Posted on 07/11/2011 7:33:00 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat
Call it eliminating an unfair break, or removing an unjust loophole, or even "taking a balanced approach". Just don't call it raising taxes.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
“Proposals consideration include raising taxes on small business owners and potentially low- and middle- income families. You won’t hear about that from Obama. Instead, the president focuses on the very rich.”
“expenditures in the tax code” = limiting govt income grab
the term shows who obamas peeps think owns all national income
This is the type of “expenditure” obama is willing to cut!
The petulant prince of pennsylvania avenue is supposed to do a presser at 11Am today. He is mad, you know.
Angry black man speech alert.
Union dues are deductible thus “expenditures in the tax code” I guess he’s not going to close that loophole.
“He is mad, you know.”
F^%$ him!
http://www.whitehouse.gov/live/
watch it live
the comments can be very entertaining, almost as good as a FR live thread
The petulant prince of pennsylvania avenue
VERY GOOD!!
Also...
The Fresh Prince of Hot Air
“raising taxes on small business owner”
After watching closely how DC is spending my money, I will teach myself how to work fewer hours. There will be NO increase in revenues PERIOD.
Are you sure it’s going to be at 11:00 AM?
I say Mr Arrogantly Rude shows up at least 15 minutes late.
Will a group of Democrats ask him to step down because he is mentally unstable and not fit to serve?
Doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results would be the definition of insanity or stupidity.
Looks like the first mulatto president has not been good for black folks as well. Fox has an article highlighting the plight of black folks who are falling out of the middle class. At the same time, BO’s failed policies are chipping away at everyone’s net worth.
What an idiot he is.
Here’s a tax proposal. Billionaires like Warren Buffett like to beg for higher income taxes while pretending they would actually have to sacrifice anything. The problem is their official income is actually in the hundreds of thousands even though their wealth is counted in billions so an income tax on them is also a tax on small business. Instead, let’s create a 1% asset tax on billionaires. Instead of paying a few thousand dollars, they have to pay $10,000,000 per billion in assets.
He will still get 90%-95% of the black vote. My hope is that he has lost the "white guilt" vote and all independent voters.
Buffett had an outstanding idea recently. If the budget deficit was over 3% of current revenue, all members of the house would be ineligible for reelection next term.
How about not? Let’s drop the whole business of taxing INCOME and tax purchases instead. Then Billionaires millionaires and six-figure-aires will pay taxes on their new purchases, along with the poor, middle class, illegals, drug dealers, foreigners, visitors, and everyone else I forgot.
THEN we’d all have “skin in the game.”
I think we are missing the boat a little on the whole “tax increase” thing.
A lot of “tax breaks” are nothing more than redistribution of wealth in disguise, and have nothing to do with letting people keep more of their own money.
Some examples: Hybrid car tax credits. They take money from working americans, and use it to bribe people into buying the cars government wants you to buy.
Or College tuition tax credits — supposedly great if you have kids. Except everybody gets them, and the colleges know it. College is already setting their tuition to the price YOU are willing to pay. If government throws another $4000 into the pot, it doesn’t change what you were willing to pay. If you wanted college for $10,000, and now government throws in $4000, colleges raise their tuition to $14000. In the end, it’s not YOUR tax credit, it’s money paid to liberal universities pushing democratic philosophy.
In contrast, depreciation allowance at least does let companies keep more of their own money, because the money goes to the company that first earned it, and then did something with it.
And when government is spending almost twice the tax they take in, it’s not quite like killing the tax credits raises the amount we pay — the tax credits were coming out of borrowed money.
So I think we really do need to go through all the various tax credits and see which ones are really spending in disguise. It’s not hard — if the tax credit or deduction is paid to people who do exactly what government wants them to do, that they might not otherwise do, it’s really government spending through a 3rd party.
The odds of me clicking on a link to whitehouse.gov are slim and none and slim left town.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.