So Much For LOWERING Taxes!

After all the hubbub and noise about Obama cutting taxes for the working class, Obama and his Democrat hordes are trying to deal us a one-two punch that we’d never recover from if they passed. “Oh, but he only raised taxes for the wealthy–we’re getting an extra $13 a week! He’s cutting taxes for us! He’s the new Robin Hood!”

Oh, gag me.

First of all, his proposal for universal healthcare would raise taxes on EVERYBODY. Not just the wealthy. Working-class folks like Philip, Steve and I would all be taxed for the benefits that our employers give us. Private healthcare would be taxed out of existence. Contrary to popular belief, that’s not competition. Wal-Mart may drive their competition out of business with low prices, but they don’t have the power to tax their competitors out of the market. The government does. That isn’t competition, it’s called abuse of power, and it’s wrong no matter which way you look at it. Somehow, some way government healthcare would need to be paid for, and it would be done through taxes.

Second–and Philip brought this up a couple of days ago–CAP AND TRADE. Oh, my God, we’re going to tax ourselves into destitution with cap and trade, and we’re smiling as we do it. Here’s the basics about this farce: it’s better known as Waxman-Markey or HR 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act. It might sound good on the surface, but all bills typically do. They’re intended to do good. But we all know that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and this bill would take us straight to hell in a handbasket. You know all those special interests and earmarks that we’re all so upset about? They’re up to their eyeballs in Waxman-Markey, and average American Joes like you and I would pay through the teeth for this ridiculous bill if it passes the Senate. Energy rationing would become more of a reality than it was during WWII.

The idea behind Waxman-Markey is to provide a way to create so-called “clean energy” for use by Americans. The way to it, however, would cost us everything we have. It would require greenhouse gas emissions to be reduced by 83% by 2050, a feat that every expert on the subject admits is herculean. That’s the tip of the iceberg. All the massive energy companies have sold out, seeming to lend credibility to the push for clean energy, making Democrats look at them in awe and say, “oh, how brave–you’re giving up your profits to save the planet!” But there’s more to that, too. No CEO in his right mind would throw his company’s support behind a bill that would cut their legs out from under them without some kind of compensation for their troubles. Their compensation is a full 85% of the rationing coupons, and the CEO’s even admitted in hearings over Waxman-Markey that they’d refuse to support the bill if they weren’t getting such a high number of those rationing coupons.

Recently, emails were revealed from the EPA that showed the reality of global warming and how we need to “save the planet.” In reality, temperatures stopped rising nearly ten years ago. The liberal brown-nosers at the EPA shut down one employee’s research on the subject when that employee revealed just how futile our efforts would be if we passed this sort of legislation. Their argument? “This employee is not a scientist.” Good God almighty–neither were 98% of the nitwits who signed Al Gore’s petition to stop global warming, but how many people took that crap seriously?!? The employee involved is Alan Carlin, and the director of the EPA was caught with his pants down when he said in an email that Carlin’s work would “hurt the office” and that they’d already decided to go forward with “endangerment funding.”

Translation? We don’t care about the fact that there’s evidence that we’re wrong–we want this, and we’re going to ram it down your throats any which way we can.

Cap and trade would result in the loss of millions of jobs, fuel and energy rationing, and only the very wealthy being able to afford their vehicles. Democrats blocked Republican amendments that would have suspended Waxman-Markey in the case of $5-a-gallon gasoline or 15% unemployment rates. Far from reducing our dependence on foreign oil, this bill would lead stateside fuel refineries to import even more in an effort to keep their product affordable for us so they could turn a profit. By 2035, my niece’s family would be paying upwards of $20,000 annually in combined energy usage. The cost of EVERYTHING would go up to balance it out, because businesses will be paying the higher energy costs, too. All that outsourcing of jobs that we’re so pissed about? Guess what? That’ll get worse, too, because it’ll be that much cheaper to hire someone in China or India to do some of our jobs because those countries have sworn they’d never do anything as remarkably stupid as Waxman-Markey.

Everything–farming, manufacturing, retail, EVERYTHING–would be taxed to the brink of destruction by cap and trade. Between lost revenue here at home and losses in the GNP, it would cost us nearly nine-and-a-half trillion dollars. Oh, and low-income families would be hit hardest by the hardships imposed by this legislation.

So much for lowering taxes!

Advertisements

22 thoughts on “So Much For LOWERING Taxes!

  1. Let’s assume this fantasy known as global warming is real.

    Anyone who is serious about solving this problem knows the real cause of global warming is living breathing human beings. There are too many of us. Just living day to day creates carbon dioxide even if you never drive a car, fly in an airplane or work in a coal fired power plant.

    Living day to day requires resources. Some are more scarce than others. People in Afghanistan need to stay warm. People in Zimbabwe need to eat. So does everyone else in between.

    But, nobody will go there and state we need to control propulation. This is what we need to do.

    Even if all of us lived in solar powered homes and took the bus or walked everywhere, that would not solve the problem.

    Sooner not later we will have to confront this mess. Entire countries will implode for lack of water, food and in some cases land itself. Does anyone think these people will go quietly?

    Do you really think millions of people in Bangladesh are going to voluntarily drown as sea levels rise? Do you think millions of Mexicans are going to voluntarily die of thirst?

    As the saying goes you can pay now or pay later but you will pay.

  2. “First of all, his proposal for universal healthcare would raise taxes on EVERYBODY. Not just the wealthy. Working-class folks like Philip, Steve and I would all be taxed for the benefits that our employers give us. Private healthcare would be taxed out of existence”

    Oh my God, Mel. You really need to stop posting things like this. No one has ever suggested taxing existing benefits. As a matter of fact, the president himself has rejected the notion of doing just that. I really am confused as to why you keep bringing this up, and where you’re getting this idea to begin with.

    Not to mention the fact that 72% of the country wants a public option for health care. Let the private insurance companies compete with the government, and see how they hold up. You think it’ll fail; fine, let the “free market” decide.

    So much for lowering taxes? So much for competition is more like it…

  3. ” Let the private insurance companies compete with the government, and see how they hold up. You think it’ll fail; fine, let the “free market” decide.”

    Big difference Robert. The private companies HAVE to make a profit IN THE FREE MARKET that this country is based on.

    What happens when the government creates a net loss? (Admittedly under probably the last four administrations). The government doesn’t have to make a profit. All they have to do is raise taxes and people like you continue to believe that somehow you are untouchable.

    It’s just ends of a rope you’re hanging onto here. Sooner or later it’s going to run out and you’ll have to buy your own.

  4. I beg to differ, Robert–both Obama and Axelrod have mentioned taxing existing health benefits. Most recently Axelrod talked about it over the weekend with George Stephanopoulos. It HAS been discussed and will continue to be discussed.

  5. “So much for lowering taxes? So much for competition is more like it…”

    I can get behind that if the public insurance system has to make money and risk going bankrupt like any other business. I don’t think Obama and Congress will structure it that way.

  6. “Most recently Axelrod talked about it over the weekend with George Stephanopoulos”

    Right, and he said it was out of the question….

  7. “Big difference Robert. The private companies HAVE to make a profit IN THE FREE MARKET that this country is based on.”

    You hit the nail on the head, my friend. The number one priority of insurance companies is making a profit, not providing its customers with affordable health care. We need a not for profit system so that people don’t become cash registers.

    “The government doesn’t have to make a profit.”

    Precisely. And if they should screw it up, We the People have the ability to punish them at the voting booth. We can’t do that with insurance CEOs. There has to be accountability somewhere. As it stands, health insurance is the biggest scam going, it’s a cash cow that relies on people’s fear that something catastrophic will happen. But I can’t tell you how many times I hear about insurance companies refusing to pay on claims, worming around it with made up maladies like pre existing conditions because you failed to disclose the fact that you had acne as a teenager. Health insurance companies no longer exist to provide people with health care, they exist to take people’s money and find a way to deny them care when they need it most. It’s absurd and it needs to change. Proof positive that they’re scared shitless is the fact that they consistently lobby, year after year, to make sure the status quo remains in effect. Billions upon billions of dollars that instead of being used to treat medical problems, are being used to ensure that they don’t have to pay to treat medical problems. That is the real sham…

  8. “Health insurance companies no longer exist to provide people with health care, they exist to take people’s money and find a way to deny them care when they need it most. It’s absurd and it needs to change.”

    There are other ways to do that vs. creating a national health care system. More government regulation is one way. Yes, I know the health insurance industry will fight it.

    The trouble with a government run system is it is o.k. to have no profit motive. I won’t dispute that. But no profit motive does not mean you pile up huge losses year after year and expect an endless subsidy.

    Finally as I have posted before, there is dirty work that comes with practicing medicine. Doctors to an extent are forced to play God. Money is an issue when deciding treatment choices. The government will run into that. Here is what I mean.

    An elderly person has colon cancer. This person is 75 years old. There is a 50-50 chance of surviving the next five years. It will cost $350,000 to $1,000,000 to treat the condition at today’s prices. Can the government say No to that treatment because of the patient’s age and cost associated? What if the patient wants the treatment? If the patient lives 5 years or 10 years it that a proper use of taxpayer funded health care? It’s one thing to have your private insurer refuse to pay. It’s quite different when you government refuses to pay.

  9. “Right, and he said it was out of the question…”

    No, he most certainly didn’t. More than anything he danced around the subject. In fact, many Democrats who are for the idea have come out and said that Obama would support it as long as he didn’t have to propose it. We have it on record through many people.

  10. “No, he most certainly didn’t. More than anything he danced around the subject.”

    So, saying that it’s a “bad idea” really means “we’re all for it” to you?

  11. “You hit the nail on the head, my friend. The number one priority of insurance companies is making a profit, not providing its customers with affordable health care. We need a not for profit system so that people don’t become cash registers.”

    Ah, the heart of a Democrat. Spend as much as we have to and demand nothing in return….no fiscal responsibility, just give and who cares if we wind up spending than what we retain. You guys just ran an entire election pretending to care about deficits.

    This is the mindset that sends people down a path to destruction. Why should anyone responsibly take steps to take better care of themselves if the government is going to pay for it all? Just how many people are going to embrace preventative care?

    No, they will merely complain when they are sitting in an over-crowded emergency room in lieu of being thankful for what the government is providing them.

    If they cannot make a profit, the quality of healthcare will decrease and decline and Doctors will not be willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical school – not to mention most of their prime youth working weekends and having no social life.

    Any responsible company or entity’s number-one priority should be making a profit. If it does not, it fails both its shareholders and its customers overtime. I prepare many not-for-profit organizations returns every year and if there isn’t a profit, the officers get red-hot.

    A profit is a profit, if the government isn’t making one it only proves what this country was not ever founded on. I am certain though that the President and officers of this organization (Obama, Pelosi, Reid) will continue to eat expensive steaks and have massive parties.

    Suddenly, they really are no different than AIG executives.

  12. “Ah, the heart of a Democrat. Spend as much as we have to and demand nothing in return….no fiscal responsibility, just give and who cares if we wind up spending than what we retain. You guys just ran an entire election pretending to care about deficits.”

    First of all, I am no Democrat, so you can just can that rhetoric. Second, conservatives had zero credibility when it comes to criticizing spending. And speaking of pretending to care about deficits, where was this caring when Reagan and Bush Jr. racked up more debt than all presidents before them combined? If anyone is pretending, it the cons. They’re only for fiscal responsibility when a Democrat is in office.

    “Why should anyone responsibly take steps to take better care of themselves if the government is going to pay for it all?”

    What exactly does the ‘life’ in ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’ mean to you? The Constitution guarantees us the rights to these things, and I would submit to you that a society that cares for its citizens truly does have the right to life. If you take a look at any other industrialized nation on earth that provides health care to its people, any one of them, you’ll find that life expectancy is longer than here, infant mortality rates are lower than here, and people aren’t bankrupted by an illness. These countries don’t grow fat and content to let the government “fix” them, they’re simply smarter in regards to their health care system. And you can see it right across the board…

    “If they cannot make a profit, the quality of healthcare will decrease and decline and Doctors will not be willing to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical school – not to mention most of their prime youth working weekends and having no social life.”

    So, in other words, the dollar should drive the doctor? All you’re doing is repeating Reagan’s meme that greed is good. What ever happened to the hippocratic oath? Nowhere does it say “first turn a buck”. Some physicians still care about other’s well being. It’s no wonder to me that the PNHP (Physicians for a National Health Program), which has more physicians as members than the American Medical Association, supports a single payer system. Some 60% or so of actual doctors would like to see a national health care plan, so I don’t really buy the poor doctor bit.

    “Any responsible company or entity’s number-one priority should be making a profit”

    We’re not talking about a company here, we’re talking about people’s lives. A Doctor’s number one priority is not to make a profit, or at least I hope it’s not. A HEALTH insurance company’s number one priority is supposed to be to provide the service that put them in business, not making a profit. The profit should be a natural side effect, if you will, of the service provided. If the insurance industry spent as much time, money, and energy providing health care as they do denying it, no one would even dream of replacing them. There’s obviously a reason for it. Would you keep employing your mechanic if every time you took your car to the shop, he let you pay him for services he never rendered?

  13. “So, in other words, the dollar should drive the doctor?”

    Considering the effort and expense required to become an MD, then yes money should drive the doctor to a great extent. Doctors have to make a living just like the rest of us.

  14. “Some physicians still care about other’s well being.”

    Many do and they also want a home in a great zip code and drive a Prosche like my MD does. Considering what he went through to become an MD, he has earned his props.

  15. “We’re not talking about a company here, we’re talking about people’s lives.”

    I smoke. I know I should quit. I also need to drop 20 lbs. I have dropped 10 lbs.

    Because I smoke I could develop lung problems from that. My health insurance company knows I smoke and they accept the risk. They are willing to gamble.

    If I get a lung condition, then my insurance company is on the hook. The rest of the country is not. I don’t expect the rest of the country to pay for my choice to smoke.

    When I drive home Saturday nights on the freeway, there is always some prick going 80 to 100 and weaving in and out of traffic. This lunk head is playing Russian Roulette in a car. Sometimes they crash and it isn’t pretty. Sorry, but I don’t want to pay for that.

  16. “If I get a lung condition, then my insurance company is on the hook. The rest of the country is not. I don’t expect the rest of the country to pay for my choice to smoke.”

    They already do. What do you think insurance is? They take the risk and spread it out over as wide a pool as possible. Your premium goes up when they have to pay out on someone else’s lung cancer treatment. If you were literally the only person with insurance, your costs would be through the roof…

  17. “So, in other words, the dollar should drive the doctor?”

    Would you spend 13 years in college if you thought your salary was going to be limited? Honestly, Robert. Your position protects underachievers as always and punishes those that sacrifice and achieve as Americans (the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness you seem to be mis-placing).

    “Reagan and Bush Jr. racked up more debt than all presidents before them combined?”

    Reagan had to bring back jobs, lower national interest rates, lower tax rates, and lower the double-digit inflation he inherited all while winning the cold war. Bush had 9/11, hurricane Katrina (both massive examples of years of liberal idiocy, ignorance, and turning a blind eye) and a housing crisis brought on by the contributors of Obama’s campaign, the Fair Housing Act, and one of many Barney Frank’s booty calls.

    If Bush had allowed those few under-achievers to lose their homes and go bankrupt as he should have done, you would have criticized him for denying them their pursuit of life and liberty. We already disagreed with his position on the bailout. Every Republican pundit and writer and people like us right here at gayconservative were screaming from the rooftops. Just because there are a few bad Republicans (not including Reagan) doesn’t mean there are any good Democrats.

    “These countries don’t grow fat and content to let the government “fix” them, they’re simply smarter in regards to their health care system.”

    Yes, those countless Canadian cases of folks running here to get surgery is the best example of that. Thanks for the enlightenment.

    “We’re not talking about a company here, we’re talking about people’s lives.”

    No my little drama queen. People are free to that pursuit you keep talking about. In that pursuit, some of us make choices and take risks. It’s the risktakers that provide the opportunity. If; in fact, life was meant to be this hip version of Janis Joplin’s “Me and Bobby McGee” as you imply it is, there would be no such thing as sacrifice, things like triumph would not need exist. This isn’t a world where we are all just sitting around (unless you’re a liberal) meaning nothing and doing nothing. Through our contributions of our efforts, we earn more and we save more.

    The strive of a company making a profit is realistic. Not just to make their shareholders happy, but to employee people, to pay taxes, and to provide a functioning society. Without individuals making those efforts, we would sink.

    And you’re dramatic tidbits about people’s lives will never change that.

  18. “Yes, those countless Canadian cases of folks running here to get surgery is the best example of that. Thanks for the enlightenment.”

    Why are they running here? My Uncle’s wife works at an alcohol treatment cetner in North Dakota. The center used to have a contract with the Canadian government to take in people who needed treatment.

    Perhaps U.S. hospitals do the same with Canada’s government?

    I live in one of the most international areas on Earth. In my 20 years here I’ve never ever read of any stories in the local news about foreigners coming to the U.S. to get treatments they can get in their home countries. Usually if someone from Europe or Canada comes to the U.S. for treatmetn it is because we have a protocol that can’t be had in those areas of the world.

  19. “Would you spend 13 years in college if you thought your salary was going to be limited? Honestly, Robert. Your position protects underachievers as always and punishes those that sacrifice and achieve as Americans”

    My position, or the position you’re assigning to me? Find me a doctor who became one for money and I’ll show you a shitty physician. My brother’s girlfriend just became a nurse, and will begin working on her Bachelor’s degree in January, on her way to becoming a doctor. She is not in it for the money. If she were, she’d remain a nurse, as they routinely make more money than doctors. It’s obviously a handsome perk, but no one should go into medicine for money. So, in essence, your position advocates greed while pushing well intentioned people farther down the pike.

    “Reagan had to bring back jobs, lower national interest rates, lower tax rates, and lower the double-digit inflation he inherited all while winning the cold war”

    No one forced the guy to blow trillions of dollars on an idiotic arms race. And that whole lowering interest rates thing is only half the story, Steve. You conveniently left out the part where Greenspan was forced to raise interest rates after Reagan’s insane tax cuts caused extremely high deficits.

    “Bush had 9/11, hurricane Katrina (both massive examples of years of liberal idiocy, ignorance, and turning a blind eye)”

    Oh, here we go! Nothing was ever Bush’s fault, right? Nevermind the fact that he was president for eight months when 9/11 took place, nevermind that he was warned repeatedly about Al-Qaeda not only from the outgoing administration, but by just about every intelligence agency in the country. Never mind that Bush was the one who botched the response to Katrina. Ignore all these things to alleviate responsibility from your guy’s shoulder. Typical con, allergic to accountability…

    “and a housing crisis brought on by the contributors of Obama’s campaign, the Fair Housing Act, and one of many Barney Frank’s booty calls.”

    Also forget (if that’s the story you want to stick to) that Bush called for eased regulations on lending standards, and he overtly promoted an “Ownership Society”, where “low income folks” didn’t have to “have a lousy home for their first home”. Everywhere you look, no matter how much you try to pass the buck, your party is largely responsible for much of the country’s problems. Own up to it, and you might garner some respect from others…

    “Yes, those countless Canadian cases of folks running here to get surgery is the best example of that. Thanks for the enlightenment.”

    Yeah, and thanks for the made up, unsubstantiated stories of our laughable health care system being better than anywhere else. It always makes me laugh when cons trot out the whole “you’ll be on a waiting list” sob story, as if we don’t already have long waiting lists in this country. The only difference is, once you get to the top of that list, then you’re told that your insurance won’t cover what you need to stay alive. What the fuck is the point of insurance if they won’t cover the services you’ve purchased insurance for?

    “Through our contributions of our efforts, we earn more and we save more.”

    Who’s we? Red staters? The same red states that decry welfare of any sort while being the biggest recipients of it? Talk about sitting around doing nothing; red states, with the exception on Texas, get more money back for every dollar that goes to federal coffers. Blue states, on the flip side get less back. Red states are factual welfare states…

    “And you’re [sic] dramatic tidbits about people’s lives will never change that.”

    Nor will your selfish attitude, so I’ll agree to disagree, but more so I’ll agree that you’re wrong.

  20. “Never mind that Bush was the one who botched the response to Katrina.”

    Are you daft? The Mayor of New Orleans bears far more responsibility than any President. He did not get his people the hell out of Dodge for starters.

    When he sent them to the Superdome the place wasn’t stocked up for at least a three day haul.

    When the looting began he did not issue a shoot to kill order.

    I live in the land of wild fires Robert. Just like hurricanes they come with a warning. In my 20 years in CA there has been one wild fire disaster that killed people who should not have died. This was the Oakland Hills fire.

    But the rest of the fires? We get our people out, we put them where they need to be, we manage the situation properly. It’s not a gargantuan task. Nor is it a simple walk across the street.

    If Mayor Nagin had done his job, then things would have turned out far different in New Orleans. He failed. He did not have the personal fortitude to own up to what he did. Why he is not rotting in prison amazes me.

    When the Loma Prieta quake struck in 1989, San Francisco Mayor Art Agnos took immediate and decisive action. The Marina District was on fire. He requested immediate help from the Army at The Presidio and got it. There was stability and order. San Francisco had a plan and executed it well.

    George Bush Sr. did not take any credit for the Loma Prieta quake because he knew he did not earn any credit.

  21. “Who’s we? Red staters? The same red states that decry welfare of any sort while being the biggest recipients of it? Talk about sitting around doing nothing; red states, with the exception on Texas, get more money back for every dollar that goes to federal coffers. Blue states, on the flip side get less back. Red states are factual welfare states…”

    At the top level you are right. But that dollars paid to DC vs. dollars sent from DC has flaws.

    The first flaw is Social Security benefits. The law allows nearly every person to live in any state they choose. Popular states for retirement have higher levels of Social Security benefits coming in.

    The next flaw are military bases. We can’t build naval bases in North Dakota and Wyoming because those sates are land locked. So the only question then becomes do we need naval bases where we have them? I know politics plays a part in where military bases are located.

    I would like to see the dollars to DC vs. dollars back from DC after the Social Security and defense spending elements are removed.

  22. “Are you daft? The Mayor of New Orleans bears far more responsibility than any President”

    Well, considering the fact that it was a FEDERAL emergency, I’m going to have to disagree with you there.

    “But the rest of the fires? We get our people out, we put them where they need to be, we manage the situation properly.”

    Escaping a slow moving fire is a hell of a lot easier than trying to avoid an entire city that’s been flooded. There is a huge difference in these two situations. I’m from San Pedro, so we’ve never had any threats from wildfires, but if where ever the hell you live ever had the anomalous misfortune of being hit by a hurricane, you’d be singing a different tune right now…

    “He failed. He did not have the personal fortitude to own up to what he did. Why he is not rotting in prison amazes me.”

    Hm, sounds like every other rational thinking person’s perspective on George Bush…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s