OBAMA’S “NO EARMARKS” PORK SPENDING SPREE…

Posted on February 28, 2009. Filed under: News And Politics... |

 
Obama’s spending spree is now out of control and not one person is stating this fact, aside from the Republicans.  He is taxing the wealthy and obviously, he isn’t looking at the big picture here.  These big corporations are going to up their prices to compensate for higher taxes, and we’re going to have to pay a much higher price for their products and services.  Obama says he is giving us a tax break.  He’s lying.  Yes, I said it.  I feel that he is just paying back the people who helped get him into office.  All you have to do is look at what happened as soon as he got into office.  Everyone had their hands out.  Why?  Because they scratched Obama’s back and now he has to scratch theirs.  There has never been a president that has given out so much money to so many undeserving recipients in this short a timeframe in the history of this country.

There’s a reason why pro-Obama outlets are nosediving since his election.  Obama bailed out Wall Street, and look at how the numbers have been plummeting every day.  He worsened the situation by bailing them out.  Again, he’s rewarding poor judgment and bad behavior.  All of a sudden cockroaches started coming out of the woodwork saying "We need money!", "We’re on the brink of disaster".  The sob stories came from thousands of corporations, heads of states, and now we have a tsunami of people crying “poor mouth”.  This money should be going to us, the taxpayers, not these over-processed pork projects. 

Obama says there are no earmarks in his plan.  Oh, really?

What about the $200,000 for tattoo removal?  Explain away the $285,000 for street scoping in Haverhill?  What about the $300,000 for Simmons College Youth Sports programs?  How are these and other countless projects going to help stimulate the economy?  I could go on and on with thousands more, but you get the picture.  Obama said, “There is not one earmark in his stimulus package”.  He’s right…there isn’t one…there are approximately 9,000 of them!  Jim James McGovern, a Worcester Democrat, actually said, “These earmarks are not pork; they’re “nourishment”.  This coming from a rep who has asked for plenty in Obama’s pork fest bill: http://nodrumlins.blogspot.com/2009/02/brining-home-bacon.html

What about the $5.8 million donation to the Ted Kennedy Institute of the Senate?  It’s going to be built off the JFK Library.  Oh, and did I mention that the JFK Library is going to get a $22 million facelift?  How about giving America’s spirits a facelift by reducing our taxes, Obama?  The fact that Ted Kennedy didn’t even ask for this money is what is so infuriating.  Remember Northern Trust that I blogged about recently that received $1.6 billion in bailout money and just spent a fortune last week in Los Angeles hosting a series of lavish parties and concerts with famous singers?  They didn’t ask for the $1.6 billion they got either.  If Obama wanted to do the right thing, he’d demand that they give the money back.  The question is, can he?  Given the fact that they didn’t even ask for the money is another thing to consider.  He just doesn’t see the consequences of his idiotic actions.  What is wrong with him?  He’s severely inexperienced, that’s what’s wrong with him, and he is at the mercy of the corrupt Democrats who are pulling his strings in their direction.  Goodbye bipartisanship!  Obama is losing his senses.  He is giving millions and billions to projects that nobody is asking for.  If you ask me, he needs to get rid of some of the wasteful spending in Congress.  How about making sure that corrupt government officials receive no severance packages or benefits?  Lawmakers see nothing wrong with rewarding these corrupt officials.  Probably because they know down the road, that they will soon be in their shoes.  They’re constantly rewarding bad behavior which encourages more corruption.

Obama is trying too hard to be the mighty one.  I have news for him…there is only one God, and Obama needs to cease and desist on his out-of-control spending.  I don’t know why people aren’t outraged about this?  The media still loves him.  Why?  The black is fading to red fast.  If anyone is contributing to the downfall of our economy, it’s him and the other Democrats.  By bailing out all these people with money that we don’t even have, he’s not only creating bigger government.  Obama needs to focus on governmental issues, not business ones.  The government should not be the big boss of big business.  They’re not in the corporate and banking babysitting business.  They are our employees, and they’re supposed to work for us—not the other way around…

QueenBee

 
 
 
February 28, 2009

Sharper Downturn Clouds Obama Spending Plans

 

The economy is spiraling down at an accelerating pace, threatening to undermine the Obama administration’s spending plans, which anticipate vigorous rates of growth in years to come.

A sense of disconnect between the projections by the White House and the grim realities of everyday American life was enhanced on Friday, as the Commerce Department gave a harsher assessment for the last three months of 2008. In place of an initial estimate that the economy contracted at an annualized rate of 3.8 percent — already abysmal — the government said that the pace of decline was actually 6.2 percent, making it the worst quarter since 1982.

The fortunes of the American economy have grown so alarming and the pace of the decline so swift that economists are now straining to describe where events are headed, dusting off a word that has not been invoked since the 1940s: depression.

Economists are not making comparisons with the Great Depression of the 1930s, when the unemployment rate reached 25 percent. Current conditions are not even as poor as during the twin recessions of the 1980s, when unemployment exceeded 10 percent, though many experts assert this downturn is on track to be significantly worse.

Rather, economists are using the word depression — a subjective term with no academic definition — to describe a condition of broad and extreme economic distress that remains stubbornly in place for much longer than a typical downturn.

This is more than a matter of semantics. As the government determines its spending plans, readying another infusion of cash for troubled banks while contemplating an additional bailout for the auto industry, the magnitude of those needs will hinge on the extent of the damage.

Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Economy.com, now places the odds of “a mild depression” at 25 percent, up from 15 percent three months ago. In that view, the unemployment rate would reach 10.5 percent by the end of 2011 — up from 7.6 percent at the end of January — average home prices would fall 20 percent on top of the 27 percent they have plunged already, and losses in the financial system would more than triple, to $3.7 trillion.

Allen Sinai, chief global economist at the research firm Decision Economics, sees a 20 percent chance of “a depressionlike possibility,” up from 15 percent a week ago.

“In the housing market, the financial system and the stock market, we’re already there,” Mr. Sinai said. “It is a depression.”

Yet, in drawing up the budget, the White House assumed the economy would expand by a robust 3.2 percent in 2010, with growth accelerating to 4 percent over the next three years.

“It’s a hope, a wing and a prayer,” Mr. Sinai said. “It’s a return to a sanguine view of the economy that is simply not justified.”

If, as is widely anticipated, the economy grows more slowly than the White House assumes, revenue will be lower, forcing the government to cut spending, raise taxes or run larger deficits.

Economists also criticized as unrealistically hopeful the assumptions by the Federal Reserve as it began so-called stress tests to gauge the health of the nation’s largest banks. In testimony, Ben S. Bernanke, the Fed chairman, said that the nation’s unemployment rate would most likely reach 8.8 percent next year.

“That forecast just doesn’t seem realistic,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, “and I don’t think it helps the Fed’s credibility to make these sorts of forecasts right now.”

As federal regulators estimate potential losses at banks, the harshest assumptions they are testing entails the unemployment rate topping out at 10.3 percent — the highest level since 1983, but hardly the worst case.

By Mr. Baker’s reckoning, the unemployment rate may exceed 12 percent — the highest level since tracking began in 1948.

“We continue to see across-the-board numbers coming in worse than we expected,” Mr. Baker said.

By Mr. Zandi’s estimation, in the most likely case, the unemployment rate will reach 9.3 percent next year. The distress in the financial system, the job market and real estate have become inextricably intertwined.

As troubled banks remain hesitant to lend, even healthy companies are laying off workers. As more Americans lose jobs, they are cutting spending, depriving businesses of revenue, and falling behind on house, car and credit card payments, multiplying losses in the financial system. As more homes land in foreclosure and would-be buyers fail to secure mortgages, housing prices fall further, adding to the losses of the banks — a downward spiral.

Many economists expect that the labor data to be released next Friday will show that as many as 700,000 jobs disappeared in February, lifting the unemployment rate near 8 percent and pushing total job losses to more than four million since the recession began in December 2007.

Given the brutal forces at play, some experts question the administration’s decision to publicize the bank stress tests, as opposed to conducting them quietly.

“It invited the interpretation that this was the beginning of triage for the banks, that we were going to start lining them up and shooting them,” said Alan S. Blinder, a former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve and a professor at Princeton. “There are some things in the bank supervisor role that you just keep secret.”

Others argue that the tests could sow needed assurance. “The stress test could create transparency,” said Alan D. Levenson, chief economist at T. Rowe Price in Baltimore.

As the gruesome data accumulates, this much is already clear: Transparency is not for the squeamish.

Mr. Levenson noted that the weakening economy was destroying demand for goods and services even faster than the $787 billion stimulus program could replace it.

 

I came across a very interesting article that was written by Charles Smith back in October of 2008.  He outlined Obama’s scheme just as it is playing out today…

Obama’s Scheme: Tax the Poor, Pay the Rich
 
Tuesday, October 21, 2008 1:57 PM
By: Charles R. Smith
 
If you think you are going to get a tax cut from Sen. Obama, think again. The fact is, Obama’s plan will actually increase taxes on the vast majority of Americans.
 

Obama promises that no one making less than $250,000 a year will see an increase in their taxes. Yet, according to The Wall Street Journal, Obama has a stealth tax — called credits — hidden in his plan.

These credits basically would have the effect of raising taxes on average income couples making between $25,000 and $40,000 a year.

In fact, some families in this range could see an increase in their taxes of up to 40 percent.

The credit scheme also discourages people from earning more. Since the credits are tied to income, the more you make, the less credits you can earn. Thus, people will see their real income go down even though they are earning more from raises or over-time. Since you take home less at the higher pay scale — the incentive is to not work overtime or seek a better paying job.

Worse still, millions of Americans who pay no taxes are also entitled to these credits. Obama has labeled the stealth credits “refundable." Thus, people who are paying no taxes at all will still receive a check from the government.

According to the Tax Foundation, under Obama’s tax scheme 63 million Americans, or 44 percent of all tax filers, would have no income tax liability. Most of those 63 million would also get a check from the IRS.

The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis estimates that by 2011, under the Obama scheme, an additional 10 million would pay no taxes while cashing checks from the IRS.

According to the Tax Policy Center, the cost of these “tax credits” to the real tax payers would quickly rise over the next 10 years by $647 billion to over $1 trillion.

Add on top of this Obama’s government backed healthcare plan that is estimated to top $1 trillion, and you have over $2 trillion worth of government backed welfare programs. Clearly, no increase in taxes on the “rich” will be able to make up for this huge outlay of cash benefits to the non-working.

So where is this $1 trillion going to come from? The answer may shock and surprise you.

Here’s another part of Obama’s stealth tax plan: The so-called credits will actually threaten Social Security. Americans paying no taxes would get an income tax credit up to $500 based on what they are paying into Social Security.

Since people are going to get a tax refund based on what they pay into Social Security, then the scheme is not about income tax relief but cutting payroll taxes. The same payroll taxes that fund Social Security.

The Obama scheme means billions of dollars in lost revenue for Social Security. In short, the solvency of Social Security system will come quickly to a head because of this lost revenue, threatening the lives of millions of senior citizens within months.

Austan Goolsbee, the University of Chicago economic professor who serves as one of Sen. Obama’s top advisers, noted this little problem during a recent appearance on Fox News.

“You can’t just cut the payroll tax because that’s what funds Social Security,” Mr. Goolsbee admitted to Fox’s Shepard Smith. “So if you tried to do that, you would undermine the Social Security Trust Fund.”

If that form of political suicide is not enough to end Obama’s career then consider this: Obama’s tax increase would hit the bottom line of small businesses.

Obama claims that no business making less than $250,000 would be hit by more taxes but this is a bald faced lie. The fact is that 85 percent of small business owners are taxed at the personal income tax rate, any moderately successful business with an income above as little as $165,000 a year will face higher taxes.

The businesses that do make more than $250,000 a year will be slammed big time, even harder than major corporations. The Obama scheme requires many small business owners to pay as much as a 4-percentage-point payroll tax surcharge on net income above $250,000.

The result is the federal marginal small business tax rate jumps up to nearly 45 percent for the little guys, while big business would continue to pay the 35 percent corporate tax rate.

Joe the plumber would get hit if he expanded his business and hired other plumbers. According to the National Federation of Independent Business, 50 percent of businesses with 20 to 249 workers would pay the extra tax. In short, the Obama scheme is an incentive to hire fewer workers.

The most successful small- and medium-sized businesses that create most of the new jobs in our dynamic society will be slammed by Obama’s tax hikes. If you hire another worker — you will get slammed harder.

Obama’s stealth tax/credit scheme is actually a plan to redistribute the wealth and is nothing more than a giant welfare program. Obama’s tax scheme will cut jobs, threaten Social Security and hit the lowest income wage earners like a ton of bricks.

I find it ironic that the base of voters who support Obama that also make between $25,000 and $40,000 a year are totally unaware of the cruel fate they are signing onto by supporting the freshman senator. Obama’s scheme is Robin Hood in reverse — tax the poor to pay the rich.

According to Obama, “When you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

 

Advertisements

Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: