Bill Gates et al. Vision Of The Future

Share

Bill Gates has become an American icon. He is the epitome of the American success story. Born into a well to do family, he attended the same elite private school as his father had before him. He went on to Harvard but drop out because he had an idea for a new type computer operating system he wanted to work at developing. He would develop an operating system that would allow low tech people to use computers. He called his new computer operating system “Windows”  and he built a company around his idea called Microsoft. Bill’s idea caught on quickly and Microsoft Windows would grow to be the dominate computer  operating system in the world. As a result of the success of Microsoft, Bill Gates became the richest man in the world  (estimated net worth is $76 billion).

So, when someone with the genius of Bill Gates talks about his vision of the future, it’s probably a good idea to pay attention to what he has to say… and it’s also a good idea to read between the lines of what he and other elites have to say about the future.

Mr. Gates spoke to the American Enterprise Institute last month and Business Insider reported on what he had to say:

… Gates said that within 20 years, a lot of jobs will go away, replaced by software automation (“bots” in tech slang, though Gates used the term “software substitution”).

This is what he said:

“Software substitution, whether it’s for drivers or waiters or nurses … it’s progressing. …  Technology over time will reduce demand for jobs, particularly at the lower end of skill set. …  20 years from now, labor demand for lots of skill sets will be substantially lower. I don’t think people have that in their mental model.”

{…}

Gates believes that the tax codes are going to need to change to encourage companies to hire employees, including, perhaps, eliminating income and payroll taxes altogether. He’s also not a fan of raising the minimum wage, fearing that it will discourage employers from hiring workers in the very categories of jobs that are most threatened by automation.

He explained:

“When people say we should raise the minimum wage. I worry about what that does to job creation … potentially damping demand in the part of the labor spectrum that I’m most worried about.”

Isn’t that something? The richest man in the world is “most worried” about minimum wage workers. And, Gates is suggesting that income taxes( including corporate taxes) and payroll taxes should be eliminated. How do Gates and friends see the cost of the federal government being paid? This Daily Caller articles tells us that they want to replace income and payroll taxes with a consumption tax.

“I think it’s [a] tough” task to protect the middle class from the impact of automation, billionaire investor and immigration-advocate Steve Case said in December.

“I do think tax structures will have to move away from taxing [companies’] payroll because society has a desire to have employment,” Gates said.

“That’s going to force us to rethink how these tax structures work in order to maximize employment,” he said. One alternative, he said, would be to create consumption taxes — such as a federal sales tax — to hit higher-income people, while also reducing taxes paid by employers for each employee.

“The idea that consumption should be progressively taxed, I think that makes a lot of sense,” he said.

A progressive consumption (sales) tax? How would that work? I guess everyone would have to have a government I.D. with a computer chip containing the information from their W-2 forms. In other words, the robot waiting on a customer would ask for their government I.D. card and scan it and the costumers income level would determine their percentage consumption tax.

Earlier in the Daily Caller article there was this little tidbit about just how much impact new technology may have on the job market:

A 2013 “study by Oxford University researchers Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A. Osborne … [predicted] that nearly half of American jobs are at ‘high risk’ of being taken over by robots in the next decade or two,” National Journal reported in March.

In 20 years half of American’s jobs may be lost to robots and “software solutions”. That is scary! Yet, as this same article and many others point out, Gates and friends are big supporters of the Senate’s immigration reform bill. Does that make sense if so many people are going to lose their jobs? How many illiterate immigrants is Microsoft going to hire? The Daily Caller article may have the answer:

The immigration increases are backed by progressives who believe new immigrants will vote for Democrats. They’re also backed by wealthy voters who stand to gain from cheaper workers or services, such as landscaping and childcare. The increases are also backed by many business leaders, including Gates and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, who try to hire cheap foreign professionals for jobs sought by American professionals.

Ah! That clears things up. Gates and friends want to be able to hire highly qualified immigrants who will accept a much lower salary than Americans with the same qualifications. The rational they use is that with so much unemployment due to technology, it’s necessary keep the employer’s cost for labor down in the formerly upper middle class so that even more people don’t become unemployed.

Summary

If Bill Gates and friends are right about “software solutions” and robotics replacing up to 50% of the workforce within two decades and if they succeed in getting the tax reforms and immigration reforms they want, America will no longer be a “first world” nation. (Logically all other “developed” nations would go the same way.) The number of people on food stamps would go from 50 million today to maybe 150 million in those two decades. The middle class will shrink dramatically and the average income of the remaining middle class will be much less than it is today. The rich oligarchs though their very high consumption tax will be paying to support all those who can not find employment.

Her is a question for you to ponder. How long will the rich oligarchs put up with supporting half or more the population?

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post:  Asylum Watch

Share

George W. Bush’s Stimulus vs. Barack H. Obama’s – A Look Back

Share

When Obama came into office, he faced the bursting of the housing bubble and a big recession. His answer was to respond with a stimulus package, mostly full of spending, but with some minor tax cuts thrown in for lip service. But his predecessor also came into office faced with a big recession and he also responded with his own stimulus package. Let’s take a look at the way both men handled the problems facing each.

As I said above, let us remember why the Bush tax cuts even took place. When Bush & Cheney took office, they faced a recession that began at the end gwbushof Clinton’s tenure in the Oval Office. The 2001 Economic Growth and Recovery Tax Act was Bush’s version of Obama’s stimulus plan. But instead of subsidizing a vast expansion of government and creating a lot of temporary government jobs, it cut tax rates increased the standard deduction for married folks, increased the child tax credit and increased contribution caps for a bunch of different savings programs.

And what did that do?

According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, the recession ended in November ’01. Of course 9/11 hit and the economy slowed way down again and it was coming back at a very anemic rate. So enter the Jobs Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003. It bolstered the ’01 tax cuts by focusing on dividends and capital gains.

What was the result this time?

Those “tax cuts for the rich” enabled the rich to pay MORE taxes in 2005 than they did any time in the previous two decades. You read that right, more than in the prior 20 years. In fact, the Wall Street Journal reported that those Bush tax cuts showed the richest of the rich – that famed “1%,” went from paying 25% of all income taxes in 1990 to 39% in 2005. The wealthiest 5% went from paying 44% of all income taxes in ’90, to paying a staggering 60% of them in 2005.

Isn’t the left always repeating that they wish the rich would just pay what they’re supposed to? Seems to me, they’d be a big fan of the Bush tax cuts, then. In fact, if you go back farther to 1980 and look at the numbers, with the top marginal tax rate at 70%, the wealthiest 1% paid 19% of all income taxes. Under Bush with the top marginal at 35%, they pay more than double that 19%.

The economy went from being near a standstill at 0.3% growth in 2001 to 2.5% just the next year, and by ’04 GDP was growing at its highest rate in 20 years. Correspondign to this, the unemployment fell to the lowest levels since WWII.

Did you catch that? The Bush tax cuts created the lowest unemployment levels – ever.

But you’ll never hear that in the main stream media, they’re too busy bashing Bush and covering for their ideological leader.

Speaking of President Obama, what exactly are the results of his economic approach?

Well, in November of 2obama finger011  the Congressional Budget Office downgraded its estimate of the benefits of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, or the ’09 stimulus spending package. The CBO says that it MIGHT have sustained 700,000 to 3.5 million jobs during it’s peak in 2010, but over the long haul, it is going to be a net drag on the economy.

Then in 2012, the CBO revised that estimate to between a paltry 200,000 and 1.2 million jobs. If we take the very optimistic number of 1.2 million jobs created by the stimulus, then each job cost the taxpayers $692,500.

Fast forward to 2014, and gues what? Looks like the CBO was correct. But what else did they say?

They said that it DID positively affect the economy in the short run, but adding all that extra debt is keeping out private investment and “will reduce output slightly in the long run…”

The Congressinal Budget Office continued to re-evaluate the stimulus every three months, so its estimates for the cost of Obama’s stimulus have varied from 787$ billion to a high of $862 billion. And the CBO has changed its model for the stimulus’ spending’s direct impact on the economy, showing that ARRA did less than first estimated.

Basically, the CBO states that for every dollar of federal spending, it “crowds out” about a third of a dollar of private spending. And this tells us what we all already knew, the best thing that government can do to put Americans back to work and get the economy pumping is to just plain get out of the way.

Share

Rich Fleeing High Tax New Jersey

Share

That those with money leave places that take said money from them should be obvious, and need no explanation, but there are democrats in the world.  So, in my own sarcastic and demeaning way, I seek to educate the willfully ignorant.  Wyblog helps considerably…

Chris Christie’s patented “Jersey Comeback” may need to be rebranded as a plea — “Come Back, please, and bring your money with you.” Because despite his attempts to reduce our state’s tax burden, the exodus of our wealthy residents continues to escalate.

New Jersey’s high taxes may be costing the state billions of dollars a year in lost revenue as high-earning residents flee, according to a recent study.

The study, Exodus on the Parkway, was completed by Regent Atlantic last year but held for publication until after the November 2013 elections. The study stated it “intentionally” held its results “as 2014 is not an election year for state legislators” and it will “hopefully encourage a serious and objective dialogue aimed at addressing and solving the challenges that New Jersey currently faces.”

The study shows the state has been steadily losing high-net-worth residents since 2004, when Democratic Gov. Jim McGreevey signed the millionaire’s tax into law. The law raised the state income tax 41 percent on those earning $500,000 or more a year.

That millionaire’s tax is still on the books. Oh sure, Chris Christie promised us a tax cut. Several times, actually. He just never bothered to deliver on it.

So, when you make something cost too much, less people buy it.  If you make it too expensive to live somewhere, people will move away.   Of course, the only solution seen by democrats is to make all states suck equally.  Of course, within a few decades, the whole country will look like Detroit, but at least social justice will finally be fully implemented.

Do I need to remind everyone that East Germany had so much social justice that they had to build a wall to keep their own people from escaping?

Share

Will Bill de Blasio Drive the Rich From NYC?

Share

If the rumblings coming from the Big Apple are correct, Bill de Blasio, the communist mayor, will successfully drive the rich, and their money, from the city.  Wyblog has more…

Gentlemen start your moving vans, wealthy NYers perpare to flee de Blasio’s commie utopia

Rich liberals don’t like it when they’re asked to pay their “fair share.”

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s eat-the-rich policies aren’t sitting to well with the city’s wealthy residents. According to Michael Goodman, a number of them are getting ready to flee the Big Apple for greener pastures, like Florida, where they won’t be treated like criminals.

Of course, leftists are taking their usual approach, claiming that it is not, or will not happen, but in 2009, I covered what happened in Maryland, when their democrats decided to punish success…

“Let’s go get those evil rich folks that are pooping on the little guy!”  The class envy folks love saying things like that.  When they get into power, as they are now, they attempt just that.  Now, I could go into a long, drawn out description of why that is a terrible idea, but they won’t listen anyway.  Instead, I’ll give an example, and laugh at their fail.  The source is found here.

Here’s a two-minute drill in soak-the-rich economics:

Maryland couldn’t balance its budget last year, so the state tried to close the shortfall by fleecing the wealthy. Politicians in Annapolis created a millionaire tax bracket, raising the top marginal income-tax rate to 6.25%. And because cities such as Baltimore and Bethesda also impose income taxes, the state-local tax rate can go as high as 9.45%. Governor Martin O’Malley, a dedicated class warrior, declared that these richest 0.3% of filers were “willing and able to pay their fair share.” The Baltimore Sun predicted the rich would “grin and bear it.”

One year later, nobody’s grinning. One-third of the millionaires have disappeared from Maryland tax rolls. In 2008 roughly 3,000 million-dollar income tax returns were filed by the end of April. This year there were 2,000, which the state comptroller’s office concedes is a “substantial decline.” On those missing returns, the government collects 6.25% of nothing. Instead of the state coffers gaining the extra $106 million the politicians predicted, millionaires paid $100 million less in taxes than they did last year — even at higher rates.

Way to go Maryland!  Yet another example of higher taxes yielding smaller returns!   How many jobs went out with them, I wonder?

Then, I covered it again, when even more damage was documented…

Three years later, the damage is even more pronounced…

A new report says wealthy Maryland residents may be moving out due to recent tax hikes – a finding that is sure to escalate the battle over taxing the American rich.

The study, by the anti-tax group Change Maryland, says that a net 31,000 residents left the state between 2007 and 2010, the tenure of a “millionaire’s tax” pushed through by Gov. Martin O’Malley. The tax, which expired in 2010, in imposed a rate of 6.25 percent on incomes of more than $1 million a year.

The Change Maryland study found that the tax cost Maryland $1.7 billion in lost tax revenues. A county-by-county analysis by Change Maryland also found that the state’s wealthiest counties also had some of the largest population outflows.

Ah, higher taxes means less revenue.  When will they ever learn?  Never, actually.  It’s more about appealing to class warfare advocates, and punishing success, than collecting revenue.  If any of them still think reciepts will grow with higher taxes is either stupid, or intentionally stupid.

But fear not, liberals, I’m sure that someone else will be blamed.  It’s the Marxist way!

Share

Obama Has Deep Pockets (Yours!)

Share

No House Limit

“You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?  The answer is yes, that’s what I’m telling you.” – Joe Biden

“We’d all like to vote for the best man, but he’s never a candidate.” – Frank McKinney ‘Kin’ Hubbard

“When I was a boy I was told that anybody could become President; I’m beginning to believe it.” — Clarence Darrow

“In order to become the master, the politician poses as the servant.” – Charles de Gaulle

The biggest spender in the history of history, flush with a brand new letter of credit courtesy of John Boehner and company, wants to go on another spree:

How is President Obama going to stanch the bleeding of red ink and get us on a path of fiscal solvency?

BY ADDING ANOTHER $56 BILLION IN SPENDING.

The president next month will release a political document dressed up as a budget calling for an additional $56 billion for programs in areas such as education, manufacturing and job training. (White House Dossier)

The Obama PlanPeople with an addiction like this are usually forced into a 12-step program, not installed in the Oval Office.More government programs?  That’s like hoping for more incurable diseases, the difference being that the diseases might someday be eliminated.

Bad laws are like flatulence.  The stench remains long after the need has passed.  In New Jersey for example, it’s illegal to delay or detain a homing pigeon.  In Washington, it’s a felony to harass a Bigfoot.  In Champaigne, Illinois, it’s against the law to pee in your neighbor’s mouth.  In Massachusetts, it’s illegal to go to bed without first taking a bath.  In the Empire State, jumping off a building is a crime punishable by death.  In Texas, it’s a felony to own more than six dildos.  And in Hawaii, it’s not permitted to place coins in your ears — a measure that may have been taken in order to prevent a future president from bankrupting the state.

What this country needs is not more laws; it’s fewer lawmakers.

Related articles

PTG

Original Post:  Be Sure You’re Right, Then Go Ahead

Share

Simple Questions About Obamacare

Share

To the American Left, please answer a few questions about Obamacare. How can the ACA be so good when it is going to drive tens of millions of Americans out of their existing coverage when the employer mandate kicks in?

 
What about the mandate forcing folks to act against their faith? Their 1st Amendment rights are violated under the ACA by making contraceptives, sterilization and aborto-facient drugs are mandatory for employers to provide.

 
What about the over 20 new taxes that are hitting the American people for a half a trillion dollars? These are levied against medical innovators, health insurance companies and there’s even a tax on the sale of your home.

 
What about the IPAB(Independent Payment Advisory Board) that is built into the ACA? Sarah Palin was reviled by the left for stating that there are death panels in Obamacare. Turns out, she was correct. Howard Dean, an MD, former head of the Democratic National Committee and former Presidential candidate had a lot to say about the IPAB. “The IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them,” Dean wrote in The Wall Street Journal. “Getting rid of the IPAB is something Democrats and Republicans ought to agree on.”

 
What about Obamacare taking a whopping $716 billion out of the Medicare budget? Please don’t tell me that it’s only ending waste, fraud and abuse because as a disabled American, and a heart transplant candidate, I can personally attest to the fact that I have been denied services previously authorized by Medicare. Literally, the summer after the law passed, I felt the first denial of service by Medicare.

 
What about that $2500 in savings that American families were going to enjoy under Obamacare? Turns out, it was his advisors’ “best guess” on possible savings by the ACA. I wrote an article that was picked up by Free Republic and The Hill. I Promise!! Barack Obama’s Great Deception on Obamacare Premiums. In it, I report how three Harvard professors that were unpaid advisers to the Obama campaign wrote a memo that cites their “best guess” of annual savings of $200 billion. They then divided that by the U.S. population, multiplied out to represent a family of four, then they rounded down to get to the $2500 figure.

 
What about the ACA fundamentally changing the relationhsip between you and your Doctor? Built into Obamacare are government control over doctor decisions. Value-based payments, quality reporting requirements, and government comparative-effectiveness boards will dictate how doctors practice medicine. Nearly half of all physicians are seriously considering leaving practice, leading to a severe doctor shortage.

 
What about this promise by Obama? “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits — either now or in the future. I will not sign it if it adds one dime to the deficit, now or in the future, period,” Obama told a joint-session of Congress in September 2009. However, the Congressional Budget Office. Realistic projections suggested by reports from not only the CBO, but the CMS trustees (the entity that controls Medicare and Medicaid) and their chief Medicare actuary is very, very dire. They state that the “primary deficit” will increase exponentially each year. The Democratically controlled Senate Budget Committee and the GAO have confirmed that this will add $6.2 trillion to our ever expanding federal deficit.

 
And finally, what do you say to the 159 new boards, agencies and programs the ACA creates? How much more government do you want?

http://www.nationalreview.com/critical-condition/304361/top-ten-worst-things-obamacare-grace-marie-turner

Share

Classic Snarky: I’m a Democrat-You Owe Me

Share

Note:  Here is a classic CH 2.0 post from the one and only Snarky Basterd.

I’m a democrat. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I have my own pile of money, but I want yours, too, including the four pennies you have rattling around in the bottom of that peanut butter jar you frugal idiots like to use as a change holder. Give it up! You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I just say I like the public school system. My kids go to private schools so that your kids can go to public schools and learn how to be good little democrats like me. When my kids grow up and become better members of a collectivist society, and your kids grow up confused, my kids will get government jobs and take more money and freedom from your kids. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I have a job with health insurance, but I think it’s everyone else’s fault when I get sick and have to cut back on my lifestyle so I can pay for health care that should be free, along with cars and houses and big screen TVs. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. There is no god. You can go ahead and get down on your knees and pray to the ceiling for forgiveness and strength and peace, but I’ll be standing right behind you with a tire iron, bashing your skull and stealing your wallet. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I hate people. I would rather sleep with my dog or a cucumber or a tree than with another person…unless I can just dump them on the curb after we’re through. You just have sex to make more people so you can continue to earn more money while you rape the planet. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I love taxes. It’s patriotic…for you…to pay them. I don’t pay any, anyway. And if I have to, I’ve figured out loop holes or have offshore accounts to shelter my money, so the government never really gets too much from me anyway. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. It’s not only my right but also my duty to take freedom and representative republicanism from you, little by little, and replace it with government bureaucracy. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. I’m needy. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I have a $20 million vacation playground on Martha’s Vineyard and a guarded compound in South Chicago and belong to the richest majority in Washington’s history. But I hate rich people who aren’t democrats and want your property too so I can save endangered swamp rats and build turtle tunnels and fix toilets. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. There are more of you than there are of me. You breathe too much. I’ve told the world outlandish lies that you’re causing global warming, using faulty correlations to get everyone so worried they’re about to let me tax thin air. And you’ll breathe a lot less. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I’m an elitist. I’m perfect. I’m not like all of you stupid wingnuts out there working your greedy little fingers to the bone trying to make a little money and feed your family and have something to call successful when you retire. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I live in the city so I can get stupid drunk and piss on the streets when I want and kick your parked car when it gets in my way. It’s too bad that you have all those guns in your humble suburban and country homes. If you didn’t, I’d come and toss you out on your naked ass and make you live in the fetid cities that my government policies screwed up. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I think you hate homosexuals. I have no idea that you just want to be left alone and live your life the way you see fit and not have your children taught with government money that they should seek alternative lifestyles for the fun of it. I just want you to do what I think you should do with your life. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I’m so tolerant I can’t tolerate anyone who doesn’t think the way I do. In fact, I hate white people. I hate all people. I hate myself. I hate myself so much that I hate you even more when you are happy. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I don’t know how to do anything for myself. I need to be told what to do. I don’t think human beings are capable of taking care of themselves. That’s what government is for. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I don’t think any people should have rights. I think fish and frogs and grass should, however, and I want to represent them in court…and you to pay for it. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I’m a child. I act like a child and I think like a child and I live like a child and I throw up my hands and have little fits when I don’t get my way. There should be no consequences for anything I do. But there should be consequences for you, even if you’re blameless in what I accuse you of. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I’m racist but I get others to think that you are racist just because I call you one. It’s a riot to watch you squirm because I know you have a conscience. I do not. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I was born poor or middle class or rich, but it doesn’t matter. I was born black or white or Asian or Latina, but it still doesn’t matter. In fact, it’s Bush’s fault that I was even allowed to be born at all. You owe me.

I’m a democrat. I want health care at your expense, while I’m young and virulent and child-like. But then I want you to kill me when I start to get old and weak and feeble, so that all of my young and virulent and child-like democrat friends can have health care at your expense.

Then I want to come back to life as a rock, so lots of birds can shit on me. They owe me, too, for being a loony moonbat.

Previously posted at Feed Your ADHD.

Share

Remembering JFK 50 Years Later: He Cut Taxes, and it Worked!

Share

Today is the 50th Anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy.   He was a Democrat from a different era-when democrats were overwhelmingly   JFK was anti-communist, and pro-growth; something scorned by today’s democrat politicians, who are, at least behind closed doors, communists themselves.  So, in honor of the memory of JFK as an actual American, here is part of a speech in which he proposed to cut taxes…

JFK did eventually cut taxes.  And, if you look it up, the 60’s were rather prosperous.

H/T:  The Lid

Share

More ObamaCare Fraud: More Navigators Caught Advising Fraud!

Share

ObamaCare has “navigators,” that are supposed to guide people through the process of signing up for benefits.  Predictably, these navigators seem to be steering people in the direction of fraud.  Two days ago, we covered that Project Veritas showed a video that exposed ObamaCare navigators discussing hiding income form taxes to obtain more government benefits.  This is what I suggested at that time…

Of course, the Urban League is stating that the entire situation was exposed under, “false pretenses.”  If you recall, this is a familiar refrain.  When ACORN was busted, and Planned Parenthood were exposed, there were similar denials and efforts to explain away the damning footage.  Then, subsequent videos are released, and when the calls of “selective editing” are made, full and unedited footage will be released.  By launching into denials, the Urban League is playing into O’Keefe’s hands, provided that he follows his normal strategy.

Time will tell. I hope O’Keefe has enough videos to insure that the entire system is thoroughly exposed.

And, true to form, Jame’s O’Keefe and the gang at Project Veritas has more…

Now, what will be the defense of round two?  I’m willing to bet that O’Keefe has at least a third video out there.

The facts are simple, it appears from these videos, that there is massive fraud already built into the ObamaCare system.  That is not going to change.  You see, the ObamaCare navigators are guiding people into committing fraud and causing people to get subsidies that they would not realistically qualify for.  In the meantime, people that actually pay their own way are losing their plans, and are being offered plans with higher out of pocket expenses, at far higher premiums.  In other words, others are paying a ton more to cover the fraud being encouraged by the ObamaCare navigators.  It literally provides significant incentives to lie on taxes, or otherwise not reporting income.  It punishes people that are honest on their taxes, by forcing them to subsidize people that hide their income, at the advise of people working for the government.

And that, my friends, is at least a million flavors of messed up.

Share

Is it Time to go Galt (Revisited)? Some Simple Ways to Avoid Feeding the Beast

Share

I original posted this about a year ago, and thought it might be worth another look. 

Since our Republic is essentially on it’s deathbed, and Obama’s hand is poised on the plug for the final pull, many are contemplating their role in the new order.  Do we quietly  acquiesce, and accept our enslavement, or do we try to sabotage the nanny state by refusing be be sucked dry?  Well, there is a way to legally and ethically resist the beast-it’s called “going Galt.”   If you are unaware  “going Galt” is a reference to Ayn Rand’s prophetic novel, Atlas Shrugged, in which the producers in a future America tire of being vilified and robbed by a nanny state.  Their response was to drop out and refuse to produce, leading to the collapse of the corrupt system.  Reaganite Republican has a good description of what it means to “go Galt.”  

What exactly is ‘Going Galt’?

Think of it as a supply-side Cloward-Piven strategy…

starve the beast, rather than milk-it-dry:

‘Going Galt’ doesn’t simply mean getting angry. That would be “Going Postal.” It means having righteous indignation at the injustice of a political system that bails out individuals and institutions for irresponsible behavior and at the expense of those like you who prosper through hard work and personal responsibly. 

‘Going Galt’ means asking in the face of new taxes and government controls, “Why work at all?” “For whom am I working?” “Am I a slave?” 

‘Going Galt’ means recognizing that you’re being punished not for your vices but for your virtues. 

‘Going Galt’ means recognizing that you have a moral right to your own life, the pursuit of your own happiness, and thus to the rewards you’ve earned with your labor. 

‘Going Galt’ means recognizing that you deserve praise and honor for your achievements rather than damnation as “exploiters.” 

‘Going Galt’ means recognizing that you do not need to justify your life or wealth to your neighbors, “society,” or politicians, or bureaucrats. They’re yours, period! 

‘Going Galt’ means recognizing that the needs of others do not give them a claim to your time, effort, and achievements. 

‘Going Galt’ means shrugging off unearned guilt, refusing to support your own destroyers, refusing to give them what Ayn Rand termed “the sanction of the victim.” 

It means taking the moral high ground by explicitly rejecting as evil the premise of “self-sacrifice” that they sell to you as a virtue— in fact “self-sacrifice” is an invitation to suicide.

So, now that you know why, what about how?  Well, Reaganite Republican has some tips as to how…

1. Buy used or new via secondary markets. Use Craigslist to find new stuff at less than retail… and you pay no taxes into the system. 

2. Contribute to the secondary market by having a yard sale, you’ve probably got tons of junk you haven’t even seen in years. 

3. Forget status symbols and keeping-up-with-the-Jones’. Maybe you can afford that nice new car, but you’ll pay A TON of taxes on it. Find a lesser vehicle that makes you happy that feeds the beast less, perhaps one bartered from within the family. 

4. Invest and hold. Avoid taxable capital gains until Jan 2017. 

5. FIX YOUR STUFF instead of replacing it. So many people look at durable possessions as disposable. Take those pants to the tailor, or better yet, get a used sewing machine and fix them yourself. Find someone with a welding machine to fix that patio chair. 

6. Maintain your possessions properly. Clean the dust out of your computer. Keep on top of the car, house, and tools.

7. Plant a garden and grow as much of your own food as possible… and don’t forget spices in your window box, fresh is best anyway.. 

8. Enjoy life more simply. Choose a day at the park over an afternoon at the movies.  Attend a church cookout instead of going to Outback.

9. Speaking of things like the movies – stop going (Ed- I did years ago). Wait for the DVD and rent it for $1 at Redbox. If there is a cheaper option to do something, take that option.

Or – here’s a radical idea – buy used books dirt cheap and READ. 

10. Set up two days a week to run errands. Run them all at once and efficiently instead of wasting money (and taxes) on fuel. If your workplace offers a work-from-home option, TAKE IT. (The ‘green’ Left will love this one, but we’re talking about opportunities to avoid paying taxes into the system, while saving yourself some coin in the process) .

11. Create gifts instead of buying them. 

12. Barter for goods and services under-the-table

13. Avoid all union shops, products, and services

14. If possible, move to a low-tax Red state

15. Lower the amount the feds withhold from your paycheck- just take the maximum allowable deductions. Yes, it may mean you have to ‘pay’ come tax time BUT if just 10% of the people who receive paychecks would do this it would put a severe crimp on the DC cash flow. Just stash the extra cash somewhere and come tax time if you need it to pay Uncle Obama well then you have it.

As you can see, it might be a sacrifice of sorts, but you won’t be feeding the government that wishes to enslave you.  Of course, the choice to “go Galt” is yours to make, but anything you can do to not feed the beast, the better.

Share

New Yorkers Going Galt, Fleeing NY, Took $46,000,000,000 With Them

Share

The blue states continue to suffer from the plague that causes the “blueness,” namely, being run by Democrats.  The latest victim is the state of NY.  It seems that lots of New Yorkers decided to say, “nyet comerade” to the state government’s nonsense, and simply leaving. The kicker is?  They are taking all their money with them, and that’s quite a lot! Here’s a map, with all the particulars, from Tax Foundation, via Lonely Conservative…

The Blue states, those that are predominately Democrat controlled face an interesting choice; abandon the destructive high taxation and regulation that causes producers to leave, just go on as usual, while blaming the rich for all of your problems, or build a wall to keep people from leaving.

Share

Record Number of Americans Renouncing Citizenship Due to Taxes

Share

As sad as it seems, ever increasing numbers of American  citizens are renouncing their citizenship.  The reason seems apparent-taxes.  Wonk Wire has more…

“The number of U.S. taxpayers renouncing citizenship or permanent-resident status surged to a record high in the second quarter, as new laws aimed at cracking down on overseas assets increase the cost of complying and the risk of a taxpayer misstep,” the Wall Street Journal reports.

“A total of 1,130 names appeared on the latest list of renunciations from the IRS… That is far above the previous high of 679, set in the first quarter, and more than were reported in all of 2012.”

This is Atlas…Shrugging.  Sadly, if taxes were more simple and reasonable, the government would get tax income from these people.  However, since they are less than reasonable, the government gets nothing.

Isn’t this like liberals though?  They claim that people aren’t paying their “fair share,” so either economic activity slows, stops, goes underground, or goes overseas, and the government gets less and less.  Since this happens in each and every circumstance in which it is tried, we have to assume that either they mean to destroy the system by punishing economic activity, or it’s chronic and complete stupidity, and a near complete break with reality.

Share

Parallel Universe Alert: Melissa Harris-Perry Claims That Detroit was Killed by too Little Government

Share

Spock_(mirror)

Was Detroit bankrupted  by too little government?  Well, if you ask Melissa Harris-Perry, we re living in a parallel universe where human nature and reality itself is the polar opposite of itself, and too little government did bring Detroit to it’s knees.  First, let’s take a look at Harris-Perry’s comments…


Um, not only did she deny reality, but she found a way to bash Republicans, who last ran Detroit in 1961. She also misses the high taxes that scared away businesses, the horrific crime rate that scared away the people that didn’t leave because of the taxes, the abysmal education system that makes sure that the citizens remain low information, , and the unions that scared most of the auto industry away. Obviously, it was big government that killed Detroit.

The sad thing is that there will be people that see this nonsense, and actually believe Melissa Harris-Perry. And, these people vote, probably repeatedly.  The upside, thankfully, is that not many peoiple actually watch MSNBC anyway, so the damage is hopefully minimal.

Share