« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Pelosi Says Surtax Could go for Deficit Reduction, too?

The Speaker needs a remedial math class.

By: Warner Todd Huston (Diary)  |  July 17th, 2009 at 10:01 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I’m sorry, I’m not much for name calling but this woman is an idiot. She is claiming that the oppressive surtax can “also” go to retire the Obama $1 trillion deficit if there is any “left over” after Obamacare is “paid for”!

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that Democrats could use a proposed new tax on the wealthy to pay down the deficit, if there’s money left over after funding healthcare reform.

But, the CBO is claiming that Obamacare will cost in excess of $1 trillion and the surtax is “only” going to raise $544 billion. How, exactly, is there supposed to be anything “left over” after Obamacare is “paid for.”

I know, I just used a lot of quote marks, but they are deservedly derisory.

The surtax will not “pay for” Obamacare because the projected costs (projections that are surely too low) are higher than what the surtax is projected to bring in. There just won’t be anything “left over.” Nor can Obamacare BE paid for. It will continue to grow wildly once passed and will never be paid for by any measure. Healthcare will become just another unfunded mandate like it has become in Massachusetts. Lastly, my quotes around “only” above is to scoff at what Washington thinks is such a tiny amount. Why, it’s only $544 billion, don’t you know? A few billion here, a few billion there… pretty soon we’re talking about real money (pardon my Dirksenism).

But here is this silly excuse for a Speaker dreaming about all the wonderful things that she can do with the surtax receipts. She reminds me of what happens when you give a 10-year-old a $20 bill. If you ask them what they’re going to do with the $20, they invariably say they are going to get all the candy they want, a passel full of new toys and a pony. They simply haven’t the mental capacity to understand how far a mere $20 will go.

This is a perfect way to describe this Pelosi claim. She’s intellectually incapable of understanding the amount of money we are talking about here. In her mind the surtax will pay for healthcare, pay down a trillion dollar deficit… and there will probably be enough left over to get her some candy and a pony.

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • johnt

    but who is going to call her on it? Besides us that is. If the msm trained it’s guns on this fool she would be laughed into a dark cellar somewhere. A basic rule; there are no stupid democrats/liberals, the sole guide to real intelligence being one’s devotion to grotesquely huge, devouring, destroying government.
    Believe in that and you qualify as an intellectual, you may even read a book or two a year.

    Being a highly qualified liar, that’s why she is Speaker, someone may have patiently explained to this ape the true costs and the absurdity of deficit reduction as is. No matter, unchallenged the dolt plunges on.

  • itdiehard

    to avoid the tax man?

    • Vannek

      … but, the proposed tax is on “income” not wealth. The tax would come from future arnings not from the wealth that trough-feeders like Pelosi and Feinstein have already amassed. They’ll hardly feel the pain from taxes on their Congressional pay.

      As for Pelosi being “intellectually incapable of understanding the amount of money we are talking about here,” I don’t think that’s true. She has the ability to understand but is blinded by ideology. I work for a major university where I’m surrounded by people like Pelosi–people who’s economic understanding is limited to reading Paul Krugman’s op eds. For years, they’ve been told that the U.S. has resources and wealth so infinite that we could turn the entire world into a paradise if we weren’t so greedy. Let me correct that last statement: “… if OTHER PEOPLE weren’t so greedy.” These folks never want their personal wealth or self-interest put into play. They’ve been brainwashed into thinking that the Bill Gates’s of the world should and must pay the price. Magical thinking.

  • Darin_H

    She’s just trying to keep up with Teh One, last year he promised revenue neutral tax policy (higher on rich with a middle class cut) along with deficit reduction while spending more.

  • djemi

    Unless it was a “side job” but I’m not going there.

    Question: Is this 544 Billion based on current GDP growth numbers? I only ask as “it would not be surprising if GDP has not yet reached its low” at least according to Larry Summers
    And this is in addition to the payroll fine you point out here

    As a side not and I hate to send poeple here but, Ha Ha Ha

    • GT350

      Apparently, there’s a list of 50 House lefties who won’t support a bill unless it contains a strong public option. They want full, comprehensive, low cost health coverage, w/ minimal or no copay. Full coverage, including mental health, dental, etc etc, for FREE**.

      They are completely out of their freakin’ minds. Yet I’m going to call the closest one to me (Barbara Lee / Berkeley) and egg her on. I really want to see a splintering between the Blue Dogs and the no-compromise Ultralefties.

      **Free means “paid for by the Rich, who can obviously afford it.”

      • GT350

        I guess this makes me a Right-Wing Moby.

        I called Barbara Lee’s office & congratulated her on the courageous stand for Single-Payer comprehensive healthcare for all. I told her to stick to her guns (figuratively, of course, since she wants to ban firearms) & NO COMPROMISES! Stick it to the Man!

        I don’t know what I would do if her version actually becomes law. I would probably shoot myself to take personal responsibility.

        • Vannek

          Thank you for this brilliant idea.

  • bobojake

    We thought you pelosi would be the scariest idiot we can find. Are you available?????????