Ok, Obama, Raise Taxes but How Will That solve the Problem?


OK. so President Obama wants to raise taxes on the rich. Yup, and his followers agree with him because the rich can afford it. They believe in their liberal ideology of redistribution of wealth and they believe in their keynesian economics but how well has it worked?

The rich are giving up their citizenships left and right. Last year alone over 1800 persons renounced their citizenship to this nation and the reasons are obvious, taxes and over regulations of business. It is reported that the 1800 is a record number since records have been kept on expatriates. And these persons are not all Republicans or members of the ideology of the right. They are members of the liberal ideology also, like Denise Rich as reported in the following links.
NY Times on expatriates
Reuters on citizens renouncing citizenship
MSNBC reporting on Renouncements

My next question in regards to raising taxes is whether or not the federal government has collected all of the taxes owed to them, have they? I ask this considering that I reported all of the people who work for the federal government and owed taxes in this post back on February 4th. How many more are there?
Collect what is owed

We also have all of those people who have just failed to pay taxes as reported in this post. My question would be just how many more are there who are refusing to pay their taxes and why aren’t they if they can afford to pay as the liberals are claiming?

And we are not finished yet. The federal government is not the only government that isn’t being fiscally responsible. State and local governments are in bad shape economically also. And to right the ship in their cases requires that they reign in the power of the unions as well as the liberal policies of the past.

Stockton California is the latest and largest city to declare bankruptcy and there are many more cities on the brink of bankruptcy and the cause are all laid on the liberal economic policies of the past. Here is a link to a list of financially troubled cities and if you look some of the bigger cities of this nation is on that list.
Scranton’s Penn. solution
List of Cities in bad trouble

Last but not least are the fifty States. Each and everyone of them carrying a huge debt. Some are trying to get control of that debt but guess who are fighting financial reform every step of the way, the liberals and unions, that is who. Here is the list of States and their debt.

State Debt

We hear a lot of talk of outsourcing of jobs and everyone blames everyone else for it but very few talk about another factor of this. When jobs are being outsourced so are the businesses that hire the people. And why do businesses leave a country if not because of regulations and taxes along with union’s outrageous demands?

When you have a nation whose people have a spending habit like this nation has how can you take their money from them to pay for government’s spending habits? Where is the money going to come from?

UPDATE:
From what I hear San Bernardino California has just filed for bankruptcy too. How many more will this happen to?
San Bernardino bankrupt

Advertisements
Categories: Politics | Tags: , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Post navigation

12 thoughts on “Ok, Obama, Raise Taxes but How Will That solve the Problem?

  1. JD

    I think this plan like all the rest will end up exactly the same way. Hurting our country. I just read where the Federal Government is going to close several border patrol stations. How is that going to help all the rest of us? Same answer.

  2. The Griper

    it does seem to get worse every day, JD. Will we ever learn that money is not an infinite quantity?

  3. JD

    Griper,

    We need those elected to understand that money is not an infinite quantity. So far nothing indicates they are grasping the concept.

  4. The Griper

    what the elected, especially those on the left, need to understand is that government revenues are a dirivative of the profits from private enterprise not from the federal mints. they need to understand that money is earned while dollars are printed. in other words, they need to understand that money and dollars are two separate terms each with their own meaning and use.

  5. BB-Idaho

    It is peculiar that California city municiple bonds continue to be highly valued, paying out over 6%. Presumably the contractual obligations both bond payout and pension payout would be impacted by bancruptcy proceedings.
    Scranton’s pension investments lost 40% of their value in the recession. They seem to have no choice but to pass the loss on
    to their pensioners and employees. Whether they continue to
    honor other debt (suppliers, bond investors) at a 40% loss rate
    is a question. I suspect the liberal folks would spread it around
    and the conservatives insist on honoring private debt and the
    expense of the pensioners…maybe not, I tend cynical in these matters.
    As far as ‘money and dollars’ being two ‘seperate terms’, only as defined in an international market currency matchup..otherwise, IMO, a dollar
    is a type of money?

  6. The Griper

    BB,
    a dollar is looked upon as money only because it still has value as a medium of exchange. if the people ever lost confidence in that thus refused to accept the dollar as a medium of exchange it no longer can be seen as money. it is just a piece of paper. the Confederate dollar is a good example of a dollar not being money.

    dollars right off the printing press is just a sheet of paper with printing on it.. it only becomes money once it goes into commercial circulation and it is accepted in exchange of some goods or service.

    granted, there is a thin line between the meanings but that line still exist and must be recognized and honored if the idea of money is to have any value at all.

    a counterfeit dollar has as much value as a government minted dollar as long as people are willing to accept it as money. it is only when it has been revealed as being a counterfeit that people will not accept it anymore as money thus is now seen as just a piece of paper.

    • BB-Idaho

      Historically, ‘money’ represented something that had current
      intrinsic value; typically a rare metal like gold or silver. And
      historically, the value of ‘money’ varied, as indeed the value
      of its intrinsic base. For example, though intrinsic and rare,
      the value of gold is subject to inflationary and deflationary factors, just
      like dollars. While the value of confederate paper is nil, we note that the variation in value of ‘money’ is also affected by historical rarity. Thus a simple seashell of ‘confederate’ worth, because it is ancient today is worth about $30.
      …what is the old aphorism? ..one man’s junk is another’s treasure, or something like that. We may guess that in
      another 6000 years those confederate notes may be quite
      valuable…we shoud grab a few! 😉

  7. The Griper

    in 6000 years, if certain people have their way, there won’t be anything called money. and everyone will have everything they need and nobody will have to work for it either. everything will be so plentiful nothing will have any value.

    • BB-Idaho

      Could be..sort of pessimistic in a way. Lately technology has been growing exponentially. Perhaps humans will control their robots just using their minds. (perhaps robots will rebel). I’m even more pessimistic: in the battle between tech and Malthus, the next 6000 years will see human catastrophe (one or more of the 4 horsemen, maybe something we haven’t invented yet, etc)
      The survivors will have the advantage at least of a few old books,
      someone will re-invent the plow, the bow and arrow…..and
      finally money….then the printing press, the internet…and the computer virus. Am I being to hard on we? 🙂

  8. The Griper

    i have a feeling that in 6000 years man will be so spread out over the universe that life will have a whole new meaning, that is, if we don’t destroy ourselves before then.

  9. BB-Idaho

    Those expatriates seem to have other, albeit related, problems;
    they have been living overseas for a long time, are married to
    foreigners, likely pay taxes in the country where they reside…then
    continue to get harrrassed by the USIRS. In order to increase the
    database, I’m wondering if these people have joint citizenship (if they renounce US citizenship do they have ANY? ..and more oddly;
    it seems most of these folks live in what are currently called
    ‘socialist’ countries..do they get cradle-to-grave when they become
    full-fledged foreigners?

  10. The Griper

    well. if the laws are similar in other nations as they are here, marriage automatically gives them citizenship. and from what i gathered from the articles the renouncement of US citizenship was for the purpose of long term savings in regards to taxes or the direct result of banking regulation as a dirivative of being a foreigner.

Be respecful or your comment will be deleted. Also know that Alinsky tactics do not phase me

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: