The New Elite: Public Servants Become Public Masters

The New Elite: Public Servants Become Public Masters

Why layoff policemen, firemen or teachers first? Why indeed!

In case you haven’t noticed, America is broke…..really broke. Not only do we not have anymore of our own money, but we are fast running out of China’s and Japan’s money as well. As we continue to pile more and more debt on the backs of our great grandchildren, there are those who want us to continue deeper down the rabbit hole.

We are dealing with a government, from the federal all the way down to cities/towns, committed to trickle down ruination. Like crack addicts looking for their next fix, our representatives (a term I use loosely) will not stop the spending on their own; they need to be removed from the addiction. Translation: separate them from the money (or more bluntly, vote them out!). But politicians have willing allies in this collective downfall: public servants. The politicians and the public servants share a symbiotic relationship, one that is not favorable to the people both groups are sworn to serve, the public.

The latest crisis (never let one go to waste) we have to deal with is one that we are told will affect our firemen, policemen, and teachers. President Obama is calling for another $50 billion dollars in deficit spending to ‘save’ (translation: bailout and reward poor behavior) troubled States and municipalities. If this money is not thrown at the crisis, cities and states will be forced to lay off thousands, if not millions of Obama’s union buddies. President Obama made it a point to mention this measure was to ensure that we did not layoff vital public servants such as firemen, policemen, or teachers. In his ‘never let a crisis go to waste’ mentality, President Obama made this proclamation late on a Saturday, when no one was watching. As if you can ‘sneak’ $50 billion dollars past the America people without them noticing (not in this climate).

But why the firemen, policemen, or teachers? Why not the librarian, the part-time city clerk, or the street sweeper? Because those cuts will not scare us enough to open our wallets! Politicians are so transparent you can see the ‘lack of a spine’ on almost any given issue. Worse yet are the willing participants who immediately write letters to the editor or appear before the city council/school board (often at the urging of the very groups that would rather see us go bankrupt than give up one precious taxpayer penny), in support of reckless behavior that has jeopardized the stability of our nation and our communities. In the name of compassion, we have placed a yolk of financial servitude around the necks of the very people we profess to be helping. Compassion without discipline is merely the actions of an irrational do-gooder, and sometimes the uninformed do-gooder is their own worst enemy.

We hear tired old mantras - “It’s for the kids, It’s a tough job, they deserve a million dollars, It’s only $30.00 more a year – per household, It’s for the kids (that one deserved repeating).” There is no shame and no exaggeration that won’t be exploited. In a time when most people have not only not seen raises (including cost of living), but salary and benefit reductions, many public servants feel that are entitled to keep feeding from the taxpayer trough, and even demand that more and more be added.

The problem with public servant salaries and unfunded liabilities (healthcare and retirement funds) has been at epidemic levels for decades, but the matter only seems to garner our attention during a bad economy. Additionally, past attempts to bring our financial relationship with public employees into proper prospective has been met with a full-frontal attack by the unions that represent them. One only needs to look at every major city in America, or the chaos in Greece, to know that public employees are only concerned about their own self-interest.

The relationship between unions/public servants and the tax payer reminds me of the old fable ‘The Scorpion and the Frog.’ In the story the scorpion convinces a frog to take him across the river. At first the frog refuses, fearing he would be stung. But reluctantly the frog agrees, only after the scorpion promises not to sting the frog, proclaiming that the sting would doom them both. You know the rest. Half-way across the river the scorpion stings the frog. When ask why, the scorpion replied – “I’m a scorpion; it’s my nature.” Both sink beneath the water. Like the fable ‘The Scorpion (unions/public servant) and the Frog (the tax payer),’ the unions seem all too willing to sting the tax payer, knowing full well that it will spell doom for the both of them. And when asked why, unions reply “We are a union; it’s in our nature.”

In his 2009 book Plunder, Steven Greenhut, did an outstanding job at detailing how the mutually beneficial relationship between our elected officials and our public servants is not beneficial to the taxpayers who have to pick up the tab. Mr. Greenhut illustrates how public servants are the new elite, and how their compensation packages are unsustainable. Public servants are no longer the servants. We have made them the masters.

When these deals were first negotiated, they seemed balanced. Public employees would earn lower salaries than those working in the private sector, but the trade off were that public employees would receive a somewhat better retirement and more days off. Now, public employees get higher average pay than those in the private sector, much better benefits, and many more days off. The selfishness of many public servants (and the unions that represent them) is perverted, and shows a willful lack of understanding as to the collective crisis we all share. We are stealing from future generations and we don’t care. The questions is not how much longer will it take before we are like Greece, but how much like Greece are we already.

Live Free or Die

Reference articles:

Public employees living larger than ever as economy struggles

Public Pension Cuts, Once Unthinkable, Now On The Table

Even in Europe: Millions in the public sector to pay more for pension

For feds, more get 6-figure salaries

Why the fireman?

Budget Crisis, States Take Aim at Pension Costs

Government employees now take higher salaries than private workers

The Debt Limit Made Simple

How Can You Tell Obama Is Lying…..His Lips Are Moving

There are things that you can always count on in life, and one such thing is that Democrats will always raise your taxes, because they cannot control their need to spend your money.

Obama will raise our taxes not because of what happen under the Bush administration. No, Obama will raise our taxes because of the reckless spending his party has committed over these past few months. President Obama will go back on his pledge (for my liberal friends, that means a guarantee, oath, word of honor), vowing not to raise taxes on those making less than $250,000.00 (although that number kept creeping down as the campaign progressed).

From a speech in Dover, NH, September of 2008 (go to 1:21 – “I can make a pledge, no family making less than $250,000.00 will see ANY form of tax increase….NOT ANY OF YOUR TAXES!



………NOT ONE SINGLE DIME. Not one of New Hampshire’s proudest moments. I love the wit….cracks me up.

What the speech told us then, and tells us now, is how naïve (or stupid, your choice) Obama's economic plan is.

The NH Disadvantage: Liberals In Charge

There was a time when New Hampshire prided itself as a Conservative state, especially in matters of our budget and taxes. The people of New Hampshire did not think of themselves as Red or Blue staters, but as a Conservative staters. The very spirit of our State can be summed up in our motto, Live Free or Die, and our State nickname, The Granite State. There is no ambiguity in either of these proclamations.

I know that it may sound funny to some people, but it makes absolute sense if you knew someone from New Hampshire (and I don’t mean the carpetbaggers that have moved here). Call it a Yankee commonsense, or the deep connection we have to the founding of our country. But whatever it is, some current residents of New Hampshire have decided to take us in a different direction, and sadly that direction is ruining our great State.

There are those that have suggested that if you don’t like how New Hampshire has “changed,” than move. That is a typical response from a liberal that moved to New Hampshire because of our greatness, then proceed to make New Hampshire like the States they had fled! Besides, why should people who have lived here their entire lives pack up and move, and abandon the values the State embraced for centuries? If termites infest your house, you won’t pack and leave…..you would fight for your home. That is what New Hampshire natives need to do.

Study: NH's economic competitiveness deteriorates, now ranks 37th
NH House approves new capital gains, estate taxes
House Budget Includes Tax Increases

Do You Know How Much You Pay In Taxes

Americans Underestimate Their Tax Burden
by Jillian Bandes

From Townhall.com
If you're educated, there's a better chance you're in favor of higher taxes. If you're a man, you're more likely to be amenable to higher taxes than if you're a woman. And no matter who you are, you're probably estimating your overall tax burden to be 5-10 percentage points less than it actually is, meaning that a large majority of Americans are paying far more than they think they're paying.

These were the findings of a new Tax Foundation report that asked respondents how they felt about the federal income tax and other tax issues. The results weren't surprising, said American Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Karlyn Bowman.

"I think that their findings are pretty much in line with what they've found in other polls. Americans are resigned to the federal income taxes they pay," said Bowman.
Americans think that what they pay is fair, but that taxes as a whole are too high, she said. It's a weird breakdown of the blame game where taxpayers believe they're being taxed at lower rates than they actually are and - depending on the demographic - aren't complaining about it.
When the Tax Foundation asked “What is the maximum percentage of a person’s income that should go to taxes – that is, all taxes, state, federal and local?” Respondents gave an average figure of 15.6 percent, though the Foundation estimated American's average tax burden at 28.2 percent.

The discrepancy in opinion by gender was marked: men said the maximum tax burden should be 17.7 percent, but women estimated it at 13.6 percent. Education also mattered: Those with less than a high school education favored a tax rate of 12.6 percent, but those with graduate degrees favored a tax rate of 22.9 percent. Bowman also said this was unsurprising. "Even paying a lower level of tax rates, it’s still a big chunk of your income," she said.

Differing opinions emerged along political lines as well, with Republicans claiming the federal income tax was too high 62 percent of the time and Democrats saying it was too high 51 percent of the time. Ryan Ellison, Tax Policy Director at Americans for Tax Reform, thinks that this speaks volumes.

"Even liberals are split about 50-50, so if you're the most liberal person in America, there's a good chance you think your taxes are too high," said Ellison. "Given that most liberals push for higher taxes, that's interesting."

The Tax Foundation surveyed attitudes towards individual taxes as well. The areas of taxation that garnered the most disapproval from respondents was the gasoline taxes and the death tax - despite the fact that gasoline taxes amount to much less than federal income taxes (which respondents were less opposed to) and the fact that death tax only affects a small percentage of high-earning Americans.

The controversial taxes on unhealthy foods, or "fat tax," were opposed by 58 percent of respondents, and viewed as acceptable by 36 percent. Twenty-three percent of respondents favored a tax on salt.

J. Justin Wilson, a senior research analyst at the Center for Consumer Freedom, says that's just evidence of the way Americans feel about the government intervening on
"For the same reason Congressional Democrats chose not to use the tax system as a punitive measure of reigning in AIG bonuses, the same holds true for using the tax system to change American lifestyles," he said. Apparently, most American's just won't stand for it.

Notes from Jeff:

I suspect that if we ceased withholding any form of taxes/goverment entitiments payments from our paychecks, requiring instead that each person write a check at the end of the year, the tea parties planned for April 15, would have happen a long time ago.

Obama’s Tax Cuts Are Just A Big Lie

We have heard the numbers before. The top 5% of tax payers pay 60% of the taxes., but under Obama’s tax plan that burden will increase. When is a enough a enough?

Jonah Goldberg: Obama’s ‘shared sacrifice’

You could take all of the money made by the richest 1 percent in this country and it wouldn’t come close to covering government’s expenses….even if those rich people for some reason kept working. How much more can we put on the backs of so few before they break?

Obama’s War On The Rich: Disney Class Envy

There are too many people in this country who have taken to vilifying the rich. The chief pitch-fork shaker being our very own President:

The Scrooge McDuck Myth

The myth starts when people arbitrarily determine who they perceive to be rich, and then start to crave what their neighbors have earned. Is that what America is closer to becoming?

Obama’s Budget Plan: The Devil is in the Details

President Obama is trying to trumpet in a “New Era of Responsibility” with the announcement of his 2010 budget. The plan at best will raise taxes and triple the current budget, and at worst create the biggest government in the history of the world:

Reuters: Obama Brings Back Era of Big Government

It will take some time before all the details of the budget are revealed, due in large part because the budget plan lacks details on such high ticket items like the healthcare initiatives (there’s transparency for you), but already people are starting to question the numbers:

NY Post: Obama's Fuzzy Math

Above all this budget does fulfill one of Obama’s campaign promises, tax relief for those that don’t pay taxes and higher taxes for those identified as the “rich:”

WSJ: Taxing the rich won't help

Much will be written, and many will disagree over the next few weeks and months, but in the end this budget (as it is written now) will not help hardworking Americans. More over, the trouble with this budget does not rest solely with the Democrats.

When are those in Washington, DC going to wake up?

A Conservative Alternative To The Proposed Stimulus Package

Now that the election is behind us, and we have “only one President,” it is time for government to get back to business of governing (or some version of it). The American taxpayers are looking at a stimulus package approaching 1 trillion dollars, but most experts agree that the stimulus could approach 2 trillion before all is said and done. If you started counting right now it would take you 3, 179 years to reach 1 trillion, but it will take our representatives less than a few hours to commit this country to a financial burden too heavy for us to carry at this time.

Adding insult to injury, the inappropriately named stimulus package (American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan) is filled with pork:

A pork barrel stimulus package

But there is a valid alternative to this boondoggle called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan. Americans should encourage Congress to should consider the Republican Study Committee’s (RSC) plan with its emphasis on reducing America’s debt, lowering the tax burden on American families and businesses, and creating an incentive for businesses to grow and invest in the economy. The RSC’s plan does this by offering:

• Across-the-board reduction in marginal tax rates
• Repeal of the Alternative Minimum Tax
• A reduction in the corporate tax rate
• Ending the capital gains tax on inflation
• Full and immediate expensing of business equipment
• A one percent reduction in government spending

Throwing more taxpayer money is not the solution. It will only lead to further fraud and waste. We would be better served reducing speeding, reducing taxes, and establish policies that encourage private industry to thrive. That is what will get American back on track.

Obama Will Raises Taxes On Everyone

Some of you may not remember the 1992 Presidential Election. During that election Bill Clinton chastised then President Bush for going against his promise of “no new taxes,” a promise Bush broke due to the overspending of the Democratic Congress.

Bill Clinton spent the ’92 campaign stating that he would raises taxes on the rich, lower taxes on the “middle-class,” and provide tax breaks for lower-income. But once Clinton took office, he raised taxes on the “rich and the middle-class,” which sent the economy into a downturn. Clinton did however provide “tax refunds” to the “lower-income.” As it just so happens, the rebates went to people not paying any taxes. If it wasn’t for the Conservative Revolution of 1994, who knows how far Clinton would have gone?

Does this all sound familiar? It should, because “Repeat “Obama is doing the same thing. Watch the following video’s and see if you notice a pattern:

Obama Is All Over The Place On Taxes:

Joe Biden Pipes In:

Bill Richardson Readjust The Figure:

Within two months the bar for the middle-class moved down $130,000 dollars. If you take Obama’s $97,000.00 statement from 2007, and the fact that he voted to tax people making more than $42,000 dollars, the pattern becomes very clear. We are all going to get taxed, which is exactly what every leading economist says you SHOULDN’T DO!

It figures, just when I find out I am rich (according to Obama and the Democrats), I don’t have enough money to enjoy my new financial status!

Obamanomics: Killing Me Softy With His Song

"I think at this point there needs to be a focus on an immediate increase in spending and I think this is a time when deficit fear has to take a second seat . . . I believe later on there should be tax increases. Speaking personally, I think there are a lot of very rich people out there whom we can tax at a point down the road and recover some of the money."

-- Barney Frank, October 20, 2008

With less than two weeks before we choose the next leader of the Free World, many in the old media (dinosaur demigods) are ignoring the debacle that would be the Obama Presidency, both on foreign policy and economics, but especially the economy:

WSJ: Obama's Tax Plan Will "Sock It" To Small Business

WSJ: An Obamanomics Preview - Tax and spend, but not in that order.

WSJ: Obama Channeling The Ghost Of FDR

Key Excerpts:

"Mr. Obama's tax increase would hit the bottom line of small businesses in three direct ways. First, because 85% of small business owners are taxed at the personal income tax rate, any moderately successful business with an income above as little as $165,000 a year could face a higher tax liability. That's the income level at which the 33% income tax bracket now phases in for individuals, and Mr. Obama would raise that tax rate for those businesses to 36%."

"Mr. Obama responds that more than nine of 10 small businesses would not pay these higher taxes. Last Thursday he scoffed in response to the debate over Joe the Plumber, saying that not too many plumbers "make more than $250,000 a year." He's right that most of the 35 million small businesses in America have a net income of less than $250,000, hire only a few workers, and stay in business for less than four years.

However, the point is that it is the most successful small- and medium-sized businesses that create most of the new jobs in our dynamic society. And they are precisely the businesses that will be slammed by Mr. Obama's tax increase. Joe the Plumber would get hit if he expanded his business and hired 10 to 15 other plumbers. An analysis by the Senate Finance Committee found that of the filers in the highest two tax brackets, three out of four are small business owners. A typical firm with a net income of $500,000 would see its tax burden rise to $166,000 a year under the Obama plan from $146,000 today."

"According to a Gallup survey conducted for the National Federation of Independent Business last December and January, only 10% of all businesses that hire between one and nine employees would pay the Obama tax. But 19.5% of employers with 10 to 19 employees would be socked by the tax. And 50% of businesses with 20 to 249 workers would pay the tax. The Obama plan is an incentive to hire fewer workers."

"Federal budget deficits are not something we obsess about, but eventually this new spending has to be paid for, and Barney Frank's comments only underscore that big tax increases are coming. The prospect of these tax increases is now hanging over the economy like a pall, as investors and businesses wonder where and how heavily an Obama Administration and Congress would strike. The pall is likely to continue well into 2009, as millions of Americans delay their investment decisions until they know how much their after-tax returns are likely to fall.

"Barack Obama is one of the most liberal members of the Senate. His reaction to the financial crisis is to blame deregulation. He even leverages fear of deregulation onto other issues. For example, Sen. John McCain wants to allow consumers to buy health insurance across state lines. Mr. Obama likens this to the financial deregulation that he alleges got us into the current mess."

"But a President Obama would also enjoy large Democratic majorities in Congress. His party might even win a 60-seat, filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, giving him more power than any president has had in decades to push a liberal agenda. And given the opportunity, Mr. Obama will likely radically increase government interference in the economy."

The most damaging statement to Obama's economic plan comes from one of his own advisors:

"Loyal Democrats have howled over the claim that small businesses will get soaked by the Obama tax plan, so we thought we would seek an authority they might trust on the issue: Democratic Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus of Montana. Here is what Mr. Baucus wrote in a joint press release with Iowa Republican Charles Grassley on August 20, 2001, when they supported the income tax rate cuts that Mr. Obama wants to repeal:

". . . when the new tax relief law is fully phased in, entrepreneurs and small businesses -- owners of sole proprietorships, partnerships, S corporations, and farms -- will receive 80 percent of the tax relief associated with reducing the top income tax rates of 36 percent to 33 percent and 39.6 percent to 35 percent."

"Experts agree that lower taxes increase a business' cash flow, which helps with liquidity constraints during an economic slowdown and could increase the demand for investment and labor."

The point has been made loud and clear, now is not the time (as if there should ever be a time) for Obamanomics. Now is the time for lower taxes, fiscal restraint and reducing the budget. We cannot spend our way out of this crisis, and what Obama is proposing is economic suicide.

Barney Frank Is A Financial Idiot

" Suffering Succotash..."

First it was Joe Biden telling a tale of apocalyptic doom if Obama is elected; now we have Barney Frank encouraging Obama to spend more, tax more, and don’t worry about the deficit:

‘….at this point there needs to be an immediate increase in spending…..…this is the time that deficit fear has to take a second seat.” There is one sane thing in Frank’s statement:

“….. my encouraging will probably have more impact on Senator Obama than Senator McCain.”

God help this country if the likes of Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid are allowed to regain power and go unchecked.

Obama’s Tax “Refund” Is Gibberish

Obama's tax plan is nothing more than a scheme to "rob Peter to pay Paul." The numbers do not add up. Obama keeps stating that 95% of Americans would receive a tax refund, but note he is not say 95% of "those that pay taxes" would be receiving a rebate. But as we have learned, 40% of the 95% do not pay taxes at all. How can that be?

So where is the refund coming from? The refund is coming from the payroll tax, or money that would normal is going into the Social Security coffers:

WSJ: Obama Talks Nonsense on Tax Cuts

Social Security is already in jeopardy, and as the Wall Street Journal article indicates, Obama's plan would only serve to place Social Security in further risk.

Before You Vote For Obama, You Need To Read This

Obama's economic plan will be a disaster for America!

America did not get to be the most prosperous country in the world because of government ownership (the current banking coup) and control (an unfair tax burden and unnecessary regulations). Our prosperity was due to the fact that America was (and I hope still is) a capitalist society that supported the entrepreneurial spirit. There are millions of Americans who have become willing participants in the death of capitalism……which would mean the passing of the America advantage.

Some of us are scared, some of us our dumbfounded, and all of us are angry. All of these emotions are valid, but we must not let these emotions drive us in the wrong direction. New taxes (regardless of a person's income), increased spending, and more government control are not the answer to getting us out of this mess.

Obama is purposing higher taxes, massive spending, and more government regulation, in short….economic ruin. These ideas are not new to American shores. They are failed socialist principles that will prove catastrophic if enacted. One only needs to do a little research to discover that socialism of any sort has brought on economic paralysis wherever it has been tried.

So lets look at what Obama is proposing.

Obama's Tax Plan:

Obama's tax plan can be summed up in one phrase….class-warfare. The belief that just because some people are financially successful merits punishing them with higher taxes is the antithesis of everything America stands for. Currently the top 1% of Americans pay 30% of the taxes, the top 5% pay 50% of the taxes, and the top 10% pays 70% of the taxes in America. Obama is going to raise taxes on everyone, it is in his liberal DNA, but he is going to start by taxing the very factors that drive the economic engine of America:

Tax Type	Currently	Obama's Plan
Income tax rate	35%	39.6%
Income Payroll	37.4%	52.2%
Capital Gains	15 %	28%
Dividends	15 %	39.6%
Estate tax	0%	55%

When you take money that will be used to create jobs (Joe Biden's favorite 3 letter word), and throw it away, the economy slows down. Obama will punish the very people and industries that are needed to get America out of this economic slump:

NRO: Obama's Tax-Plan Disaster

How is it fair to raise taxes on the capital gains, there by bringing in less taxes? The facts are simple. Whenever you increase the capital gains tax (or any tax for that matter), the government collects less in taxes. Additionally, when you give people a "tax break" who do not pay taxes (as Obama plan clearly states) you need to call it what it is….WELFARE. How will either of these factors help? Answer, they won't.

GRADE = F

Obama's Shopping Spree:

Barrack Obama has proposed 1 trillion dollars (1,000,000,000,000) in new spending. If you started counted right now, it would take you 31688 years, 32 days, 1 hour, 46 minutes, 40 seconds. It will take Barrack Obama just a few seconds to add this new spending to our debt. Combine this with his "tax plan," which will reduce the amount of money coming in, and America will drown in our own national debt:

Washington Times: How Obama Will "Spread The Wealth"

USA News: Obama's Math Does Not Add Up

Fox Forum: Obama Fiscal Follies

GRADE = F

Regulatory Reform:

Liberals never met a tax they didn't like, and have never found an industry they couldn't regulate into failure.

The Democrats have made it a point that the lack of regulation of industries such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is what got us into this mess. Alright I'll bite:

Question - Name three regulatory failures of President Bush that led to the financial crisis we are witnessing today? Two? One?

Answer - There are none. We have been living with the regulatory oversight supported by the Democrats, and signed by then President Clinton.

Question - Name one regulatory recommendation introduced by the Democrats in either the House or the Senate that would have helped to prevent this current fiscal crisis?

Answer - There were none. The fact that the top three recipients of Freddie Mac and Fannie were all Democrats might have something to do with the absence of action from the Left.

Question - Name one regulatory recommendation introduced by the Republicans in either the House or the Senate that would have helped to prevent this current fiscal crisis?

Answer – S.190, which was introduced in 2005 by Sen. John Sununu (R-NH) and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), and was defeated by….wait for it……the Democrats! Not ONE Democrat signed on to support this Senate Bill. Experts agree, had S.190 passed we would not be dealing with this current financial crisis.

Question – What regulatory policies did Obama every initiate that would have prevented this financial meltdown?

Answer – None…..oh wait, he "wrote a letter" to the Treasury Secretary, months after he announced he was running for President. There's leadership for you. For the amount of time it took him to write this letter he could have either written a Senate Bill with some bite, or support a Senate Bill that would have provided balanced oversight. If only someone had introduced a Senate Bill that Obama could have support…..say like S.190! Not only did Obama not support S.190 (there's bi-partisanship for you), he took no action:

WSJ: Obama Voted 'Present' on Mortgage Reform

WSJ: Another 'Deregulation' Myth

GRADE = F

Whether you are blue or red is not what is at stake. It comes down to Conservative principals or Liberal ideals. It comes down to what will work best, fiscal restraint or free-spending standards. The clear answer is fiscal restraint, which points to only one candidate….John McCain.

Life Under Obama: Obama’s Small Business Tax Plan A Job Killer!

Are you a small business owner like the millions of Joe the Plumbers (Joe Wurzelbacher - Wall Street Journal: Who is Joe the Plumber), or are you one of the millions dependent on your paycheck thanks to a small business owner? Are you wondering what an Obama presidency will mean to small business? It will bring it to a grinding halt:

ATR: Record Tax Hike on Small Businesses Will Kill Last Job-Creating Sector

The truth of Obama’s contempt for capitalism can be heard in his own words:

“It is not that I want to punish your success”…..that's exactly what excessive taxes are, a punishment for those that work hard. Joe Wurzelbacher wants to be a working class hero, and the business he wants to buy is an example of the type entrepreneurial spirit that represents hardworking Americans. There are millions of Americans that are pulling the wagon that is the American economy; their called small-business owners. Barrack Obama’s idea of spreading the wealth is having a bunch of people jump in the wagon that small business owners are pulling, regardless of the harm it will do to that small business owner.

But Barrack Obama is not alone in this taxation mindset. Obama and the Democrats have been very successful of parlaying their “class-envy” attacks to get the “masses (Joe Biden’s words)” on their side. Take for example undecided voter Janet Chittock of Ohio (Janet Chittock: Tax the "rich" plumber!), who feels that anyone “making $250,000” is rich. I would remind people such as Ms. Chittock that President Clinton had a very similar plan prior to being elected, but ended up enacting an across the board tax increase, even for people making less than $40,000.00. This betrayal was the reasons why the Democrats lost control of Congress in 1994.

Class envy will be the least of Joe the Plumber's problems. Joe should expect an onslaught from the full force of Obama's media relation team, CBS, NBC, ABC, as well as others in the "mainstream media." As the Forth Estate did with Governor Palin, and did not do for Barrack Obama, they will leave no stone unturned to discredit Joe. I give it a few days, and there will be negative stories about Joe all over the place. But what the press doesn't realize is that Joe Wurzelbacher is not the story. The story is Obama's tax plan, and how it will stifle small business, where the majority of Americans are employed.

The problem is that this figure is misleading. It is not Joe the Plumber making $250,000.00, it is Joe’s Plumbing Service making $250,000.00. But Joe also has expenses, or maybe Joe wants to expand his services, hire people, or upgrade his equipment. Well guess what? Under Obama’s plan Joe must first “spread the wealth,” and then anything that is left over, Joe can decide how best to spend it. Gee’s Mr. Obama, thanks

Simply put, John McCain, a thousands economist, and history are right on this issue. CUT TAXES FOR EVERYONE, and REDUCE SPENDING! The “redistribution of wealth” sounds nice, but never works. You punish people who are the engine of our economy, and make other people more dependent on government handouts.

I would encourage everyone go to the Small Business Association's website (Small Business Association) to see the thousands of industries that will be affected in a negative way by Obama's tax plan.

Obama’s Tax Plan: A Recipe For Disaster

Obama recently made an appearance on ABC Sunday with George Stephanopoulos. Obama’s appearance, and the conversation regarding his latest tax plan, had the Wall Street Journal (as well as others) wondering if Obama knew what his tax plan was, let alone its negative affects on our economy:

Wall Street Journal: Obama Tax Plan 3.0

Mr. Stephanopoulos: “So even if we’re in a recession next January, you come into office, you’ll still go through with your tax increases?”

Senator Obama: “No, no, no, no, no. What I’ve said, George, is that even if we’re still in a recession, I’m going to go through with my tax cuts. That’s my priority.”

Mr. Stephanopoulos: “But not the increases?”

Senator Obama: “I think we’ve got to take a look and see where the economy is. …”

“Look and see where the economy is…” That is not very reassuring, and places Obama in the same spot President Clinton was in 1993. During the entire 1992 Presidential Campaign Clinton promised tax breaks for the middle class (after mocking then-President Bush for raising taxes). He “changed” his mind once he got in office, choosing instead to raise taxes on EVERYONE. Fortunately all the stars aligned for Clinton, but that type of alignment is a once in a lifetime occurrence.

If Obama wins the Whitehouse, and the Democrats hold onto Congress, there is little doubt that we will see the largest tax increase in the history of this country. Obama’s lack of economic understanding, coupled with poor advice from socialist mentors will drive us into a deep recession, and possible even a depression (Barrons: Did Obama Learn Nothing From Hoover). “IT'S HARD TO PIN down the details of Obama's tax proposal because they keep changing.” Is this the time for vagueness and indecision?

I am no economist, just a simple Conservative, but it does take a genius to see that what our economy needs is someone ready to hold the line on federal spending and ensure tax cuts for everyone. Does anyone have faith that the socialist that control the Democratic Party are prepared, and willing, to commit to a disciplined spending plan and limited taxes?

The Housing Bailout: Unfair To Those That Played By The Rules

President Bush signed the housing bailout bill into law, something he promised he would not do. It does not take a genius to figure out that the housing crisis was completely avoidable. It also does not take a genius to see that the housing bailout bill is the wrong response:

Wall Street Journal: The housing bailout sends the wrong message

Once again the burden of paying for irresponsible behavior falls on the tax payer. The bill rewards bad credit behavior, while punishing those that followed the rules and spent within their means. Additionally, this bill will increase the federal debt limit by $800 BILLION DOLLARS to $10.6 trillion dollars. The bill also features a provision requiring the reporting of ALL credit transaction that occur on-line (Visa, Mastercard, Paypal, Ebay), regardless of whether they have anything to do with the purchase of a home (????????....why!). Why would the government (in particular, the IRS) need this information, to impose NEW taxes!

The lone voice speaking out against this madness was Senator Coburn, of Oklahoma:

American Thinker: Coburn Stands Alone

The Housing Bailout is just another example of Washington's "rape and pillage mentality" against the American Taxpayer. It may be time for the American Taxpayer's to consider a "pitchfork rebellion," but Congress will probably figure out away to tax the pitchforks.

Is Your State In Fincial Trouble? Who's To Blame?

Over the past few weeks we have seen a rash of stories about the many States that are experiencing, or are anticipating, a budget shortfall. The reality is that the reports of budget shortfalls have become an annual Spring tradition for many States, like the blooming of the Cherry Blossoms. But what is interesting is that many in the media and the government are stating that this is a sign of a recession. No its not. There are two reasons that the States find themselves in this mess:

• Our elected officials are spending too much money.

• Tax revenue are far less than was expected.

In my home State of New Hampshire we are looking at a possible deficit of $300 million dollars. The classic response has been “it’s George Bush's fault.” Why not, it has become so easy to blame President Bush for anything and everything, just ask Keith Olbermann. Personal and professional accountability has been lost on many State legislators, Governors, and other government officials responsibly for creating sound budgets, but instead have driven their States into the ground with their lack of fiscal conservatism.

How did all the States find themselves in this mess? I wish the easy answer was the downturn in the economy, but the truth is that our representatives have been acting recklessly with OUR money for sometime; it is only now starting to catch up with them. States gather together every year to draw up a budget. Part of that budget process includes a list of everything they want to spend money on (which often looks like the Christmas list of a 5-year old child) , and the other part is a listing all of the “expected” revenue. Excepted is a funny word. To some it means actual revenue, to others it merely means potential revenue. But what expected truly means is a best guess. Well for many that guess was off, not by a little, but by a lot.

So how do WE get out of this mess, because you see, the politicians will be looking to their next victims (oh, I am sorry…continuant's) to “help solve this crisis?” We will hear how we all have to “tighten our belts,” “sacrifice on a few things,” or “go through the pain now” to correct the problem.

Like foxes in the henhouse, our representatives have already made a few “suggestions:”

Maryland – Tax the Rich (Replace Tech Tax with Capital Gains Tax)

New Hampshire – Increase the burden on the lower income and tourist (Increase in Cigarette Tax and reduce Wine Discount on Volume Sales)

North Carolina – There it is again, the “sin tax” (Increase Tax on Cigarettes)

New York City – Say it with me, “sin tax” ($1.50 per pack tax INCREASE)

Minnesota – Some tax increases, but major cuts ($373 millions dollars, manageable. 1 billion dollar, bend over tax payers!)

New Jersey – 3 billion in the hole. Raise toll charges, and oh, spend $580 million more on schools ("That will be $100.00 to cross the bridge over to NYC)

California - $14 billion dollar deficit, no big deal! (Maybe Hollywood Can Throw a Fundraiser!)

Massachusetts - 2.5% tax on college endowments (No...we meant tax the evil oil companies, not us!). This of course follows the failed attempt by Davel Patrick to get casino gambling.

In all, 31 States are facing revenue shortfalls (CBPP: States facing Tough Budget Times). Trust me when I say that there is enough blame to go around. Republican, Democrat, and Independent. Blame goes to the Republicans for abandoning their conservative fiscal principals. To the Democrats for living up to the motto of “Adeo Ut Illic Es Miseratio , Nos Vadum Epulum.” And to the Independents for being non-committal on everything. So my fellow taxpayers, hold onto you wallets, because the taxman cometh!

Most budget crisis’s could have been prevented, but now some tough choices will have to be made. All of the concerned States will implement a combination of budget cuts and tax/fee increases. But how can the effected States prevent this from happening in the future? The solution is simple, but not easy:

1. Set a realistic budget. You cannot be everything to everyone. The goal of any State is to preserve the infrastructure (roads and bridges), provide an adequate education, insure strong law enforcement, and maintain a disciplined social services.

2. Set realistic revenue goals. Granted you cannot foresee every bump on the “economic highway,” but in the same regard, we should not be spending every last penny. Experts believe that you have to underestimate your potential revenue, by as much as 25%.

3. Document and audit every penny spent. Enact “Budget Transparency” policies and laws. This would require each department to post how they are using OUR money to support OUR needs.

4. Establish a strict “Rainy Day Fund (RDF).” This fund should have stringent guidelines as to how the fund can be used. Rainy Day Fund can be subsidized by (but not limited to):

• Any cost savings recognized at the end of the year is not spent, but placed in the Rainy Day Fund. That would mean strictly monitoring each State Office and holding them to task.

• Any revenue collected above the estimated projected revenue would be placed into this fund.

But what can “We the People” do to ensure that our elected officials are managing our money correctly?:

1. For beginners, be smarter about who we elect. Think less about Democrat, Republican, and Independent, and think more about the agenda of the candidates. Every candidate wants our children to have a good education, but how to achieve that differs from candidate to candidate.


2. Hold each of your representatives to task, even if you didn’t vote for them. Each representative should tell you exactly where they stand on matters related to the budget and taxes. Screw the rhetoric and insist on facts!


3. Voice your concerns. If you do not express your disappointment, then your representatives will feel that they have free rein to do whatever they want with YOUR money. Write editorials, call and write your representatives, get your neighbors and friends involved. Remember, your representative doesn’t have to agree with you, but if enough people speak up, they will listen.

It is important to remember that States do more harm to their citizens when they support a fiscal environment that is mismanaged and strained. It is not just a matter of spending wisely, but taxing wisely as well. In the end fiscal accountability, contrary to what our representatives would have us believe, is the duty of the people, not the politicians.