Showing posts with label raising taxes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label raising taxes. Show all posts

June 1, 2009

Of Deficits, Debt and Spending

President Obama. The man who's campaign included the notion that the budget deficit should be tackled with a scalpel instead of a hatchet.

FOX NEWS: LOS ANGELES -- Sen. John McCain proposed a possible spending freeze on virtually every federal program except the Department of Defense, for veterans and entitlement programs in a presidential debate with rival Barack Obama Friday night. Obama countered that approach is too broad-based, saying it was the equivalent of "using a hatchet where you need a scalpel."

Why did he say this? Clearly even the President is smart enough to realize the debt he's accumulating is unsustainable. Perhaps during the campaign, he was unaware of the consequences of his debt-accruing future actions. But even someone who wants to nationalize at a bare minimum, health care, but potentially also the banks and the automotive industry, has to realize that the funding for all of this has to come from somewhere. The President has not lost touch with reality. He recently stated he was concerned about the unsustainability of the national debt.

May 14 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama, calling current deficit spending “unsustainable,” warned of skyrocketing interest rates for consumers if the U.S. continues to finance government by borrowing from other countries.

“We can’t keep on just borrowing from China,” Obama said at a town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. “We have to pay interest on that debt, and that means we are mortgaging our children’s future with more and more debt.”

Holders of U.S. debt will eventually “get tired” of buying it, causing interest rates on everything from auto loans to home mortgages to increase, Obama said. “It will have a dampening effect on our economy.”


Gee, do ya' think?!? This from the man who has provided a national budget that will DOUBLE the national debt accumulated by every other President in history COMBINED, and who has presided over the largest expansion over government EVER. The President's budget is $3.55 trillion. A trillion is a million sets of a million. How many Americans had heard of Barack Obama 3 years ago? Now he's set to spend over $3.5 trillion dollars America doesn't have. Good luck with that America.

But since the President has come to realize the danger that his spending has created, it's all okay now. We can all hit the snooze button on the United States' upcoming fiscal demolition, because the President is going to fix it.

Despite the empty words of the election campaign, the reality of the national debt is something that the President realizes he has to tackle. After all, he can't transfer wealth and pay for entitlements if there's no cash to support all of it.

The President has three options for handling the debt he burdened America with;

(1) Actually get out his scalpel and cut spending. Everywhere - maybe a hatchet would be good.
(2) Borrow from the Chinese and from future generations.
(3) Raise taxes.

What do you suppose the President will do? Well, it's all out in the open - he's doing all three.

(1) He's taken a scalpel to government, ordering his cabinet to cut $100 million in spending. That's not even a start though.



But it turns out, that wasn't the big hit he had planned. He decided to cut "wasteful" defense spending by 10%;

The Obama administration has asked the military's Joint Chiefs of Staff to cut the Pentagon's budget request for the fiscal year 2010 by more than 10 percent -- about $55 billion -- a senior U.S. defense official tells FOX News.

Last year's defense budget was $512 billion. Service chiefs and planners will be spending the weekend "burning the midnight oil" looking at ways to cut the budget -- looking especially at weapons programs, the defense official said.


All told it looks like the defense spending cuts (in the middle of a war) amount to $55 billion. Combined with the other savings the administration is finding, it amounts to $55.1 billion. He's taken a scalpel to everything but the military. Apparently the military was good enough to still get the hatchet.

(2) The President, despite running up a MASSIVE new debt, proclaimed the US can't just keep borrowing from China. Despite the fact that it's exactly what he's doing!

From Boston.com;

Obama said the debt situation would create greater economic problems if foreign countries like China lost their appetite for U.S. treasuries.

"What's also true is at some point they're just going to get tired of buying our debt,"
he said.

"And when that happens, we will really have to raise interest rates to be able to borrow and that will raise interest rates for everybody."

The White House estimated earlier this week the U.S. budget deficit will be $1.84
trillion for the fiscal year that ends September 30.

Obama has pledged to halve the U.S. deficit within four years despite implementing economic stimulus measures that will make it larger in the short term.


Even more ironic - after spiking the debt, he's promising to cut it in half in four years - to a level way beyond the worst annual deficit in American history. And that's supposed to be comforting? Or acceptable?

Why the press is still giving him a pass on the dooming of the nation is a mystery. Why he's claiming he can't do what he's doing is more obvious. He's setting the stage for the inflation he created so that he can - you guessed it - blame somebody else and replay his youtube clip in 2 or 4 years, saying "See, I warned you about this." Galling.

Running deficits means borrowing. Much of that borrowing is from countries like China. And it means, because of the size of the borrowing, that it will take generations to fix. That's the reason it's been called generational theft. What it also means is an increasingly nervous China that holds $767 billion in US debt (as of March 2009) and Japan holds another $686 billion. All told, $3.2 trillion is being held offshore. That is nationally dangerous. Compare it to March of last year when China held, $490 billion, Japan held $597 billion, and all told, $2.5 trillion was held offshore. In one year, China's stake in America has climbed 56%, Japan's by 15% and the world's stake has risen by 28%.

Not all of that gets laid at President Obama's feet. But let's face it, he's the guy now and he could choose to tackle the problem, ignore the problem or exacerbate the problem. He has chosen to compound the problem two-fold and over the next 10 years, three-fold. It borders on treasonous.

(3) Of course there's a third way. A Shining Path as it were. I mentioned Obama was setting everyone up for an 'I told you so' when the inflation hits. The reality is even worse. He's setting up the country for massive tax increases. Benefit now, the bill will come later. It's the only way he can get some of this stuff passed. By the time the bill comes due, he wants people to be thinking of everything as sunk costs. It has to be too late to turn back.

Tax changes are coming America. And they won't be small. Obama knows the money has to come from somewhere. He's proven he won't REALLY cut costs. He's setting up for the borrowing being an unsustainable option. So where does that leave you?

A lot of new taxes. He won't tell you to read his lips, but he's already saying it if you listen closely.

May 28, 2009

End Government Greed!

Yes, it's time for another call to get yourself out to a July 4th Tea Party. Why?

All too often, the Democrats and their socialist cohorts drone on and on about Wall Street greed, or corporate greed. It's class warfare distilled down to a blame game. Wall Street greed led to the need for a TARP bailout plan.

It's quite see-through if you bother to look, but most people won't bother. Blaming the other guy to get your vote is an age old political trick. Hitler had the Jews, the Democrats have the faceless corporations.

NOTICE I didn't compare Obama to Hitler, I just compared a tactic that Hitler used to something out of the Democratic playbook? But if this blog were reasonable well-read (which, unfortunately it isn't (yet)), I'd no doubt now be branded as shrill and a right-wing kook.

In any case corporations have every right (so far) to pursue and maximize their profits. It really shouldn't be called greed until it crosses the line into unethical behavior - cutting corners on safety, illegal activity, that sort of thing.

But there does seem to be a greed that the class warfare experts don't want you to notice, and that's government greed. The small government/ limited government crowd is derided in the mainstream media, but they have reason to fear a bigger government. A bigger government has more power to come after your money and your freedom if they so choose.

For example, when Democrats are in power, they have a distinct tendency to raise taxes - and not just on the highest tax brackets, the lowest brackets too. They 're greedy to get and spend your money, their way.




That chart should be enough to raise the hair on the back of your neck. A top marginal rate of 92% and a bottom marginal rate of over 22%! But even if that's not enough to scare you because you figure the United States could never go there again, you still can see that there's a Democrat tendency to raise taxes on all brackets and a conservative tendency to lower taxes on higher brackets and hold the line or lower taxes on the bottom bracket. So the financial greed exists, but is much more pronounced when Democrats are in power.

The current government is also greedy to hoard power to themselves and their ilk. For example, the power brokering that seems to have gone on to ensure that Chrysler dealerships that got closed were the ones that supported the GOP and not the ones that supported the Democrats or more precisely, President Obama in 2008.

It's being dubbed dealergate, and it's really, really, scary.

Some detailed articles:

Hot Air
World Net Daily
The Truth About Cars
Libertarian Republican blog
I Hate The Media
NiceDeb blog

More will be written on this in the coming days. IF it turns out to be accurate, it's something that SHOULD blow the doors off the President's personal popularity. It likely won't but it should. He's looking to establish his own cabal of ruling class. He said doesn't want to run the auto industry - he's too busy. He didn't lie. What he didn't say was that he wanted to ensure that those in his camp were the ones running it. It should make you nervous about not only the automotive industry but also the banking industry. Obama doesn't just want the unions in his pocket, he wants the businesses too.

Can you say Al Capone?

UPDATE: Apparently the chart doesn't show too well. Anyone with skills on how to edit jpg files, please let me know so I can make it more visible.

May 14, 2009

Hat Tip - Hot Air

I've got to tip my hat to Hot Air today. They've killed it with their articles on May 13/14. They're consistently a good source of information on issues from a conservative perspective. Today however, they nailed a bunch of topics that when looked at as a whole, shape a pretty clear picture. Outstanding.

The economy - the path Obama and the Democrats have chosen has disaster written all over it.

How much of the Porkulus bill has been spent? Do you really want to see this?

US speeding towards a financial crash. Ouch. The graph in the page is telling, disturbing.

Housing foreclosures are accelerating. Really? Who'd have guessed. I'd been meaning to blog on how the foreclosure forestalling meant only a delay in the inevitable - Hot Air beat me to the punch. But that may explain some of the stock market rally we've been seeing over the last 9 weeks.

The coming tax hikes are going to destroy American productivity. Why? Because the left hand doesn't know what the far left hand is doing. Bailing out GM and helping the UAW disproportionately is one bad thing, but raising taxes in a recession is unconscionable.

Amidst the chaos, Obama pushing ahead with unfunded Health Care benefits. Why? Because the President is agenda driven and not reality driven.

Water boarding & The War on Terror - let's all agree that the Democrats are starting to cave and that Bush was right, okay?

Schumer hypocrisy on water boarding - he voted for it being good, before he voted for it being bad.

Feinstein defends water boarding by defending Nancy Pelosi - Bush bad, Pelosi understandably not bad, just prudent. Guess what you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Even Jon Stweart hit Pelosi on water boarding. Why? Well at least, unlike the Democrats he's consistent in his position, wrong though it may be.

The President changes course on releasing Abu Ghraib photos. Why? Bush was right. Come on, say it.

Ethics and hypocrisy - Democrats being Democrats. Obfuscate to skate.

"Most ethical Congress" kills ethics investigation Is anyone surprised by this? Besides Jon Stewart. Wake up Sleeping Beauty, your party is full of poison apples.

Schumer hypocrisy on water boarding - yep, so bad it shows up in two categories.

AIG Bonuses were known about months before the faux outrage. Yep. Hypocrisy.

Report on Right Wing Extremist pulled. And underlings blamed. Go figure.

Hot Air really had a banner 24 hour period in its reporting. Way to go!

March 19, 2009

UN - Ditch the Dollar / Save the Planet

Part 1 of 2

If the United Nations ever displayed it's hostility towards the United States more blatantly than it has in the last 48 hours I don't recall the occasion. They also have managed in the same 48 hours to display their latent stupidity.

Shortly after the Reuters report came out saying that the UN was looking for a $750 Billion oil tax to create a "Green New Deal" (a tax that would no doubt significantly hit Americans, and is egregiously ill-timed), they follow it up with the idea of dumping the American dollar as the world's reserve currency. Honestly, I'd encourage the United States to take a "not if I ditch you first" attitude on all of this garbage.

Stepping back to the Green Deal idea for a second, Reuters quotes the head of the U.N. environment agency, Achim Steiner as saying;


"The opportunity must not be lost...If, for argument's sake, you were to put a five-year levy in OECD countries of $5 a barrel, you would generate $100 billion per annum. It translates into roughly 3 cents per liter, it would be almost, if not totally, unnoticed by the consumer," he said, especially since oil prices have fallen from more than $140 a barrel at mid-2008 peaks to about $40.
Where to begin?

(1) What freaking OPPORTUNITY??!? During a major global recession he wants to increase oil taxes? Of course this guy is an environmentalist and knows less than zero about economics. This is NOT in any way shape or form an opportunity to levy more taxes. Unless of course you subscribe to the Emmanuel school of 'don't waste a crisis' panic management.

(2) 3 cents per liter equates to about 11.4 cents per gallon. Depending on the size of the vehicle gas tank, that's anywhere from $1 to $3 extra per fill up. Not to mention impacts on other industries - construction, aviation, plastics, manufacturing, transportation. Furthermore if the United States consumes 25% of the world's oil, it will therefore absorb 25% of that $100 billion per year. True that's peanuts compared to all the money President Obama's putting towards recovery, health care, mortgages, bailouts, etc. But it just might be the straw to break the camel's back.

(3) Global warming is still complete bunk. It doesn't matter what Al Gore says, he's out of touch with reality - he won't even debate except to say debate is over. Tell that to the thousands of scientists who think global warming is not a man-made phenomenon.

(4) The article claims the idea for a Green New Deal was inspired by Roosevelt's New Deal that supposedly ended the Great Depression. Except all it did to end the Depression was to move the end date out by a few years, thus prolonging the depression. Great idea Achim.

This had to be the stupidest idea ever. At least for a few hours until the next UN stupid idea came along shortly afterwards.

(See Part 2)

February 26, 2009

The NY Times vs. Reality

The NY Times in an article explaining why your taxes are going to rise, doesn't fail to get it's dig in against former President Bush and the Bush tax cuts, while managing to gloss over the fact that;
But the problem can’t be solved just by taxing the rich. That top 1 percent pays only about one-quarter of federal taxes. Once the recession ends, taxes on the not-so-rich will need to rise, too.
Admitting in one short paragraph that the taxes on the middle class will have to rise and that the top 1% of income earners pay 25% of all taxes, the editor of the Times must have been asleep.

There's a couple of problems with the New York Times when compared to reality. Firstly there's this issue; as recently as October 31st, 2008 (just before the election), the New York Times had this to say;

Independent analyses of the presidential candidates’ tax proposals show that those who make less than $250,000 a year would not see their taxes raised under Senator Barack Obama’s plans. Further, Mr. Obama would generally cut taxes more than Senator John McCain would for households with incomes less than $100,000 a year.

Uh okay - you were lying then or covering for Obama now, NYT - take your pick. The reality is that your statements from 4 months ago are diametrically opposed to your statements today.

But the deception goes further. The article today (as shown in the graph below) points out that tax revenue as a percentage of GDP dropped as a result of the Bush Tax cuts of 2001 and 2003.




But that is in direct contrast to the graph Nonsensible Shoes posted on February 23rd that shows the Bush tax cuts of 2003 led to the highest revenue ever recorded in 2005.

Are both of these graphs potentially true? Well, yes actually. Looking at tax revenue as a percentage of GDP is a bit of a red herring. If you lower taxes of course it's percentage of the domestic economy will fall. More economic activity is happening outside of the tax base, so as a percentage it will necessarily be smaller. It has to be. But look what happened to the tax revenue. It rose, and quite significantly too.

So while liberals would have you look at the impact on tax as a percentage of the economy, what they are doing is distracting you from the fact that reducing taxes decreased the government revenue. Extra money held by consumers and business created additional economic activity, clearly with a higher multiplier effect and grew the economy which made the tax percentage fall even further, even while the tax revenue for the government still managed to rise quite dramatically.

The graph below shows what the real issue is;


Revenue dipped in the early part of the decade with the recession and then the 9/11 attacks compounding the problem. But the tax cuts, particularly the 2003 tax cuts started to kick in over time and by 2005 the tax revenue was steamrolling past historical highs. But look at the spending line. In the last 14 years spending has doubled and the graph shows no sign of curtailing the spending. It's just a steady rise.

Looking back at the Times chart, the interest payments and the Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security burden are what's going to hurt. Getting the debt down is important, but most important is figuring out smarter ways to finance Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security has got to be priority #1 for the government. And by the way, in 2004 that's what President Bush wanted to spend his political capital on. Seems like not only was he right in warning about the impending mortgage crisis, he was also sounding another warning that wasn't being heeded under his watch.

Perhaps it's deliberate misdirection in support of Obama's tax plan, or perhaps it's too much to expect of the NY Times to understand basic economics (tax revenue growth is possible with tax reductions). In either case, don't let the Times, the Democrats or the President fool you into another crisis mentality with respect to government deficits and the national debt. Yes the deficit must be addressed, but the issues are on the spending side, not the revenue side. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Share This