Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Mr. Quarter on the "Tax Cuts"

Last night I listened in complete dumb struck disbelief as Obama made his concession speech on the "compromise" he had reached concerning the "tax cuts." Any thinking person would first recognize that they are not "tax cuts" that were the topic of conversation in Washington yesterday, but TAX INCREASES that were averted. Mr. Obama then went on, ungraciously and without magnanimity, to point out the profound differences in the parties and that the Republicans were simply insisting that they had to have a tax cut for "millionaires and billionaires" that would cost ultimately $700 billion over 10 years. His mendacity is staggering.

First, since when did annual income of $250,000 for couples and $200,000 for single tax payers make them "millionaires and billionaires?" This must be the same mathmatics that allows this fraud to claim that cancelling the scheduled increase in the marginal tax rates is a "Tax Cut."

Second, lets look at the real mathmatics that Obama and the Democrats use. The total estimated federal revenue lost by extending the tax rates for 10 years is $3.7 trillion. Obama and the Democrats are harping and whining that a tax cut for "millionaires and billionaires" that would cost ultimately $700 billion over 10 years. So they are really concerned about the $700 billion lost, but are ok with letting $3 trillion go because that would have to come out of the pockets of the "middle class."

Personally, Mr. Quarter is fed up with the class warfare that is incited and encouraged by the progressives and Democrats. Something on the order of 46% of all tax payers in the US pay NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX AT ALL! How the hell is that fair? How the hell can the federal government continue to take more and more from the pockets of 54% or even the upper 5% and redistribute that money so that half of the population gets a free ride. Time for everyone to wake up and smell the coffee.


Anonymous said...

So?? No free rides??? I wonder how the math works. If we exempt " only " min wage on down....and said everything above that MUST pay at least SOME tax. One wonders how much would be paid at say?? 3% at lowest lvl, then graduating upwards 1% every 50K until U reach a max tax rate of say?? 15% for the Richest of the rich. What if we also killed ALL tax breaks and credits!! Period !! All!! The uber rich would probably pay more ( in some cases) because their would be no deductions. No one would pay all but nearly all would pay some. ( Likewise, some welfare cheats/frauds I have personally known would lose incentive to have a ton of kids because all of that would go away......and yes...some DO have kids only for the deductions and perks). IDK, im afraid the math is above my pay grade. The " flat tax" threatens the IRS and also CPAs and a lot of lawyers too. I dont see it happening regardless of how much sense it makes. Be careful though. If you expect EVERYONE who likes living in the US to kick in financially...the next logical step is to bring back the " Draft" and make everyone responsible for defending the country as well. All the old arguments....a professional army vs a drafted bunch who dont want to be there. Everyone sharing the load...vs mainly the poor. Hmmm


The Deuce said...

Maybe it's the main stream media, but why is it that there doesn't seem to be any conservatives in the fed government that can expose the administration's b.s. nearly as well as the conservatives on cable and talk radio? Even those senators and rep's who are truly conservative can not muster the rightous indignation and the rapier logic to slice and dice the commie's arguments like Rush, Hannity, Beck, Savage and Mr. Quarter. The Repub's need a firebrand to get in front of the mics and GO OFF! ALL DAY, EVERY DAY!

Anonymous said...

Great Point !!! Yet the Conservative commentators refuse to even consider a run for any office. You would think that at least SOME of the elected officials would be good at public speaking AND making commentary. I suspect its because even the " Conservative" Congressmen are afraid to even LOOK at a microphone without A) taking 3 opinion polls telling them what the voters think...even if they plan on ignoring them...they at least know and can work on the spin for why they ignored them. B) Like Obama, many fear working without a teleprompter at least nearby. It helps keep them on track with their message and keeps them from saying what they REALLY think...but what they think U dont want to hear. C) I dont totally agree, however, I do think people except/expect outrageous things from Rush, Beck etc...they would often NOT except the same behavior/tone from ANY elected official. This false sense of " Manners" may also be why US politics has become somewhat boring. In most foreign democracies...the parties yell, scream, flip each other off...and sometimes have to be physically restrained from attack. Prior to about 1890 or so, this was ALSO true of our Congress. Ink bottles were sometimes thrown...people were tackled as they drew sabers...and duels were challenged ( if rarely accepted )! ( ie see Aaron Burr) . For some reason Congress is oh so polite at least when the cameras are on. It is just bad manners to go after your opponent TOO strongly. ( ie no negative campaigning ) ( Used to be they would suggest your mother didnt know who your father was...and that was during a Presidential campaign/debate.)