What day did he tax?These people aren’t stupid; they’re lazy and slothful. They are perfectly willing to downsize ‘their’ economy if it doesn’t require that they actually work.. Deaf Ears here....
Ditto! It’s time SNL get in on some of this action - these dimwitted Dems are impossible to resist making fun of!
They are not stupid. They are well fed. Pigs get fat. Fat hogs go to the slaughterhouse. It’s the way of the world, and the poor don’t even get the squeal from the hog.
Does Obama think so little of the GOP that he would actually expect them to jump on this Scroogesque bandwagon?
This is a move that’s out of touch with everybody, Republicans and Democrats alike.
It goes to show what a pig obama really is.
I don’t believe it! This has to be a joke.
This is one of the reasons I have my doubts about Mr. Cantor. Either he really doesn't understand what motivates the Obama administration, or he does not have the cojones to call them out.
This one ain't rocket surgery folks. In their supreme arrogance, Obama and his minions genuinely believe that they are more capable of determining where the need is and how much money to give each and every individual agency than the rest of us. They know that a tax on charitable giving will decrease charitable giving. Thus the agencies and the people they help will become even more dependent on the feds.
And as an extra added bonus, they think they will decrease the number of churches when their funds dry up. Yeah, right.
Hey. Might as well demagogue the demagoguers. LOL!
What day did he tax?Why does Obama hate poor people?
The libs always whine the we "frame the issues" better than they do. Well, it's baloney. This time, though, Cantor's really gone and done it.
The Soup Kitchen Tax. Just brilliant.
Obozo wants to tax charitable donations to organizations dedicated to helping those in greatest need of help? The only possible outcome would be fewer and fewer donations to said organizations. I must muse as to just what goes on inside that empty head of his? He can’t seriously believe this is a good idea!
Has anybody seen a copy of the “Jobs Bill” - I’d like to know what it says.
No, they're evil. It's all part of their plan to completely eliminate private charities, and have all "aid" go through the government. That way they can control who gets the aid, who eats, who goes hungry. It's all a part of their plan for total control over every aspect of peoples' lives. They are working hard to destroy the economic engine of America, in order to get as many people as possible dependent on the government. Then by eliminating private charities, they can give people ultimatums to get the to do what the government wants...
This, combined with the elimination of the "charitable contribution deduction" will get the US more in line with European socialist governments, and help bring about that "fundamental change" that Obama was talking about before the election.
Mark
Taxing charitable contributions is perfectly in line with leftist dogma. How do you force people to rely on the state when they rely on churches and etc? Defunding the charities shifts the burdens of society on to the government.
The idea under consideration here is not a "tax on donations," as Cantor's message implies. It is simply a reduction (or elimination) of the tax deduction for charitable contributions. This may sound like a bad idea on its face, but the reality is that so many "charities" these days are little more than legalized rackets -- with well-paid executives and board members -- that actually spend very little money on the "charitable work" they're supposed to be doing.
Many of the larger denominations, such ad Obama’s former church, are far left. Always talking about social justice, environmentalism, etc. and in a round about way blaming Republicans.
I suspect they will be silent on this issue, even though it would hurt their own food banks and soup kitchens and the people they claim to be helping.
The New US Poverty Numbers: Everyone, Just Everyone, Gets This Wrong
by Tim Worstall, Business & Technology Contributor
The new US poverty numbers are out from the Census. The poverty rate is over 15% and isn’t this just terrible? It’s higher than it was decades ago and that’s just even worse, isn’t it?
Sadly, everyone, and I do mean near everyone other than myself, gets these numbers entirely wrong. From the left we’ve Angry Bear, from the right Dan Mitchell at Cato. Both have, sadly (sadly, for I quite like both of them), entirely misunderstood the little problem we have at the heart of the US poverty numbers.
The most important result of this little problem being that you simply cannot compare them over time.
Some grubby details: the US poverty line is calculated as being three times the food bill of a family in the early 1960s, upgraded over time for inflation. Doesn’t matter whether that’s a good definition or not, that’s just what it is.
When we calculate who is in poverty, who is below the poverty line, we include in the income said person or family gets their market income (of course) and also any cash that they get given directly by the government to alleviate their poverty. This seems sensible enough really, if you’ve got more cash you’re less poor than if you don’t have more cash.
However, we do not include in that household’s income all of the other things we do to alleviate poverty. We don’t include free medical care, or maybe help with the rent of an apartment or house. We don’t include any help that comes through the tax system nor do we include any vouchers: like Food Stamps for example . . . [see link above for continuation of article]
[Turns out, when these paid-in-kind benefits, and the EITC benefit, are included in the poverty calculations, quite a few more people are calculated to be above the poverty line. Like all statistics, it’s important to vet the internals.]