Tag Archives: Liberty

The Tax Foundation – Basic Facts on Redistribution and the Impact of Obama’s Policies

Introduction

The debate over taxing high-income families to fund the expansion of health care coverage in America has renewed the broader question of government’s role in redistributing income through tax and spending policies. What is missing from this debate is some hard numbers on how much current tax and spending policies redistribute income from some Americans to others and how much the policies advocated by the Obama Administration will change the overall amount of redistribution.

The Tax Foundation’s “Fiscal Incidence” project has filled this void by first calculating how much current tax and spending policies are redistributing, then estimating how much President Obama’s policies—from taxes to health care to climate change—will alter that redistribution. Simply put, the Fiscal Incidence Model[1] compares the total amount of federal taxes families pay (such as income taxes, excise taxes, payroll taxes, etc.) to the total amount of government spending they receive (such as entitlement benefits, defense spending, public works, etc.).

How the Money Comes and Goes

We divide American families into ten equal groups by income level, and at the top end of the spectrum, we are able to break that 10 percent down into smaller groups. In general, as anyone would expect, families who earn more pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits while families who earn less receive more in federal spending than they pay in federal taxes. These individual results are then summed up into a national picture of how much tax and spending policies redistribute income from some American families to others.

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE HERE:  The Tax Foundation – Basic Facts on Redistribution and the Impact of Obama’s Policies.

Leave a comment

Filed under Barack Obama, Big Government, Capitalism, Constitution, DEFICIT, Dollar, Economics, Entitlements, Government Spending, individual rights, IRS, Liberals, Limited Government, Lobbying, Medicaid, Medicare, Organized Labor, Progressives, Social Security, Socialism, Sovereign Debt, Stimulus, Taxation, TREASURY, United States of America, USA, Welfare

Why most Americans are angry about approval of ObamaCare

In spite of heavy opposition from the citizens from sea to shining sea, the U.S. House of Representatives proceeded to approve the ObamaCare legislation by a vote of 219-212.  The bill was passed without the support of even one Republican.

Yet 34 Democrats joined with Republicans in voting no.

Rarely has any piece legislation so bitterly divided the citizens of this nation.  The clear majority in poll after poll shows that this bill is very unpopular and Americans by and large are very angry that their elected representatives in Congress would even consider such a thing, much less vote in favor of it.

read the rest here: Why most Americans are angry about approval of ObamaCare.

**This article was written by Anthony G. Martin, one of my FAVORITE

Twitter friends.  You can follow him on twitter @welshman007

Leave a comment

Filed under 10th Amendment, Barack Obama, Big Government, Budget, Congress, Conservatives, Cronyism, DEFICIT, Dictators, Economics, Elections, Entitlements, Government Spending, Healthcare Reform, Ideology, individual rights, Liberals, Limited Government, Medicare, National Debt, Progressives, Social Security, Socialism, Sovereign Debt

Healthcare Just a Costly Legacy Booster?? –>Best Letter to the Editor EVER!

EDITOR,

On July 30, 1965, at the Harry S. Truman Library in Independence, Mo., President Lyndon Baines Johnson handed former President Harry S. Truman the very first Medicare card ever issued to a U.S. citizen. A few seconds earlier, Johnson had signed the Medicare Bill, America’s newest entitlement program.

The Congressional Budget Office projected that Medicare would cost American taxpayers $12 billion annually by 1980. In 1980, Medicare cost taxpayers $110 billion, almost 10 times the projection of the CBO. In 2009, the Medicare entitlement cost taxpayers $418 billion.

The CBO calculates costs based on the assumptions given by the proponents of the bill. In other words, the rosiest of the scenarios is given by the CBO. The costs are slanted by the group advocating the bill.

There is only one consistency with the CBO: When it comes to CBO projected costs on an entitlement, the CBO is consistently wrong. On cost projections, I always take the CBO numbers and triple them. History proves that a multiple of 3 is a very conservative guess when it comes to entitlements.

The CBO projects President Obama’s health care proposal will cost $940 billion over 10 years. This cost assumes a $500 billion cut in Medicare. When was the last time the government cut cost on anything?

For the Americans who will actually work and pay taxes for this boat anchor, we will begin paying immediately for a so-called benefit that we won’t see until after Obama leaves office. Then, when the program actually begins, our health care premiums will cost more than a privatized health care plan.

Just remember Tracy residents, Obama told Joe the Plumber we must “spread the wealth around a little.” This is all part of that grand plan.

However, the scariest part of this whole process is the complete subversion of the U.S. Constitution the Democrats are planning in order to get this bill passed. Yellow-bellied Democrats who do not want their names on this travesty want to “deem the bill to have passed” when voting on proposed changes to the Senate health care bill. This is the trickery of cowards, led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who do not want to go on record as voting “Yea” on the bill.

Article 1, Section 7, of the U.S. Constitution states “All bills which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate shall … be determined by the Yeas and Nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the journal of each house respectively.”

In President Obama’s recent interview on the Fox News Channel, Obama stated he does not care about the process used to get this bill passed. He just wants his health care bill to sign into law. The president was very specific about calling this “his” health care bill.

President Obama is really telling us he could care less about the U.S. Constitution. He just wants his legacy to show that he rammed health care down America’s throat.

via Tracy Press – Your Voice Health care just a costly legacy booster.

1 Comment

Filed under Article 1 Section VII, Congress, Constitution, Cronyism, DEFICIT, Economics, Entitlements, Government Spending, Healthcare Reform, House of Representatives, Ideology, individual rights, Liberals, Medicaid, Medicare, National Debt, Senate, Social Security, Stimulus, Uncategorized, United States of America

We’ve traded liberty for ‘safety’ -by: John Stossel

People suffer and die because the government “protects” us. It should protect us less and respect our liberty more.

The most basic questions are: Who owns you, and who should control what you put into your body? In what sense are you free if you can’t decide what medicines you will take?

This will be the subject of my Fox Business program tomorrow night.

We’ll hear from people like Bruce Tower. Tower has prostate cancer. He wanted to take a drug that showed promise against his cancer, but the Food and Drug Administration would not allow it. One bureaucrat told him the government was protecting him from dangerous side effects. Tower’s outraged response was: “Side effects – who cares? Every treatment I’ve had I’ve suffered from side effects. If I’m terminal, it should be my option to endure any side effects.”

Is your doctor well-informed? Read “What Your Doctor Doesn’t Know About Nutritional Medicine May Be Killing You”

Of course it should be his option. Why, in our “free” country, do Americans meekly stand aside and let the state limit our choices, even when we are dying?

Dr. Alan Chow invented a retinal implant that helps some blind people see (optobionics.com). Demonstrating that took seven years and cost $50 million dollars of FDA-approved tests. But now the FDA wants still more tests. That third stage will take another three years and cost $100 million. But Chow doesn’t have $100 million. He can’t raise the money from investors because the implant only helps some blind people. Potential investors fear there are too few customers to justify their $100 million risk.

So Stephen Lonegan, who has a degenerative eye disease that might be helped by the implant, can’t have it. Instead, he will go blind. The bureaucrats say their restrictions are for his own safety. “There’s nothing safe about going blind,” he says. “I don’t want to be made safe by the FDA. I want it to be up to me to go to Dr. Chow to make the decision myself.”

Read the rest here:  We’ve traded liberty for ‘safety’.

Leave a comment

Filed under Barack Obama, Big Government, Economics, Government Spending, Governmental Agencies, individual rights, Jobs, Liberals, Social Security