Prime Example of Why We Need Tax Reform

During a town hall meeting recenly, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) cited GE as an example of why we need serious reform to our tax code. He stunned the crowd with the following details:

GE's reported income for last year was $14,000,000,000. Through the use of loopholes in the tax code, deductions provided for by law, and preferential treatment from the government in the form of tax credits, GE paid no taxes on that income.

Everything GE did was apparently legal. GE's management performed their jobs by maximizing the company's profit and shareholder returns. They did nothing wrong.

Why isn't the Obama Administration attacking GE as a 'rich' tax evader? Why isn't His Highness referring to them in every speech he makes about his desire for wealth redistribution? It's simple - GE's upper management has made a very smart decision to suck up to Obama and his agenda. His policies have no bigger corporate cheerleader than GE. As a result, GE avoids criticism of its 'rich' status, no one is attacking their lack of paying taxes, and it continues to benefit from billions of dollars in government contracts. Smart business.

If GE had paid taxes of, say, 20% on their profits last year, that would have been almost $3,000,000,000 added to the Treasury.

BTW - GE's tax return, if it had been filed on actual paper, would have been 57,000 pages long!

New Democrat Tax Plan

We're seeing the major Republican candidates put forth their plans for reforming the tax code. Most of them involve cutting taxes in some form. Horribly upset at these proposed injustices, Democrat leadership is working on their own reform plan, which they will unveil later. It is a simple plan, probably the flattest tax plan that can be imagined:


Everyone in America pays 95% of their income to the Federal Government, who in turn will redistribute that money to those who they think deserve it.


There are a few exceptions - folks who fall into these categories will pay no income tax at all:

Anyone registered as a Democrat Voter, and can prove they voted for Obama

Anyone belonging to any racial minority

Anyone classified as an illegal immigrant

Anyone of the Jewish faith, unless they actually support Isreal

Anyone who received a liberal arts degree

Anyone who is a card carrying member of a national union

Any government employee who also belongs to a union

Any current or former member of ACORN

Anyone who believed Rev. Wright's sermons were loving gospel

Anyone who works for DailyKOS, Move On, MSNBC, CNN, Huffington, or the other perfectly balanced, logical, and completely fair quaility news outlets.

Any intern that did NOT complain about Bill Clinton's advances

Anyone who believes 9/11 was justified, or caused by US action

Anyone who believes that our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan were simply attacks on peace loving peoples in order to steal their oil.

Anyone who makes under 100,000, and signs a pledge to support the Democrat Party for life

Anyone who makes over 100,000, and pledges to deliver one of these: A) yearly campaign donations of 5,000 or more, B) 25 or more manufactured votes per national election cycle, or C) perform on national TV, giving whatever false testimony the DNC provides to you as your own.

Anyone who will follow ACORN direction and actively participate in the Occupy Whatever movement for a minimum of 30 days.

Any person falling into these categories will receive monthly compensation checks from the government of such a size that they do not have to participate in any actual work. In addition, they will receive free healthcare, free tuition, free drugs, free abortions, free condoms, free needles, and free Obama campaign buttons.

TARP - What Happened To It?

You all remember those emergency meetings in the fall of 2008, where Obama and McCain were called to the White House to discuss the impending collapse of the US financial system. The meeting Obama ran and used as a campaign speech, where McCain sat and kept his mouth shut? The meeting that convinced George Bush that unless a huge infusion of cash was given immediately to big financial organizations, the entire economy of the United States was going to collapse?

As a result to that meeting, $787,000,000,000 was placed in the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP). A single person was placed in charge of distributing the money as he saw fit. No provision was made for any kind of oversight or any kind of accounting for what happened to the money. By law, there is no way for the American Public to know what happened to this money.

A large portion of the pile of cash (all of which was borrowed - deficit spending) were large financial institutions - banks, credit card companies, mortgage companies. Supposedly , this cash was supposed to flow through those organizations to the public in the form of mortage relief, credit card paydowns, and low cost loans. None of that happened - that money went to those organizations, who pretty much all kept it to bolster their bottom lines. How much money exactly was this? No one except the TARP director and Obama know - estimates I have seen place this at $250-300,000,000,000.

The rest of the money has sat unused. Actually that isn't correct, because the money doesn't exist. It is actually Congressional authorization for the TARP director and Obama to spend that much money without having to ask permission or justify the expenditure.

Republican efforts to revoke that authorization have fallen on deaf ears. Obama will not even allow the subject to be discussed. Who can blame him? He's got the largest slush fund in the history of the world, and Congress' authority to spend it however he wants to without fear of anyone questioning it.

Some Republicans in the new House leadership have announced that they will hold investigations into TARP, and demand an accounting of the expenditures. Republican, Democrat, I don't care ... we deserve to know what has happened to this incredible sum of money! If there is any of it that hasn't been spent, authorization for spending it should be revoked immediately. It is clear that the money was not needed for the purpose for which it was made available.

Now, Obama and his finance 'geniuses' want to spend another $600,000,000,000 on another stimulus package. Even though the last stimulus was a dismal failure and horrendous waste of money, they want to do it again. To 'soften' the blow, Obama is offering to use $250,000,000,000 of those unused TARP funds to help fund this stimulus. How generous of him.

It is a very sad statement about the condition of our government and its leadership over the past couple of years that figures of hundreds of billions of dollars are thrown around as if they are chump change. This is one huge sh**pile of money, money our country doesn't have. How much? Each billion dollars Obama throws around is equal to $3.33 for every man, woman, and child in the US, including illegals. The original TARP fund was equal to $2623.33 for every one of us, whether we pay taxes or not. Where is all of it? What has happened to it? Why can't we hold anyone acocuntable for it?

I want to know ...

What's "Fair Share" ?

I've heard this so many times from liberals I am sick of it.

How many times must we hear that the 'rich' don't pay their 'fair share'?

I in no way consider myself rich. The definition of 'rich' changes depending upon who you ask, and sometimes (as with our Liar-in-Chief) the definition changes to suit their mood or purpose. What is 'rich'?

What is 'fair share'? If it is not defined by our current tax code, what is it exactly?

Here's an easy question for any liberal who cares to answer. If you don't think that the rich pay a fair share, tell me exactly what their fair share should be. I'll make it easy. Presume the 'rich' person makes an even $100,000 a year. How much should that person give to the government? How much, total, in income tax, state income tax, SS tax, Medicare tax, sales tax, etc.? Give me a dollar figure. How much of the $100,000 that person has earned do they get to keep?

The Grim Reaper (IRS) Approaches ...

As part of his tax cut package, President Bush cut the Death Tax way back. Otherwise known as an estate tax, the elimination of this tax allowed folks to keep much more of their inheritance during this past decade. Family owned businesses stayed in the family, rather than being liquidated to satisfy the government's thirst for money.

The Death Tax has always been an evil creation of the government. For the Feds to come in and tell you that they own a percentage of your inheritance is just plain wrong. In almost all cases, what they are taxing has already been subject to taxation, in some cases several times over.

The far left wants the Death Tax back - they love the revenue it brings in, and they love the fact it punishes the 'rich' - another form of the redistribution of wealth that they are so fond of.

The Bush tax cuts expire at the end of this year, unless Congress reinstates them. If nothing is done, the Death Tax will come back, and revert to its pre-Bush tax cut levels. In other words, folks who inherit substantial estates will lose 55% of the estate to the Federal Government.

Democrats love this - they don't have to do anything and this tax increase will happen. They'll say 'Oh, we didn't do it ...'.

Republicans, and some moderate Democrats are trying to get this addressed in Congress, but they are being stonewalled by Reid and Pelosi. All the Democrat leadership has to do is delay any effort to reinstate the cuts, and they succeed.

Two examples I heard today really brought this into focus.

First, a family owned lumber mill in Alabama, worth $50,000,000. When the elderly owner dies, his sons, will have to pay the Federal Government $27,500,000 in cash in order to keep their business. If they don't sell the business to pay the tax bill, the government will sieze the business and sell it, taking all of the proceeds. Approximately 500 people employed by the business will lose their jobs.

Second, Yankee Owner George Steinbrenner. If he had died on Jan. 1 of 2011, his heirs would have had to sell off the Yankee franchise in order to pay the Feds their cut.

Who in the hell could ever think that either of these situations is fair? Answer - far left Democrats, those running our government, who want this to happen.

Obama Breaks No Tax Promise, Round One

Many times during his campaign, Obama the Immaculate stated that his new tax plans would not raise taxes for anyone earning under $250,000.

"I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes." - Obama, Sep. 12 2008

"You will not see any of your taxes increase one single dime." - Obama line, frequently stated during campaign

As of April 1, the federal tax on a pack of cigarettes rises .62 cents, to $1.01 per pack.

Smoking is prevalent in people of lower incomes. It is a sad fact that the people who can afford to smoke the least, are the ones who generally do it the most. So, the first people to feel the brunt of Obama's tax wrath are the very people he promised repeatedly he wouldn't attack.

I told you so seems to be so inadequate .....