Archive for category Taxation
What’s Obama Up To?
Posted by Tom in Centrally Managed Economy, Deficit, Democrats, Economics, Financial Crisis, Individual Freedom, National Character, National Debt, Nationalized Health Care, State Finances, Statism, Taxation on March 5, 2010
On paper Obama appears to be a smart guy and reasonably well informed. I suspect he knows:
- We face $1.4 Trillion annual deficits for the next decade.
- Our current national debt is $12.3 Trillion and will grow by $1 Trillion a year.
- Estimated unfunded liabilities from social security and medicare are $107 Trillion.
- States with aggregate deficits of $350 Billion, debt of $1.9 Trillion, and unfunded liabilities of $1.4 Trillion are asking for federal handouts.
- Unemployment is 9+% with private sector growth stalled.
Why then would he promote a radical takeover of healthcare with 10 year costs of $2.3 Trillion that adds $1.86 Trillion to the deficit over the next 20 years, that creates employment taxes and mandates, each discouraging private sector employment, and that fails to solve the demographically certain failure of medicare, social security and medicaid? We’ve proven our inability to handle two, no three if you include medicaid, major entitlements, why add another? And why would he risk his party’s control of Congress and his own ability to govern to attain this goal that a majority of Americans don’t want?
Obama is smart enough to know that Obamacare will exacerbate the financial straights of the United States. It’s uncertainty will decrease private sector employment. It’s taxes will decrease private capital for investment. It will cede financial and technological leadership to other countries. In short, we will be worse off tomorrow than we are today. Why would he risk that…want that?
It is clear that he knowingly intends to drive us further to the brink. It is also clear that given his apparent intelligence he has an end-game in mind. Take our admitted crisis, you know the “never-let-a-crisis-go-to-waste” kind, explode it into a gigantic, off-the-clff catastrophe, then come up with a one-of-a-kind, popular solution that involves “shared pain” and if we are all lucky, someday “shared gain.” Call it a Cloward-Piven Strategy on steroids. (See: Cloward-Piven Strategy: Is It Obama’s? and references cited therein.)
As Larry Kudlow said in NRO, One Giant Government Leap Backwards,” One of the most galling features of this plan is a taxpayer-subsidized government-insurance entitlement for people earning up to 400 percent above the poverty line, or nearly $100,000 for a family of four. In other words, a middle-class health-care entitlement that will add millions of people to the federal dole. It’s all too reminiscent of the political dictum of the old New Dealer Harry Hopkins: tax and tax, spend and spend, elect and elect.”
So will Obama’s “Fiscal Responsibility and Reform Commission” turn out to be the VAT Commission with a European 12% sales tax on top of the income tax, excise tax, etc. And those on top of the various state sales, income and property taxes? All this to finance BIG GOVERNMENT? If so, we will then all have the advantage of being “in the same boat,” “equal,” and “happy” in an ever declining country and economy.
So for the literarily inclined, Obama wants us on Hayek’s Road to Serfdom where we will encounter Orwell’s Animal Farm with 1984’s Big Brother in control. As Obama recently said in response to a push-back, “we won the election.” And win the next election and the next, he aims to do with the creation of more and more dependency on him and less and less individual responsibility.
I won’t be around to witness the outcome but I hope the next generation will become informed and engaged, lest our grandchildren and great-grandchildren suffer horrible consequences.
Tom Motherway
Obama Can’t Answer Paul Ryan
Posted by Tom in Deficit, Democrats, Government Regulation, National Debt, Nationalized Health Care, Statism, Taxation on February 25, 2010
Stephen Spruiell’s succinct report today in NRO, Ducking and Dodging, clearly sets out the Obamacare fiscal deficiencies highlighted today by Paul Ryan. Representative Ryan blasted Obama’s “insurance care” today and none of the Democrats could counter his arguments. Basically he pointed out that Obamacare front-loads tax hikes and Medicare cuts and defers costs, forcing the CBO to score ten years of offsets with only six years of spending! The true cost of the bill is $2.3 Trillion not the $950 Billion advertised by Obama.
Ryan focused further on other Democratic gimmicks:
- Double Counting: “savings” are counted as offsets for spending and at the same time reserved to pay for future entitlements. Example, $52 Billion in Social Security tax increases.
- “Doc Fix”: The bill’s 21% cut in Medicare reimbursements is put back in via separate legislation not subjected to combined CBO scoring.
And what does the wimpy Obama say in response? “We have some strong disagreements on the numbers, but I don’t want to get too bogged down!” If there were disagreement you would think he would have answered the criticisms.
As for getting bogged down, Obama should start getting real bogged down in his record breaking deficits, unsustainable national debt and bankrupting unfunded liabilities. Instead he is hell-bent-for-leather to add to that trio of financial irresponsibility. And this at a time of high unemployment when small businesses won’t hire because of the uncertainty, regulation and taxes proposed with Obamacare!
I guess destruction of our economy is a small price to pay for these socialists to gain total control of that economy. You’d think they would see it as a bad bargain.
I pity our future generations.
Tom Motherway
When Insurance Is Not Insurance
Posted by Tom in Deficit, Individual Freedom, Nationalized Health Care, Taxation on February 24, 2010
The Democrats’ goal of healthcare rapidly turned into health “insurance” care. This to supposedly provide healthcare to some inflated numbers of people who had no healthcare. But by law everyone has healthcare, just get to the emergency room and you will be cared for with or without insurance. So the leftist needed another tack to take over 16% of the U.S. economy. Thus Obamacare magically became Obama insurance.
Health insurance is not “insurance” in any true sense of the word. True insurance is a contingent indemnity against loss provided by a business that assesses and pools specific risks. As Clifford Asness states in his Bloomberg.com article today, “Don’t Ask” Is No Way to Run Health Care, “true insurance comprises two things: The first is a goal: to protect against very large losses. The second on is a method: the proper assessment and pricing of risk.” So fire insurance assesses the risk of occurrence of fire in a specific location and the expected degree of damage from fire in that location. Facts and circumstances like construction type, proximity to a fire plug or station, and repair or replacement costs are taken into account. Since others need such insurance like risks will be pooled and spread by the insurance company. To cover expected losses, that company will maintain reserves and beyond that has its owners capital. Companies can incur underwriting profits or losses depending on their experience in the specific insurance pools.
Health “insurance” in this country amounts to prepaid health care expenses. It does not indemnify against only large risks but prepays for every cold and sniffle. In fact it is practically speaking the only way in which medical providers get paid for their services. It is this fact–third party payment–that causes overuse and unnecessary costs.
Think about it. Employer provided insurance benefits are an expensive cost of compensation, yet they are not taxable as compensation to the insured employee, even though they are deductible to the employer. From the employee’s perspective, medical service is a free service.
“Having businesses offer full health coverage almost from the first dollar spent is phenomenally inefficient. Health care is over-consumed because it is essentially, at the margin, free to employees and too cheap — fully deductible — to the company. All incentive for the consumer to control costs is abandoned. Furthermore, the system is nonportable and famously bureaucratic, with the associated costs in time, money and frustration.
“To put the “insurance” back in health insurance, we need to remove the tax deduction for routine health-care expenses, whether the coverage is purchased by employers or individuals. If we choose to retain a deduction for insurance against large losses, it should apply equally to plans bought by individuals directly and those provided by employers.
“Among other benefits, this would remove a large tax deduction and the savings could be used to reduce other tax burdens. It would also solve the portability problem because without a tax advantage at work most individuals would purchase their own insurance. Most importantly, by buying their own insurance, designed to protect against only relatively large losses, individuals would become conscious of medical costs.”
In short, we need Consumer Driven Health Care (CDHC) where consumer pays for what he gets. He will spend economically both on high deductible insurance and generic drugs. His policy will be portable. It will be highly competitive if companies can cover across state lines and if tort reform reduces the costs of defensive medicine. With increased use of Health Savings Accounts costs will be further reduced. And yes, major pre-existing diseases can be inexpensively covered by subsidized high risk pools.
Tom Motherway
Obamanomics Will Lead To Our Demise
Posted by Tom in Business, Centrally Managed Economy, Democrats, Economics, Government Regulation, Taxation on February 24, 2010
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry to see the dynamic trio, Obama-Reid-Pelosi, ramming Obamacare down our throats at the small price tag of $950 Billion, oh yes and price controls on private insurers, expensive mandates on employers, and the government take over of 16% of the U.S. economy. Employers are not hiring, not investing, and not borrowing. At the very time jobs are needed businesses face health care uncertainty, higher taxes, falling consumer sentiment and high unemployment. Why invest if there aren’t going to be any consumers around to consume? Consumption is three quarters of the economy!
The only jobs the non-stimulus stimulus has created are government jobs–that would be the non-productive jobs that are a drag rather than a stimulus to the economy.
Speaking of economy, Robert Robb pens a dynamite article in Real Clear Politics today, The Chief Economic Worry About Democrats. With syllogistic logic he points out the elites lack of appreciation of investment capital and its function in the economy. Liberals assume a given level of economic output, a dangerously false assumption. Output doesn’t just happen it depends on investment capital. The government cannot supply that capital but can only redistribute what it takes by way of taxes. What it takes in taxes is withdrawn from private productive investment.
“Producers have to produce before consumers can consume. But producers cannot produce ex nihilo. Investment capital provides the financial bridge between production and consumption….In reality, however, the affluent provide most of the country’s investment capital. They are the ones with discretionary income. What the rich do with their money is very important economically.
“The Democrats want to raise taxes on the affluent and on corporations (which are repositories of investment capital). The numbers, and their effect on investment capital, are staggering..So, between Obama’s budget and the health care plan, that’s a shrinkage in the nation’s investment capital pool of up to $1.9 trillion over the next decade. But that’s only the beginning of the effects. Between Obama’s increased income tax rates, the income tax surcharge in the House health care plan, and state income taxes, the highest marginal income tax rate in most states will approach or exceed 50 percent. That will hugely discourage savings and investment by the affluent.”
“This tax-the-rich approach is justified as a matter of social justice. The government needs money, goes Democratic thinking, and it is fairer to get it from the rich than the middle class or the poor. Democrats also tend to believe that large disparities in income and large accumulations of wealth are evils to be ameliorated in their own right. The rich already pay a higher percentage of federal income taxes than they make in income. And the true social justice question shouldn’t be whether income or wealth disparities are increasing, but whether the lot of the poor is improving. Concentrating on the latter question leads to entirely different policy choices than concentrating on disparities.” (emphasis added)
Robb’s back to Adam Smith basics is brilliant, thus I’ve perhaps over quoted in this post. What I suggest is a read of the whole article and selected comments following the article which are displayed by clicking on “COMMENTS” at the end of the article.
Tom Motherway
Entitlement Generation’s Generation…Our Schools Train Socialists But Not Much Else!
Posted by Tom in Economics, Education Facts & Policies, State Finances, Taxation, Unions on February 12, 2010
Our great grandparents ventured from the old world to settle this new world, risking, sacrificing, and working for a better life. Our grandparents braved grueling covered wagon treks across the plains, deserts, and mountains to stretch the boundaries of this new world while scratching out a better life for their families by sacrificing and hard work even though outcomes were none too certain. Our parents fought in foreign wars to maintain the freedom and livelihood that their families enjoyed in this new world and help establish those freedoms worldwide.
Sadly we, circa babyboom generation, became complacent. Things were handed to us. We expected them. When they weren’t there we got mad. We rebelled against authority. We had “rights.” In short, we were entitled!
Why work? Why pay tuition? Job, what’s that? The state will pay it and if it doesn’t we’ll protest. Our children are entitled to the best education free. They are entitled to reduced class size and private tutoring if need be. We are the entitlement generation.
And what we are and what we have spanned is an embarrassment to our heritage.
This from the Las Vegas Sun: “UNLV students let their voices be heard on proposed education cuts. Organized walkout of classes joined by president, chancellor.” Yes, UNLV President Neal Smatresk, Chancellor Dan Klaich, and Chairman of the Board of Regents Dean Leavitt participated in the protest.
And this today from the Las Vegas Review Journal: “Desert Oasis students walk out of class to protest budget cuts.” Over 400 students walked out to protest state budget cuts to education. Of course, they won’t be punished because they got permission from Principal Emil Wozniak before the walked out!
The leftist educators and their poorly educated students are “entitlees.” They don’t know the meaning of work, sacrifice, or individual responsibility. They are the embodiment of the leftist model. How will they compete in a world where people do understand those virtues?
Sadly, we have been spending our hard earned tax dollars to support the exorbitant costs in terms of salaries, pensions, and general waste of this public unionized system. Economically, it is unsustainable.
Tom Motherway
Just Say No
Posted by Tom in Congress, Deficit, Democrats, Economics, Financial Crisis, Financial Policy, National Debt, Taxation on January 25, 2010
Facing $1.4 Trillion in annual deficits for the next decade, current national debt of $12.3 Trillion and 2009 estimated social security and medicare unfunded liabilities of $107 Trillion, Obama endorsed a bill that would set up a bi-partisan deficit-reduction commission.”These deficits did not happen overnight, and they won’t be solved overnight,” Obama said in a statement. “We not only need to change how we pay for policies, but we also need to change how Washington works. The only way to solve our long-term fiscal challenge is to solve it together — Democrats and Republicans.” Is this just another Obama promise like “no earmarks” or “negotiations on CNN?” Or, is it designed as a set up for the Republicans to cover the Democratic Congress’ and administration’s spendthrift ways?
Let’s see, we’re up in discretionary spending by 8% in 2009, the third such consecutive year since the Democrats took control of the Congress, that’s 25% from $873 Billion to $1.090 Trillion. The non-defense discretionary programs got an 8% bump in 2009 and again in 2010 not even including the $311 Billion in additional “stimulus.” The omnibus 2010 appropriations bill includes: a 120% increase in low income energy assistance, a 30% increase for the corporation for national and community services (SOUND FAMILIAR?), a 22% increase for the essential (?) (read rural congressmen’s) air service, and, of course, a 9% increase for Amtrak. (See Heritage Foundation report here.)
Does anyone remember the inflation rate? How about public employee salaries? Well then, try Congressional junkets? Surely then, the recession, the unemployment rate and our belt tightening? Enough said!
Problem is that these discretionary increases add to the “baseline” for future years!
Why should Republicans participate in the inevitable tax and tax solution that the Democrats have in mind? As demonstrated, they will not cut and cut, the only correct solution.
There are two reasonable alternatives to put to these out-of-control fools: one, tell them to repeal all non-defense discretionary spending enacted in the last three years and start with a zero baseline budget, and two, tell them NO, HELL NO! Let them clean up their own mess!
The second is easier to explain to America. Some of us still have our wits about us and would appreciate it! Say HELL NO!
Tom Motherway
Republican Health Care Reform: CDHC
Posted by Tom in Economics, Nationalized Health Care, Taxation on January 21, 2010
With the Scott Brown victory and the corresponding loss of his Democratic Senate supermajority, Obama is apparently willing to listen to a less intrusive health care plan. The Republicans should take up the challenge and propose Consumer Driven Health Care, CDHC. Put medical decisions in the hands of the consumer. It would have the following elements:
- A break down of state barriers to insurance company competition. Qualification in one state equals qualification in all states.
- The taxability of benefit compensation as compensation, including health benefits.
- The deductibility of privately purchased medical insurance policies.
- An expansion of Health Savings Accounts, increased deductibility for contributions, and a relaxation of the high-deductible or catastrophic medical policy qualification rules.
- Serious tort reform including a significant cap on non-economic damages.
This combination would reduce costs by virtue of increased competition and reduction of defensive medicine. It would not add one dime to the federal deficit or debt. And it would put the consumer in charges of his medical services.
Admittedly this would take political courage on the part of the Democrats as it would offend their fat-cat bosses, the trial lawyers and the unions. Sometimes you need to do what is best of the country and neglect the special interests.
Tom Motherway
Kudos to Nevada Governor Jim Gibbons
Posted by Tom in Deficit, Education Facts & Policies, State Finances, Taxation, Unions on January 7, 2010
Finally, a conservative solution to help put fiscal sanity back into the state and improve the quality of education at the same time. Jim Gibbons announced his education plan yesterday with these highlights:
- Abolish collective bargaining. This has no place in governmental service.
- Abolish the class-size reduction program. A make work union rule.
- Create a statewide school voucher program.
- Eliminate full-day kindergarten requirement.
- Repeal the prohibition against using student achievement data in teacher evaluations. Another union boondoggle rule.
Predictably, Democratic candidate Rory Reid who like his father is owned by the unions opposes the suggestions.
Sadly, Brian Sandoval also panned the proposal. Methinks Sandoval is showing his true, liberal colors. Remember, Guinn v. Legislature? Brian like Guinn was a tax and spend RINO then; doesn’t look like he has changed!
Tom Motherway
$400 Billion in Job-Killing, Economy-Killing Taxes
Posted by Tom in Deficit, Nationalized Health Care, Taxation on December 23, 2009
Old Harry Reid takes the term tax & spend to a new level. Besides the $300 Billion in Senate bribes, and the $480 Billion in Medicare “cuts,” his Senate Obamacare bill includes nearly $400 Billion in new or increased taxes. Some quite arbitrary, like those on tanning salons! Decroy Murdock summarizes them well in today’s National Review Online post:
“A $2.7 billion levy on indoor tanning salons that Reid imposed after ditching a plastic-surgery tax. He just as arbitrarily could tax haircuts, or heirloom tomatoes, or Hula Hoops. Why not a tax on guys named Harry?
A $5 billion Medicine Cabinet Tax specifically permits insulin purchases but otherwise prohibits using money in Health Savings Accounts, Flexible Spending Accounts, or Health Reimbursement Accounts for non-prescription, over-the-counter medications. While diabetics thankfully are spared, how does this benefit those who use antacids or asthma inhalers?
A $15 billion individual mandate would force Americans to buy health insurance. In 2014, those without “qualifying” government-approved coverage would pay $495 or 0.5 percent of Adjusted Gross Income, whichever is higher. In 2016, that rises to 2 percent of AGI, or approximately $640 today.
A $15.2 billion tax requires costs to reach 10 percent of AGI, up from 7.5 percent, before Americans may deduct itemized medical expenses.
A $28 billion tax would hit employers who do not provide health coverage to their payrolls of at least 50 employees. If only one worker qualifies for a health-care tax credit, the employer must pay a fine of $750 on all 50 staffers, not just the one tax-credited employee. For 50 staffers, this penalty equals $37,500 annually. Small-business owners who file personal returns and earn below $250,000 will suffer this tax themselves.
Sen. Mike Crapo (R., Idaho) tried to enforce Obama’s pledge by deleting from Obamacare all taxes on families earning less than $250,000 and individuals making under $200,000. Every Republican supported Crapo’s amendment. All but five Democrats ganged up and killed it.
Beyond the $250,000 threshold, Santa Harry’s sleigh overflows with other new taxes:
A $149.1 billion, 40 percent excise tax awaits those with “Cadillac” health plans worth at least $8,500 per individual and $23,000 per family. These taxes, the Congressional Budget Office predicts, “would be largely passed through to consumers in the form of higher premiums for private coverage.” Also — in an affront to equality before the law — longshoremen are exempt from this tax. Why not ship captains, or nurses, or test pilots?
An additional $59.6 billion tax on health-insurance companies also will make costly coverage costlier.
A $22.2 billion tax on drug companies would increase price pressures and slash funds available for pharmaceutical research and development.
A $19.2 billion medical-device tax would boost prices of hearing aids, heart stents, artificial limbs, and similar implements and divert money to Washington that could refine such products and create new therapeutic, life-saving inventions.”
Obama says he wants to create jobs, yet he kills job creation with his expensive socialized medicine. He says he wants to reduce the deficit, yet he increases it by some $300 Billion with this Obamacare fiasco. Can we believe a word that this demagogue says?
Tom Motherway
Smart Parasites Don’t Kill Their Hosts…Someone Tell Obama
Posted by Tom in Deficit, Economics, Stimulus/Bailout, Taxation on November 30, 2009
Obama and his apparatchiks Pelosi and Reid fail to understand that the fundamental relationship between government and the economy is that of parasite to host. Aside from essential governmental functions of adjudication of civil disputes, law enforcement and defense, the governmental social functions like Medicare, Social Security and welfare are a redistribution of wealth. They are uneconomic. They do not create wealth. The simple truth is that government cannot create wealth. It can consume wealth, as in the case of the court system or military defense, and it can redistribute it as in the case of welfare or cash for clunkers; but, it cannot create wealth! To the extent it that it engages in social functions and redistribution functions it is a parasite. It only has what it takes from the creators of wealth, the innovators, the producers and the sellers, the real economy.
Jack Kelly incisively states the case in his November 30th post in Real Clear Politics, Note to Obama: Only Private Sector Creates Wealth, Jobs. A healthy host can support a lot of parasites; a sickly host cannot, so try to keep the host healthy.
Yet Obama is hell bent for leather to milk the host dry: phony stimulus, bondholder bailout, Obamacare, cap and trade, mortgage subsidies, ad infinitum.
The unemployment rate reached 10.2 percent this month, more than two percentage points higher than Mr. Obama’s economic advisers predicted it would if his $786 billion stimulus bill were passed. The Associated Press, in reporting Tuesday on disappointing third-quarter economic numbers, noted some economists expect it to reach 11 percent by next summer. That would be the highest since the Great Depression.
The stimulus failed chiefly because it was designed more to reward the president’s political allies than to fight the recession. But the stimulus failed also because stimulus funds were used to preserve jobs state and local governments could no longer afford because of falling tax revenues. The private sector has borne more than 100 percent of the job loss because state and local governments have added 110,000 jobs, according to an August report by the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government.
A job’s a job, right?
Not exactly. Preserving government jobs may deepen the recession because government workers are not engaged in wealth creation and their salaries must be paid by people in the private sector who are.
So we have Obama, Reid and Pelosi with the Democratic left taking the country 180 Degrees off course-expanding government. For the economy to grow, government must shrink. Will someone please tell Obama to stop killing the host!


