Saturday morning President Obama spoke to the nation as he routinely does on a weekly basis (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/07/27/weekly-address-better-bargain-middle-class). President Obama opened his address highlighting a few of his accomplishments over the past four and half years - "We saved the auto industry, took on a broken health care system, invested in new American technologies to reverse our addiction to foreign oil, and changed a tax code too skewed in favor of the wealthiest at the expense of working families."
President Obama is accurate that the auto industry is better than it was four years ago, but the Ford is leading the way and they didn't take bailout money. In regards to the "broken" health care system, why then is there a one year delay in the implementation for businesses but not individuals? Then we move onto American technologies - guess Solyndra bankruptcy is a forgotten aspect of that strategy, the Keystone Pipeline still isn't in place. Oh yeah, you go Buffet to agree with you on the "tax the rich" scheme in exchange for keeping the pipeline on the back burner so Buffet's railroad company can thrive.
It cracks me up that President Obama, and others, tout that 7.2 Million new jobs have been created over the past four and half years. President Obama, and others, how many people have left the job force over the past four and half years? Mr. President, when you took office only 81,023,000 not in the labor force while the latest data says 89,717,000 which is a difference of over 8 million people. So, let's be honest, that 7.2 million new job creation is a facade and an empty number.
President Obama is correct when discussing "trends that have been eroding middle-class security" in regards to technology making jobs obsolete, "global competition that makes others moveable, growing inequality and the policies that perpetuate it". As we demand cheaper products, higher wages and easier ways of doing things - skill sets will change and people will need to adapt. To this challenge, President Obama stated that "reversing these trends must be Washington's highest priority." Hmmm...that sounds like central planning to me and that is not something that a free society requires.
It is time for Washington to stop picking winners and losers. I am not saying to unregulate the market; rather regulate intelligently in a manner that doesn't pick winners and losers. North Dakota and areas in Texas are seeing job booms because of fracking of shale for oil and natural gas. That is using current technology to create high wage jobs for the eroding Middle-Class. Now, this will require many to re-tool their skill sets and that is something every American should constantly be doing without the guidance of Government. As a side not, the sand used in fracking is used also in producing solar panels.
President Obama is correct when he said, "Washington has taken its eye off the ball." but not for the reasons he states. "Phony scandals" are not phony Mr. President - violating our rights as citizens or sitting idly by as four Americans die in a foreign land are serious events. Unfortunately, far too many media outlets shutter at the thought of doing their job of investigating civil right violations by Washington. These scandals are not just President Obama; rather they are scandals for all in Washington.
Showing posts with label Solyndra. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Solyndra. Show all posts
Sunday, July 28, 2013
Monday, September 19, 2011
Buffet rule - Class Warfare or Simple Math?
I received this today from the Obama administration after President Obama announced the "Buffet rule" at a Rose Garden ceremony today:
This morning, the President proposed the "Buffett Rule," which would require those earning more than $1 million a year to pay the same share of their income in taxes as middle-class families do.
This proposal makes sure millionaires and billionaires share the responsibility for reducing the deficit. It would correct, for example, the fact that Warren Buffett's secretary currently pays taxes at a higher rate than he does.
The other side is already saying it's "class warfare" -- that's their rhetorical smokescreen for providing millionaires and billionaires special treatment.
As the President said this morning, "This is not class warfare -- it's math."
The wealthiest Americans don't need further tax cuts and in many cases aren't even asking for them. Requiring that they pay their fair share is the only practical way forward. The Republican alternative is to drastically slash education, gut Medicare, let roads and bridges crumble, and privatize Social Security. That's not the America we believe in -- but many in the Republican leadership actually prefer those policies, which explains their refusal to act.
That's why they'll say "tax increase" over and over again, trying to muddy the waters and trick ordinary Americans into thinking the Buffett Rule will hurt them. And if we don't speak out right now, they just might get away with it.
Of course, the Buffett Rule won't really touch most Americans -- only 0.3% of households will even be affected.
And without it, the only way to reduce our debt is to savage the programs that seniors and middle-class families rely on.
That's exactly what the President refuses to do -- in fact, he's said he'll veto any bill that changes benefits for folks who rely on Medicare but doesn't raise serious revenue by asking the wealthiest Americans or biggest corporations to pay their fair share.
This isn't just a commonsense approach to cutting the deficit -- it's the only way to make sure we can provide security to people who work hard and play by the rules.
So right now, I'm asking you to say you'll stand with the President on something that won't be easy. Get the President's back today:
http://my.barackobama.com/Buffett-Rule
Thanks,
Messina
Jim Messina
Campaign Manager
Obama for America
My question is why do we distorting the facts? It is true the Warren Buffet effective tax rate is less than his secretaries nominal rate but if his secretary is making under $60,000 there is a very good chance that she pays 0% in an effective tax rate. So why don't we all get on the same page when talking about these rates. That being said it is widely accepted that our revenue, no matter the tax rate, ranges between 16-18% of GDP historically. The other widely accepted truth is that our current spending is north of 22% of GDP.
To get a handle on our deficit spending is not to raise revenue as President Obama would like for us to think; rather we need to get our spending under control. Notice that President Obama is not out there trying to defend the $535M given to Solyndra from the last Stimulus package that has now gone belly up! Perhaps we could use that money to help fix Medicare, Medicaid or SSN. Instead the notion is to raise taxes on the wealthy and claim it is not class warfare.
If we want to get serious about our deficit then start with the tax code. Flatten the tax code to 8% and eliminate all tax credits and deductions for everyone. Eliminate the corporate tax rate, and all tax credits and incentives, as corporations simply pass along those taxes onto the consumer. Then on investment income - raise short term capital gains to 55% while putting long term capital gains at 15% - this will curb some of the hedging that exists and encourage people to think long term as well.
This morning, the President proposed the "Buffett Rule," which would require those earning more than $1 million a year to pay the same share of their income in taxes as middle-class families do.
This proposal makes sure millionaires and billionaires share the responsibility for reducing the deficit. It would correct, for example, the fact that Warren Buffett's secretary currently pays taxes at a higher rate than he does.
The other side is already saying it's "class warfare" -- that's their rhetorical smokescreen for providing millionaires and billionaires special treatment.
As the President said this morning, "This is not class warfare -- it's math."
The wealthiest Americans don't need further tax cuts and in many cases aren't even asking for them. Requiring that they pay their fair share is the only practical way forward. The Republican alternative is to drastically slash education, gut Medicare, let roads and bridges crumble, and privatize Social Security. That's not the America we believe in -- but many in the Republican leadership actually prefer those policies, which explains their refusal to act.
That's why they'll say "tax increase" over and over again, trying to muddy the waters and trick ordinary Americans into thinking the Buffett Rule will hurt them. And if we don't speak out right now, they just might get away with it.
Of course, the Buffett Rule won't really touch most Americans -- only 0.3% of households will even be affected.
And without it, the only way to reduce our debt is to savage the programs that seniors and middle-class families rely on.
That's exactly what the President refuses to do -- in fact, he's said he'll veto any bill that changes benefits for folks who rely on Medicare but doesn't raise serious revenue by asking the wealthiest Americans or biggest corporations to pay their fair share.
This isn't just a commonsense approach to cutting the deficit -- it's the only way to make sure we can provide security to people who work hard and play by the rules.
So right now, I'm asking you to say you'll stand with the President on something that won't be easy. Get the President's back today:
http://my.barackobama.com/Buffett-Rule
Thanks,
Messina
Jim Messina
Campaign Manager
Obama for America
My question is why do we distorting the facts? It is true the Warren Buffet effective tax rate is less than his secretaries nominal rate but if his secretary is making under $60,000 there is a very good chance that she pays 0% in an effective tax rate. So why don't we all get on the same page when talking about these rates. That being said it is widely accepted that our revenue, no matter the tax rate, ranges between 16-18% of GDP historically. The other widely accepted truth is that our current spending is north of 22% of GDP.
To get a handle on our deficit spending is not to raise revenue as President Obama would like for us to think; rather we need to get our spending under control. Notice that President Obama is not out there trying to defend the $535M given to Solyndra from the last Stimulus package that has now gone belly up! Perhaps we could use that money to help fix Medicare, Medicaid or SSN. Instead the notion is to raise taxes on the wealthy and claim it is not class warfare.
If we want to get serious about our deficit then start with the tax code. Flatten the tax code to 8% and eliminate all tax credits and deductions for everyone. Eliminate the corporate tax rate, and all tax credits and incentives, as corporations simply pass along those taxes onto the consumer. Then on investment income - raise short term capital gains to 55% while putting long term capital gains at 15% - this will curb some of the hedging that exists and encourage people to think long term as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)