|
|
May 20, 2013
|
|
Obama Talks TaxesPosted on Apr 15, 2009
As “tea parties” tepidly brew in cities across the country to protest government spending and budget deficits, President Obama is on the offensive, maintaining that the tax relief of his administration’s nascent months is helping resurrect our fallen economy.
Advertisement Previous item: Truthdig Nominated for Best Political Site in Best Political Year Next item: They Don’t Build Democracies Like They Used To New and Improved CommentsIf you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy. |
By akapatrick, April 23, 2009 at 5:29 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
The predominant theory on recovery from the great depression was that the money spent by the government cured us, and isolationism caused it to drag out. There was debate about the gold standards effect on our recovery also.
Now we may never know wish did what because they happened together and logically speaking, which cause was which effect is up for debate. I tend to go against the conventional theory that isolationism dragged out the great depression, but rather strengthened the nation. Isolationism forced our industry to be self reliant, and in the face of a world war, we were able to call the shots while we strengthened. At the end of the war, we were left with an intact, versatile industrial base, which was ready to serve the needs of the world ravaged by war.
Isolationism made our country the power house it was for decades to come.
When I look to the decisions being made today towards unimaginable spending and unifying us even closer to the banks, industries, and markets of the world I have to wonder. Is simply funding new niche markets for a minority industry really worth the greater losses in other industries here in the US? The main argument of why the banks crashed was that they were too interrelated and, is creating more power of an international organization over all banks going to fix that vulnerability or magnify it? When they talk about jobs created by imports, what jobs exactly are they talking about that wouldn’t already be filled, if we made the same products here? Wouldn’t we also have the addition of the jobs making those products here?
Simple math comes into play here. Let’s look at the February trade numbers as posted by U.S. Census Bureau. We had exports of $126.8 billion, and imports of $152.7 billion. If we did not export, or import in February, where would Americans have gotten the $26.0 billion dollars worth of products extra that we imported? We would have had to make these goods ourselves. This would mean more jobs, and ultimately more buying in the following month.
How many jobs does $26.0 billion buy for America? Well the per capita GNP is $100,000. Divide that by 12 for a monthly figure and you get 8.3 thousand. Divide $26.0 billion dollars, by the monthly GDP, and you get 3,120,000 jobs. Surprisingly, that is almost exactly half of those currently on unemployment around the country.
How do we fix the other half? Well any plan that sustainably has as a base number that cuts unemployment in half is going to create more jobs simply because of a prosperous economy with money to spend, and buy. Based on DOL numbers that say 4.7% of American’s are accepting unemployment, dropping to 2.4% is a pretty nice number to begin with. The other half will make up over time, but in a free market society, where some people simply can’t hold a job to save their lives due to personal issues, it will never be zero.
Wouldn’t our huge out pouring of money better be spent on us, rather than supplementing a banking system we are surrendering to global control, rather than to a world monetary fund under world control, and rather to industries that as history has shown, can be produced cheaper in other countries with fewer taxes, restrictions, wages, and workers’ rights?
Report thisBy guntotinsquaw, April 23, 2009 at 4:50 am Link to this comment
akapatrick…. to break it down simple
$100 million = 2 hrs. interest on the deficit
ONE IF BY LAND
Report thisBy akapatrick, April 20, 2009 at 7:54 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Just in is that President Obama is giving everybody the ultimatum to cut $100 million dollars in 90 days to show that the government is being fiscally responsible. In return he is asking for a $3.67 trillion dollar budget.
Hmmm, what percentage is 100 million of 3.67 trillion? Anybody remember their scientific notation, the percent is so small you need a microscope to see it. He will save us 2.7247956403269754768392370572207e-3%
If I remember my math here, this should be .00275% LOL, for those who did great at English and could spell stuff good, but stunk in math, let me break it down, it’s not 1%, it’s not one tenth of a percent, it’s not even one hundredth of a percent, it is rounded off at three thousandths of a percent. Or better yet if you saved a quarter in the next ninety days, your boss should give you…. drum roll please….. $10,000. I’d save a quarter by purchasing a cheaper lunch if you gave ten grand to do it.
Ohhhh, wait, we already gave him how many trillions already this year beyond the budget? Chaching, penny saved is a penny earned my ass.
So now for those that still stand behind their vote, not only does he not have executive experience, apparently he can’t do math to well either. Either that or he thinks we’re all mindless idiots. After all, we did vote him in.
Report thisBy guntotinsquaw, April 17, 2009 at 1:36 pm Link to this comment
I’m real tired of being called a republican right wing, perhaps you should have come to the TEA party and listened to what was said. NO PARTIES!!! Are you hearing it clear enough. I’m not right or left, I am an AMERICAN and I like my FREEDOM. I happen to be be pro-choice, pro-gun, pro-gay marriage, pro-stem cell, boy I’m as right wing as they get. I’ve never asked the govt. for anything and never will. In turn the govt. never came around with a spare tit so they don’t get a voice in MY house. If I want a gas guzzler, MY choice. If I want a personal assult rifle, MY choice. The govt. doesn’t have the right to force me to be charitable. If I want to be charitable with my money, ITS MY CHOICE. I shouldn’t have to feel compassion for 20 billion illegals with MY MONEY! English only PLEASE! Secure my borders, a nation without borders is NOT a nation. We are not a welfare state for corrupt foreign countries. I don’t want the govt. telling me what car I can drive, how much electric I can use, or what doctor I can see or how much I spend on my meds. I was mad with clinton, bush and obama. I sick of the direction they (republican and democrats alike)are taking MY country. I expect them to follow the constitution….The government ain’t your daddy. If you want to try a socialist lifestyle that’s great, pack your crap and move to France. I can’t move to another capitolist country, this is it and we have piggy backed the world long enough. NOW DO YOU UNDERSTAND!!!!! I’ll keep my money and my guns YOU KEEP YOUR CHANGE
Report thisBy gerald4, April 16, 2009 at 3:09 pm Link to this comment
Paracelsus:
I totally agree.
After the American revolution, the USA instituted high import tariffs to encourage the industrialization of the USA, and it was successful in establishing a positive balance of trade, accumulating Gold reserves, creating a manufacturing base, creating a technical data base, and making the USA independent from England for technology. One way or another we must stop the selling of title to everything of value in America to pay for what we consume. We must create a positive balance of trade by any means possible. If not, we will destroy the purchasing power of the US dollar. Without import tariffs, most all products will be purchased for less money if they are manufactured in foreign countries where labor costs are minimized. The US labor force has no future without high import tariffs to prohibit foreign imported products. Without high import tariffs, US workers must compete with foreign workers at foreign wage scales for employment. Most USA citizens do not want to work for wages that the same job in a foreign country would pay. Until we re-industrialize and correct our foreign trade imbalance, we cannot afford to have free trade because it will destroy the US Economy.
We should repeal all free trade legislation and international trade treaties.
The only thing that will save, preserve or restore the buying power of the dollar is reversing the trade deficit and then re-building our gold reserves. Only a positive balance of trade will restore the value of the dollar, and we must accomplish this by any means possible, or accept third world poverty on a large-scale basis. The only way to do this is to produce and export more (dollar value of) things than we import. The only way that we can accomplish exporting US made products is to re-industrialize and make these products with US materials & Labor. The only way that our products will be sold abroad is if these products are either technologically superior, or cheaper.
What is preventing the USA from re-industrializing? The US citizens do not want to work for the extremely low wages that are paid in foreign countries to manufacture the things that we consume. This is the main reason why the US manufacturers have closed their US factories. As an example, the US tire manufacturing companies closed their plants, sold the tire manufacturing equipment to Foreign Citizens who relocated this equipment to their foreign countries where labor costs are very low compared to US labor costs. These foreigners re-constructed and re-started these plants using workers that are paid only a fraction of the pay that US citizens would accept. As a result, these foreign companies now manufacture most of the tires consumed in the USA. The USA importers ands distributors pay the foreign manufacturers in US currency for these products, and these foreign countries do not buy very much if anything from the USA because our products are much more expensive than foreign made products.
Report thisBy jfior, April 16, 2009 at 2:36 pm Link to this comment
As I look at the tax code on my office desk…I am an international tax consultant for a big accounting firm…the top tax rate for married filing jointly in 1983 was 50% on income over 162,400 ($346,000 in today’s dollars), in 1981 the top rate for the same bracket was 70% $215,000 ($503,000 in today’s dollars), in 1978 it was 70% on income over 203,200 (664,000 in today’s dollars)....while there were more “loop holes” back then these were high rates.
While the late 70’s and 80’s had some financial issues…the world did not end and America didn’t become a socialist society…at least I don’t htink it did….some on the right might disagree….
Report thisBy Paracelsus, April 16, 2009 at 4:12 am Link to this comment
@ gerald4
We had excellent system of taxation before the IRS. It was the tariff tax on imports. This tax funded internal improvements, and infrastructure development. The Roundtable groups and the CFR think tanks put an end to that beginning around 1920. A big supporter of the CFR was Harold Pratt, an executive at one of Rockefeller’s Standard Oil companies. The CFR is housed at the Harold Pratt Building in NYC.
The problem was that strong tariffs are one of the signatures of a nation that will not give up its sovereignty to a global organization. An interdependent world cannot live with a strong economic nation that is largely independent.
As to the IRS tax, most people in 1913(?) thought only the very wealthy would pay such a tax. It was not too long after the income tax was enacted that we had the Great War. It was surely a coincidence, aye? Anyhow top marginal tax rates soon rocketed over 66% to cover the war, and very few were left untouched by it. I would venture that the income tax made the warfare state possible as well as replacing the tariff system, which strengthened domestic industry with a tax system that discourages wage laborers with ambition. Such a tax system was able to pull money out of the real economy in order to fund weapons programs and interest on the debt. The IRS works with the Federal Reserve to discourage savings and investment in a production economy. One of the biggest deductions a wage earner can get is mortgage interest. So it is no surprise that the housing sector is overbuilt. Without that bias that money could have been invested something else that produces more goods and services than a house.
Soon after the income tax, a great wave of foundations were formed by plutocrats as a way to skirt the income tax as well as engineer the system after their own hearts’ desires. So we have these well funded NGO’s who fancy themselves as tribunes for the people. In a way it is as if the government by proxy is funding undemocratic social change.
Report thisBy Paracelsus, April 16, 2009 at 3:32 am Link to this comment
The impetus toward the anti-tax movement is that Congress won’t listen to its constituents. We still have wars going in Iraq and Afghanistan. We still have Gitmo in operation as a star chamber. Money is going down a bottomless pit from the derivatives meltdown. This is a movement that like other movements is liable to being co-opted by the establishment gargoyles. I am not surprised to see Republican icons running a head of the crowd to become the “leaders”. Many of these politicians are quickly recognized as hypocrites. I don’t see why any citizen should pay for government that doesn’t represent him/her.
Report thisBy P. T., April 15, 2009 at 10:30 pm Link to this comment
Whenever the tax rate is raised a bit on rich people, they have a tantrum. The same thing happened when Clinton became president.
Report thisBy Paracelsus, April 15, 2009 at 10:16 pm Link to this comment
I have been against taxes on income earned through money wages for a long time. Why should government tax income earned through sweat? It smells worse than feudalism. Peasants had a lighter burden on them from their lords than the typical wage earner has now.
Report thisBy John, April 15, 2009 at 7:16 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Before we start looking at the tax code, doesn’t this bother anyone but me? Why are we taking out HUGE high interest loans from foreign governments creating multi-trillion dollar debt so Obama and the government can claim that some 40% of first bailout package would go to a “tax cut” (it’s not one it’s a high interest loan) that equates to an average meager $40-$60 dollars a month?
Why not be honest and just not collect the taxes and avoid the interest?
Report thisBy samosamo, April 15, 2009 at 3:37 pm Link to this comment
Those repubs are so damn hypocritical it is sickening when they try stunts like this:
Report this“tea parties” tepidly brew in cities across the country to protest government spending and budget deficits,”.
Where were these traitors when w & dick were blowing the american economy out of the water during the last 8 years? I’ll tell you where, at the trough sucking up as many of those free dollars that they could put in the back of their dump trucks. But it is sad to say that the repubs really know how string those 85s along to lead them to believe this dribble.
By Hulk2008, April 15, 2009 at 1:52 pm Link to this comment
The fact is that as long as there are big disparities in costs for various services spread out across the country, simplification (e.g. flat tax) will be impossible. e.g. Real estate tends to be cheaper in the middle states but those states lack transportation & infrastructure. The entire US shares in the need for protection from external forces - but wealthy corporations and individuals have more need for protection than those without property or means. Same goes for police and fire protection. Some areas are arid and need potable water while others suffer from frequent flooding. Destruction from Mother Nature varies by region.
Report thisBottom line is that each geographic area elects its representatives to go to Washington and get those famous earmarks and tax breaks unique to each area.
We need a system that ensures that every citizen pays SOMEthing - no loopholes, no deductions, no exemptions. Behavioral scientists have proven that getting something totally free results in abuse. But the devil in the details is what the rate(s) might be and how to enforce them. Taxes should somehow be tied to the GDP - pay more when we produce and consume more, less when times are tougher. But there are no magic bullets for proper reform “out there” yet.
By psickmind fraud, April 15, 2009 at 12:45 pm Link to this comment
I’d rather see a flat rate tax. Any time the gubmint tried to mess with it, it’d be easier to see exactly what they were doing.
Report thisBy gerald4, April 15, 2009 at 12:31 pm Link to this comment
Do not replace the existing tax system with anything that is subject to easy revision such as a flat tax. This will only be modified by congress until we get back to what we have now.
Report thisWhy not have a national sales (consumption) tax, and disband the IRS, and fire most of the IRS employees.
Make New Products, New Vehicles, New Houses, New House Additions & Improvements, Fast Food, pre-prepared food from grocery stores, Restaurant Charges, Sports Tickets, Entertainment Expenses, New Vehicles, New Boats, Building Materials, all labor, and other similar new purchase items taxable.
Make uncooked food, used clothing, rent up to a minimum amount, and any new clothing items under $15.00 tax exempt to help the poor.
Businesses would also pay these taxes on new plant constructions, new plant expansions, plant maintenance supplies, maintenance labor, operating labor, administration Labor, consumable office supplies, replacement parts, and other expense items that are used in the business (and not re-sold).
Wholesale materials, parts, etc. that are re-sold should not be taxed until the final sale is made to the end user or retail consumer (like state taxes). If you buy a used house, you pay no sales tax, but when you remodel and/or improve it, you pay sales taxes on the material, and on the labor as you obtain these items to improve the value of your property. You do not pay taxes on the increase in appreciation value, and this might be a break or incentive for people to buy houses rather than rent.
Foreign Exports could be taxed at a different rate, or maybe not taxed at all to make our export products less expensive for export, and/or the same retail rate depending upon the export surplus or deficit.
Generally each item produced shall pay taxes only one time when that item is newly manufactured and sold into the market to the final user and/or retail consumer. Pay the states to collect these taxes (these systems are generally in place) and minimize the number of federally paid employees collecting taxes.
Make the sales tax one time on new cars, and then no additional sales taxes on the subsequent times that the used vehicles are sold. Tax New Parts and Maintenance as these expenses are applied to these cars.
Make the sales tax one time on new Houses, and then no additional sales taxes on the subsequent times that the used houses are sold. Tax the material and labor used to improve, operate and/or maintain these houses after the initial purchase purchased.
Repeal the Tax Code with its special tax breaks for various farmers, tobacco growers, etc.
By RdV, April 15, 2009 at 12:19 pm Link to this comment
But when there is a protest against the war or opposing any Bush-Obama policies it might as well not happen for all the news coverage it gets.
Report this