This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Obama Redirects From A Broke US Government By Playing The Class Warfare Card, Focuses On "Millionaires And Billionaires"

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 06/29/2011 18:17 -0400

In what appears to be an increasingly tenuous attempt to redirect focus from terminal federal government failure through the imposition of yet another round of class antagonism, Barack Obama, as part of his earlier address to the nation, stressed that more revenue "must be part of any deficit-reduction deal" and criticized Republicans for protecting tax breaks for "millionaires and billionaires" in the process even invoking users of corporate jets (despite that fact that he himself boasted using the $56,000/hour taxpayer funded Air Force one to travel the 110 mile distance between Washington DC and Williamsburg, VA). As the WSJ puts it: Obama "staked out his position in budget negotiations, which have reached a critical phase and increasingly appear to hinge on which side wins the public-relations battle." Well-aware of the dead end trap that Bernanke finds himself in namely that monetary policy alone is now (or ever) powerless to fix the economy (although it sure would do miracle for the Russell 2000... and hyperinflation), and that a fiscal stimulus is currently unpassable, Obama dragged out the strawman, suggesting "that some initiatives designed to stimulate the economy in the short term should be included in a final deal, singling out a yearlong extension of the payroll-tax break for employees, which expires in January." The bottom line is that as the $4 trillion budget cutting goal is completely unattainable (something the Republicans have claimed is a priority in allowing a debt ceiling hike, yet which is nothing but a PR bluff), Obama has instead once again resorted to what he does best: foment class antagonisms within America, by singling out the rich versus the poor. Ironically, as a WSJ commentator puts it so eloquently, "Obama clearly wants all Americans brought down to a shared level of misery --- except, of course, our federal overlords who will continue to demand their own personal jets, international family travel at taxpayer expense, lifetime health benefits while being excused from the ravages of ObamaCare, and of course their recurring exemptions from all other laws that they impose on us lowly serf taxpayers. Obama wants class warfare? Well he got it: Americans vs their elitist, corrupt, irresponsible, thieving government." One can hope that the final outcome of said warfare here will be more effective than any and everywhere else, where said "governments" continue to dangle the carrot of (insolvent) entitlement program elimination should the population dare to change the status quo.

The WSJ summarizes Obama's speech:

"You can't reduce the deficit to the levels that it needs to be reduced without having some revenues in the mix," Mr. Obama said at a news conference on Wednesday that spanned a wide range of topics from the economy to gay marriage and Afghanistan and Libya.

"Deficit reduction, debt reduction should be part of an overall package of job growth over the long term," Mr. Obama said. "I think that it makes sense, as we're looking at an overall package, to see: Are there some things that we can do to sustain the recovery, so long as the overall package achieves our goals?"

"Democrats have to accept some painful spending cuts that hurt some of our constituencies and we may not like, and we've shown a willingness to do that," he said. "So the question is, if everybody else is willing to take on their sacred cows and do tough things in order to achieve the goal of real deficit reduction, then I think it would be hard for the Republicans to stand there and say that the tax breaks for corporate jets is sufficiently important that we're not willing to come to the table and get a deal done."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) reiterated Wednesday that a deficit-reduction package must contain big spending cuts and no tax increases or additional spending to stimulate the economy.

And while Obama was pumping up the rhetoric on the non-golf tour, and attempting to regain a shred of credibility with a general public that has long since lost all interest in both the hope and the change, Tim Geithner was waxing philosophically yet again and threathening with eternal damnation all those who dare oppose America's replacement of one tapped out credit card with another.

Below is Geithner's full response to a Jim DeMint letter from May 26 in which the republican made the all too clear observation that a US default is purely in the eyes of the tax evader.

Dear Senator DeMint:

I am writing in response to your letter of May 23, 2011, regarding the statutory debt limit. President Obama is strongly committed to restoring fiscal responsibility, and he has put forward a specific framework and set in motion a process to work with both parties to accomplish this critically important objective. Although agreement has not yet been reached, we have made progress toward that objective, and I welcome the statements by leaders of both parties making clear that the debt limit must be increased in order to protect America’s creditworthiness.

The debate over the debt limit can seem esoteric, but a failure to resolve it in the near term would have painful implications for people in every walk of American life. It would have a serious impact on members of the Armed Forces who depend on paychecks to feed and house their families. Social Security recipients who subsist on their monthly benefits, veterans who rely on the government for their retirement and health care needs, and small business owners or employees who provide goods and services to the country.

In your letter, you suggest that the debt limit should not be raised, and instead the federal debt be “capped” at the current limit. You further propose that after the government’s borrowing authority id exhausted in August, the United States should for some indefinite period pay only the interest on its debt, while stopping or delaying payment of a broad swath of other commitments the country has made under the law.

I have expressed my concerns about this idea before, but I will restate them to be clear: this “prioritization” proposal advocates a radical and deeply irresponsible departure from the commitments by Presidents of both parties, throughout American history, to honor all of the commitments our Nation has made.

The debt limit applies to past decisions of Congress. Increasing the debt limit is necessary to allow the United State to honor obligations previously authorized and appropriated by Congress. You explained this well in 2010 when you said:

You don’t have much choice if you charge something on your credit card. You have to pay it, and that’s effectively what this debt limit is … we’ve already spent the money. The question is now, do we shut down the government, or do we fund what we’ve already done.

Increasing the limit does not increase the obligations we have as a Nation; it simply permits the Treasury to fund those obligations Congress has already established. As James A. Baker III, Secretary of the Treasury under President Reagan, informed Congress in 1987:

I should stress that defaulting on already outstanding, validly incurred obligations has far graver effects than halting operations of the Government when spending authority is allowed to lapse, such as when there is a delay in action on appropriations. A failure to pay what is already due will cause certain and serious harm to our credit, financial markets and our citizens; it is not remotely similar to a lapse in authority to incur new obligations. (Emphasis in original.)

The statutory debt limit is not and never has been, as you argue, a “budget enforcement mechanism” that can be used to implement spending reductions by selectively defaulting on obligations previously approved by Congress. Our Constitution provides that “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” When Congress determines that certain commitments in the law should be altered or terminated, those decisions must be effectuated through enactment of legislation, not by attempting to coerce the Treasury to renege on existing legal commitments.

Even if the idea of “prioritization” were not so unwise, it would not be a mere exercise in “belt tightening,” as you suggest. The United States in now required to borrow approximately 40 cents for every dollar of expenditures. Your proposal would require cutting roughly 40 percent of all government payments. These deep cuts would be felt by all Americans, and they would risk throwing the economy back into recession.

You are also mistaken when you state that the Treasury has “prioritized” payments in the past. This is false. Never has the Treasury failed to meet any obligation as a result of a debt limit impasse, nor has Treasury ever “prioritized” payments. Congress has never failed to raise the debt limit when necessary. It is true that there have been failures at time to enact appropriations legislation, and this has caused temporary government shutdowns. Specifically, the 1995-1996 furloughs and suspensions of programs you refer to were caused by appropriations lapses, not a failure to raise the debt limit. But as Secretary Baker explained, there is no comparison in either cause or effect between a shutdown and a failure to increase the debt limit.

At its core, your letter is based on an untested and unacceptably risky assumption: that if the United State were to continue to pay interest on its debt — yet failed to pay legally required obligations to its citizens, servicemen and women, and businesses — there would be no adverse market reaction and no damage to the full faith and credit of the United States. Again, this idea is starkly at odds with the judgment of every previous Administration, regardless of party, that has faced debt limit impasses.

“Prioritization” also fails to account for how payments on principal would be made if investors were to lose confidence in U.S. creditworthiness. In August of this year, for example, more than $500 billion in U.S. Treasury debt will mature. Under normal circumstances, investors who hold Treasuries purchase new Treasury securities when the debt matures, permitting the United States to pay the principal on this maturing debt. Yet in the scenario you advocate, in which the United State would be defaulting on a broad range of its other obligations, there is no guarantee that investors would continue to re-invest in new Treasury securities. In fact, some market participants have already indicated that they would be disinclined to do so. As one of the major ratings agencies concluded in a recent report, failure to pay non-debt obligations “would signal sever financial distress and potentially imminent debt default,” prompting the U.S. sovereign rating to be place on “Rating Watch Negative.”

If investors chose not to purchase a sufficient volume of new Treasury securities, the United States would be required to pay the principal on maturing debt, and not merely the interest, out of available cash. Yet the Treasury would be unable to make these principal payments without the continued confidence of market participants willing to buy new Treasury securities. Your proposal assumes markets would be unconcerned by our failure to pay other obligations. But if this assumption proved incorrect, then the United States would be forced to default on its debt.

I understand that you have a different view of what would happen if the United States were unable, for the first time in its history, to meet its legal obligations. Nevertheless, I hope we can all agree that we should not and must not gamble with the full faith and credit of the United States. The consequences of miscalculation are too grave. The full faith and credit of the United States is too precious an asset to risk. If you are wrong in your prediction, to quote then-Secretary Baker, “Future generations of Americans would have to pay dearly for this grave breach of a 200-year old trust.”

Ultimately, the notion of “prioritizing” payments is futile because the debt limit must be increased regardless of which spending path is adopted. There is no credible budget plan under which a debt limit increase can be avoided. In addition, a failure to enact a timely increase in the limit would have the perverse effect of increasing the government’s borrowing costs and worsening our fiscal challenges.

For all of these reasons, the idea of “prioritization” has been rejected by every President and Secretary of the Treasury who have considered it. It is unwise, unworkable, unacceptably risky, and unfair to the American people. There is no alternative to enactment of a timely increase in the debt limit. As President Reagan wrote in 1983:

The country now possesses the strongest credit in the world. The full consequence of a default — or even the serious prospect of default — by the United States are impossible to predict and awesome to contemplate. Denigration of the full faith and credit of the United States would have substantial effects on the domestic financial markets and on the value of the dollar in exchange markets. The Nation can ill afford to allow such a result. The risks, the costs, the disruptions, and the incalculable damage lead me to but one conclusion: the Senate must pass the legislation before the Congress adjourns.

I appreciate your attention to this important issue and I look forward to working with you and other Members of Congress in the weeks ahead.

Sincerely, Timothy F. Geithner

(incidentally, the bolded text above is an admission by the Treasury Secretary that the US financial system is a ponzi).

Zero Hedge will shortly present a technical update from the perspective of US debt, on just what is so magical about the August 3 date that everyone keeps referencing.

- advertisements -

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:48 | 1413695 mynhair

Name one who didn't vote for him, though.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:12 | 1413999 Rodent Freikorps

I think even Carlos Slim voted for him since IDs were not required.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:42 | 1413694 Sudden Debt

Funny thing is that government employees in the US almost always get a loan for a new house. So why would common working people who don't get the job guarantee and denial of loans even care about these people?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:47 | 1413697 rlouis

"The debate over the debt limit can seem esoteric"

Actually, it seems rather fundamental: the country is broke or broker - or maybe just damn broken.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:03 | 1413738 bob_dabolina

They make it seem esoteric because they engage in fiscal prestidigitation to fund their special interests, and maintain their agenda. An agenda of which has polarized the country and interwoven antipathy into our social fabric.

The deconstruction of our national identity is also high on their priority for example; the refusal to say "god" during the national anthem, certain places not allowing the American flag to be displayed, an unsecured border and system that encourages amnety to anyone, affirmative action, language barriers (especially Texas/California) and class warfare.

This country, at one point, had a great and rich tradition that no longer exists and it is a national tragedy to say the least.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:49 | 1413702 mynhair

Hell, I'm not even worth a billion pennies.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:48 | 1413709 Rynak

If he hates ultra-rich so much (and i do NOT consider millionaires ultra-rich..... billionaires though may fit), then how about he first goes for the richest of all, who by coincidence also were exactly those who pushed the economy and debtlevel over the cliff.......... oh wait, now i remember - he prefers to GIVE massive amounts of money to them instead.

Tyler is right: No matter your stance on taxation and wealth distribution.... O is simply engaging in sophism, to redirect attention.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:00 | 1413761 trav7777

he's going to go after his donors?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:14 | 1413784 bob_dabolina

Yes, but he will do so in a polite, courteous, and professional manner.

He still needs to secure the 99.4% black demographic that vote for him. Don't forget, 90% of black children are on food stamps, so we're gona' need to get all the support we can to make sure the white devil continues to pay for those benefits.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:14 | 1413796 carbonmutant

He has a long history of exemptions...

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:51 | 1413713 Caviar Emptor

It's all about who is going to pay for "Austerity". Bottom line, everyone thinks it should be the next guy. Lowering tax subsidies to oil companies? No way, Jose. You'll be paying them at the pump and through your utility bills, but you'll also be cutting a check to support them at tax time.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:03 | 1413980 JW n FL

Top 10 corporations which paid no taxes

Here is Sen. Sanders’ list of the 10 worst corporate income tax avoiders:

1) Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits in 2009. Exxon not only paid no federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings. (Source: Exxon Mobil’s 2009 shareholder report filed with the SEC here.)

2) Bank of America received a $1.9 billion tax refund from the IRS last year, although it made $4.4 billion in profits and received a bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department of nearly $1 trillion. (Source: Forbes.com here, ProPublica here and Treasury here.)

3) General Electric made $26 billion in profits in the United States over the past five years and, thanks to clever use of loopholes, paid no taxes.(Source: Citizens for Tax Justice here and The New York Times here. Note: despite rumors to the contrary, the Times has stood by its story.)

4) Chevron received a $19 million refund from the IRS last year after it made $10 billion in profits in 2009. (Source: See 2009 Chevron annual report here. Note 15 on page FS-46 of this report shows a U.S. federal income tax liability of $128 million, but that it was able to defer $147 million for a U.S. federal income tax liability of negative $19 million.)

5) Boeing, which received a $30 billion contract from the Pentagon to build 179 airborne tankers, got a $124 million refund from the IRS last year. (Source: Paul Buchheit, professor, DePaul University, here and Citizens for Tax Justice here.)

6) Valero Energy, the 25th largest company in America with $68 billion in sales last year, received a $157 million tax refund check from the IRS and, over the past three years, received a $134 million tax break from the oil and gas manufacturing tax deduction. (Source: the company’s 2009 annual report, pg. 112, here.)

7) Goldman Sachs in 2008 only paid 1.1 percent of its income in taxes even though it earned a profit of $2.3 billion and received an almost $800 billion from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury Department. (Source: Bloomberg News here, ProPublica here, Treasury Department here.)

8) Citigroup last year made more than $4 billion in profits but paid no federal income taxes. It received a $2.5 trillion bailout from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury. (Source: Paul Buchheit, professor, DePaul University, here, ProPublica here, Treasury Department here.)

9) ConocoPhillips, the fifth largest oil company in the United States, made $16 billion in profits from 2006 through 2009, but received $451 million in tax breaks through the oil and gas manufacturing deduction. (Sources: Profits can be found here. The deduction can be found on the company’s 2010 SEC 10-K report to shareholders on 2009 finances, pg. 127, here.)

10) Carnival Cruise Lines made more than $11 billion in profits over the past five years, but its federal income tax rate during those years was just 1.1 percent. (Source: The New York Times here.)

http://www.greenpartywatch.org/2011/04/30/top-10-corporations-who-paid-no-taxes/

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 21:37 | 1414237 Aristophanes

So maybe he means corporation like these should get taxed? After all, corporations are legally "people". If that's true, I take back saying that the president is a "treasonous rat bastard".

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:54 | 1413715 Moe Howard

F*#K Timmay.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:10 | 1413716 Stuck on Zero

Can Geithner explain why they cancel credit cards when someone goes deep in the hole?

Can Obama explain where all those billionaires earned their money? Gee, do you think the government helped them get rich?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:56 | 1413719 Atlantis Consigliore

I just go laid thanks to the community organizer,

and bankrupt liar in thief:

chick asks, so what do you do when your not shorting gold and bonds and betting against the dollar.

Answer: Baby, Im a Jet Owner the community organizer says so:

The Lear is in Greece cleaning off the manure spread on it.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:39 | 1413880 mynhair

You have my sympathy. It's ok to tell your story.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:56 | 1413720 GlassHammer

My 2 cents:

You can generate more revenue when you are not fighting 3 wars.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:56 | 1413742 Rollerball

They were shovel-ready.

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 01:38 | 1414616 WeekendAtBernankes

Thread winner.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:14 | 1413795 Alex Kintner

Slight correction: 3 POINTLESS Wars.

But who is counting? -- Obviously not our gifted looters, er leaders.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 23:46 | 1414465 Van Halen

Make that 5 wars (Yemen, Pakistan). And factor in that Obama has driven Afghanistan to a record death toll.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:56 | 1413731 cougar_w

I'm not impressed with this interpretation of the address.

In any class struggle in America, the elites will win. I could see them wanting to initiate such a thing very soon, so they could win it with the greatest advantage. But as things go down hill that would become harder. Now is the time.

What they fear is not class struggle. They fear collapse. They can manage the former, I think they've lost hold on the latter. A good-old-fashion civil war might serve their requirements nicely, driving common folk deeper into poverty, disarray and political disconnect.

They want Feudalism and slavery. Class struggle is our destiny. But there is no telling what a collapse would bring from the ashes. So they won't go there.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:03 | 1413760 mynhair

Cat, how will they prevent a collapse? Keep kicking the can?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:22 | 1413821 WaterWings

The ONLY thing that matters in the end is Western military supremacy - the US can collapse as long as it does so LAST.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 21:32 | 1414214 hedgeless_horseman

...or as long as it does so LEAST.

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 05:02 | 1414763 WaterWings

Touche!

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:34 | 1413841 cougar_w

There is a point past which the "can" can do as it pleases, it won't have mattered any more. The elites would very much like to keep the music playing a while longer -- a few years, a decade maybe -- after which it simply will not matter any more to them for they will have completely rewritten the rules to suit them.

The economy we are so worried about is a fantasy, born during the last decades of the Industrial Revolution, which is about to play itself out and take our "economy" with it. There are other ways for rich people to stay rich, and those ways worked for thousands of years before James Watt or Henry Ford showed up. They don't need us to participate and they don't need our 401K to suck blood from, they need us to remain predictable and easy to herd around, easily distracted, and ultimately too afraid to embrace the whirlwind of looming disaster.

I say, bring the disaster if that's what they are so afraid of. At the bottom of that fall, we are all of us once again simply men.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:38 | 1413890 mynhair

But I'm a feline, and peeps might try to eat me......

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:52 | 1413924 cougar_w

Fey. Our ancestors ate their ancestors for 5 million years straight. It's such a wonderful idea I'm writing an entire book on the subject.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 22:01 | 1414287 topcallingtroll

Next to bacillum, the feline and ursus families have historically been the biggest threat to homo, well, except other homos.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:16 | 1413816 carbonmutant

Some states will assert their rights sooner than others...

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:35 | 1413873 cougar_w

That's an interesting point.

I wonder if a break-up of the USA into regions or even sovereign states is in their interests? I've never thought about it before, but my first instinct is that this would suit regional strongmen and not the elites we are dealing with now. So it sets up a power struggle that would be interesting to watch.

I'd expect that the centralized elites would bring in the traditional Army and HLS to "quell disorder" as an end-run around the regional strongmen who will be playing the "states' rights" card among their people. Clash of the titans, sort of thing. They would both wrap themselves in the American flag claiming that they are just protecting freedoms from godless anarchists and Fascism, while both are actually angling for the same thing: Absolute power.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 22:20 | 1414338 mayhem_korner

Agreed. I believe that sufficient defense and bona-fide trade are the only two stumbling blocks to TX telling the US of A to pound sand. At least their border is protected by water to the south and compatible ideologies in neighboring states (esp. OK).

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:22 | 1413840 Rollerball

They want revolution to tighten their grip and they'll push as hard as they have to to get it. Or, in the words of a famous pure(in)bred reptile: "... go ahead, make my day" ...

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:03 | 1413982 sun tzu

The problem is that you and your ilk count people making $250K a year as elite and rich. In Clownifornia, anyone with $46,000 of taxable income is in the highest state income tax bracket. I count the "rich" as those making at least $10 million a year.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:57 | 1413747 rsnoble

Let's see, the rich comprise less than 1% and own 90% of everything. Personally I have no problem taxing these fucks to death.

Of course ill always be lectured by the over educated $8hr Mcdonald's clown on why it's wrong and why capitalism is so great. Ha, Fuck you moron.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:06 | 1413771 mynhair

Tax them on what? How do you define ill-gotten Ponzi gains?

Maybe just tax them for breathing? They made the tax laws, moron!

You're pissing up a rope.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:43 | 1413885 bob_dabolina

I think you're just jealous because you're not in the 1%

I'm gona' pull the Rockefeller card here. He was a rich and powerful motherfucker right? He came from a poor family and started out as a clerk. You know what he did? He saw an opportunity, he made the right decisions, and he was cunning. The US at one point encouraged that type of behavior and it helped make us a superpower.

In Russia/China you know how they got there? It's all about who you know, and who your parents know. That's what seperated us. You could be a schlep on the street, see an oppourtunity, and HAVE the oppourtunity to become rich and powerful. Now a days, it's more about who you know in government, and who can wright laws in your favor. That's what's unfortunate.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:43 | 1414093 Rynak

Envy may be a reason to argue this way.

Another reason would simply be one against hording. It is mathematically impossible to "reward" someone infinitely.... there must be a cap.... and that cap should not be "He owns half of the nation".

Rightwing capitalistas need to get into their head, that capital is a limited ressource, and that the actual point of "rewarding" success, is not the reward itself, but instead a mechanic to encourage competition *in a defined range*.... for free market capitalism, as well as ressource distribution to work at all, wealth may not rise or drop infinitely per agent.... if it drops too low, entry to the market is removed.... and if it goes too high, you get hording and monopoly issues... for the premises of a free market (rather than blind darwinism) to be functional at all, there must be upper and lower bounds..... not primarily for the sake of "socialism" but instead to prevent the market from going totally out of balance.

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 01:46 | 1414631 WeekendAtBernankes

Leftwing communistas need to get into their head [sic], that free market capitalism is not a zero-sum game. If it was, we never would've made it out of agrarianism.

You think someone actually "awards" success? Your delusions about the powers of government have left your mind feeble and incapable of rational, imaginative thought. We're talking the creation of wealth here. Get it? Creation. The government isn't like, "Good idea, here is a reward so we can encourage competition."

In fact, when government attempts what you suggest, it fucks it up royally and never achieves the results you assert.

FFS man, they've done left you retarded. How does it feel to voluntarily think inside the box your master's made for you?

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 07:51 | 1414894 Rynak

You disagree with caps..... so you consider it acceptable, that a single person could - if he does all the right decisions... own an entire country.... heck, why not half of the planet. Which will then give him the ability to do even more than govs and banks can do now.

BUT, i'm sure you're totally against "fascist kleptocracy oligarchic crony capitalism", you fucking hypocrite.

Capatalists who do not believe in bounds == The same elitist assholes as those now, just with a different paintjob.

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 12:27 | 1415861 WeekendAtBernankes

I'm "totally against 'fascist kleptocracy oligarchi crony capitalism', you fucking [moron]."

Nice try, but that's not free market capitalism. Not even close. I'd break it down for you point by point but you don't even know what those words mean, you've just seen them around and pasted them here in a string.

I think I shall hereafter call you Cockholster.

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 12:29 | 1415871 WeekendAtBernankes

Also, you forgot to answer the question, I'll ask again:

How does it feel to voluntarily think inside the box your master's made for you?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:48 | 1414108 topcallingtroll

+ 10000000

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 21:02 | 1414132 Freddie

Wasn't Rockefeller and JP Morgan - puppets for the Rothschilds (and still are)?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:06 | 1413988 sun tzu

You'll always be lectured by the $8/hr Mcdonald's clown because he's your supervisor. Go mop the floors you fucking retard

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 22:18 | 1414333 disabledvet

i thought i told you to put your pants on?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:57 | 1413750 HeyNav

You don't cure an alcoholic by giving him more to drink. In the same manner we cannot fix our budget problems by taxing "the rich" and companies to death. Revenue is not the problem...buying votes of the ever growing ranks of the "dependent class" is the problem! Before raising taxes one red cent the government MUST take the following steps:

1. Stop paying for illegals! No more free healthcare, no more free education to children of illegals (regardless of where they are born), no more food stamps...nothing but a bus ticket back to their country of origin (and then send that country a bill for the ticket)

2. Absolutely NO WELFARE for 3rd generation welfare recipients. That's right...if your parents and grandparents spent their lives on welfare then YOU don't get any. If 1 generation out of 3 can't do something productive then your DNA is obvioulsly defective and should be removed from the gene pool

3. A balanced budget MUST be submitted each year. Deficit spending should only be undertaken in the event of a natural catastrophe or war.

And for those of you who think balancing the budget is merely a matter of making the rich pay more, you could take every penney everyone who earns over a million dollars a year makes and it would be a drop in the bucket! Of course, the next year all those peolple will have moved away so then where do you stand?

Wake up ans smell the coffee. Obama has no interest whatsoever in reducing the debt because his goal is to bankrupt the economy, forcing us into a "world economy" ruled by his puppet master...George Soros.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:05 | 1413769 rsnoble

I'm so glad some of you are totally unaware of social unrest. Sure, cut 30% of the population off everything. Then send them to a job that doesn't exist. Pure genius you stupid fuck.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:11 | 1413786 mynhair

So go ahead and vote for the Squirrel again. Nobody is stopping you.

That is the point. You can be as stupid as you want to be, but you, as a Lib, are totally intolerant.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:19 | 1413828 topcallingtroll

We are one of the gew countries that routinely puts our servant class on welfare and fake disability.

Plenty of servant jobs would open up if we just kicked those fuckers off the dole. I would hire at least one myself.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:52 | 1413926 Piranhanoia

They're just children. They know the sun revolves around them, and have never had to study any history in school. Ignorance is bliss.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:07 | 1413997 sun tzu

Give me money or I will riot and kill your family. You stupid retarded fuckhead

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 02:10 | 1414650 WeekendAtBernankes

God damn, I love your style

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:25 | 1413850 Misstrial

Thing is the courts are involved with Numbers 1 and 2 and even if the executive and legislative branches changed the laws as you advocate tomorrow, there are enough judges whose ideology is set in stone that these laws will never be rescinded.

Its the judges and/or justices.

~Misstrial

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:42 | 1413889 chet

Whatever your feeling on welfare, those programs are a relatively small part of the overall budget. Social Security, Medicare and Defense are the big ones.

So cut welfare if you want. Now you've got some large segment of the population in more dire circumstances plus you still haven't come close to solving the fiscal problem.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:41 | 1413902 mynhair

A good point. The EPA suks up more money and does more damage.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:04 | 1413985 chet

Actually the EPA is a much smaller slice of the budget than welfare.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:10 | 1413993 mynhair

Not in damage done.

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 02:53 | 1414684 Urban Redneck

The EPA is choke-point on job creation, by eliminating the relatively small expense of the EPA, the tax revenue expands by significantly more than the cost reduction. Eliminating the EPA is a 10-bagger on the road to balancing the budget.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:04 | 1413967 JW n FL

by HeyNav
on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 18:57
#1413750

3. A balanced budget MUST be submitted each year. Deficit spending should only be undertaken in the event of a natural catastrophe or war.

**************************************************************
**************************************************************

Top 10% of America's farms collect 75% of federal farm subsidies http://www.ewg.org/farmsubsidies

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-hadro/2011/06/29/anderson-cooper-again-hits-bachmann-over-farm-subsidies-lead-segment-cnn

For the second night in a row, Anderson Cooper opened his regular news cast Tuesday touting a story about Michele Bachmann's hypocrisy in benefitting from federal agriculture subsidies. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvf_vXrLZGs Rockefeller Gets Farm Subsidies From Taxpayers

Boehner Cuts Spending for the Poor! Gives Tax Breaks to the Rich! http://goo.gl/UMDm4 $28M Lobby Whore http://goo.gl/J8WwZ

Senate Republicans blocked a Democratic Bill to End tax Breaks for Moving U.S. Jobs Offshore! http://goo.gl/6qhnK

Republican committee voted for a 18-month delay of regulations to reduce risk in OTC Derivatives. http://goo.gl/4IYGP

Republican Senate Campaign Contribution Monies from Government Military Contractors with Free Speech Argument http://goo.gl/35V9l

Republicans! Stealing $2.5 surplus from Social Security - Robbing The Middle Class http://goo.gl/m8QMq

Republican Tax Cuts! General Electric $14.2B Profits, Pays $0 in US Taxes http://goo.gl/cgg4O $39M Lobby http://goo.gl/rZLDY

Top 10 corporations which paid no taxes

Here is Sen. Sanders’ list of the 10 worst corporate income tax avoiders:

http://www.greenpartywatch.org/2011/04/30/top-10-corporations-who-paid-no-taxes/

and...

‘Dutch Sandwich’ saves Google billions in taxes Internet giant uses complex structure to keep its overseas tax rate at 2.4%

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39784907/ns/business-us_business/t/dutch-sandwich-saves-google-billions-taxes/

and..

Microsoft’s purchase of Skype for $8.5 billion provides a perfect illustration of why adopting a true worldwide corporate income tax system is critical to our economic future.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the cash for Microsoft’s purchase of Skype (a Luxembourg-based company) will come out of its $42 billion in liquid assets held in foreign subsidiaries.

Because it is purchasing a foreign company with its overseas assets, Microsoft can avoid paying any U.S. tax that would be due if it had repatriated foreign earnings in order to purchase a US company for the same amount. Based on the company's effective foreign income tax rate disclosed in their most recent SEC filings, a repatriation of $8.5 billion dollars would cost Microsoft somewhere in the neighborhood of $1.1 billion in U.S. tax.

As a Forbes commentator opines, the Microsoft-Skype deal demonstrates the harmful incentive created in our current system that encourages companies to invest in overseas companies rather than domestic ones. The fear is that this deal may just be “a harbinger of things to come.”

http://www.ctj.org/taxjusticedigest/archive/federal_tax_issues/tax_avoidance_tax_evasion_and/offshore_abuses/

Republicans to roll out new tax-cut proposal: WSJ
25 May 2011, by Michael Kitchen - Los Angeles (MarketWatch)
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/republicans-to-roll-out-new-tax-cut-proposal-wsj-2011-05-25

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives are set to unveil a new economic proposal Thursday that will cut taxes for multinational corporations and lower other tax rates.

1) House and Senate Renew PATRIOT Act With No Modifications
2) National Security Letters Increasingly Used on Americans
3) Proposed Senate Bill Would Add Civil Liberties Protections
4) Senators Raise Concerns on DOJ's Interpretation of PATRIOT

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 02:58 | 1414687 Urban Redneck

Means testing transfer payments (individual and corporate) is one those issues that can be addressed by a SINGLE PAGE piece of legislation. Too bad Congress is bought and paid for the very recipients who need to be means tested out of the programs.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:04 | 1413751 vegas

[O] One [B] Big [A] Ass [M] Mistake [A] Amerika

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 01:16 | 1414592 Joseph Jones

Yes, true dat. But for persons who might have preferred McCain/Palin, certainly those two Republicraps would have invaded Iran by now, no?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:03 | 1413756 purple

So ZH aligns itself with the WSJ editorial board. Nice.

Good to see what side of the barricades you all sit.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:05 | 1413777 Tyler Durden

You are very observant of our affiliation with the "WSJ editorial board", despite pieces such as:

Blatant WSJ Revisionism Redlined

and:

On The New York Fed's Editorial Influence Over The WSJ

But you are absolutely right. Someone said it best 20 centuries ago: if you are not with us, you are against us.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:33 | 1413868 JW n FL

it is easier to kill them, than suffer educating them.. you see.

http://vimeo.com/6475921

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:49 | 1413912 Greeny

"He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters." Matthew 12:30 === Don't think it's appropriate in the current case. We are talking about dirty things here, nothing to do with the actual statement above...

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:14 | 1414010 JW n FL

we are talking about striking down the Lobby / Lobby Whores / Bankers / Money Changers..

Righteous Kills, ALL!

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 21:22 | 1414196 XenoFrog

Ah yes, the notorious "money changers"...

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 07:34 | 1414611 Mad Cow

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:04 | 1413763 nwskii

When the Federal Government spends $56,000 to fly Obama 110 miles that should be labeled as misuse of TaxPayers funds. Obama is blowing money on vacations for him, his wife, golfing, dinners I could go on and on. He clearly knows the shit is going to hit the fan and he doesnt give a shit.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:24 | 1413831 Stax Edwards

Seriously, this is the shit that keeps you up at night? WTF? Blowing money on Dinners? Isnt Dancing with the stars on tonight?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:34 | 1413865 topcallingtroll

Hypocrisy and character are noted in the small details.

Yes it is important considering he called me a jet owning plutocrat and I dont even have the money right now to put two kids through Harvard at the full price.

Obamao is a hypocrite

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:44 | 1413897 JW n FL

you could buy a used Lear and fly yourself (with a buddy co-pilot).. of course you couldnt afford to fuel it.. or park it.. or wash it.. or tires..

any way.. buddy.. it us verse them.. they are trying to find common ground with the middle! that they are going to ass rape tax wise going forward so that the top 1% does not have to pay taxes.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:48 | 1413917 JW n FL

Top 10 corporations which paid no taxes

Here is Sen. Sanders’ list of the 10 worst corporate income tax avoiders:

http://www.greenpartywatch.org/2011/04/30/top-10-corporations-who-paid-no-taxes/

and...

‘Dutch Sandwich’ saves Google billions in taxes Internet giant uses complex structure to keep its overseas tax rate at 2.4%

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39784907/ns/business-us_business/t/dutch-sandwich-saves-google-billions-taxes/

and..

Microsoft’s purchase of Skype for $8.5 billion provides a perfect illustration of why adopting a true worldwide corporate income tax system is critical to our economic future.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the cash for Microsoft’s purchase of Skype (a Luxembourg-based company) will come out of its $42 billion in liquid assets held in foreign subsidiaries.

http://www.ctj.org/taxjusticedigest/archive/federal_tax_issues/tax_avoidance_tax_evasion_and/offshore_abuses/

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives are set to unveil a new economic proposal Thursday that will cut taxes for multinational corporations and lower other tax rates.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:39 | 1413994 topcallingtroll

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:12 | 1413998 topcallingtroll

But 250,000 per year is not the top one percent.

Top one percent is around 400,000 per year. Sure tax them a bit more. I would support you. The simplest thing is to tax all income at the same rate, earned and unearned.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:16 | 1414014 JW n FL

everyone on the top 10 list needs to go.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:22 | 1414034 topcallingtroll

I could support expanding it to the top 500 people. Bring on the guillotines!

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:53 | 1413918 Stax Edwards

Oh, in that case boo fucking hoo pigman troll

You have got to be f'n kidding me

WTF? Its like the twilight zone over here

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:20 | 1414028 topcallingtroll

Hypocrisy is obvious in obamao.

Actually I probably could afford it, but couldnt buy a new car or eat out as often or take a fancy vacation. Ive never been a hypocrite about it at least.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:00 | 1413945 Rynak

(repost)

Rather quick putting someone in the same category as the sheeple, hmm?

There is more than one way to interprete the excessive spending of politicians:

1) Envy. This is compatible with class warfare.

2) Naively believing, that those expenses are actually significant to the entire state budget. This too is someway compatible with class warfare, but less.

3) Considering it a representative example, of how those people have no issues with burdening the population, yet never themselves accepting compromises for themselves and their lobby-friends.

Number 3 is actually a pattern that even repeats in normal corporations. I vaguely remember an example of this, from a few years ago. A bunch of big german corporations were broke, and were asking the state for a bailout. When a meeting was held, to discuss this with gov representatives, the first thing the main gov representative did, was to ask the CEOs: "Whom of you came here via corporate jets?". Then, he threw everyone out of the meeting, who did so.

This behaviour pattern is linked to an article, which Gonzo wrote a few days ago: http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2011/06/ibgybg-owning-vs-managingdemocra...

....which in turn is linked to my recent comments, which proposed that governing parties of nations, should not just manage the nations capital, but actually have a stake in it.... so, ruin state finances, and your own party also is ruined - i.e. by in future terms having less ability to spend.... which can in extreme cases get so far, that a party becomes permanently unable to govern..... R.I.P.

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 03:08 | 1414692 Urban Redneck

It costs a hell of a lot more than $56,000 to fly Obama 110 miles. That number is just as BS as the crap that comes out of the BLS. It is not just a basic model incorporating labor and fuel for a single airplane, it's actually the annual operating budget of an entire air wing and the advance planning departments within the Secret Service and DoD divided between all the President's trips that year. $500,000 would be closer to the actual expense than $56,000.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:04 | 1413764 Reptil

Summary: "Aaaaaaand it's gone."

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:12 | 1413778 nodoctor

I wanted to be sarcastic and say how awesome the contrapositive of this:

"If investors chose not to purchase a sufficient volume of new Treasury securities, the United States would be required to pay the principal on maturing debt, and not merely the interest, out of available cash. Yet the Treasury would be unable to make these principal payments without the continued confidence of market participants willing to buy new Treasury securities."

would be as a business model. The reality is, words fail me in the realization that not only did he submit this passage, but he used the word "confidence" in the relevant context. We are the damned.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:17 | 1413824 mynhair

Cluelessness rises to new levels under Jeetner, for sure. Are you asceered yet?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:43 | 1413892 Rynak

Rather quick putting someone in the same category as the sheeple, hmm?

There is more than ony way to interprete the excessive spending of politicians:

1) Envy. This is compatible with class warfare.

2) Naively believing, that those expenses are actually significant to the entire state budget. This too is someway compatible with class warfare, but less.

3) Considering it a representative example, of how those people have no issues with burdening the population, yet never themselves accepting compromises for themselves and their lobby-friends.

This behaviour pattern is linked to an article, which Gonzo wrote a few days ago: http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2011/06/ibgybg-owning-vs-managingdemocra...

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:48 | 1413913 mynhair

I take it this was a response to a prior post, so yes Rynak, you are a sheeple.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:54 | 1413941 Rynak

Yes, the reply was supposed to address someone else.... namely, the post of "Stax Edwards" above: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/obama-redirects-broke-us-government-pla...

As for you..... you're just a republican who posts a lot of one-liner flames.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:02 | 1413958 mynhair

Drink more. It's 1929! And please, never vote.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:09 | 1413972 Rynak

I have never ever voted, because i considered representative democracy pointless already when long ago, i passed the legal age to vote :-)

You? :)

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:58 | 1413942 JW n FL

Top 10 corporations which paid no taxes

Here is Sen. Sanders’ list of the 10 worst corporate income tax avoiders:

http://www.greenpartywatch.org/2011/04/30/top-10-corporations-who-paid-no-taxes/

and...

‘Dutch Sandwich’ saves Google billions in taxes Internet giant uses complex structure to keep its overseas tax rate at 2.4%

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39784907/ns/business-us_business/t/dutch-sandwich-saves-google-billions-taxes/

and..

Microsoft’s purchase of Skype for $8.5 billion provides a perfect illustration of why adopting a true worldwide corporate income tax system is critical to our economic future.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the cash for Microsoft’s purchase of Skype (a Luxembourg-based company) will come out of its $42 billion in liquid assets held in foreign subsidiaries.

http://www.ctj.org/taxjusticedigest/archive/federal_tax_issues/tax_avoidance_tax_evasion_and/offshore_abuses/

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives are set to unveil a new economic proposal Thursday that will cut taxes for multinational corporations and lower other tax rates.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:01 | 1413968 mynhair

You forgot those companies issuing debt to pay dividends. All based on overseas profits.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 21:27 | 1414212 XenoFrog

Spam some more.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 23:26 | 1414439 JW n FL

as compared to your line line of drivel? really? I understand you are not capable of much, it is not your fault.. your are a woman, you are from the shallow end of the pool and those things are not your fault.. it is not your fault, just keep saying that to yourself and you will feel better.

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 01:19 | 1414591 XenoFrog

We'd actually agree on this issue, if you weren't spamming the article with the same copy pasted shit over and over. Maybe you should take a class down at the community center on how to communicate effectively.

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 01:02 | 1414570 i-dog

"adopting a true worldwide corporate income tax system is critical to our economic future"

No, it's NOT!!

All we need is small government ... or, preferably, no fucking parasite government at all! The United States of America were doing just fine -- growing for nearly 300 years, from a few settlers to an industrial giant, with NO corporate taxes and NO income taxes AT ALL, prior to 1913.

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 02:59 | 1414690 AnAnonymous

The United States of America were doing just fine -- growing for nearly 300 years, from a few settlers to an industrial giant, with NO corporate taxes and NO income taxes AT ALL, prior to 1913.

And the Indian land transfer ended in 1898. Expansion has some advantages and it has some drawbacks.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:13 | 1413792 chet

Hmmm. So income inequality going exponential is bad. And progressive taxation is bad.

Quite a pickle.

I'm fine with raising their taxes. Reagan was fine with tax rates on upper incomes significantly higher than they are now. Was Reagan a Kenyan socialist? As soon as the rich stop waging class war on us, I'll stop waging class war on them.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:26 | 1413839 mynhair

Uh, tax rates were lower under Reagan, receipts were up.

Better find a better school.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:46 | 1413894 lizzy36

Since 1964, the U.S. debt had accelerated fastest under President Ronald Reagan, at an annualized growth rate of 14.18% -- a record held until Jan. 20, 2009.

Republicans Are Fiscal Conservatives

Since 1968, the U.S. debt had accelerated fastest under President Ronald Reagan until President Obama claimed this distinction. The national debt does not take inflation into account, so perhaps we should look at inflation-adjusted deficits instead.

From 1946-2010:

Democratic President

Total Years: 29
Average Inflation Adjusted Deficit: $150.73 billion

Republican President

Total Years: 36
Average Inflation Adjusted Deficit: $202.28 billion

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:58 | 1414123 nmewn

Presidents sign or veto...that's their only choices Lizzy...all he is, is the last line of defense against deficits & debt regarding the budget.

Congress passes the spending (the Senate & the House) nothing goes to him without their approval first...right now the House, which represents the people most broadly has both branches by the short hairs.

I hope they rip it out by the roots.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 21:35 | 1414222 hedgeless_horseman

Thanks for staying sober.

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 00:03 | 1414501 slewie the pi-rat

this is kinda funny b/c i have a friend who is canadian. i was breaking up a LTR and sleeping on his couch while i found a new place during the bush-gore insanity. he would follow everything and talk to friends and people he worked with, then he would "explain" it to me, and i would think everything he said was wrong.

i thought i would wring his neck just over the electoral college! and i was his guest! then i realized there were a few things i didn't know, too, of course,...

i think the president sends the budget to the congress, where they render it unrecognizable with jimmy dean products and then the pres gets it back and can either veto the whole thing or pass it.

The Budget | The White House

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 06:54 | 1414833 nmewn

"i think the president sends the budget to the congress..."

It is a budget proposal he sends...it is a request to spend X. Usually, his request contains no cuts in spending...baseline budgeting...meaning, the size of the budget (thus departments/government) stays at least the same as in the last fiscal year.

In the normal course of events there are several budget proposals circling around.

On the electoral college...that is a subject worth an entire article.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:44 | 1413914 chet

The top marginal tax rate was 50% during most of his presidency and 38.5% during his last year. It is now 35%.

Before you accuse someone of being poorly educated, you should do a quick Google. Otherwise you might look foolish.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:47 | 1413922 mynhair

28% was the top rate when I had to pay it. Google is not a source worth mentioning. Might as well use Wikipedia.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:52 | 1413936 Stax Edwards

Twilight zone I tell you

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:56 | 1413953 chet

Google isn't a source. Google leads one to other sources. What are you a caveman?

But in this case, I did make a mistake. 28% was the top rate during Reagan's last year. 38% the year before that. 50% for five years before that.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:12 | 1413983 mynhair

Thank you. Try following the Google for Maurice Strong. Does Quadrangle always show up for you?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 21:18 | 1414187 Conchy Joe

A 50% rate for anyone is assinine!

Seriously when did working half a year to pay for government services become sensable?

Does that number factor in the multitude of taxes levied into the things they buy with the money they do get to keep?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:09 | 1413793 Catullus

You could always stop paying interest on treasury bonds held at the Fed

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:16 | 1413803 razorthin

Revenue? This stuck pig is drained dry. Oh, you mean a recall on the clown bux? I'd go for that.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:18 | 1413808 slewie the pi-rat

timmah sez:
You don’t have much choice if you charge something on your credit card. You have to pay it, and that’s effectively what this debt limit is … we’ve already spent the money. The question is now, do we shut down the government, or do we fund what we’ve already done.

slewie sez: shut the bad boy d-000,000,000,000,000,000-w-n.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:22 | 1413837 razorthin

That's right, and BLOW ME! (down).

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:17 | 1413823 nodoctor

Is it possible that the trendspotters at the DIA and the risk analysts at the NSA have read the tea leaves and have submitted reports positing that for Gen X and younger the perception is that the American Dream is dead; and so perception becomes reality - consumption in the next forty or so years will never again catch the pace of the last forty? Therefore even if the private sector were loosened - even with lower taxes, even with less regulation, even with more freedom - the American consumer would not respond as required, Ipods be damned. Therefore the only way to ensure growth is to capture and command as much of the economy as possible.

Why else are they not ashamed of 40% debt spending? How else can Timmah say things like "we have to raise taxes so we don't risk cutting government"?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:24 | 1413846 topcallingtroll

Loosening regulation and freeing the private sector is always a good thing even in a nonconsumer oriented economy. Here is why.

If gen x were able to live in a more productive economy they could save the money if they arent interested in a consumer lifestyle, or just work less.

Improving productivity is always good even if spending.does not increase commensurately.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:36 | 1413870 razorthin

That's right, and you can do practically everything on an iPad. There's an app for that.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:21 | 1413829 Joebloinvestor

When in doubt, start some class warfare.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:47 | 1413844 michigan independant

Taxes are necessary. But the system of discriminatory taxation universally accepted under the misleading name of progressive taxation of income and inheritance is not a mode of taxation. It is rather a mode of disguised expropriation of the successful capitalists and entrepreneurs. Whatever the governments' satellites may advance in its favor, it is incompatible with the preservation of the market economy. It can at best be considered a means of bringing about socialism. Looking backward on the evolution of income tax rates from the beginning of the Federal income tax in 1913 until the present day, one can hardly believe that the tax will not soon absorb to 100 per cent of all surplus above the customary level of a labor-union leader's salary. Economics is not concerned with the spurious metaphysical doctrines advanced in favor of tax progression, but with its repercussions on the operation of the market economy.

The fact of matter is they are incompetant to preserve a market.

The question is now, do we shut down the government, or do we fund what we’ve already done.

http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/debt_deficit_brief.php

LVM

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:53 | 1413929 JW n FL

Top 10 corporations which paid no taxes

Here is Sen. Sanders’ list of the 10 worst corporate income tax avoiders:

http://www.greenpartywatch.org/2011/04/30/top-10-corporations-who-paid-no-taxes/

and...

‘Dutch Sandwich’ saves Google billions in taxes Internet giant uses complex structure to keep its overseas tax rate at 2.4%

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39784907/ns/business-us_business/t/dutch-sandwich-saves-google-billions-taxes/

and..

Microsoft’s purchase of Skype for $8.5 billion provides a perfect illustration of why adopting a true worldwide corporate income tax system is critical to our economic future.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the cash for Microsoft’s purchase of Skype (a Luxembourg-based company) will come out of its $42 billion in liquid assets held in foreign subsidiaries.

http://www.ctj.org/taxjusticedigest/archive/federal_tax_issues/tax_avoidance_tax_evasion_and/offshore_abuses/

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives are set to unveil a new economic proposal Thursday that will cut taxes for multinational corporations and lower other tax rates.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:28 | 1413845 putbuyer

Barry, the big dummy does not even know the age of his oldest daughter. Today he said she is 13 - AH! no bozo, she is 12.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:28 | 1413859 ebworthen

"Obama wants class warfare? Well he got it: Americans vs their elitist, corrupt, irresponsible, thieving government"

Aye, and their crony capitalist henchmen.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:31 | 1413869 buzzsaw99

campaign time again. never a mention of this when they had both houses of congreff, now, with no hope of having to actually do anything he starts with this. hopey is one of them.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:31 | 1413871 Seasmoke

FOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRE Trillion

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:37 | 1413877 monopoly

Obama is digging his own grave with these absurd comments. Taxing the rich more adds pennies to the coffers. It is ridiculous. We have to stop Spending. I find it interesting that not one commentator, reporter or important figure has not advised Congress to take a pay cut as a good gesture. It will not add much to the till but would send the right message.

Most of these children in Congress are multi millionaires, and we give them salary, million dollar expense accounts, health insurance, perks, it is absurd. That would be a good place to start. Look, the system is broken, and until we pay the piper and stop delaying what we all know must happen, it is just going to get worse and be harder to come back from the brink. But since job one is getting re-elected, it is not going to happen until the markets force it upon us. Then, and not until, we will have the "funding crisis":. It will happen.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:54 | 1413931 JW n FL

Top 10 corporations which paid no taxes

Here is Sen. Sanders’ list of the 10 worst corporate income tax avoiders:

http://www.greenpartywatch.org/2011/04/30/top-10-corporations-who-paid-no-taxes/

and...

‘Dutch Sandwich’ saves Google billions in taxes Internet giant uses complex structure to keep its overseas tax rate at 2.4%

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39784907/ns/business-us_business/t/dutch-sandwich-saves-google-billions-taxes/

and..

Microsoft’s purchase of Skype for $8.5 billion provides a perfect illustration of why adopting a true worldwide corporate income tax system is critical to our economic future.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the cash for Microsoft’s purchase of Skype (a Luxembourg-based company) will come out of its $42 billion in liquid assets held in foreign subsidiaries.

http://www.ctj.org/taxjusticedigest/archive/federal_tax_issues/tax_avoidance_tax_evasion_and/offshore_abuses/

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives are set to unveil a new economic proposal Thursday that will cut taxes for multinational corporations and lower other tax rates.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:04 | 1413963 ebworthen

Yup.

Here are Obama's contributors (corporate masters): http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638

McCain's were little different; banks and corporations making sure We The People get screwed over, and over, and over, and...

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:19 | 1414024 JW n FL

they both need to be hung for Treason on the White House Lawn! Obama and McCain.

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 01:21 | 1414598 XenoFrog

Hanged for treason, not hung for treason. That would be pretty interesting porn title though.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:21 | 1414029 chunkylover42

You know what would be great? If you could post the same thing over and over in response to others' comments, despite the fact that nobody is commenting on your post.

Really adds to the discussion.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:46 | 1414105 cosmictrainwreck

yeah - no shit. and only takes up half a page per post.......

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:47 | 1414107 ebworthen

Wait, didn't you and I just comment?

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 23:24 | 1414442 JW n FL

lol

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:33 | 1413878 Piranhanoia

Tyler, start a companion site that deals with; "their last words before..." There are so many raving kleptos running loose that an angry populace is going to start "greeking" them on the street. As the news comes in, their name, the last totally ridiculous thing they said before the ax, and we should have a few thousand good reminders why we can't afford to have a politician involved in government again.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:43 | 1413895 John McCloy

Somebody should ask him under oath while he is busy paddling the "wealthy"
1. Did you or any of your aides have a conversation in which you authorized the Fed to activate the PPT to print and buy stocks? Were the primary dealers involved in the convo?
2. Is it coincidental that prior to th largest gain annum in history that you said" buy stocks they are cheap"?
3. Was an edict in private issued to the PDs by Bernanke and yourself that in exchange for free money you would not be permitted to sell equities in largesse for 10 plus years?
4. Was the discussion of third party equity purchasing ever discussed with the Fed?

We all know the answer to this. The rally began the day after Pres. Obama played Wall Street ball. Also is the president aware that Nancy Pelosi has more than doubled her stock maker gains since Bazooka Hank dropped to his knees and begged her to unlease tax payer capital?
Think about those questions..and one more thing was U2 playing " Where the Street Have no name" while she attended a concert last week while supposedly preoccupied with debt ceiling hikes that we know are a slammy?
I only ask this because soon the streets certainly will not have names.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:55 | 1413932 JW n FL

Top 10 corporations which paid no taxes

Here is Sen. Sanders’ list of the 10 worst corporate income tax avoiders:

http://www.greenpartywatch.org/2011/04/30/top-10-corporations-who-paid-no-taxes/

and...

‘Dutch Sandwich’ saves Google billions in taxes Internet giant uses complex structure to keep its overseas tax rate at 2.4%

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39784907/ns/business-us_business/t/dutch-sandwich-saves-google-billions-taxes/

and..

Microsoft’s purchase of Skype for $8.5 billion provides a perfect illustration of why adopting a true worldwide corporate income tax system is critical to our economic future.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the cash for Microsoft’s purchase of Skype (a Luxembourg-based company) will come out of its $42 billion in liquid assets held in foreign subsidiaries.

http://www.ctj.org/taxjusticedigest/archive/federal_tax_issues/tax_avoidance_tax_evasion_and/offshore_abuses/

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives are set to unveil a new economic proposal Thursday that will cut taxes for multinational corporations and lower other tax rates.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:47 | 1413908 ivana

Just a headfake.

Year or 2 later, you'll be calling it feudal, not federal government

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:55 | 1413934 cougar_w

That's my take on it.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:48 | 1413916 Alcoholic Nativ...

It's only natural to be mad at the rich in this kind of economic enviroment that totally favors them, where a vast fortune collecting interest can "produce" more income than really any other kind of labor.

I'm pro class warfare in this kind of enviroment. You would have to be an idiot or a shill to not see this.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:02 | 1413978 Stax Edwards

Finally some truth. When you see the hoopla in the media about the "death tax", you know it is all about aristocracy. By all means teach your children well, educate them, show them the way, but goddamn, let them learn to fly on their own, win or lose. The amounts of taxpayer largesse literally given to these pigmen and passed to their offspring can only be compared to royal aristocracy. Class warfare is right by god, and the first stone was tossed by the elite. The masses will awake one day very soon to the enslavement they have been born into

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:17 | 1414030 Yes_Questions

Sometimes there are enough rocks..

Thu, 06/30/2011 - 03:18 | 1414701 Urban Redneck

So you prefer ADM and the corporate oligarchy to family farms? Equating taxpayer largess with the absence of inheritance tax is irrational. It is not a gift from the taxpayer to property owner, it is simply the government not stealing wealth that has already been created and taxed. You deserve your enslavement to the corporate oligarchs.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:45 | 1413919 PulauHantu29

"More good news on the economic front as American consumer spending dropped to 20 month lows. I believe the bulls on the economy are officially extinct. Perhaps it is time to listen to the bears who have been right about the economy?"

http://expectedreturnsblog.com/economic-slowdown-underway/

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:49 | 1413920 Problem Is

"Barack Obama, as part of his earlier address to the nation, stressed that more revenue "must be part of any deficit-reduction deal" and criticized Republicans for protecting tax breaks for "millionaires and billionaires"

Obama Bin Lyin' The KING of Talking Out His Ass
Hey Barry Soetoro... when the Bush tax cuts came up in Dec. 2008... You went down on your knees faster than Monica Lewinsky to cave in and approve of more tax cuts for your puppet string holders Jamie & Lloyd... & Immelt...

Douche bag Soetoro... the White House has not seen such a bald face liar and disingenuous fucktard since "Dick" Nixon...

Obama Bin Lyin'
In the words of my friend Tom the Fisherman: "He's a worthless cock sucker..."

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:48 | 1413927 billwilson

Give an f###ing break!

Of course taxes on the rich have to go up. To deny that is to deny reality, or to be a Republican.

Next step take on the corporate welfare bums, with their "special" tax breaks.

Then cut defense and the military industrial complex.

Then the bankers.

Once those are done then we can talk about other stuff.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 19:59 | 1413961 topcallingtroll

No, taxes dont have to go up.

We could cut 50% of federal expenditures instead and cap medicaid and medicare payments.

Wed, 06/29/2011 - 20:26 | 1414041 lawrence1

You are, of course, Republican, basic defender of the status quo kleptocracy, ignoraling social and class issues. Probably a shrink employed by the government ... dont bite the hand that feeds you.

Obama Redirects From A Broke US Government By Playing The Class Warfare Card, Focuses On "Millionaires And Billionaires"

Comment viewing options