Archive for the ‘Taxpayer’ Category
What happens when you sit back silently and allow criminal behavior to go unpunished?
Tea Party leaders refused to accept an apology from the IRS Friday in which the agency acknowledged that it inappropriately flagged conservative groups for additional review during the 2012 election to see if they were violating their tax-exempt status.
Jenny Beth Martin, national coordinator for Tea Party Patriots, said she wants to see resignations over what she called the “disturbing, illegal and outrageous abuse of government power.”
How about some fucking indictments?
“The House will investigate”, says Cantor. Sure it will. Like it has investigated Benghazi? Even after acknowledging that the narrative given the people was an utter fiction we’re still pussyfooting around that issue and the dead Americans it produced.
Further, the IRS originally lied in that it claimed there was no such targeting. Just like the FBI lied when they said they had no contact with the Boston Bombers, and it was only when their families disclosed to the media irrefutable evidence that the FBI was bullshitting did they come clean.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said “the fact that Americans were targeted by the IRS because of their political beliefs is unconscionable.”
No Darrell, it’s unconstitutional and thus unlawful.
Just like bilking people with hinky deals on mortgage bonds is illegal — that’s criminal fraud.
It is also unlawful to back-date deposits so as to make a bank look more sound than it is. People lost real money because of that scam and the agency involved, the OTS, had people who did it previously during the S&L crisis. Not only were they not prosecuted that time they weren’t prosecuted this time either.
Unlawful bill collection tactics are, as the name implies, illegal.
So is filing knowingly perjured documents in courtrooms to take people’s houses, which happened over 100,000 admitted times.
So is money laundering in the hundreds of millions of dollars for drug gangs by American banks.
So is knowingly allowing the delivery of thousands of guns to drug runners who intend to, and do, deliver them across the border into Mexico for the purpose of murdering people.
Instead of prosecuting any of this you Darrell, along with Boehner and the rest of you clowns allow The Fed and Treasury to reward the banksters who did this, screwing the American public blind, letting them get shot with guns provided by the government and paid for with laundered money run by the very same banksters — and exactly none of the people responsible for any of this crap have gone to jail.
WHERE ARE THE DAMNED INDICTMENTS ALONG WITH BILLS OF CONTEMPT AND IMPEACHMENT?
Last June, like most conservatives, I felt great shock and disappointment with the ruling of the Supreme Court holding Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act—commonly known as Obamacare—as constitutional. The legislation itself represents an assault on our basic liberties. Americans should not be penalized because they have made the economic decision to not purchase health insurance in the private marketplace. Our federal government, which is supposed to be limited in scope, should not be so powerful as to have the ability to regulate not only what we do, but also what we do not do. For the first time in history inaction is now a taxable undertaking. This is wrong and goes against the very nature of American governance and tradition. The United States is exceptional because the very charter that created our nation recognized our inalienable right to liberty. That liberty discussed in the Declaration of Independence includes taking the economic risk of not purchasing health insurance even when you can afford it.
As the law came before the Supreme Court, Justice Scalia made a prescient point that showed how the motivating factor behind Obamacare erodes our freedom. He said, “Everybody has to buy food sooner or later, so you [the federal government] define the market as food, therefore, everybody is in the market; therefore, you can make people buy broccoli.” Progressive liberals who support the president’s healthcare reform cling to a notion that unwinds the protections granted to us by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Conservatives must respond by standing together to empower Americans with the freedom offered to everyone by a limited government.
Obamacare is one of the largest expansions of the size of government in our national history. By validating that the federal government has the ability to tax inaction the Supreme Court has ruled that Congress can regulate every aspect of our lives through the tax code. This ruling is a step too far. Good intentions by Washington politicians cannot replace our basic liberties and self-responsibility. Despite being law for over three years, a large majority of Americans want this law repealed. As members of Congress, it is our duty to protect the rights of the people, not take them away.
Regardless of whether or not Obamacare is eventually repealed, the Supreme Court has set a dangerous precedent that only opens the door for future abuse by ambitious lawmakers. The Court ruled that Congress has the ability to pass laws that can force Americans to either buy particular products in the private market or face the IRS. Under this precedent, Congress could force anyone to buy a product that lawmakers in Washington deem indispensible to living a proper life. Chief Justice Roberts has essentially ruled that the Framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights were wrong in expecting Americans to be able to make decisions regarding how to live their lives.
If the Supreme Court is going to twist the meaning of the taxation power of Congress to include mandated behavior, the only recourse left is for the people of the United States to change the Constitution, serving as a check on Washington’s authority. I revere the Constitution, and changing it in anyway is something that I take very seriously. A 5-4 ruling should not grant the federal government nearly unlimited power. To rectify this problem, I propose an amendment to the Constitution that prohibits Congress from using the creation of taxes in order to compel individuals to engage in commercial activity. It is the only way to ensure our limited government even if Obamacare is eventually repealed.
Majority Leader Cantor has said that we need to hack away at the infringements of our freedoms that are pervasive through Obamacare. This is my chop. Below is my proposed amendment to the United States Constitution. Washington should not be allowed to control every aspect of our lives. I ask all of you to join me in standing up to this intrusion into our daily lives. We can reclaim our right to be self-responsible citizens without the management of Washington bureaucrats, but we must take action while we still can.
Language of the proposed Bentivolio Amendment:
The Congress shall not have the power to lay and collect taxes in order to compel any person or persons to engage in commercial activity, nor shall Congress have the power to lay and collect taxes from any person or persons for a failure to engage in any form of commercial activity.
Kerry Bentiviolio – Red State
Kerry Bentivolio is a first-term Congressman who represents Michigan’s 11th district. He is a veteran, school teacher, small business owner, and family farmer.
Imagine being a rancher and having a pack of predators attacking your livestock. These predators pose a grave danger to your livelihood and the safety of your family. You have a few options as to how to deal with this ravenous pack. You can remain vigilant and stand watch; shooing the hungry pack away whenever they come around. A possibility could be to try to provide alternate food options for them to keep them away from your animals. You may even choose to sacrifice the weakest of your livestock periodically to satiate the appetite of the predators. This will only cause the pack to increase in size and appetite… it will devour more of your livelihood. Or… you can get rid of the predators.
Speaking of hungry predators with insatiable appetites, have you seen what your governments have been up to lately?
The predators that come back night after night after night, ObamaCare and tax increases, are still going strong. The periodic predators that only come around when the opportunity presents itself, control of the internet and gun control, are coming out of the desk drawers that they have been stored in… waiting for just the right crisis/opportunity.
After having ObamaCare pushed upon the unwilling with complete disregard for the rights of individuals, the costs are already going up with double digit increases. I thought the ACA was supposed to reduce costs? While many state governments are refusing to fully comply with ObamaCare or to implement state run exchanges, the GoverNerd of my home state of Michigan has been going like gangbusters to getbought off by the feds.
By now everybody has been lambasted with smaller paychecks by the government ending the payroll tax holiday. Ben Swann reports how some politically connected groups got special deals as a part of the “fiscal cliff” negotiations while the citizenry got the shaft! What ever happened to the promise that nobody making less that $250,000 per year will see their taxes go up in any way, shape, or form? Oh yeah… that was a lie.
Not only do Americans face a smaller paycheck, they also face the fact that the money won’t go as far as it used to. This is not only due to the Federal Reserve devaluing the currency through planned inflation, but from a potential new sales tax on health insurance. For the new ObamaCare related taxes, click here. For more on rules on income taxes, click here. If you are productive, you are nothing but a life support for the State.
“We will keep the Chinese and Russian governments from cyber-attacking US computer systems… by spying on and collecting the personal information of US citizens.” He didn’t really say that… he’s not that honest.
First there was SOPA and PIPA and those went away due to public outcry. Then CISPA was introduced and went away due to public outcry. Now, it’s back.
Rep. Mike Rogers (R) MI has reintroduced CISPA. If we are to suspend common sense for just a moment… why would we want an organization that constantly comes under cyber attack and is continuously being hacked providing cyber security? It’s like UPS or FedEx going to the post office for advice on efficiency. Wouldn’t it be better to hire a group like Anonymous? Those guys at least appear to be capable.
The president even signed a questionable executive order related to emergency internet control. Sounds harmless enough, Winston and Julia?
What these new internet laws really provide is an opportunity for politically connected, rent seeking corporations to enforce IP at tax cattle expense and for the federal government to censor unpopular information and spy on the citizenry just like the Soviets would have done. Ever heard of firewalls, anti-virus software, or a business taking the personal responsibility for their own cyber security?
It also appears that many local and state governments as well as the federal government feel that mere mortal citizens do not have the right to own and use property without their blessing. The president has signed 23 executive orders related to gun control. The state of New York has rammed through legislation to restrict the property rights of citizens of that state. Meanwhile in Missouri, the democrats are pushing for full confiscation of private property with new legislation that will essentially make ownership of semi-automatic firearms and proper capacity magazines a class C felony. Other states and localities are getting into the act too. All of this is happening while the federal government stocks up on enough weapons and ammo to fight a 30 year war and local police departments are provided with urban assault equipment similar to that used in war zones.
The Political Response
“As soon as you say, ‘Those Democrats [or Republicans] are what’s wrong with this country,’ you’ve gladdened the Establishment’s heart. You’ve fallen for the Punch and Judy show. You are no threat to the system. Meanwhile, the looting goes on.” ~Tom Woods.
If anything has been learned by the people protesting ObamaCare at the town hall meetings and through writing letters and making phone calls, it’s that your rulers really do not give a damn what you think and you can put your concerns where the sun doesn’t shine. They are going to do what they want and unless you have enough money to outbid their true owners, you can go suck an egg.
Warning: This part will offend some of you but it needs to be said. You could always hold up your pocket constitution and shout, “Stop it! Stop it! You’re not allowed to do that!” You will then be ignored like the constituents before you since the very first congress and president took office. No government has ever been restrained by a constitution. The only thing that has ever restrained any government is its own inability to consume and destroy everything all at one time. And that inability is being overcome more and more with each passing day. There has never been a time in this country’s history ( or any country for that matter) where the constitution was obeyed even closely, let alone strictly. Not even under Grover Cleveland was it followed closely. Sure, Cleveland vetoed a lot of stuff but the fact that it made it to his desk in the first place is proof that the constitution wasn’t followed. What part of, “criminals don’t obey laws” do you not understand? I am certain that somebody will read that statement and despite all of the historical evidence will pull a Sheriff Mack, hit the refresh button and say, “If we could only get back to the constitution.”
I will concede that Nullification at the state level can be used to fight federal tyranny to a point. If the fed goons decide that they want something to happen, they will employ every dirty trick in their arsenal from bribery to outright brute force. But what if it is your state that is violating your rights to own property? For all branches of government, individual nullification will be the only real answer.
I would caution people not to put too much hope in their elected rulers to advocate on their behalf. That has been done before and here they are over $16 trillion dollars in debt later. It’s not that one party caves under pressure from the other party or popular opinion. No, it is that any period of resistance is nothing more than the requisite waiting period to make it look like they fought the good fight and do what they were planning to do all along. Then it is hailed as meeting in the middle in a grand example of bipartisanship and statesmanship. After all, the Indefinite Detention of US Citizens provision of NDAA 2012 was a result of bipartisan cooperation just as blocking any attempt to repeal that provision has been examples of bipartisan cooperation.
As Walter Williams has written, Under Article 1, Section 7 : “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.” Constitutionally and by precedent, the House of Representatives has the exclusive prerogative to originate bills to appropriate money, as well as to raise revenues.” The GOP could have defunded ObamaCare as soon as they took control of the House. By the same token, the Democrats could have defunded the wars as soon as they took control of the House. Ever notice how the actual policies never really change even though the rhetoric and party does? The system must be preserved at any and all costs.
This video clip is from the pro gun rights rally in Albany, New York. The likelihood of the politicians that voted for the NY gun ban getting voted out of office is pretty slim. The incumbency/recidivism rate for politicians is usually over 90%. The main point here is that the people are growing their numbers and getting others fired up. They are rising up against their rulers. They are setting the stage for nullification on the individual level!
The Effective Response
“No.” ~Rosa Parks
Bad laws are not repealed because people want them repealed or because the rulers have a moment of benevolence. Prohibition was not repealed because FDR was such a swell guy. Prohibition was repealed because it was unenforceable, Too many people were ignoring the law. The violation of the law made the government look impotent in addition to looking like the miserable failure that it was. The Civil Right movement did the same thing with the Bus Boycott and their activism.
The answer is non-compliance and civil disobedience. It is my sincere hope that it does not come down to armed resistance but that is a strong possibility. New Yorkers are the first to face off against their state government. This may be the “shot heard round the world.” As Alex Newman writes for the New American in his article Gun Owners Refuse to Register Under New York Law
“They’re saying, ‘F— the governor! F— Cuomo! We’re not going to register our guns,’ and I think they’re serious. People are not
going to do it. People are going to resist,” explained State Rifle and Pistol Association President Tom King, who also serves
on the National Rifle Association board of directors. “They’re taking one of our guaranteed civil rights, and they’re taking it away.”
Figure out ways to separate yourself from the government. Look into alternative currencies and markets; starve the beast. Twelve million fewer people voted in the 2012 elections, and that was the most important election of our lifetimes since the last most important election of our lifetimes… and until the next most important election of our lifetimes. Can you imagine the politicians trying to claim legitimacy and a mandate when only 10% of eligible voters even bother to show up to the polls? That is the easiest part of individual nullification as you don’t even have to show up.
If you are unhappy with the government you have… withdraw your consent. If America chooses to make a stand, they had better make certain that they make themselves clear. It will not be enough to just win the battle only to have the rulers pull back to regroup. If that is the case, they will come back again with a fervor never before seen. They will come back with an unimaginable violence… that is the nature of the State.
Imagine being a private citizen trying to earn a living and take care of your family but are constantly stalked by your government. These predators pose a grave danger to your livelihood and the safety of your family. What do you do?
“It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace²but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” ~Patrick Henry
Lou – Freedom Feens
The following is making the rounds on Facebook:
My reply, which incidentally is all easily-verified, was thus:
No you didn’t.
You were conned.
You paid a tax, nothing more.
This has been ruled on by the US Supreme Court.
That is the same Supreme Court that liberals believe has the right to ban guns (any or all), starting with the NFA and onward through Miller and more.
It is the same US Supreme Court that the liberals say was correct in endorsing Obamacare.
The problem is that the US Supreme Court ITSELF is a con; in Marbury .v. Madison they ARROGATED the right to change the Constitution to themselves, but no such power was ever delegated to them IN the Constitution or by Amendment thereof.
All of those acts by the US Supreme Court are thus unlawful, and those that impugn fundamental liberty interests are openly seditious.
But…. you believe in that court, so go take the issue up with them, SINCE THEY HAVE RULED YOUR SO-CALLED “PAYMENTS” NOTHING MORE THAN A TAX.
You can’t have this one both ways folks…..
It never ceases to amaze me how people get “column inches” in a paper like the NYT peddling nonsense like this gent is doing. Oh wait; it’s not that hard to figure out – the media is not about reporting or even opinion, it’s about shaping opinion — and the truth, even arithmetic, be damned.
WE have two political parties in America, runs a saying that conservatives like to quote. One is stupid, the other is evil. And when they join forces to do something that’s both stupid and evil — well, that’s what we call “bipartisanship.”
The payroll tax holiday that passed Congress in the winter of 2010 was a rare exception to this pessimistic rule. Cutting the payroll tax was good short-term politics for both Democrats and Republicans: it was a tax cut that liberals hoped would double as stimulus, and a boost to the middle class that conservatives could support without embracing new federal spending. But more important, it opened the door to what would be good long-term policy as well — because more than almost any feature of the American tax code, the payroll tax deserves to be pared away into extinction.
Ross goes on to do what so many other so-called “populist” commentators do — he conflates the two components of the payroll tax and then talks about getting rid of one of them.
That’s intentionally dishonest and Ross knows it.
The Payroll Tax has two components, both of which are intentionally designed so that you, the employee, only “see” half of them. Both halves, however, come directly out of your wages even though employers are forbidden by federal law to itemize the second half (the “employer contribution”) and show it to you on a pay stub as a deduction off what you would otherwise be paid.
Social Security has a number of very serious and I would argue intentional design features that are both racist and sexist. For example, a black man is expected to live to be 70.8 years, while a white woman is expected to live to 81.2 years. If we presume an equal retirement age of 65 (which the Social Security system does for equal benefits, assuming equal earnings history) the black man will collect benefits for 5.8 years, while the white woman will collect them for 16.2 years, or 279% of the black man’s Social Security payments. Note that a large percentage of the difference is found in things that kill black men before they reach 65; those people get exactly nothing.
All paid in, however, the exact same amount of money.
That’s racist and sexist — and intentional. Those who pay in and get nothing wind up being the net “suckers”; they have no choice but to pay, but they get zero since their payments do not have their name on them – they’re just a tax.
In addition Social Security is “progressive” in that the amount of benefit you get from further contributions once you reach the minimum requirement is less, on a ratable basis, than what you paid in. That is, the lower-income person gets a larger benefit in proportion to their paid-in capital than the higher-income does. Further, the FICA cap and payout cap means that beyond a certain level of contribution, which is reasonably modest and occurs in the middle class income band, you get nothing further at all. Of course you pay nothing more either, so that, I suppose, is “fair.”
Nonetheless Social Security is fixable without a lot of drama, although we certainly should talk about whether the program should exist at all, or whether it should exist in its present form. The reality is that the payroll tax has become a convenient slush fund from which the government steals, and which causes the reported deficit to be smaller than it really is. It was responsible for Clinton’s so-called “Surplus”, which in fact never happened — he simply stole the amounts paid in from the payroll tax that were not immediately disbursed as benefits! Every President since Ronald Reagan has done the same.
To fix Social Security removing the payroll tax abatement is required, as is indexing the full benefit retirement age to longevity. If we want to fix the sexist and racist elements as well, we could index the retirement age by race and gender; this would work because the persons with the lower life expectancy would also pay in for fewer years and likely would have lower benefits, but they would last for the same average amount of time as does someone who is of a longer-lived race and/or gender. This could be adjusted on a five-year sliding scale to account for changes in demographics.
The real problem with the payroll tax is found in Medicare. The Federal Government went from spending $53 billion on all medical services in 1980 to about $850 billion last year. The average retiree gets between three and five dollars out from every dollar they “contributed” during their working years. To put this in perspective the payroll tax is 3.8% for Medicare (both halves) and if we look at the average working wage of about $50,054 (all workers, all races, US Census Bureau) then the payroll tax for Medicare is $1,902 annually (both halves.) Over a 45 year working life this amounts to $85,592.34.
How long does this amount of money last?
The fact is that the average expense that Medicare puts forward for a given retiree is close to $300,000!
There is simply no way to make the books balance given these facts; to make the books balance either benefits must be cut by more than two thirds or the 3.8% Medicare tax must more than triple.
This has been hidden intentionally from the public debate on entitlements because both Democrats and Republicans know what the figures say, and they also know there are only three choices when it comes to solving this problem:
- Triple the Medicare tax to approximately 12%, 6% each for employer and employee with no earnings cap. Incidentally, this is only the forwardcomponent for retirement; you still have medical costs during your working years, insured or not!
- Dramatically curtail Medicare benefits — by a literal 2/3rds or more. That’s not going to be popular, but it’s what is inevitably coming if we don’t solve this, because the law does not permit Medicare to go into negative balances, and by the end of the decade it will.
- Break the medical industry’s monopoly-style pricing and controls. Up and down the line, from drugs to devices to “CON” laws and more. In short, make the entire industry from insurance to providers to hospitals to doctors accountable under Sherman, Clayton, Robinson-Patman and first-sale doctrines, along with removing all shields that prevent them from being attacked under Racketeering and similar statutes for any element of price-fixing or other anti-competitive behavior. This would cause prices to collapse by 75% or more, and suddenly the problem goes away.
#3 is the only way that can work in the long term. But #3 causes an instant deep recession or worse, as the short-term impact of removing that spending from GDP will be immense. It also destroys the political power of these companies and groups, such as the AMA and the insurance industry.
What you’re seeing in editorials like the one cited above, along with the so-called “debate” in Washington (and what drove Obamacare) is the inherent scam and fraud in the system as it has been designed and implemented. Whether FDR intended Social Security to be racist and sexist at its inception is not material to the debate, but the factual outcome as it exists today most-certainly is!
Yet nobody — not Democrat, Republican or even the so-called “Libertarian” party, all of which espouse equality under the law for all persons, will take these issues on and bring them to the forefront of public and political discussion.
Instead what we get is the Three-Card Monte game run by columnists in the NYT, along with the political class, seeking to divert us from the facts and figures that are right under our noses.
Some ugly facts for your Saturday….
From 1990 to 2000 GDP expanded at an average rate of 4.80%. Debt expanded at an average rate of 7.51%
From 2000 to 2010 GDP expanded at an average rate of 4.13%. Debt expanded at an average rate of 6.55%.
From 2010 to 2Q 2012 GDP expanded at a rate of 3.93%. But debt expanded at only 0.94%, which is a massive paradigm shift from the previous 20 years.
This is good instead of bad, right?
In a word, no. It is signaling the end of the self-delusional game we’ve been running for the last three decades. That endpoint is here, now and today.
Real economic growth has to subtract out government deficit spending. When you do that it looks like this:
There has been no growth of materiality since 2000. We cheated. And we cheated before too, but in the private sector with all the Internet scam companies that blew up in the tech wreck.
And by the way, at current run rates (although the numbers are not in yet) this year in terms of actual deficit and actual adjusted GDP will be almost identical to 2011, unless something dramatic changes in the next two months.
We have a grown a few things though. First, let’s look at the growth in Federal (only) health spending. This is what we’ve done thus far (smoothed, using the endpoints — $53 billion in 1980 and $850 billion last year.)
And then there’s what that rate projects out to for the next 35 years, which is what the government has promised all those who are 50 and older – your Medicare will not change if you’re 50 or older — remember?
Best of luck with that, Kemosabe; roughly $16 trillion on federal health spending alone in 2043?
By the way, for the math-challenged by 2029 we will spend more on health care than the entire federal budget is today. If you believe that can happen, say much less that 2043 will happen, I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn. The foundation might have had a bit of trouble of late though. I think it was called “Sandy”. Heh, that works, doesn’t it?
Of course we’ve all heard that the economy is recovering since early 2009. That recovery must be real because this statistic is just skyrocketing — the number of people (and households) on food stamps. Uh, if the economy is recovering, why does this number keep going up and why has it gone up by more than 50% in the last four years — and has never gone back down?
That must be because the fine government people and “eCONomists” are all lying to you. Let’s see if we can find the lies.
We’ll being with employment. We keep hearing that we’re gaining jobs. This is half-true. We have in fact added 7.2 million jobs from January 2010 to today.
Unfortunately we also added 7.15 million working-age people during the same time period. So in point of fact, we added jobs – all 50,000 of them, when you account for working-age population growth.
Eh, that’s not so good, and nobody wants to talk about that.
Of course during the same time gasoline prices have roughly doubled, and most food items are up dramatically in price — 50% or more. Milk, eggs, cheese, meats. I wonder if that would force people onto food stamps — stagnant employment and outrageously-rising costs.
It just might!
Why is that happening? Well that might be due to the Federal Budget. Ok, ok, it’s not really a budget because they didn’t pass one. But this is where we’re spending our money, and where we’re taking in money in taxes — and what we’re putting on the credit card. I ordered a few things to point out that we must pay the interest, we must pay “General Government” (that’s the light bill for the Capitol, among other important things) and we probably want to pay for things like the Fibbies (various federal law enforcement entities and their infrastructure.) It’s also important to keep in mind the size of those shards of the budget, so when someone says “but the FBI and government is so wasteful on such programs” you can point to exactly how much we would “save” if we stopped doing all of it.
That is, not enough to matter.
So if we were to stop deficit spending today we could pay the interest on the debt, we could pay for the lights in the White House, we could pay for the FBI and similar, we could pay for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.
But then we run out of money half-way through Defense and have nothing for Welfare, Other spending, Education or Transportation.
Zip, zero, nada.
There’s this little problem with that chart too which explains all of the above with employment and food stamps, along with the other markers of actual economic health. That nasty red bar with the label “Debt”, and which both sides of the aisle claim we can continue to add onto every year, is actually dilution of the nation’s wealth. This is exactly identical to imposing a tax, and it’s over a trillion dollars annually. In point of fact from 2008 to 2012 (calendar) it has been $1.40 trillion, $1.647 trillion, $1.852 trillion, $1.225 trillion and at the current (10 month) run-rate for 2012 it will be $1.246 trillion this year.
Remember, President Obama, when he took office, told us all that he would cut the deficit in half from the fiscal 2008 level, which was about $600 billion, by the time he came up for re-election.
He instead more than doubled the annual deficit and added about $5 trillion in debt across his first term.
And let’s not forget that this is not just a Democrat thing. Oh no — all spending bills must originate in The House. Without the House there is no spending and there is no deficit. And who controls The House? Why that would be Mr. Speaker Boehner, and I do think he has an “R” after his name. Despite all the screaming about “fiscal responsibility” he (and Paul Ryan) are abject liars; when push comes to shove they are all more than happy to shove all right – they shove you, your children and every senior citizen right into the hole right along with help from Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.
But that’s not the bad news. The bad news is that at the rate of escalation going on today we will try to do this by the end of the decade:
Now that is just not going to work at all; we’ll pay that light bill, the Fibbies and Health Care but then will run out of money about halfway through Social Security, at which point the FBI will have plenty to do as Granny’s shotgun comes out.
So as you go about your weekend, contemplate these facts:
- You can’t fix medical entitlement spending. You instead have to fix the medical system, and the only way to do that is to pull all of the monopoly-style protections so that the cost of care in terms of dollars spent crumbles by 75% or more. This will result in a lot of short-term unemployment and contraction in GDP, but if it’s not done our government and society will blow up. This is a mathematical certainty.
- You can’t keep escalating defense spending either. But to fix that you must solve our energy dependence problem, because a huge part of why we spend over $750 billion a year is found there. Oh, it might help if we didn’t hand man-portable anti-aircraft missiles to our “friends” that happen to be affiliated with Al-Qaida too, as we reportedly did in Libya.
If we contracted Medical Spending by 75% and Defense by half, expiring the payroll tax credit and indexing Social Security retirement to longevity we would balance the budget and stop destroying our nation’s competitiveness and middle class.
Doubt me? Here’s the graph, and those three things are all I changed; Social Security does not move in expense but tax receipts go up due to the payroll tax cut expiration by about $200 billion a year.
There isn’t any other way to do it. Welfare, even if cut dramatically, can’t be cut enough. Other spending, education and transportation don’t have enough margin in them either — even cutting them in half won’t get there. Social Security can be slowed in escalation but in point of fact most of it is paid for by the Payroll Tax, or at least it was before Congress raided it with the allegedly “temporary” payroll tax deduction that costs about $210 billion a year in revenue. Indexing retirement to longevity gets us the rest of the way there by halting the advance of spending on that program.
It comes down to medical spending and defense, and with medical spending the only solution is to remove the monopoly protections and allow competition to force the industry to eat well over a trillion dollars a year in decreased gross revenues, accepting the impact that has on the economy and employment in the short term. On defense we must resolve our energy dilemma and stop pandering to the Middle East, then literally go home, cutting defense spending in half. There is no other answer; raising taxes to close the debt gap is exactly identical to what we’re doing now in terms of economic damage; the downward spiral will continue if that is attempted exactly as if we do not and keep trying to deficit spend our way out of the hole.
This is reality folks, and yet nobody wants to face it.
Arithmetic cannot be bargained with.
It just is.