Rangel:The Culture of Corruption is Alive and Well

Like I was sayin… do as I say, not as I do.  Charlie Rangel is perhaps one of the biggest proponent of raising taxes.  However, he continues to avoid paying “his fair share” all the while demanding that others pay more.

Over at the Conservative Patriot HQ there is a post about all of the ethical and tax issues that Congressman Rangel is involved in.  I am amazed that he is allowed to continue to chair the committee that is in charge of writing tax law when he refuses to pay all of his taxes.

Congressman Rangel has been in office for over 38 years.  He should be one of the poster children of term limits.  Why do we continue to send such arrogant people to Washington to represent us?  It will be interesting to see if these matters are cleared up before Mr. Rangel runs for congress again.

The Stimulus is a great success or something.

Like I was sayin… you can put lipstick on a pig.

This week, the President trumpeted how successful the stimulus has been and that it is working exactly as planned.  The President was either untruthful to us then, or telling lies now.

We were told earlier this year that the stimulus would provide a jump start to the economy by funding shovel ready projects.  Now we are being told that the stimulus is being used to bailout the states preventing job losses and exend unemployment benefits.

The fact is that the government takes too much of our money now and wastes in on pet projects and programs that don’t work.

Remember what we are being told now and what we were told earlier this year.  This will help you decide if you should support the second stimulus that is being talked about now.

Global Warming and Truth in Advertising

As congress moves closer to drafting and passing a cap and trade bill, Americans need to understand that they are the victims of a giant hoax.

There is a great post over at the Conservative Patriot HQ discussing this topic.  Our media and government seem to want to ignore that fact that man made global warming claims are dubious at best.  Most of the studies ignore evidence to the contrary or skip the peer review process all together.

Soon, Americans will be burdened with a massive energy tax that will cripple our economy.  The question is, are we going to let this happen?

Political Stories You Might have Missed – Week ending 6/12

Like I was sayin… you have to pay attention.  Conservative Patriot HQ has a weekly list of political stories that you might have missed and need to be aware of.  You can find them here.

This weeks column talks about more hate from Paul Krugman, Taxing your cell phone, the stimulus promise busted, more on the Pay Czar, and Miranda rights for terrorists.

Obama’s plan to regulate paychecks

Like I was say… you make too much!

No long ago in a speech, the president said that executives that receive bonuses in this economy is in bad taste and as president, he won’t stand for it.  Now, it seems reasonable to agree that executives and employees that work for companies that would have gone out of business except for large cash infusions from the tax payers should not receive bonuses.  However, back when I saw this I noticed that between the lines Obama wasn’t attacking those companies, but all companies.

Today I was reading an article that indicated that Obama was going to introduce a new plan that would call for increased oversight of executive pay at all financial companies and not just those that received taxpayer help.

The Obama administration will call for increased oversight of executive pay at all banks, Wall Street firms and possibly other companies as part of a plan to overhaul financial regulation, the New York Times reported.

The story mentions that the administration is currently debating how broadly they can regulate the pay of private companies.  Another worrisome fact is that they will not achieve this through legislation, but rather through regulation.

The changes could go into effect through regulations, not legislation, depending on the result of discussions on the issue.

The article goes on to report more troubling information:

The regulations would reportedly cover all financial establishments, not just those receiving federal bailout aid and would likely work to ensure executive pay was in line with the financial interest of the company.

So now, the administration that is running trillion dollar deficits, is filled with people that can’t figure out their tax forms, and is still “working” on a plan to rescue banks is going to be deciding how to best pay executives as private companies to ensure the companies are well run.

Regan said it best when he said something along the lines of “government isn’t the solution to our problems, it isthe problem”.  Now they are finding new and creative ways to be a bigger problem.  Our income tax system started as a way to limit the wealth of a few extremely wealthy individuals and then trickled down to the rest of us to the point that the government believes that it can take over 1/3 of our incomes.  I imagine that it will only be a few more years when depending upon what you do for a living, anything over what the government things is good for the company will be taxed at 90% or more.

We are all rich when it comes to Cap and Trade

Like I was sayin… you get what you ask for.

Everybody wants to be kind to the environment, however, some would like all Americans to pay a hidden tax to combat the specter of global warming (or climate change, the new ice age, or whatever bugaboo the climate fear-monger’s PR department is using now).

The president’s current budget depends upon and plans for vast revenues from a cap and trade program.  Some people assume that corporations will just pay these fees without passing on the expense to customers.  This is a very naive way of looking at how businesses work.

Today in the WSJ, there was a great opinion piece that lays out the ramifications for all Americans.

Hit hardest would be the “95% of working families” Mr. Obama keeps mentioning, usually omitting that his no-new-taxes pledge comes with the caveat “unless you use energy.” Putting a price on carbon is regressive by definition because poor and middle-income households spend more of their paychecks on things like gas to drive to work, groceries or home heating.

The bottom 95% of earners will not have their direct taxes raised, but rather the amount that they pay in pass through taxes.  A pass through tax is a tax that a company passes along to it’s customers.  By the way, all taxes levied on businesses are pass through taxes.

Interestingly enough, this “tax” would not be spread evenly across all Americans.  Some will be harder hit than others.

Coal provides more than half of U.S. electricity, and 25 states get more than 50% of their electricity from conventional coal-fired generation. In Ohio, it totals 86%, according to the Energy Information Administration. Ratepayers in Indiana (94%), Missouri (85%), New Mexico (80%), Pennsylvania (56%), West Virginia (98%) and Wyoming (95%) are going to get soaked.

The fact that individual Americans will be required to pay for this type of program seems to not sink in for many Americans.

Many liberal democrats have lamented the drop in oil prices which were impacting all Americans.  This cap and trade scheme put forth by the administration is an attempt to push energy prices back up.  In another opinion piece in the WSJ, Laura D’Andrea Tyson points out:

 Critics of a cap-and-trade system are correct when they claim it will raise the prices of goods and services whose production and use emit carbon. That’s exactly the point: Higher prices are necessary to encourage energy efficiency and the development of renewable energy, to discourage carbon emissions, and to reduce the societal costs of global warming.

Here again is the specter of global warming being put forth as justification for enacting policies that will be detrimental to all Americans.  The fact that global average temperatures have been dropping for the last 8 to 10 years doesn’t seem to figure into the calculation.

Slowly but surely, Americans will begin to realize the path we are headed down.  I only hope that it won’t be too late to reverse course when they do understand.

Obama: Taking aim at Success

Like I was sayin… Life is so unfair.

Unless you live under a rock, you have heard that the Obama administration has put a cap on salaries for executives of companies that get a bailout from the tax payer.  This cap is currently set at $500k.

It would seem to make sense that if somebody so badly manages a company that the tax payers have to bail the company out, those managers shouldn’t be rewarded for failure.  Most people get rewarded when they do a good job and get penalized for a poor job.  I agree that those companies that need help should be penalized.

However, I am concerned about some of the things that Obama said during the announcement of the cap.  In part of the speech Obama says:

For top executives to award themselves these kinds of compensation packages in the midst of this economic crisis is not only in bad taste — it’s a bad strategy — and I will not tolerate it as president.

This part of the speech is of particularly great concern.  It is aimed not at executives at failing companies, but executives at successful companies that have very generous compensation packages.  And as president, Obama will not tolerate it.

As a free market-capitalism loving American, I am very concerned about he ramifications of what can happen next.  I would hate to think that I live in a country that believes that if the economy is in recession, it is wrong for me to make a lot of money. 

Again, I don’t take issue with penalizing the managers of companies that need to be bailed out, but it would seem that Obama is indicating that further changes are needed to executive compensation in America.

Finally, these guidelines we’re putting in place are only the beginning of a long-term effort. We’re going to examine the ways in which the means and manner of executive compensation have contributed to a reckless culture and quarter-by-quarter mentality that in turn have wrought havoc in our financial system. We’re going to be taking a look at broader reforms so that executives are compensated for sound risk management and rewarded for growth measured over years, not just days or weeks.

“This is only the beginning of a long-term effort…”  It would seem as though Obama believes that the government should decide how executives are compensated rather than the owners of the companies.  Is this the first step in the long march toward the government deciding what pay scales are correct for which jobs?

We should all be concerned that one day the government may take an interest in how much each one of us makes each year and deciding what is fair.

Real Stimulus that will work

(Jan 28, 2009) – Like I was sayin… somebody will eventually come up with a good idea.

Today, house republicans put forth an alternative stimulus that actually makes sense.  It is short on sod, governement vehicles, ACORN funding, contraceptives, and $500 checks.  What it does do, is cut everyone’s taxes and offers some minor spending reductions.

The Economic Recovery and Middle-class Tax relief act of 2009 focuses on cutting taxes.  It cuts tax rates 5% accross the board, increases the child tax credit from $1,000 to $5,000, and freezes capital gains taxes at 15%.  This will never reach a vote as house democrats would rather try to increase spending and handouts in an attempt to jump start the economy.

The problem is that our elected representatives don’t seem to remember the impact of the last stimulus package which did little to help the economy.  I wasn’t against the govenment sending me a check, but it is only a temporary blip and didn’t do much to stimulate the economy.  If the dems send everybody a check for $500, people will simply pay off bills or pay down debt.  However, a permanent cut in taxes will change the behaviors of people.

The Republican bill will positively impact the economy in a number of ways.  First, businesses will have less taxes to pay.  Some people will argure that “businesses don’t pay enough taxes and should pay more”.  However, many people fail to realize that businesses just pass the expense of taxes on to you.  Will smaller tax bills, currently successful firms will be able to invest and grow which means jobs.  Struggling firms will have a reduced tax burden which will help them stay afloat.

Individuals will benefit in many ways.  Most importantly, they will have more money in their paychecks.  This won’t be a one time check, but will show up in every paycheck.  People who are struggling will have more money to make ends meet.  People who are doing well will have more money to spend, save, or invest.  It is also important to remember that when people save or invest, that provides more capital for businesses to use to grow with in turn creates jobs.

People need to stop worrying about which party proposes something and think about what the bill does for themselves and the county.  If government spending stimulated the economy, we would have the best most stable economy in the world.

Obama and the Incredible Shrinking Tax Base

Like I was sayin… soon there will be a new minority.

Both candidates are pitching major changes to the tax code.  Both candidates paint each others tax plans as bad.  However, the devil is often in the details.

One thing that I have always believed is that taxes need to be fair.  The very poor shouldn’t be overly taxed, but neither should anybody else.  Senator Obama and the democrats believe otherwise.

Senator Obama continues to push that he is cutting taxes for 95% of Americans.  Firstly, only 62% of Americans actually pay income and payroll taxes.  Take out the evil top 5% and you are left with tax cuts for only 57% of Americans.  Secondly, the Obama plan doesn’t cut anybodies taxes.  His plan only increases tax credits and refundable items.  Tax credits are different than cutting the rates.

Tax credits work like this: suppose based on my income I owe $10,000 in taxes.  With kids and other exemptions, I might have $6,000 in tax credits.  That means that I end up only owing $4,000.  If my with-holding from my paycheck totals to $7,000, then I get a refund of $3,000.

Now lets say that I make a lot less and everything else is the same.  I owe $0 in taxes based upon my income, but I still have $6,000 in credits.  The IRS then sends me a check for $6,000 (plus anything that might have been withheld.  If the government took $2,000 out of my paycheck, then I get a check back for $8,000.  There are many people in America who pay no income or payroll taxes, but get tax refunds under the current plan.  Under Obama’s plan, those who pay no taxes will get more back.  In effect, they are taxing me to give it to somebody else.  That’s what’s called “spreading the wealth around”.

In addition, Chuck Rangle the chairman of the house Ways and Means commitee is proposing an additional “surtax” on those making over $200k.  That would push marginal tax rates on those making over $250k close to 50%.  That means on that 250,001st dollar, you get to bring home 50 cents.

I hate to have to say in addition again here, but Obama also wants to eliminate the cap on social security taxes.  Anybody making over $102,000 will see their payroll taxes go up.  This will change social security from an insurance program to a massive retirement plan that further “spreads the wealth around”.

Lastly, according to the Tax Policy Center, under the Obama plan the number of Americans paying income taxes will be reduced to 52%.  That means that only 52% of us, will be paying all the income taxes.  Soon, the majority of Americans will pay no income taxes at all.  America is moving to an erie place where a minority of Americans will be taxed so that checks can be sent to the majority of Americans.  All this coming from Obama who made several millions from books and gives almost nothing to charity.  Chuck Rangle is a gem too as he wants to raise taxes, but has been caught not paying all of his.

Americans need to decide if they want to be a nation with some with their hands out and others with their pockets turned out or a nation where hard work and success is celebrated.

A windfall vote tax?

Like I was sayin… if you can’t earn ‘em, buy ‘em.

The windfall profit tax has been making the rounds again recently.  If you are not aware, a windfall profit tax is a tax on profits that are “just too big”.

The dems have been pushing a windfall profit tax on “big oil” again recently.  I have had a lot of conversations around the watercooler lately and am amazed on how unfamiliar many people are with the facts.  For instance, the biggest evil out there, Exxon, has been earning record profits lately.  Huge numbers like 11 billion make headlines.  However, most people don’t know that the profit margin, what is left over after Exxon pays all it’s expenses, is only 10%.  That means for every dollar they earn in revenue, Exxon keeps roughly 10 cents.  The other 90 cents go to pay expenses.  That is above the average for other oil companies, but below the average for Computer, electronic, and pharma.  It is also worthy to note that of that 10 cents, Exxon gives 2 cents to the shareholders via dividends.

The scary thing is how do the dems define a windfall profit.  Earlier this year, dems supported a tax on oil companies that had profits that grew by more than 10% for any one year.  That is far below profit growth for many successful companies.  If I switch jobs and get a 10% increase in income, am I in danger for some some future “too successful tax”?

The American people have been somewhat luke-warm to the idea.  However, that may change.  According to some reports, Sen. Obama will make a windfall profit tax part of his energy plan.  To help make this more popular, he proposes giving $1,000 dollars to families ($500 for individuals) and having “big oil” pay for it with their “outrageous profits” through a new tax.  Wouldn’t it be better for the government to give us some of the billions of dollars they get from the oil companies via the taxes they already collect?

It will be interesting to see how many people support the “vote for me and I will give you $1,000″ candidate.  Yet another example of the “politics of change”.  He says that he doesn’t look like past presidents, but he sure sounds like past politicians.