SPAIN 2010: TOTAL: AT LEAST $250,000
U.S. taxpayer paid for the First Lady’s 68 person personal security army, assistants, and of course why not use presidential jumbo jet Air Force Two.
Air Force Two was a modest $150,000 for the trip.
Personal security runs at $281 per day – totaling $100,000 for the vacation.
HAWAIIAN CHRISTMAS 2010: TOTAL: Over $1,500,000.00
$63,000 to fly in Michelle and the kids on a private jet.
$1,000,000 for Obama to come in on Air Force One.
$38,000 rent payed for the luxury ‘Winter White House’.
$16,000 to provide housing for local security including Seals & Secret Service.
$134,000 to keep staff in the local luxury hotel. Spare no expense on your staff…
$251,000 paid out to police for staying overtime.
$10,000 so that an ambulance could park outside at all times. Why not?
LUXURY SKI VAIL 2011:
Michelle and the kids stayed in a room which costs more than $2,400 per night.
Michelle & kids fly in on Air Force Two (add a couple hundred thousand).
MARTHA’S VINEYARD 2011:
The Obama’s decided that a modest hotel room that costs $2,400 wasn’t quite nice enough. This time they decided to stay at the “Blue Heron Farm estate” which goes for $50,000 per week.
Via
Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts
List of Tax Hikes in Obamacare
Remeber when Obama said, "I've been a little amused over the last couple of days where people have been having these rallies about taxes," the president said, noting the numerous tax cuts pushed by his administration. "You would think they'd be saying thank you." Of course you remember, it was yesterday. Well, for all your little smug liberal friends that say Obama cuts taxes, ask them about the taxes stuffed into the new Obamacare disaster:
(Page numbers reference ORIGINAL REID-OBAMA BILL unless noted):
Individual Mandate Tax (Page 324/Sec. 1501/$15 bil/Jan 2014): Starting in 2014, anyone not buying “qualifying” health insurance must pay an income surtax according to the higher of the following (page 71 of manager’s amendment updates Reid bill):
Single
2014 $495/0.5% AGI $990/0.5% AGI $1485/0.5%/AGI
2 People
2015 $495/1.0% AGI $990/1.0% AGI $1485/1.0%/AGI
3+ People
2016+ $495/2.0% AGI $990/2.0% AGI $1485/2.0%/AGI
(Exemptions for religious objectors, undocumented immigrants, prisoners, those earning less than the poverty line, members of Indian tribes, and hardship cases (determined by HHS).)
Employer Mandate Tax (Page 348/Sec. 1513/$28 bil/Jan 2014): If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $750 for all full-time employees. Applies to all employers with 50 or more employees.
If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer).
Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans (Page 1979/Sec. 9001/$149.1 bil/Jan 2011): Starting in 2013, new 40 percent excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans ($8500 single/$23,000 family). Higher threshold ($9850 single/$26,000 family) for early retirees and high-risk professions. CPI +1 percentage point indexed. Longshoremen have been exempted (page 362 of the manager’s amendment)
From 2013-2015, the 17 highest-cost states are 120% of this level.
Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2 (Page 1996/Sec. 9002/Min$/Jan 2011): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns.
Medicine Cabinet Tax (Page 1997/Sec. 9003/$5 bil/Jan 2011): No longer allowable to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin)
HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike (Page 1998/Sec. 9004/$1.3 bil/Jan 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.
FSA Cap (Page 1999/Sec. 9005/$13.3 bil/Jan 2011): Imposes cap on FSAs of $2500 (now unlimited). Indexed to inflation after 2011 (added on page 363 of manager’s amendment)
Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting (Page 1999/Sec. 9006/$17.1 bil/Jan 2012): Requires businesses to send 1099-MISC information tax forms to corporations (currently limited to individuals), a huge compliance burden for small employers
Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals (page 2001/Sec. 9007/Min$/immediate): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new "community health assessment needs," "financial assistance," and "billing and collection" rules set by HHS (updated on page 364 of manager’s amendment).
Tax on Innovator Drug Companies (Page 2010/Sec. 9008/ $22.2 bil/Jan 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year.
Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers (Page 2020/Sec. 9009/$19.2 bil/Jan 2010): $2 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to shares of sales made that year. Exempts items retailing for <$100. Rises to $3 billion annually in 2017 (updated by page 364 of manager’s amendment).
Tax on Health Insurers (Page 2026/Sec. 9010/$59.6 bil/Jan 2011): $10 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year. Phases in gradually until 2017. Fully-imposed on firms with $50 million in profits (updated on page 365 of manager’s amendment)
Eliminate tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D (Page 2034/Sec. 9012/$5.4 bil/Jan 2011)
Raise "Haircut" for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI (Page 2034/Sec. 9013/$15.2 bil/Jan 2013): Waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only
$500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives (Page 2035/Sec. 9014/$0.6 bil/Jan 2013)
Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax (Page 2040/Sec. 9015/$86.8 bil/Jan 2013): Current law and changes:
Current Law:
First $200,000 ($250,000 Married) = 1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
All Remaining Wages Employer/Employee = 1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
Reid-Obama Tax Hike:
First $200,000($250,000 Married) Employer/Employee = 1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
All Remaining Wages Employer/Employee = 1.45%/2.35%
3.8% self-employed
The 0.9% new rate addition is not deductible for the self-employment tax adjustment. Updated by page 372 of manager’s amendment.
Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike (Page 2044/Sec. 9016/$0.4 bil/Jan 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services
STRICKEN: Tax on Cosmetic Medical Procedures (Page 2045/Sec. 9017/$5.8 bil/Jan 2010): New 5% excise tax on elective cosmetic surgery to be paid by the surgery patient.
REPLACED BY: Tax on Indoor Tanning Services (Page 373 of Manager’s amendment/$2.7 billion/July 1, 2010): New 10% excise tax on indoor tanning salons
PDF Version
List of tax hikes in original Reid bill
Manager's Amendment
CBO Score of Manager’s Amendment
JCT Score of Manager’s Amendment
(Page numbers reference ORIGINAL REID-OBAMA BILL unless noted):
Individual Mandate Tax (Page 324/Sec. 1501/$15 bil/Jan 2014): Starting in 2014, anyone not buying “qualifying” health insurance must pay an income surtax according to the higher of the following (page 71 of manager’s amendment updates Reid bill):
Single
2014 $495/0.5% AGI $990/0.5% AGI $1485/0.5%/AGI
2 People
2015 $495/1.0% AGI $990/1.0% AGI $1485/1.0%/AGI
3+ People
2016+ $495/2.0% AGI $990/2.0% AGI $1485/2.0%/AGI
(Exemptions for religious objectors, undocumented immigrants, prisoners, those earning less than the poverty line, members of Indian tribes, and hardship cases (determined by HHS).)
Employer Mandate Tax (Page 348/Sec. 1513/$28 bil/Jan 2014): If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $750 for all full-time employees. Applies to all employers with 50 or more employees.
If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer).
Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans (Page 1979/Sec. 9001/$149.1 bil/Jan 2011): Starting in 2013, new 40 percent excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans ($8500 single/$23,000 family). Higher threshold ($9850 single/$26,000 family) for early retirees and high-risk professions. CPI +1 percentage point indexed. Longshoremen have been exempted (page 362 of the manager’s amendment)
From 2013-2015, the 17 highest-cost states are 120% of this level.
Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2 (Page 1996/Sec. 9002/Min$/Jan 2011): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns.
Medicine Cabinet Tax (Page 1997/Sec. 9003/$5 bil/Jan 2011): No longer allowable to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin)
HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike (Page 1998/Sec. 9004/$1.3 bil/Jan 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.
FSA Cap (Page 1999/Sec. 9005/$13.3 bil/Jan 2011): Imposes cap on FSAs of $2500 (now unlimited). Indexed to inflation after 2011 (added on page 363 of manager’s amendment)
Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting (Page 1999/Sec. 9006/$17.1 bil/Jan 2012): Requires businesses to send 1099-MISC information tax forms to corporations (currently limited to individuals), a huge compliance burden for small employers
Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals (page 2001/Sec. 9007/Min$/immediate): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new "community health assessment needs," "financial assistance," and "billing and collection" rules set by HHS (updated on page 364 of manager’s amendment).
Tax on Innovator Drug Companies (Page 2010/Sec. 9008/ $22.2 bil/Jan 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year.
Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers (Page 2020/Sec. 9009/$19.2 bil/Jan 2010): $2 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to shares of sales made that year. Exempts items retailing for <$100. Rises to $3 billion annually in 2017 (updated by page 364 of manager’s amendment).
Tax on Health Insurers (Page 2026/Sec. 9010/$59.6 bil/Jan 2011): $10 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year. Phases in gradually until 2017. Fully-imposed on firms with $50 million in profits (updated on page 365 of manager’s amendment)
Eliminate tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D (Page 2034/Sec. 9012/$5.4 bil/Jan 2011)
Raise "Haircut" for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI (Page 2034/Sec. 9013/$15.2 bil/Jan 2013): Waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only
$500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives (Page 2035/Sec. 9014/$0.6 bil/Jan 2013)
Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax (Page 2040/Sec. 9015/$86.8 bil/Jan 2013): Current law and changes:
Current Law:
First $200,000 ($250,000 Married) = 1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
All Remaining Wages Employer/Employee = 1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
Reid-Obama Tax Hike:
First $200,000($250,000 Married) Employer/Employee = 1.45%/1.45%
2.9% self-employed
All Remaining Wages Employer/Employee = 1.45%/2.35%
3.8% self-employed
The 0.9% new rate addition is not deductible for the self-employment tax adjustment. Updated by page 372 of manager’s amendment.
Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike (Page 2044/Sec. 9016/$0.4 bil/Jan 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services
STRICKEN: Tax on Cosmetic Medical Procedures (Page 2045/Sec. 9017/$5.8 bil/Jan 2010): New 5% excise tax on elective cosmetic surgery to be paid by the surgery patient.
REPLACED BY: Tax on Indoor Tanning Services (Page 373 of Manager’s amendment/$2.7 billion/July 1, 2010): New 10% excise tax on indoor tanning salons
PDF Version
List of tax hikes in original Reid bill
Manager's Amendment
CBO Score of Manager’s Amendment
JCT Score of Manager’s Amendment
Obama Amused by Tea Party Protests
"I've been a little amused over the last couple of days where people have been having these rallies about taxes," the president said, noting the numerous tax cuts pushed by his administration. "You would think they'd be saying thank you."Thank you? First, the tax cuts are a joke. Your spending monstrosities mean higher taxes, now or later, the people will pay. Second, if you'd drop the smug SOB act for a moment, you'd see that the Tea Party movement is about more than just taxes. The movement is also about big government and big spending, particularly TARP, the stimulus package and Obamacare.
No sir, we won't thank you until there is real tax reform, real spending reform and real government reform.
Social Security, Medicare And Interest On Debt Will Gobble Up All Tax Dollars By 2020
From the Economic Collapse Blog:
There is a silent monster that looms menacingly over U.S. government finances. Every politician knows about it, but very few of them ever want to talk about it. This silent monster grows larger every year, and yet nobody seems to know quite what to do about it. Those who have closely analyzed this monster all seem to agree that one day it will create a financial tsunami of a magnitude that is absolutely unprecedented, but there is vast disagreement about how to escape this financial tsunami or if it is even possible to escape it. The name of this monster is "entitlements" - Social Security, Medicare and other social Ponzi schemes that the U.S. government has locked itself into funding. It would be hard to understate the seriousness of the problem that entitlements present. In fact, according to an official U.S. government report, rapidly growing interest costs on the national debt together with spending on major entitlement programs will absorb approximately 92 cents of every dollar of federal revenue by the year 2019. By 2020, that figure will be up around 100 cents of every dollar of federal revenue. So that means that interest on the debt and spending on entitlement programs will eat up everything the U.S. government takes in before a penny is spent on anything else. That is a recipe for national financial suicide.
And unfortunately, the problem is only going to get far, far worse when you project things out beyond the year 2020. Right now, interest on the debt and spending on entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare eat up only about 10 percent of GDP. By 2080, they are projected to eat up approximately 50 percent of GDP. In fact, things are even more dire than the chart below indicates. This chart is based on previous government figures that projected that mandatory spending will exceed government revenues at some point between 2030 and 2040, but the latest government figures now project that this will happen right around 2020. So as mind blowing as this chart is, keep in mind that it actually understates the problem we are facing...
Now it is happening in 2010.
It turns out that the "recession" that we have just been through has hit Social Security revenues really hard.
And unfortunately, as waves of Baby Boomers start retiring, these "Social Security deficits" are going to get even worse.
So where will the money come from to pay the benefits that are owed?
For now, the money will come from the $2.5 trillion Social Security Trust Fund that has been accumulated.
But keep in mind that the $2.5 trillion figure is extremely misleading.
There are not $2.5 trillion dollars sitting around in a bank account somewhere to pay these benefits.
The truth is that the Social Security Trust Fund does not contain any actual assets.
The only assets the Social Security Trust Fund has are IOUs from the U.S. government.
So basically the U.S. government owes the Social Security Trust Fund $2.5 trillion dollars, and now it turns out that the Social Security system is going to start needing that money.
So where will the U.S. government get that money?
Well, they will borrow it of course.
The reality is that the Social Security program is simply not sustainable.
Back in 1950 each retiree's Social Security benefit was paid for by 16 workers.
Today, each retiree's Social Security benefit is paid for by approximately 3.3 workers. By 2025 it is projected that there will be about two workers for each retiree.
As a society, we simply have not been producing enough new workers to sustain the current system.
Of course the politicians all say the right things to make us think that they are going to do something about this crisis. For example, Barack Obama recently had the following to say about the massive deficits the U.S. government keeps piling up: "It keeps me awake at night, looking at all that red ink".
But the truth is that neither political party would dare propose a dramatic restructuring of
Social Security or Medicare that would significantly reduce benefits.
Why?
Because it would be political suicide.
Say what you want about old people - the truth is that they vote more than the rest of us do.
Anyone who would dare "take away" their Social Security or Medicare would suddenly find hordes of old people voting against them in the next election.
But something has to be done.
The 2009 Financial Report of the U.S. Government was recently released, and it basically says that the U.S. government is facing financial Armageddon if something drastic is not done....
Absent a change in policy, under this scenario, the interest costs on the growing debt together with spending on major entitlement programs could absorb 92 cents of every dollar of federal revenue in 2019.
Keep in mind that this is before anything is spent on defense, health care, education, homeland security, job creation or anything else.
The following chart was pulled right out of the report. These aren't the projections of some Internet wacko. These projections are in an official U.S. government report. The implications of the chart below are absolutely mind blowing...
Keep in mind that the U.S. government and the U.S. economy are already on the verge of financial oblivion in 2010. So what is going to happen if these projections are anywhere close to accurate?
In addition, the report also admitted that the present value of projected scheduled benefits exceeds earmarked revenues for entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare by about $46 trillion over the next 75 years.
$46 trillion!
Either the U.S. government is going to have to radically slash Social Security and Medicare benefits or they will have to come up with tens of trillions of extra dollars from somewhere.
And remember, the $46 trillion figure is just the "present value" of those future payments.
Because of inflation, the "actual value" of those future payments will be far greater.
In a section about Social Security and Medicare, the authors of the report confessed that "it is apparent that these programs are on a fiscally unsustainable path".
Obviously something has got to give.
These programs cannot keep on paying the same level of benefits.
It is financially impossible.
But what are we going to do? Millions upon millions of elderly Americans rely on these programs.
Are we going to reduce payments to a level where they can only afford dog food to eat and a shack to live in?
As a society, we are really between a rock and hard place.
If we continue on the same path, the United States government is going to go bankrupt.
But any politician who tries to cut benefits or raise taxes will likely face the wrath of the voters at the ballot box.
So for now the U.S. government just continues to spend even more money and continues to go into increasing amounts of debt - apparently hoping that somehow everything will just turn out okay.
But things are not going to turn out okay. We are headed for a financial mess of horrifying proportions.
The truth is that it doesn't matter how much the U.S. government cuts spending in other areas if it does not get entitlement spending and interest on the national debt under control. If those expenditures are not addressed, it is absolutely guaranteed that the U.S. government will be swamped in red ink for many years to come.
But until severe financial pain starts happening, a large percentage of the American people are not going to be motivated to do anything about this problem.
But by then it will be too late.
There is a silent monster that looms menacingly over U.S. government finances. Every politician knows about it, but very few of them ever want to talk about it. This silent monster grows larger every year, and yet nobody seems to know quite what to do about it. Those who have closely analyzed this monster all seem to agree that one day it will create a financial tsunami of a magnitude that is absolutely unprecedented, but there is vast disagreement about how to escape this financial tsunami or if it is even possible to escape it. The name of this monster is "entitlements" - Social Security, Medicare and other social Ponzi schemes that the U.S. government has locked itself into funding. It would be hard to understate the seriousness of the problem that entitlements present. In fact, according to an official U.S. government report, rapidly growing interest costs on the national debt together with spending on major entitlement programs will absorb approximately 92 cents of every dollar of federal revenue by the year 2019. By 2020, that figure will be up around 100 cents of every dollar of federal revenue. So that means that interest on the debt and spending on entitlement programs will eat up everything the U.S. government takes in before a penny is spent on anything else. That is a recipe for national financial suicide.
And unfortunately, the problem is only going to get far, far worse when you project things out beyond the year 2020. Right now, interest on the debt and spending on entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare eat up only about 10 percent of GDP. By 2080, they are projected to eat up approximately 50 percent of GDP. In fact, things are even more dire than the chart below indicates. This chart is based on previous government figures that projected that mandatory spending will exceed government revenues at some point between 2030 and 2040, but the latest government figures now project that this will happen right around 2020. So as mind blowing as this chart is, keep in mind that it actually understates the problem we are facing...
Now it is happening in 2010.
It turns out that the "recession" that we have just been through has hit Social Security revenues really hard.
And unfortunately, as waves of Baby Boomers start retiring, these "Social Security deficits" are going to get even worse.
So where will the money come from to pay the benefits that are owed?
For now, the money will come from the $2.5 trillion Social Security Trust Fund that has been accumulated.
But keep in mind that the $2.5 trillion figure is extremely misleading.
There are not $2.5 trillion dollars sitting around in a bank account somewhere to pay these benefits.
The truth is that the Social Security Trust Fund does not contain any actual assets.
The only assets the Social Security Trust Fund has are IOUs from the U.S. government.
So basically the U.S. government owes the Social Security Trust Fund $2.5 trillion dollars, and now it turns out that the Social Security system is going to start needing that money.
So where will the U.S. government get that money?
Well, they will borrow it of course.
The reality is that the Social Security program is simply not sustainable.
Back in 1950 each retiree's Social Security benefit was paid for by 16 workers.
Today, each retiree's Social Security benefit is paid for by approximately 3.3 workers. By 2025 it is projected that there will be about two workers for each retiree.
As a society, we simply have not been producing enough new workers to sustain the current system.
Of course the politicians all say the right things to make us think that they are going to do something about this crisis. For example, Barack Obama recently had the following to say about the massive deficits the U.S. government keeps piling up: "It keeps me awake at night, looking at all that red ink".
But the truth is that neither political party would dare propose a dramatic restructuring of
Social Security or Medicare that would significantly reduce benefits.
Why?
Because it would be political suicide.
Say what you want about old people - the truth is that they vote more than the rest of us do.
Anyone who would dare "take away" their Social Security or Medicare would suddenly find hordes of old people voting against them in the next election.
But something has to be done.
The 2009 Financial Report of the U.S. Government was recently released, and it basically says that the U.S. government is facing financial Armageddon if something drastic is not done....
Absent a change in policy, under this scenario, the interest costs on the growing debt together with spending on major entitlement programs could absorb 92 cents of every dollar of federal revenue in 2019.
Keep in mind that this is before anything is spent on defense, health care, education, homeland security, job creation or anything else.
The following chart was pulled right out of the report. These aren't the projections of some Internet wacko. These projections are in an official U.S. government report. The implications of the chart below are absolutely mind blowing...
Keep in mind that the U.S. government and the U.S. economy are already on the verge of financial oblivion in 2010. So what is going to happen if these projections are anywhere close to accurate?
In addition, the report also admitted that the present value of projected scheduled benefits exceeds earmarked revenues for entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare by about $46 trillion over the next 75 years.
$46 trillion!
Either the U.S. government is going to have to radically slash Social Security and Medicare benefits or they will have to come up with tens of trillions of extra dollars from somewhere.
And remember, the $46 trillion figure is just the "present value" of those future payments.
Because of inflation, the "actual value" of those future payments will be far greater.
In a section about Social Security and Medicare, the authors of the report confessed that "it is apparent that these programs are on a fiscally unsustainable path".
Obviously something has got to give.
These programs cannot keep on paying the same level of benefits.
It is financially impossible.
But what are we going to do? Millions upon millions of elderly Americans rely on these programs.
Are we going to reduce payments to a level where they can only afford dog food to eat and a shack to live in?
As a society, we are really between a rock and hard place.
If we continue on the same path, the United States government is going to go bankrupt.
But any politician who tries to cut benefits or raise taxes will likely face the wrath of the voters at the ballot box.
So for now the U.S. government just continues to spend even more money and continues to go into increasing amounts of debt - apparently hoping that somehow everything will just turn out okay.
But things are not going to turn out okay. We are headed for a financial mess of horrifying proportions.
The truth is that it doesn't matter how much the U.S. government cuts spending in other areas if it does not get entitlement spending and interest on the national debt under control. If those expenditures are not addressed, it is absolutely guaranteed that the U.S. government will be swamped in red ink for many years to come.
But until severe financial pain starts happening, a large percentage of the American people are not going to be motivated to do anything about this problem.
But by then it will be too late.
It Is Now Mathematically Impossible To Pay Off The U.S. National Debt
It Is Now Mathematically Impossible To Pay Off The U.S. National Debt
A lot of people are very upset about the rapidly increasing U.S. national debt these days and they are demanding a solution. What they don't realize is that there simply is not a solution under the current U.S. financial system. It is now mathematically impossible for the U.S. government to pay off the U.S. national debt. You see, the truth is that the U.S. government now owes more dollars than actually exist. If the U.S. government went out today and took every single penny from every single American bank, business and taxpayer, they still would not be able to pay off the national debt. And if they did that, obviously American society would stop functioning because nobody would have any money to buy or sell anything.
And the U.S. government would still be massively in debt.
So why doesn't the U.S. government just fire up the printing presses and print a bunch of money to pay off the debt?
Well, for one very simple reason.
That is not the way our system works.
You see, for more dollars to enter the system, the U.S. government has to go into more debt.
The U.S. government does not issue U.S. currency - the Federal Reserve does.
The Federal Reserve is a private bank owned and operated for profit by a very powerful group of elite international bankers.
If you will pull a dollar bill out and take a look at it, you will notice that it says "Federal Reserve Note" at the top.
It belongs to the Federal Reserve.
The U.S. government cannot simply go out and create new money whenever it wants under our current system.
Instead, it must get it from the Federal Reserve.
So, when the U.S. government needs to borrow more money (which happens a lot these days) it goes over to the Federal Reserve and asks them for some more green pieces of paper called Federal Reserve Notes.
The Federal Reserve swaps these green pieces of paper for pink pieces of paper called U.S. Treasury bonds. The Federal Reserve either sells these U.S. Treasury bonds or they keep the bonds for themselves (which happens a lot these days).
So that is how the U.S. government gets more green pieces of paper called "U.S. dollars" to put into circulation. But by doing so, they get themselves into even more debt which they will owe even more interest on.
So every time the U.S. government does this, the national debt gets even bigger and the interest on that debt gets even bigger.
Are you starting to get the picture?
As you read this, the U.S. national debt is approximately 12 trillion dollars, although it is going up so rapidly that it is really hard to pin down an exact figure.
So how much money actually exists in the United States today?
Well, there are several ways to measure this.
The "M0" money supply is the total of all physical bills and currency, plus the money on hand in bank vaults and all of the deposits those banks have at reserve banks. As of mid-2009, the Federal Reserve said that this amount was about 908 billion dollars.
The "M1" money supply includes all of the currency in the "M0" money supply, along with all of the money held in checking accounts and other checkable accounts at banks, as well as all money contained in travelers' checks. According to the Federal Reserve, this totaled approximately 1.7 trillion dollars in December 2009, but not all of this money actually "exists" as we will see in a moment.
The "M2" money supply includes everything in the "M1" money supply plus most other savings accounts, money market accounts, retail money market mutual funds, and small denomination time deposits (certificates of deposit of under $100,000). According to the Federal Reserve, this totaled approximately 8.5 trillion dollars in December 2009, but once again, not all of this money actually "exists" as we will see in a moment.
The "M3" money supply includes everything in the "M2" money supply plus all other CDs (large time deposits and institutional money market mutual fund balances), deposits of eurodollars and repurchase agreements. The Federal Reserve does not keep track of M3 anymore, but according to ShadowStats.com it is currently somewhere in the neighborhood of 14 trillion dollars. But again, not all of this "money" actually "exists" either.
So why doesn't it exist?
It is because our financial system is based on something called fractional reserve banking.
When you go over to your local bank and deposit $100, they do not keep your $100 in the bank. Instead, they keep only a small fraction of your money there at the bank and they lend out the rest to someone else. Then, if that person deposits the money that was just borrowed at the same bank, that bank can loan out most of that money once again. In this way, the amount of "money" quickly gets multiplied. But in reality, only $100 actually exists. The system works because we do not all run down to the bank and demand all of our money at the same time.
According to the New York Federal Reserve Bank, fractional reserve banking can be explained this way.
"If the reserve requirement is 10%, for example, a bank that receives a $100 deposit may lend out $90 of that deposit. If the borrower then writes a check to someone who deposits the $90, the bank receiving that deposit can lend out $81. As the process continues, the banking system can expand the initial deposit of $100 into a maximum of $1,000 of money ($100+$90+81+$72.90+...=$1,000)."
So much of the "money" out there today is basically made up out of thin air.
In fact, most banks have no reserve requirements at all on savings deposits, CDs and certain kinds of money market accounts. Primarily, reserve requirements apply only to "transactions deposits" – essentially checking accounts.
The truth is that banks are freer today to dramatically "multiply" the amounts deposited with them than ever before. But all of this "multiplied" money is only on paper - it doesn't actually exist.
The point is that the broadest measures of the money supply (M2 and M3) vastly overstate how much "real money" actually exists in the system.
So if the U.S. government went out today and demanded every single dollar from all banks, businesses and individuals in the United States it would not be able to collect 14 trillion dollars (M3) or even 8.5 trillion dollars (M2) because those amounts are based on fractional reserve banking.
So the bottom line is this:
#1) If all money owned by all American banks, businesses and individuals was gathered up today and sent to the U.S. government, there would not be enough to pay off the U.S. national debt.
#2) The only way to create more money is to go into even more debt which makes the problem even worse.
You see, this is what the whole Federal Reserve System was designed to do. It was designed to slowly drain the massive wealth of the American people and transfer it to the elite international bankers.
It is a game that is designed so that the U.S. government cannot win. As soon as they create more money by borrowing it, the U.S. government owes more than what was created because of interest.
If you owe more money than ever was created you can never pay it back.
That means perpetual debt for as long as the system exists.
It is a system designed to force the U.S. government into ever-increasing amounts of debt because there is no escape.
Of course if we had listened to our very wise founding father Thomas Jefferson, we could have avoided this colossal mess in the first place.
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
But we didn't listen, did we?
We could solve this problem by shutting down the Federal Reserve and restoring the power to issue U.S. currency to the U.S. Congress (which is what the U.S. Constitution calls for). But the politicians in Washington D.C. are not about to do that.
So unless you are willing to fundamentally change the current system, you might as well quit complaining about the U.S. national debt because it is now mathematically impossible to pay it off.
A lot of people are very upset about the rapidly increasing U.S. national debt these days and they are demanding a solution. What they don't realize is that there simply is not a solution under the current U.S. financial system. It is now mathematically impossible for the U.S. government to pay off the U.S. national debt. You see, the truth is that the U.S. government now owes more dollars than actually exist. If the U.S. government went out today and took every single penny from every single American bank, business and taxpayer, they still would not be able to pay off the national debt. And if they did that, obviously American society would stop functioning because nobody would have any money to buy or sell anything.
And the U.S. government would still be massively in debt.
So why doesn't the U.S. government just fire up the printing presses and print a bunch of money to pay off the debt?
Well, for one very simple reason.
That is not the way our system works.
You see, for more dollars to enter the system, the U.S. government has to go into more debt.
The U.S. government does not issue U.S. currency - the Federal Reserve does.
The Federal Reserve is a private bank owned and operated for profit by a very powerful group of elite international bankers.
If you will pull a dollar bill out and take a look at it, you will notice that it says "Federal Reserve Note" at the top.
It belongs to the Federal Reserve.
The U.S. government cannot simply go out and create new money whenever it wants under our current system.
Instead, it must get it from the Federal Reserve.
So, when the U.S. government needs to borrow more money (which happens a lot these days) it goes over to the Federal Reserve and asks them for some more green pieces of paper called Federal Reserve Notes.
The Federal Reserve swaps these green pieces of paper for pink pieces of paper called U.S. Treasury bonds. The Federal Reserve either sells these U.S. Treasury bonds or they keep the bonds for themselves (which happens a lot these days).
So that is how the U.S. government gets more green pieces of paper called "U.S. dollars" to put into circulation. But by doing so, they get themselves into even more debt which they will owe even more interest on.
So every time the U.S. government does this, the national debt gets even bigger and the interest on that debt gets even bigger.
Are you starting to get the picture?
As you read this, the U.S. national debt is approximately 12 trillion dollars, although it is going up so rapidly that it is really hard to pin down an exact figure.
So how much money actually exists in the United States today?
Well, there are several ways to measure this.
The "M0" money supply is the total of all physical bills and currency, plus the money on hand in bank vaults and all of the deposits those banks have at reserve banks. As of mid-2009, the Federal Reserve said that this amount was about 908 billion dollars.
The "M1" money supply includes all of the currency in the "M0" money supply, along with all of the money held in checking accounts and other checkable accounts at banks, as well as all money contained in travelers' checks. According to the Federal Reserve, this totaled approximately 1.7 trillion dollars in December 2009, but not all of this money actually "exists" as we will see in a moment.
The "M2" money supply includes everything in the "M1" money supply plus most other savings accounts, money market accounts, retail money market mutual funds, and small denomination time deposits (certificates of deposit of under $100,000). According to the Federal Reserve, this totaled approximately 8.5 trillion dollars in December 2009, but once again, not all of this money actually "exists" as we will see in a moment.
The "M3" money supply includes everything in the "M2" money supply plus all other CDs (large time deposits and institutional money market mutual fund balances), deposits of eurodollars and repurchase agreements. The Federal Reserve does not keep track of M3 anymore, but according to ShadowStats.com it is currently somewhere in the neighborhood of 14 trillion dollars. But again, not all of this "money" actually "exists" either.
So why doesn't it exist?
It is because our financial system is based on something called fractional reserve banking.
When you go over to your local bank and deposit $100, they do not keep your $100 in the bank. Instead, they keep only a small fraction of your money there at the bank and they lend out the rest to someone else. Then, if that person deposits the money that was just borrowed at the same bank, that bank can loan out most of that money once again. In this way, the amount of "money" quickly gets multiplied. But in reality, only $100 actually exists. The system works because we do not all run down to the bank and demand all of our money at the same time.
According to the New York Federal Reserve Bank, fractional reserve banking can be explained this way.
"If the reserve requirement is 10%, for example, a bank that receives a $100 deposit may lend out $90 of that deposit. If the borrower then writes a check to someone who deposits the $90, the bank receiving that deposit can lend out $81. As the process continues, the banking system can expand the initial deposit of $100 into a maximum of $1,000 of money ($100+$90+81+$72.90+...=$1,000)."
So much of the "money" out there today is basically made up out of thin air.
In fact, most banks have no reserve requirements at all on savings deposits, CDs and certain kinds of money market accounts. Primarily, reserve requirements apply only to "transactions deposits" – essentially checking accounts.
The truth is that banks are freer today to dramatically "multiply" the amounts deposited with them than ever before. But all of this "multiplied" money is only on paper - it doesn't actually exist.
The point is that the broadest measures of the money supply (M2 and M3) vastly overstate how much "real money" actually exists in the system.
So if the U.S. government went out today and demanded every single dollar from all banks, businesses and individuals in the United States it would not be able to collect 14 trillion dollars (M3) or even 8.5 trillion dollars (M2) because those amounts are based on fractional reserve banking.
So the bottom line is this:
#1) If all money owned by all American banks, businesses and individuals was gathered up today and sent to the U.S. government, there would not be enough to pay off the U.S. national debt.
#2) The only way to create more money is to go into even more debt which makes the problem even worse.
You see, this is what the whole Federal Reserve System was designed to do. It was designed to slowly drain the massive wealth of the American people and transfer it to the elite international bankers.
It is a game that is designed so that the U.S. government cannot win. As soon as they create more money by borrowing it, the U.S. government owes more than what was created because of interest.
If you owe more money than ever was created you can never pay it back.
That means perpetual debt for as long as the system exists.
It is a system designed to force the U.S. government into ever-increasing amounts of debt because there is no escape.
Of course if we had listened to our very wise founding father Thomas Jefferson, we could have avoided this colossal mess in the first place.
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
But we didn't listen, did we?
We could solve this problem by shutting down the Federal Reserve and restoring the power to issue U.S. currency to the U.S. Congress (which is what the U.S. Constitution calls for). But the politicians in Washington D.C. are not about to do that.
So unless you are willing to fundamentally change the current system, you might as well quit complaining about the U.S. national debt because it is now mathematically impossible to pay it off.
Obama Budget Contains Middle Class Tax Increase
Obama Budget Contains Middle Class Tax Increase.What you talkin 'bout Willis? Obama would never do that, because he promised no tax increase for people making under $250K.
Via
Pelosi Chartering Military Aircraft for Her Family
Doug Ross reports that Ross reports that this is the American taxpayer millions of dollars. It doesn't help that Peloser is only reimbursing the government for the flights at a bare minimum:
Military flights cost between $5-$20 thousand dollars per hour to operate. Pelosi only reimburses the government between $120-$400 per flight. You and I pick up the rest of the tab with our tax dollars.
It's all perfectly legal, of course - or is it? Even if it is, perhaps we should start asking why a politician's children and grandchildren should have their travel subsidized at taxpayer expense?
Here you can find requisition forms and food/beverage receipts that will make you want to puke. We need to get this self important, mad with power, she-witch out of office.
Via
Be a Good Boy and Pay Your Taxes
From the National Review Online:
When Scott Brown was elected to the Senate in Massachusetts, it was because he rode a “wave of voter frustration” (Associated Press) and “capitalized on voters’ disaffection with the status quo” (New York Times). “Anger” and “antipathy toward federal-government activism,” more than support for Brown, drove Massachusetts’s voters to go with the Republican (Washington Post).
When Oregon voters approved tax increases on corporations and families making over $250,000, however, it was because the voters had finally decided to “behave like responsible adults” (Newsweek). It showed that Beaver State voters had bravely “gnawed back fears of tax hikes” (The Olympian) and “ended two decades of tax scrimping” (L.A. Times). What motivated them was the very opposite of the “anti-Washington sentiment” that animated Scott Brown’s campaign (CBS News). In voting for new taxes, voters in Oregon “bucked decades of anti-tax and anti-Salem sentiment” (The Oregonian).
When voters go for higher taxes, they are acting bravely, responsibly, and wisely. When they put Republicans into office, they are throwing “temper tantrums.”
When Scott Brown was elected to the Senate in Massachusetts, it was because he rode a “wave of voter frustration” (Associated Press) and “capitalized on voters’ disaffection with the status quo” (New York Times). “Anger” and “antipathy toward federal-government activism,” more than support for Brown, drove Massachusetts’s voters to go with the Republican (Washington Post).
When Oregon voters approved tax increases on corporations and families making over $250,000, however, it was because the voters had finally decided to “behave like responsible adults” (Newsweek). It showed that Beaver State voters had bravely “gnawed back fears of tax hikes” (The Olympian) and “ended two decades of tax scrimping” (L.A. Times). What motivated them was the very opposite of the “anti-Washington sentiment” that animated Scott Brown’s campaign (CBS News). In voting for new taxes, voters in Oregon “bucked decades of anti-tax and anti-Salem sentiment” (The Oregonian).
When voters go for higher taxes, they are acting bravely, responsibly, and wisely. When they put Republicans into office, they are throwing “temper tantrums.”
Quit Increasing the Debt Limit - Morons
VERONIQUE DE RUGY: The Government’s Endless Appetite for Spending: It’s time for Congress to go cold turkey. “Democrats proposed allowing the federal government to borrow an additional $1.9 trillion to pay its bills, a record increase that would permit the national debt to reach $14.3 trillion (roughly the size of our GDP) to support the federal government’s borrowing through 2010. Since they have been in full control of the federal purse strings, Democrats have spent a lot of money and got the country into a lot of debt. Hence the two consecutive increases of the debt limit in 3 months. And they aren’t the only ones. According to the Office of Management and Budget, the federal debt limit has been increased 98 times since 1940—more than once a year on average.”Via Instapundit
Explain this logic to me, because I just don't get it. "Spend our way out of debt." Has this ever worked before? Dunno? Me neither. Well then explain this one. "Increased taxes will save the economy." Dunno? Me neither.
Consider this: Two of the major reasons the Roman Empire fell, were taxes, and inflation due to the devaluation of fiat money through hyperinflation. Their money was worthless, and they had very little of it. This meant people quit their jobs as tradesmen, and instead turned to sustenance farming, just to survive. Let's not let that happen to America.
Tax Poem
Tax his land,Tax his bed,
Tax the table at which he's fed.
Tax the bald spot on his head.
Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.
Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for peanuts anyway.
Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.
Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he tries to think.
Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries tax his tears.
Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways to tax his... butt.
Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers,
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till he's good and sore.
Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid.
Put these words
upon his tomb,
"Taxes drove me to my doom."
When he's gone,
Do not relax,
It's time to apply
The inheritance tax.
Video: 09/12 March on DC
I wish I would have had the time and money to go to the rally, but I just couldn't afford it. That protest, as massive as it was, was only a tiny fraction of the people that share the same views on our current government. We are sick of the spending, the lies, the interference in our lives. Thanks to everyone that was able to make it.
Video: Obama's Hiddent Economic Agenda Part 2
Like I said for part one, this guy is as boring as Ben Stein on sedatives, but resist the urge to stop watching, or falling asleep. This is a must watch. Also, make sure to watch part one, posted yesterday.
Video: Obama's Hiddent Economic Agenda Part 1
This guy is as exciting as cardboard, but resist the urge to fall asleep, because his message is one you MUST hear.
Letter from the Boss
LETTER FROM THE BOSS:
As the CEO of this organization, I have resigned myself to the fact that Barrack Obama is our President and that our taxes and government fees will increase in a BIG way. To compensate for these increases, our prices would have to increase by about 10%.
Since we cannot increase our prices right now due to the dismal state of the economy, we will have to lay off sixty of our employees instead. This has really been bothering me, since I believe we are family here and I didn't know how to choose who would have to go.
So, this is what I did. I walked through our parking lots and found exactly sixty 'Obama' bumper stickers on employees' cars and have decided these folks will be the ones to let go. I can't think of a more fair way to approach this problem.
They voted for change, I gave it to them. I will see the rest of you at the annual company picnic.
As the CEO of this organization, I have resigned myself to the fact that Barrack Obama is our President and that our taxes and government fees will increase in a BIG way. To compensate for these increases, our prices would have to increase by about 10%.
Since we cannot increase our prices right now due to the dismal state of the economy, we will have to lay off sixty of our employees instead. This has really been bothering me, since I believe we are family here and I didn't know how to choose who would have to go.
So, this is what I did. I walked through our parking lots and found exactly sixty 'Obama' bumper stickers on employees' cars and have decided these folks will be the ones to let go. I can't think of a more fair way to approach this problem.
They voted for change, I gave it to them. I will see the rest of you at the annual company picnic.
545 People Run This Country
I did not write this, it is from an e-mail I received. I don't know if Charlie Reese is the actual author or not, but I don't think it matters, the message is the same. Those in congress, the senate, the President and the Supreme Court have far to much power, and it is too often abused.545 PEOPLE
By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.One hundred Senators, 435 Congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices -- 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party. What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes.
Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red ..
If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ .
If they do not receive Social Security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power..
Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.
Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.
We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.
The Tax System Explained, With Beer
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they pay 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 decide to do. The ten men drink in the bar every day and seem quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner throws 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 wants to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men are unaffected. They will 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 realize 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 suggests that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeds 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 pays $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now pays $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now pays $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now pays $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now pays $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six is better off than before. And the first four continu to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men begin to compare their savings.
‘I only got a dollar out of the $20,’declares the sixth man. He points to the tenth man,’ but he got $10!’
‘Yeah, that’s right,’ exclaims the fifth man. ‘I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!’
‘That’s true!!’ shouts the seventh man. ‘Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!’
‘Wait a minute,’ yell the first four men in unison. ‘We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!’
The nine men surround the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man doesn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sit down and have beers without him. But when it comes time to pay the bill, they discover something important. They don’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, 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.
Via
