The real problem with Washington...

THE REAL PROBLEM WITH OUR GOVERNMENTAL SYSTEM

The folks who are getting free (*)(*)(*)(*), don't like the folks who are paying for the free (*)(*)(*)(*), because the folks who are paying for the free (*)(*)(*)(*), can no longer afford to pay for both the free (*)(*)(*)(*) and their own (*)(*)(*)(*).

And, the folks who are paying for the free (*)(*)(*)(*), want the free (*)(*)(*)(*) to stop.
And the folks who are getting the free (*)(*)(*)(*), want even MORE free (*)(*)(*)(*) on top of the free (*)(*)(*)(*) they're getting already.

Now, the people who are forcing people to PAY for the free (*)(*)(*)(*), have told the people who are RECEIVING the free (*)(*)(*)(*), that the people who
are PAYING for the free (*)(*)(*)(*), are being mean, prejudiced and racist.

So, the people who are GETTING the free (*)(*)(*)(*), have been convinced they need to HATE the people who are PAYING for the free (*)(*)(*)(*) because they are selfish.

And they are promised more free (*)(*)(*)(*) if they will vote for the people who force the people who pay for the free (*)(*)(*)(*) to give them even more free (*)(*)(*)(*).

And that's the Straight (*)(*)(*)(*)!

Code key: (*)(*)(*)(*) = s h i t

 

The rich are richer than ever.

U.S. households worth $1 million or more grew to 7.8 million in 2009, up 16% from 2008, according to a survey from Spectrem Group, a Chicago-based market research and consulting firm. The firm's report also found that the number of ultra high-net-worth households, worth $5 million or more, jumped 17% to 980,000.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/09/news/economy/more_millionaires/index.htm

Yet relative federal tax collections are are the lowest in 60 years. And we have the biggest deficits largely because of it.

Why do you say they can't afford it? Sounds like more baseless whining from the Pass the Buck generation to me.

 

Almost 50% of working America does not pay federal income tax. More and more people are on government assistance. Entitlements are out of control. Gee, where is the tax base? Oh yeah, get more from the wealthy.

 

Gotta keep that voting base strong And when you start losing that base, well, slip in the dead of night Obamacare, springing forth multiple Fed Employees for the other side of the coin...the sagging union base.

Kick in a healthy dose of fear, and you can have TSA, Fed Employees, massively scaled up at airports, train stations and bus stations.

Simultaneously, gimp the economy with the Dodd-Frank Strangling Act, while creating numerous more governmental Fed Employee bodies to assist with strangulation....voila. (*)(*)(*)(*) on a stick, Obamanation.

 

You can thank the last president you put into office for that. I don't recall you all complaining about that when the Bush tax cuts were passed.

But yeah. We should definitely get more from the wealthy, if you care about deficits. Why should guys like Warren Buffet pay lower marginal tax rates than his secretary?

 

Do you support free trade/outsourcing? What do you expect? There is good and bad in all. The good for the top from free trade/outsourcing is record gains from slave labor. The downside is the majority of working America is unemployed or underemployed. You can't have your cake and eat it too in this situation. Do you want a strong tax base and less taxes each has to pay? Or a weak tax base with those who are doing well paying more? It is not brain surgery, nor is it rocket science.

 

I didn't have a problem with the tax cuts. Even Obama has extended them.

Warren Buffet is a talking-head hypocrite. He advocates for higher taxes on the wealthy, yet he is fighting taxes he owes in court as we speak.

 

Obama is doing a good job of shedding American jobs. He is promoting free trade agreements and regulating jobs out of America.

 

Yet you complain that a large percentage don't pay income tax. You can thank the Bush tax cuts for that.

Your opinions do not refute the facts.

 

Yet 5 million jobs have been added by the private sector since Jan 2010.

 

And out of those 5 million, how many are incomes where the person has something left over to be taxed, let alone income left over to spend? A job is the ability to move forward, though slower mobility than self employment. Minimum wage jobs one can't even tread water, they simply are going backward slower than all out slavery. Only with manufacturing here, with tariffs on imports, is America an employee market. And only in an employee market, with a government as easily bought by the rich as in America, is the playing field truly equalized.

 

Then we should re-instate the lower half.

It's true about Buffet. He's talking out of both sides of his mouth.

 

We've been through this before. There is a net job loss of about 2.5 million since Obama took office. Quit sugar-coating this job issue.

 

He uses "seasonal jobs" to bolster his numbers. Those jobs come and go, are not permanent, and should not be used in any net jobs gained scenario.

 

I don't know. Why don't you tell us?

 

Good idea. Because the middle and lower classes are doing so well otherwise.

Your opinion does not refute the facts I stated.

 

In Jan 2009 we were under the policies of the last Republican administration.

Since Jan 2010 the private sector has added 5 million jobs. Fact.

I appreciate that you reject any positive news on the economy.

 

...and the fact that Buffet is a hypocrite.

 

Remove seasonal, temporary jobs, it becomes a negative 2.5 million jobs.

 

Paying for strangers' upkeep is infuriating. People game the system so badly.

 

To the contrary. You have you polarity mixed.

Jan 2010 106793
Aug 2011 109170

Even the adjusted figure, that's positive 2.4 million

http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

 

In fact he is not.

 

You figured that is our problem? About 8 million people decided to game the system at about the same time?

 

From the time Obama took office, we are down 2.431 million jobs.

Jan 2009 - 133563
Aug 2011 - 131132

 

Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway owes $1 billion in back taxes:

C’mon, IRS. “Stop coddling the super rich.” Contrive to successfully extract the taxes they already owe.

Mr. Buffett, I barely want to waste my breath on your blatant hypocrisy.

And, Mainstream Media (by which I mean the NYT, which ran Buffett’s obnoxious op-ed in the first place), WHERE ARE YOU?

From NewsMax:

Billionaire investor Warren Buffett triggered a major debate over taxes recently when he wrote in The New York Times that he should be paying more to the federal government. He called on Washington lawmakers to up tax rates on the rich.

But it turns out that Buffett’s own company, Berkshire Hathaway, has had every opportunity to pay more taxes over the last decade. Instead, it’s been mired in a protracted legal battle with the Internal Revenue Service over a bill that one analyst estimates may total $1 billion.

Yes, that’s right: while Warren Buffett complains that the rich aren’t paying their fair share his own company has been fighting tooth and nail to avoid paying a larger share.

The story of Berkshire’s years-long tax battle, which is generally known in business circles, took on new life this week when a group called Americans for Limited Government (ALG) reported that, according to Berkshire Hathaway’s own annual report, the company is embroiled in an ongoing standoff over its tax bills.

Human Events’ John Hayward opines perfectly:

On top of this tax bill, figure the value of the time IRS agents have invested trying to collect it – they don’t work cheap, and we pay their salaries – and the resources Buffett’s people have invested fighting back. All of which would have been saved if Buffett simply practiced what he preached, and willingly handed over his fortune to the brilliant and compassionate “leaders” he commands the rest of us to support without resistance.

Warren Buffet is no different from the other liars and frauds orbiting Barack Obama. His hypocrisy just runs billions of dollars deeper. When it comes to “shared sacrifice,” you do the sacrificing, and they do the sharing.

Meantime, Dan Primack over at CNN Money whines at the accusations of hypocrisy surrounding another of Buffett’s tax-minimizing moves (investing in Bank of America, which enables Berkshire to pay a 14.175 percent tax rate on the money it receives as dividends from BOA — rather than the typical 35 percent corporate federal income tax rate):


At this point, I’m not really sure who’s allowed to advocate for higher taxes on the rich. Certainly not the lower 98 percent, lest they be accused of engaging in “class warfare.” And apparently not the uber-wealthy like Warren Buffett, who is to be ignored until he donates a cargo plane full of gold bullion to the IRS.

Mr. Primack, anyone is allowed to advocate for higher taxes on the rich, but no one is allowed to controvert the evidence: People respond to the incentives set up by the tax system, including the Oracle of Omaha. That’s why it makes no sense to raise taxes on the folks most able to provide jobs for a job-starved nation. They’ll respond to those tax increases — and it won’t be in a way to save Obama from the high unemployment rate that threatens his reelection.

Source