Tax & Spend Liberals
[Biden Tells Crying Baby: You'll Have To Pay For Romney's Tax Cuts] "That's another trillion dollars in tax cuts over the next ten years going to the top 1% of American taxpayers. [baby crying] I don't blame her for crying. She is going to inherit it. She's going to pay for it. That's one smart baby," Vice President Joe Biden said at a campaign event today..." Full text: Biden Tells Crying Baby: You'll Have To Pay For Romney's Tax Cuts
Do they have more than appealing to man's covetousness and envy?
Ex 20:15, 17, Ro 1:29, Tit 3:3. Any tax over 10% is highway robbery (1 Sa
8:15,17). Biden knows if he got his tax increase, it would not pay down the
debt.
Class warfare is being used for political purposes only (1 Ti 6:4). It's the
entitlement spending stupid.
Related:
Taxmageddon 2013
Also see:
They're so responsible with our money (Am 8:5)--
Let's give them more.
Mind readers, clowns, champagne spritzers in Las Vegas
Response to comment [from other]: ""Bush...prescription drug program"
That was wrong, too. I hope you weren't counting on me to
defend RePublicans.
Response to comment [from a Christian]: "Clinton enjoyed the windfall of Reagan's policies."
Liberals can't help themselves.
All they know is tax, spend and regulate.
[Obama V. Clinton On Taxes by Dick Morris] "President Obama is trying to
re-write history when he says that his tax program is the same as Bill Clinton
supported "when 23 million jobs were created."
It's not that way at all. Clinton's 1993 increase of personal income taxes on
the top bracket to 39.6% had a very negative effect on the economy. It was only
after Clinton's 1997 cut the capital gains tax - the opposite of what Obama
proposes - that job growth really piled up.
When Clinton took office he did all the wrong things. He raised taxes sharply,
hiking the top bracket from 35% to 39.6% and raised taxes on gasoline. The
result was that the economy, which had been recovering, staggered. GDP growth
dropped to 0.7% in Clinton's first quarter (down from 4.3% in Bush's last
quarter) and stayed around 2% for the rest of 1993. Personal income rose 6.3% in
1992 under Bush but slowed to 4.1% under Clinton in 1993.
The tax increases Clinton passed failed to generate the revenue he had expected.
The tax paradox set in. Martin Feldstein, former Chairman of the Council of
Economic Advisors, summed it up in his Wall Street Journal article, "What the
'93 Tax Increase Really Did," published on October 26, 1995. He said taxpayers
reduced their incomes when they saw the tax hikes coming. Feldstein writes that
"the Treasury lost two-thirds of the extra revenue that would have been
collected if taxpayers had not changed their behavior." Because of Clinton's tax
hikes, real personal income fell by $25 billion. High income taxpayers, facing
the prospect of a tax increase reported 8.5% less taxable income in 1993 than
they would have if their tax rates had not changed. The tax paradox!
Then Clinton got wiped out in the Congressional elections of 1994, losing
control of the Senate and the House - the first time the Republicans had run the
House in forty years!
Clinton suddenly saw the error of his ways and began to hold down spending and
push for a tax cut. In 1997, he and the Republican Congress combined to cut
capital gains taxes from 28% (the rate to which Bush had increased it) to 20%.
The result was electrifying! Real wage growth was 6.5% in the four years after
the tax cut compared to minuscule wage growth of 0.8% over the four years after
Clinton's tax increase!
And the tax paradox was again evident: lower rates produced higher revenues! In
1996, the year before the capital gains cut, the tax collected revenues of only
$66 billion. In the four years after the cut, they averaged $100 billion a year.
But, what was more important was the surge in economic activity that the capital
gains tax cut generated. In 1996, before the tax cut, there were $261 billion in
capital gains in America. In the three years after the cut, capital gains rose
to an average of $440 billion. The increased tax collections and the greater
economic activity were such that they pushed the budget into a surplus for the
first time since the 1950s.
These facts may be "inconvenient truths" for Obama to face but they are the
facts!"
Millions noticing paychecks lighter today, due to payroll
tax hike by Joshua Rhett Miller] "Gabriella Hoffman’s paycheck is a little
lighter today, thanks to a payroll tax increase that is forcing millions of
Americans to make the kind of tough budget cuts their representatives in
Washington lawmakers seem unwilling to tackle.
Hoffman, a 21-year-old Virginian who works at a nonprofit, estimates her
paycheck will be roughly $30 less this biweekly pay period, or about $780
annually, thanks to the end of a two-year cut on payroll taxes, which fund
Social Security. The tax has risen back up to 6.2 percent from 4.2 percent,
costing someone making $50,000 annually about $1,000 per year and a household
with two high-paid workers up to $4,500..." Full text:
Millions noticing paychecks lighter today, due to payroll tax hike
Am 8:5,
Eccl 10:2,
Jn 10:10
[Why Americans will soon pay more to drive every mile by
Justin Hyde Motoramic] "The financial lookouts who toil in America's
transportation departments have been waving red flags for years that there
wasn't enough money to keep the nation's 4 million miles of roads and bridges
drivable. Now the federal government's top accountant has told Congress it
should experiment with taxing drivers by the mile to make up billions of dollars
in shortfalls. The debate isn't whether you'll pay more to drive in the future,
but how you'll pay — and how much..." Full text:
Why Americans will soon pay more to drive every mile
Ex 20:15,
Eccl 10:2,
Jn 10:10
Chicago Mulls Bike Tax Ex 20:15, Eccl 10:2, Jn 10:10
Obamacare tax: Gym members forced to pay new tax
$17.4 Trillion: President calls for end to 'austerity'
Proposes $56b spending bump
Obama Calls for Highest Sustained Taxation in USA History
