There seems to be a lot of happy talk surrounding Barack Obama’s recent trip to Capitol Hill, and his attempt to sell his stimulus bill to Republicans by adding a few ‘tax cuts.’ But bipartisan bonhomie notwithstanding, there’s no more reason to embrace Barack Obama’s stimulus plan today than there was a week ago.
It is still a tremendous waste of taxpayer dollars, will do nothing to help the economy, and will blow an even bigger hole in a deficit that has risen from $162 billion to $1.2 trillion annually since Democrats took control of Congress. What Obama is selling and what he’s offering are two different things. While the economy needs a genuine stimulus, Obama is offering to ’spread the wealth.’ And in so doing, he’s brazenly disregarding his read-my-lips campaign pledge to offer a net spending cut at a time when everyone else is tightening their belts.
Under the proposal, as presently described, successful businesses would get no tax cuts. Unsuccessful businesses would get taxpayer subsidies. The government would be all in with respect to picking winners and losers in what used to be the free market. Likewise, Obama’s “tax cuts” are actually an end run around welfare reform — giving the most money to people who pay little or no taxes, then taking that money away if they get a pay raise or a better job. Nothing proposed by Obama — not the infrastructure spending, not the aid to the states, and not the redistributive tax cuts — would help create jobs or wealth. In fact, taxing the people of each state to give money back to their own state government isn’t just robbing Peter to pay Paul, it’s robbing Peter to pay Peter. If states need to raise more revenue, let their governors make that case directly to their taxpayers.
The best plan we are aware of to create jobs and wealth starts with making the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent. These reductions in capital gains taxes and dividend taxes, as well as the elimination of the death tax, are far more likely to get the economy moving again than anything proposed by Barack Obama or his Congressional allies. Absent that, there is no reason for Congressional Republicans to lend support in the crafting of an ineffective and wasteful pork barrel bill.
If the Democrats will not make the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent, the GOP should not even hint at supporting the Democrats’ plan. Two Republican Senators, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, are already suggesting they can work with Barack Obama on his “tax cuts” as presented. Just callling something a tax cut does not make it so, just as calling something a stimulus does not make it so.
Mitch McConnell, Saxby Chambliss, and the rest of the Republican caucus could probably use some encouragement to avoid the siren song of tax cuts and stimulus before they lend their support to a bill that is neither.
From Barack Obama's own website
bk Friday, January 9th at 7:29AM EST (link)http://www.barackobama.com/issues/fiscal/
The Obama/Biden Plan to restore fiscal discipline to Washington
Liberals will say he’s broken #2; the rest of us will say he’s trashed all the others. He may be the first President who’s broken every campaign promise before even getting inaugurated.
"The only way out of this mess that the government helped create is to have less government...."
bk Friday, January 9th at 7:47AM EST (link)That was Peter Schiff on CNN yesterday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbIgPCJZpnI
bk, can you identify the language from Obama's proposals
Mike gamecock DeVine Friday, January 9th at 1:48PM EST (link)that are the basis of this statement in the blog and that I have heard Rush and Levin say:
“Under the proposal, as presently described, successful businesses would get no tax cuts. Unsuccessful businesses would get taxpayer subsidies.”
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” - Andrew Jackson
Not sure about that specifically
bk Friday, January 9th at 2:24PM EST (link)but the impression I got in the few minutes I heard on Rush today was along the lines of this (much paraphrasing and added comments from me):
- We’re giving money to people who have failed in their business or personal life.
- That money is coming from somewhere, so it must be from successful businesses or from people who work and pay their bills.
- Therefore we are setting up a system where we are rewarding failure and punishing success, even more so than what a progressive tax system does already.
Does that help? I’m sure others can say it better than I described.
That helps bk, but I am reluctant to accept that conclusion based on what I know so far
Mike gamecock DeVine Friday, January 9th at 2:37PM EST (link)I guess I need to go ahead and do my column on why I don’t think it wise or accurate to call the proposed tax cuts “welfare” given that only those that work get a check and given that most will not get a check that exceeds their FICA taxes.
Given that the tax cuts are based on income level, I don’t see how one could characterize the recipients as failures. I need more info.
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” - Andrew Jackson
I don't think it's about tax cuts to working people
bk Friday, January 9th at 3:09PM EST (link)but rather bailouts
Exactly what do you mean by: successful businesses would get no tax cuts
Mike gamecock DeVine Friday, January 9th at 8:33AM EST (link)Under the proposal, as presently described, successful businesses would get no tax cuts. Unsuccessful businesses would get taxpayer subsidies.
What provisions say this and what is the wording that leads to this conclusion?
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” - Andrew Jackson
Yes, I'd like to see that also...
USNJIMRET Friday, January 9th at 9:10AM EST (link)Not saying that the facts aren’t as stated, but would like to see the actual plan.
That said, how foolish must everyone be to again accept the doom and gloom argument?
A hundred billion here (TARP), a few billion there (Auto bail out), and unknown hundreds of billions for ’stimulis’….after a while, it gets to be real money.
From what I can tell, esp given the time that has elapsed
Mike gamecock DeVine Saturday, January 10th at 9:05AM EST (link)there is no basis for the characterization.
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” - Andrew Jackson
Gamecock
Erick Erickson Sunday, January 11th at 12:09PM EST (link)According to Obama’s plan as outlined by his advisers, businesses that have lost money in the past year will get a tax subsidy and will be encouraged to apply it toward keeping jobs.
Successful businesses that have made money will get no corporate tax rate reduction and will not get any new depreciation advantages. In addition, they’ll lose the Bush tax cuts have have benefited them.
Who will stand on either hand and keep this bridge with me?
Thanks Erick. I actually did some research later and discovered that fact
Mike gamecock DeVine Sunday, January 11th at 12:12PM EST (link)Thanks man and great work bro!
Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” - Andrew Jackson
What does this sound like?
arel Friday, January 9th at 9:21AM EST (link)“Only government can break the vicious cycles that are crippling our economy,” Obama said in his speech just yesterday. Does anyone else hear a socialist overtone here?
Anyway, Obama seems to think that by throwing money at our problems they will just go away. His ever growing stimulus package is just going to add on to our ever growing deficit. Giving lower and middle class tax cuts doesn’t really do much when you are unemployed nor does a $500.00 stimulus check. I do agree with reducing taxes that alone will help those that are working at a minimum wage.
There is no easy or painless fix for this problem. Maybe it is time to start looking at the big picture and learn from our past experiences. How about we eliminate wasteful spending by our government and ourselves, loose the majority of the social programs as many are being abused and some just don’t work, reduce our government and stop living above our means. Everyone doesn’t deserve to have things that they can’t afford. Throwing more money that we don’t have at a problem it will not fix is just the same old crap wrapped up in a different package.
Arel
Obama has it totally backwards
izoneguy Friday, January 9th at 9:53AM EST (link)Is it an wonder that a marxist is preaching socialist propganda wrapped under the guise as a capitalistic stimulus. Obama’s “goal” is to cripple the will of a capitalistic society so he can more easily impose his vision of his “new society”. Sounds a lot like some other leaders in the past. Look at Cuba - 50 years of corruption and brain washing and look what you got - that really worked out well for the Castros.
“When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.”
Thomas Jefferson
Aw heck,
USNJIMRET Friday, January 9th at 9:58AM EST (link)I saw a story yesterday that the Obama Transition Team has sent a letter to whoever, asking that the nearly four year in the planning transition to digital only broadcasting be delayed. And one of the reasons why? Because the elderly, poor and disadvantaged haven’t been properly prepared! The letter claimed that the educational effort has been ‘woefully inadequate’, and there was/is not enough funding to ‘help’ with the converter boxes.
The organization providing the coupons, $40 credit card like ‘coupon’, ran out of money, having only been funded for something like 1.4 BILLION to do the job.
I’ve seen more and more and more of the adviso’s from local, Denver, TV stations about the coming transition. They, the TV stations, have offered special infomercials explaining the how to. The coupons are for $40 to help offset a $47 box at Walmart!
And even after all that, the time, money and educational effort…the claim is that the usual idiots who also can’t figure out how to get a photo ID, aren’t ready. And will be unfairly punished if this four years in the planning event takes place as planned.
And you think that the Government is going to have any capacity at all to reign in wasteful spending in already established programs?
Not a chance, not one.
Let's get this to the top of the recommended list
The_Gadfly Friday, January 9th at 12:30PM EST (link)Yeah, I know it is from the directors. But for the title alone we readers should put this at the top of the list so whatever Republicans do wander through this site, they know the Directors are speaking what we are thinking on this issue. I have the feeling right now that they are backsliding and listening to their beltway connected advisers rather than the people who put them in office. The Iron Lady put it best “Don’t go all wobbly on us,” and we may need to put some backbone in them.
We’ve been called racists enough now that it shouldn’t bother us any more.
-AChance, http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2009/11/03/what-men-may-do-we-have-done/#comment-24463
If NY23 was a beat down for Conservatives, what do you call what happened to Progressives in NJ and VA?
inspired by ColdWarrior, http://www.redstate.com/hooah_mac/2009/11/04/ny-23-the-agony-of-defeat-not-so-much/#comment-156
Agree nt
itrytobenice Friday, January 9th at 2:17PM EST (link)The problem with America is stupidity. I’m not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why don’t we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?