Budget has NOT been passed yet....sm

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

The budget funds Volunteer America, and includes a provision to set up a commission to STUDY whether or not "mandatory volunteerism" should be established. My prediction is that it won't happen.

1. Roll back a significant portion or all of the stimulus that has not yet been distributed as of 2010.

2. Indiiduals earning less than $50,000 or couples earning less than $100,000 could either file under the current tax provisions or pay a flat 10%. Others earning more would pay a flat 25%. All who choose the flat tax rate could literally file their taxes on a form the size of a single index card.

You have to think about some of the implications of these tax ideas to understand the less obvious benefits, among which would be the stanching of the flow of investment outside the country and attraction of foreign investment, and an enormous savings in the waste of time and money that presently go to nothing more productive than filing taxes. A simple scheme like this would also be much more difficult to defraud than the complex system currently in place.

On this last point, just consider all the back taxes that Obama has collected from his tax-scofflaw political appointees - over $100,000! Not one of the excuses that any of them offered for not paying their taxes - i.e., that the tax laws are too complicated even for that "brilliant" idiot, Geithner (who now heads up the IRS). Not one of them could have skated by "paying their back taxes" while apologizing that they just couldn't get a handle on what they're supposed to pay. Now, multiply just those people by all the other tax cheats in this country who couldn't use similar excuses (or schemes, whichever term you prefer).

It's simple: What do you make? Withhold 10% and you owe nothing at the end of the year. Fill out your card, send it in, and you're done. And you tax accountants who have helped your clients avoid taxes for years...we need accountants for other purposes, so you won't starve either.

Peter Peterson. (Photo: Reuters)

Peter Peterson is coming to get your Social Security and Medicare. Peterson was the commerce secretary in the Nixon administration. He then went on to make billions of dollars as one of the top executives at the Blackstone Group, a private equity fund. Mr. Peterson is known as one of the top beneficiaries of the fund managers' tax break, through which he personally pocketed tens of millions of dollars.

Mr. Peterson has been using his Wall Street wealth to attack these social insurance programs for decades, but he recently stepped up his efforts. Last year, he spent $1 billion to endow the Peter G. Peterson Foundation to further his efforts.

In politics, it's not easy to counter the impact of $1 billion. In addition to its money, the Peterson crew enjoys the support of many important news outlets, most importantly The Washington Post, which pushes his line on both its editorial and news pages.

In fact, The Post even went so far as to identify Peterson's foundation by its boilerplate, an organization that "advocates for federal fiscal responsibility," instead of telling readers of its political leanings, the normal mode of identification for such organizations. (The Center for Economic and Policy Research was established "to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives.")

While the Peterson crew may have the money and the support of the media, the rest of us can rely on logic and ridicule to counter the attack. In this spirit, we have the Peter G. Peterson Intergenerational Fairness Tax Credit. (Mr. Peterson is apparently fond of having things named after him. In addition to his new Peter G. Peterson Foundation, he also has a think tank named after him, the Peter G. Peterson Institute for International Economics.)

The Peterson tax credit would essentially take the Peterson crew at their word. They claim that they are worried that huge tax burdens will leave future generations worse off than the generations that preceded them.

This isn't true. There is no plausible scenario, short of war or environmental disaster, that would leave future generations worse off than their parents or grandparents. But we don't have to argue with the billionaire; let's just give future generations the option to trade places with their parents or grandparents who made out so well.

This is where the tax credit comes in. The tax credit would allow an individual to trade her after-tax income for the after-tax income that someone born 20 or 40 years sooner would have earned at the same age. For example, if someone born in 1990 believes in 2020 that their grandparents got a better deal, they would simply check off the year 1940, and they would have their taxes adjusted so that they would have the same after-tax income of a person born in 1940, when they were also age 30.

Of course, the young ones would end up big losers in this story. Real wages, on average, will be more than 50 percent higher in 2020 than they were in 1970. Even if tax rates were, on average, 5 percentage points higher, workers in 2020 will still have after-tax wages that are more than 40 percent higher than their counterparts in 1970.

This means that anyone who chose to take advantage of the intergenerational equity tax credit would end up as a big loser. That is why it can help solve the deficit problem. If people check off the tax credit, they will pay more in taxes and, therefore, increase government revenue.

It might be hard to convince large numbers of people to voluntarily pay more in taxes. This is where the Peterson Foundation comes in. They are spending huge amounts of money trying to convince young people that they are being ripped off by their parents and grandparents. They are even promoting front groups of young people to advance this effort.

With his billion dollars, Peterson could convince a huge number of gullible young people to tax advantage of the intergenerational equity tax credit. Insofar as he is successful in this effort, he can help to generate billions of dollars that can be used for items like health care, preschool education, and other pressing needs.

So, let's join efforts with Mr. Peterson and encourage his followers to take advantage of the Peter G. Peterson Intergenerational Fairness Tax Credit. There is a word for taking money from willfully ignorant young people who would deny their parents and grandparents the Social Security and Medicare benefits they need to survive: justice.

over the past 3 years, including charts. This is by the National Debt Awareness Center. There are lots of other links on there to check out too but, again, I am short on time today.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/2009/02/25/hot-docs-bleak-and-uncertain-federal-budget-outlook-as-deficit-climbs.html

I saw today where they passed a budget to take us through the next couple months to the tune of $896B. Filled with pork. Hopefully, I'll get a chance to look it up tomorrow.

The only problem is...they are raising the cigarette tax to $.61 a pack. According to Glenn Beck, we will need 21,000,000 NEW smokers to cover the program. Kinda ironic....use something that is unhealthy to give coverage to keep the kids healthy.

I don't know what they are thinking. I think the government has their heads in the sand. Every time they tie a new program to smokers, more smokers quit. How are they ever going to cover all these children if another couple thousand people quit smoking?

I absolutely think this program will not work like they think and in a couple years, if not next year, they will be raising taxes on everyone because of the shortfall in the planned coverage.

Now it's on to the House-Senate negotioations. I just hope we can stand this as a nation.

Democrats have apparently reached an agreement to move forward with a House vote on the huge cap-and-trade energy tax known as Waxman-Markey this week.

The monstrous bill has already grown from the 946-page version passed by the House Energy and Commerce Committee to an even-heftier 1201-page version released by House Democratic leadership last night.

And they aren't done yet. Negotiations continue between Pelosi and her ally, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (both D-Calif.) on one side and House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) on the other.

The apparent breakthrough, which paves the way for a floor vote on Friday or Saturday, is a big giveaway for rural electric co-ops -- a big Peterson priority. Peterson may also extract other big-ticket concessions before a vote happens on the House floor. And why not? What's a few billion dollars between friends when you have a multi-trillion-dollar energy tax hike to divvy up?

That's what's so outrageous about this whole process. Cap-and-trade imposes massive new hidden energy taxes on American consumers. The taxes are hidden in higher prices for gasoline, electricity, and every product in the economy that's grown, shipped, or manufactured. All the revenue, the last estimate from the Congressional Budget Office has the pot at $846 billion over just the first 8 years, so it will clearly be many trillions over the 38-year duration of the program goes into a big pot that politicians can use to buy off opposition and advance other big-government objectives.

Senator Barbara Boxer, the biggest Senate proponent of cap-and-trade and the one who will dole out the billions of dollars on the Senate side if the bill makes it through the House, candidly explained how this works a couple of weeks ago:

There's so much revenue that comes in from a cap-and-trade system that you can really go to a person in a congressional district and get enough votes there by saying, "What do you need? What do you want? You can really help them."

This disastrous bill, which will send energy prices skyrocketing while having no discernible impact on global average temperature will only get worse as even more special interests are bought off at the expense of taxpayers. It's a scam, an enormous tax-and-spend bill concealed in a cloak of green political correctness. The real purpose of the plan is to dramatically enhance the power of Washington politicians by giving them control over vast swaths of the U.S. economy.

Think of this as the death blow for our already teetering rule of law and free market economy. Just as we've seen politicians make arbitrary decisions in banking and the automobile industry, this new central planning of energy will let them exercise similar control over all aspects of the U.S. economy. This type of control, while perhaps well-intentioned, we saw in the 20th century inevitably fails and often leads to despotism.

The outcome in the House is still in doubt. House Blue Dog chairwoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-S.D.) said in an interview with Energy and Environment Daily last week that Blue Dogs will not vote for the bill if it's brought up this week. She said:

"Many will insist that we have a number of days to review the language ourselves, to have back and forth with our constituencies and stakeholder groups, to understand how the system with a significant manager's amendment will work. Yes, absolutely, we need to chew on this awhile."

Obviously, Nancy Pelosi is ignoring the concerns of the Blue Dogs, and of all the Democrats from Middle America whose constituents will be slammed with vastly higher energy prices under the plan. Constituents who don't share the smug self-satisfaction that coastal elites will enjoy, that warm, green feeling that's supposed to make it all worthwhile.

If these so-called moderate Democrats fall in line behind the radical leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Henry Waxman, if they vote for a cap-and-trade tax that President Obama famously said will cause energy prices to necessarily skyrocket, they will expose themselves as radical leftists and out of touch with their districts.

Every American who cares about affordable energy and economic freedom needs to contact his or her member of Congress before this vote and demand a no vote on cap-and-trade. The House switchboard is 202-225-3121 or you can use this form on the AFP web site. If they vote for this, they deserve the full political consequences.

They had the votes before they started. They hoped to use the Rs to help this disaster, who got shut out at the end of this thanks to Pelosi, who has no control over her caucus, anyway. The drivebys won't report this.

Second, many Dems are scared ** about not getting elected again. Other Dems waited until the very end of voting to cast their vote to play the game to win both ways. Mine, for ex., is all for this mess, but has been saying how he'll vote it down. That's b/c he's got a strong opponent and he can't afford something this risky.

Think of it this way. You have surgery to repair your left leg and the doc cuts off your right one instead. So you go back to the same doc who screwed it up to fix it. That's exactly what you have here. You wouldn't do this in your private life, so why would it be okay for those on The Hill to behave in the same way?