Obama and his Democrat allies are feverishly working to pin the blame for our country’s current struggles on the Republican House, but let’s try to remember who the real lazy asses are.
I will always love your blunt honesty, Governor Christie.
This is a great ad:
Please help it go viral!
The Biggest “Fat Cat” of All
by Frank J. Fleming
All the folks protesting the “wealthiest 1 percent” seem so earnest — how could anyone not take drum circles seriously? — and yet they all blatantly ignore America’s most egregious example of unearned wealth. While the “Occupy” people pick on a few small-fry millionaires and billionaires, they haven’t taken on the one who has far, far too much money, got his wealth through dubious means and doesn’t appreciate the cash he has.
I’m speaking, of course, of that fat-cat weasel Uncle Sam.
If you want a great example of income inequality, compare Sam to any minuscule billionaire. He spends the net worth of Bill Gates in a couple of weeks. In fact, this one guy takes in a staggering 28 percent of all the wealth earned in this nation.
If you’re wondering where all our money went, look to the country’s only trillionaire, who is stroking his weird goat beard and laughing at us.
Heh. Quite true.
— according to a recent poll conducted by Gallup.
Interestingly enough, even those who identify as Democrats believe the federal government wastes almost half of every dollar it gets. And people like Elizabeth Warren are demanding that we give the government more money? Ridiculous! Say you hire a contractor to fix up your kitchen. If you start to suspect that said contractor is ripping you off, should you keep paying him?
Every time the tax intake increases, government spending climbs to meet – and then exceed – the new revenues. The extra money is not used to pay down the debt; instead, it’s used to hire more bunny inspectors. Rather than feeding into this vicious cycle, we need to starve the beast.
His lips are moving:
FACT CHECK: Are rich taxed less than secretaries?
@ The Associated Press
There may be individual millionaires who pay taxes at rates lower than middle-income workers. In 2009, 1,470 households filed tax returns with incomes above $1 million yet paid no federal income tax, according to the Internal Revenue Service. But that’s less than 1 percent of the nearly 237,000 returns with incomes above $1 million.
This year, households making more than $1 million will pay an average of 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes, including income taxes, payroll taxes and other taxes, according to the Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank.
Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will pay an average of 15 percent of their income in federal taxes.
Lower-income households will pay less. For example, households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will pay an average of 12.5 percent of their income in federal taxes. Households making between $20,000 and $30,000 will pay 5.7 percent.
The latest IRS figures are a few years older — and limited to federal income taxes — but show much the same thing. In 2009, taxpayers who made $1 million or more paid on average 24.4 percent of their income in federal income taxes, according to the IRS.
Those making $100,000 to $125,000 paid on average 9.9 percent in federal income taxes. Those making $50,000 to $60,000 paid an average of 6.3 percent.
And yet Obama wants to base his tax policy on his best buddy’s anecdote. Boy, I really hope we can vote this guy out of office next year.
Warren Buffett’s Tax Dodge
@ The Wall Street Journal
Like Mr. Obama, Mr. Buffett speaks about raising taxes only on the rich. But somehow he ignores that the President’s tax increase starts at $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples. Mr. Obama ought to call them “thousandaires,” but that probably doesn’t poll as well.
The President needs to levy his tax increase at such a lower income level because that’s where the money is. In 2009, 237,000 taxpayers reported income above $1 million and they paid $178 billion in taxes. A mere 8,274 filers reported income above $10 million, and they paid only $54 billion in taxes.
But 3.92 million reported income above $200,000 in 2009, and they paid $434 billion in taxes. To put it another way, roughly 90% of the tax filers who would pay more under Mr. Obama’s plan aren’t millionaires, and 99.99% aren’t billionaires.
Mr. Buffett says it’s only “fair” to raise his taxes, but he’s lending his credibility to raising taxes on millions of middle-class earners for whom a few extra thousand dollars in after-tax income is a big deal. Unlike Mr. Buffett, those middle-class earners aren’t rich and may earn $250,000 for only a few years of their working lives. How is that fair?
Recently, in the midst of the debt-ceiling crisis, a group calling themselves the “Circle of Protection,” led by Jim Wallis of the activist group Sojourners, met with you and your staff to claim that biblical mandates preclude limits to federal programs for low-income people. The Circle includes representatives of the National Association of Evangelicals, Bread for the World, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Wallis and the “Circle of Protection” do not speak for all Christians. However laudable their intentions, the consequence of their action is to provide a religious imprimatur for big government and sanctify federal welfare programs that are often ineffective — even counterproductive. Contrary to their founding “Statement,” we do not need to “protect programs for the poor.” We need to protect the poor themselves. Indeed, sometimes we need to protect them from the very programs that ostensibly serve the poor, but actually demean the poor, undermine their family structures and trap them in poverty, dependency and despair for generations. Such programs are unwise, uncompassionate, and unjust.
Somebody from our local Catholic parish recently emailed me some “Circle of Protection” propaganda, so I practically bruised my fingers in my eagerness to affix my name to this document.
And by the way, “CASE” stands for “Christians for a Sustainable Economy.” Darn straight!