Hold on to your wallet

Matthew Hoy
By Matthew Hoy on February 26, 2009

President Barack Obama has unveiled his budget plan, and if you think you're going to be better off because of it, then you must be on welfare.

First, the spending:

Obama can complain all he wants about "inheriting" a deficit, but what President Bush gave him was chump change compared to what he's spending.

Second, if you think that he's going to get all the money he needs to pay for all his plans from "the rich" who make more than $250,000, you're naive.

A tax policy that confiscated 100% of the taxable income of everyone in America earning over $500,000 in 2006 would only have given Congress an extra $1.3 trillion in revenue. That's less than half the 2006 federal budget of $2.7 trillion and looks tiny compared to the more than $4 trillion Congress will spend in fiscal 2010. Even taking every taxable "dime" of everyone earning more than $75,000 in 2006 would have barely yielded enough to cover that $4 trillion.

And if you think anyone's going to work an extra minute if the government is taking 100 percent of what they earn, you're an idiot.

Where's the necessary money going to come from? Well, let's just say that $250,000 floor on people getting tax increases is going to start shedding zeros pretty quick.

If you take a look at some of the tax breaks that are going away and new taxes being created, along with a cap-and-trade program to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, you won't be the least bit surprised if your energy bills start rising much faster than any other tax breaks from the government appear to cover them.

And, just to show you that nothing has changed since Democrats took over Congress and vowed to drain the swamp of corruption, we have these inconvenient truths: There's tons of earmarks in this budget -- including many first proposed by then Sen. Barack Obama, who as a candidate for president said he was opposed to earmarks. Democrats in the House also quashed a move to force the "ethics committee" to investigate lobbyist-lawmaker ties of the type that have made Rep. John Murtha famous.

Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., sponsored the proposal that would have forced the House Ethics Committee to launch a probe into ties between the source and timing of campaign contributions by lobbyists and subsequent legislator requests for special projects or earmarks.

While open-ended, Flake's resolution was a direct response to the ongoing federal investigation into the PMA Group, a lobbying company accused of making fraudulent donations to lawmakers using names of people who did not exist. 

The firm, which has contributed millions to politicians in the last decade, has close ties to senior Democratic appropriators including Reps. John Murtha D-Pa., and Pete Visclosky,D-Ind.

The swamp hasn't been drained; its denizens have changed.

0 comments on “Hold on to your wallet”

  1. I'm directing my financial advisor to liquidate ALL of my remaining stocks (I pulled the majority out in Nov 2008). I'm closing 2/3 of my savings account and reducing the third. I've ordered a weather-proof safe and bought my guns. Screw this administration! They don't have the brain power my cat has! I'll probably get a refund I don't really deserve - which I will donate to the charities of MY choice. I am completely uninterested and unwilling to support the dummies who didn't get an education, didn't plan, didn't save, didn't make good decisions, bought more than they could pay for, etc., etc., etc.

  2. So, I've been out of the sock market for a few months now before the meltdown.
    I don't have a 401K to retire on. I'm counting on the future workers to PAY for my
    retirement. I can thank the republicans for that. Now that they've become the party of
    failed ideas and obstructionism. Go on, keep at it. What makes them think that their
    ideas are going to work now when they did not in the last 8 years? Mr Obama please tax
    the **** out of the rich people. Its about time I get something out of their backs.

    [If the word is inappropriate for the "family hour" on broadcast TV, then it's not allowed here. -ed]

  3. My wife and I earns a little over 250K. Thanks to us staying in medical school, residency program, and now only starting our practice close to mid-30's. I don't have any savings, almost half of my salary goes to federal and state taxes, we're buried in student loans, and Obama and his allies want more of my hard-earned money. I guess one of us have to stop working or we should stop working part-time. Maybe then, the government would not consider me rich and will send me some "stimulus money".

  4. Blue Proctor

    I have an idea for you. Why don't know you just find a "rich person" and rob him at gunpoint at his house? It is the moral equivalent of the "tax the **** out of the rich people" policy that you advocate and it gets money in your pocket sooner. In fact, why don't you and your buddies gang up and threaten a bunch of rich people with bodily harm if they don't give your gang money? That too is the moral equivalent of the policies you advocate. Then we can cut out the middlemen, the politicians.

  5. I never thought I would say this but this new administration makes me long for the days when Bill Clinton was President. At least he seemed to have some concept of how capitalism works. Perhaps Obama does too, and simply wants to kill capitalism, at least as it has been practiced in the US. In any event, we are now on the high speed train to Euro-style capitalism. That's worked so well for them, hasn't it?


[custom-twitter-feeds headertext="Hoystory On Twitter"]


February 2009



linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram