Saturday, April 23, 2011

Who Is Actually Doing The Taking?

In this video President Obama talks about the wealthy or the entrepreneurs "taking". Taking from who? The entrepreneurs are not taking from anyone. If entrepreneurs are successful and earn their own wealth they are not taking money from anyone. Obama's argument is so illogical. The Federal government is the one that is taking, taking the money from both the entrepreneurs, poor, and middle class folks. And, for what? Failed programs?

Here is a chart which shows how Congress has spent money from 2006 through 2010.

Here is a chart which shows the money that comes into the government from income taxes, corporate income taxes, social security and payroll taxes, excise taxes, Estate and gift taxes, customs duties, and other (not sure what other consists of), and the money that is spent by the government.

Do you see that between income taxes and Social Security and Medicare taxes the government takes from us  over $2 trillion.  If you take a look at your paychecks you will see lines that say Federal Income Tax, Social Security Tax, Medicare Tax, and then you have your State taxes.  In those columns you see a negative sign. This was originally your money, this is money that you have earned and that the Federal government takes from you in order to use it for the various federal programs.  This could be money in your pocket but Big Government GREED takes your money to spreads the wealth. So, who is doing the taking?  Plus, the government has just added Obamacare - a huge entitlement program - which will cost Americans more money than the President has predicted, and give will you, the consumer, less choices related to your health care.  Plus, the death tax returned thanks to the Democrats.  So, now there will be a 35 percent tax on property and items being passed onto the children of the dead which will create some additional revenues for the federal government.  Nothing like taxing one's property and possessions after you gone off to the Great Beyond.  This is yet another way for our progressive government to penalize the successful and steal their money and property.  This is another one of the liberal initiatives to screw the future of America.

Between Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security the Federal Government spends $1578 billion.   The Federal government takes in $1578 billion from taxpayers to pay for these programs.  Where does the government get the money to pay for these programs?  From taxpayers like you and I.  Who gives this money to the poor and elderly to help pay for these programs?  Taxpayers.  So who is really doing the taking?  Is it the Federal government?  YES.  The Federal government takes money from hard working taxpayers to help the less fortunate.  But, the taxpayers DO NOT TAKE FROM THE GOVERNMENT OR THE POOR!!

Our government takes in $2.57 Trillion and yet it cannnot stay within its own budget.  This out of control Washington spending dishes out close to $4 Trillion, which is around 1.25 Trillion dollars more than it takes in from taxes.

We need to make some serious spending cuts. We may even need to make some tax increases, but that would only be a last resort.

Since Obama keeps on saying that everyone needs to share the pain, (even though he really believes that the poor shouldn't bear any of the pain), I have an idea, Let's return to the spending levels of 2006. In addition some departments may need be cut even though their spending may not have increased that much or not at all.

 Here is Teresa's fiscal plan:

Looking at the chart we would subtract 230 Billion dollars from the Health and Human Services Department.

We would end this nonsensical non-war in Libya and cut Defense Department spending by 175 billion dollars.

The Treasury Department actually looks like it spends less money than in 2006 so let's decrease that by 5 percent which would be approximately $2.25 billion.

The Department of Agriculture needs to be cut by $65 billion.

Since education spending levels were lower in 2007 and 2008 then in 2010 and 2006 the departments funding should be reduced to 2007 levels which would decrease their funding about $50 billion.

Veterans Affairs funding would be reduced by about $35 billion.

Department of Homeland Security spent the highest amount of money in 2006 so I would decrease funding for them by about $15 billion.

The Office of Personnel Management would be reduced by about $15 billion.

The Department of Transportation's funding would be reduced by $20 billion.

The Department of Justice would be reduced by about $15 billion

The Department of Energy would be reduced by $20 billion.

NASA would be reduced by $2 billion.

International Assistance Programs would be cut by $10 billion

Other independent agencies would be cut by a total of $35 billion.

Department of State would be cut by $10 billion.

Department of Interior would be decreased by $4 billion.

The Environmental Protection Agency would be decreased by $10 billion.

Corps of Engineers funding would be decreased by $3 billion.

Department of Commerce would be decreased by $8 billion.

National Science Foundation funding would be decreased by $8 billion.

The Legislative Branch funding would be decreased by $8 billion.

I wouldn't touch the funding for Executive Office.

My total reductions would be $740.25 billion right off the bat. There would be no phasing in for these reductions.

Then we would have to tackle the high costs of medicare, medicaid, and social security.  But, that I will do in a later post.

Two economists, each on opposites sides of the aisle, agree on raising the age for social security and reducing defense spending.

I agree that the age to receive social security should be raised and that the budget for defense spending should be reduced.  I also think that the cap on wages for contributing to social security needs to be lifted.  I don't think that those earning above the cap should contribute at the same rate as those below the cap but maybe 1/3 the tax rate that those below the cap do?

Also, I am so sick of these rich progressives complaining about their ability to give more money to the government but not doing this of their own accord.  President Obama didn't pay more than his allotted amount for taxes.  If he and others wanted to feel more patriotic as Joe Biden says or that it was their duty to pay more in taxes why don't these people just write out that paycheck for the additional funds?  Why do they need the government to tell them the amount they additionally owe as well as forcing other Americans to pay more money?

Does Obama not think that serving in the military and being willing to sacrifice your life should afford you certain benefits?  A GI Bill is a small compensation considering that person could have lost his or her life.  Did Obama's grandparents not contribute to both medicare and social security before they received benefits?  How did this affect him as a person?  How did he "take" as he put it?  His misconception of how the world goes round and how people earn their wages is quite disconcerting.  Wealthy persons who create jobs did not take from the government.  They take out loans from banks and pay them back and if the persons don't pay on their loans they will go into bankruptcy.  Wealthy people are the entrepreneurs of this country giving others the opportunity to have jobs.  The vast majority of job creators get taxed just like you and I do (except big companies like GE, Verizon, and AT&T) which means the government - Federal and state governments  - take money out of our paychecks.  Unfortunately, these big companies use tax loopholes to pay no taxes. Our tax code needs to be changed so this isn't able to happen.

So, who is the taker of wealth in this country? The wealthy job creators or the Federal government?

My answer is the Federal government.

No comments:

Post a Comment