Regardless of the “fiscal cliff” issue – obAMATEUR WILL RAISE TAXES on EVERYONE Regardless of Income!!!

ObAMACARE is coming and it will affect EVERYONE regardless of income.  Open your wallets – BOHICA!

How soon does everyone forget! – especially the mindless drones of the DEMOCRATS and the WHITE HOUSE.

There is more to come!  Remember, “we have to pass the healthcare bill in order to see what is in it” – the former (fortunately for us) speaker from Haite-Ashbury.

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan:  A good point…if we let taxes rise then we’ll essentially just be sticking Americans with the bill for President Obama.  Obama cruised to re-election partially because taxes remained low while Obama went on a spending binge.  Now we have a chance to square accounts and let people know just what Obama and his Democrats are costing…and that might make people think differently in 2014 and 2016.  People thought that Hope and Change meant free stuff…well, it did…until now.

UPDATE II, by Mark Noonan:  One of the alleged worries about going over the fiscal cliff is that the mandated cuts in spending will force us in to recession.  One can only believe this sort of idiocy if one believes that government spending got us out of the Great Depression.  Of course, any reasonable observer of what happened – ie, the Great Depression continued in unabated force as both Hoover and FDR ramped up government spending – knows that government spending didn’t do a darned thing to help the American economy.  And its not doing anything to help, now – in fact, by grossly misallocating resources based upon purely political considerations, its likely making the economy worse.  For those, however, who want to persist in thinking that the spending cuts will harm the economy, here is a report showing that the “multiplier effect” of government spending is zero.

As for me, I believe we re-entered recession some months ago…and we’re back in recession because government tax and regulatory policy has crippled America’s productive capacity.  Here’s a news flash:  if you don’t make, mine and grow as much stuff as you used to, you won’t be as rich as you once were.  Period.  End of story.  The fix lies in changing the tax and regulatory stance of the government to be pro-growth…and to cut spending so that we don’t have a complete financial melt-down spinning us in to decades-long recession.

UPDATE III, by Mark Noonan:  The NY Post has an article about people, once told how much their taxes will rise, are getting upset.  Good.  Given that the biggest bite will be among people who live in blue areas of the country, it is only just that they pay the piper for their absurd vote for Obama.  Oh, to be sure, it’ll hit me, too…but I live in a low-tax State and so I’ll be hit less than New Yorkers and Californians.  Boys and girls, ultimately the 2012 election was all about the fiscal cliff – meaning how to deal with spending and taxes to deal with the gigantic bill Obama and his Democrats have run up since 2009.  That people preferred to concentrate on how mean Romney was because he was rich or wanted to talk about their lady parts or worried that birth control wouldn’t be “free” is not my problem…here is reality:  we’re broke.  Obama has bankrupted the United States – and its either take a huge hit in taxes or give up the free stuff.  Pick one.

A (Temporarily) Lost Debate

We certainly haven’t convinced a majority of our fellow Americans on this basic issue:

…Sixty percent in this ABC News/Washington Post poll support raising taxes on incomes more than $250,000 a year, long a popular option overall, but also a divisive one: While 73 percent of Democrats and 63 percent of independents are in favor, far fewer Republicans, 39 percent, agree…

…Sixty-seven percent in this poll…oppose another suggestion, raising the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67.  And on this idea, strong opposition surpasses strong support by more than 3-1, 49 to 14 percent…

So, at the end of the day, a solid majority are in favor of raising taxes on “the rich” while an even more solid majority are opposed to the basic, common-sense idea of raising the age of Medicare eligibility in order to preserve the Medicare system.  People are in favor of something which won’t help and opposed to something which would.  Whatever else we did in 2012, we utterly failed to make a dent on the issue of fiscal reform of the United States government.

I think our failure on taxes is that our absolute opposition to all tax increases has painted us in to a corner where Democrats (aided by the by-lined Democrats in the MSM) can label us as extreme.  To be sure, opposing tax increases has been, is and will remain a key GOP principal because we know that you can never feed the Big Government beast enough.  No matter how much money you give to it, it will be blown through and more demanded.  We’d have a $6 trillion a year budget if we hadn’t held the line on taxes all these years.  But one must not allow rigidity to overcome good sense – we should have seen four or more years ago that as long as there are people with more money than they know what to do with the Democrats would be able to successfully campaign on an “make the rich pay their fair share” slogan.  That most of these super-rich are liberals and that Democrat tax proposals will hit the super-rich lightly, if at all, is irrelevant: we handed them an issue and ideological rigidity against tax increases prevented us from a counter-offensive which can preserve low marginal rates (vital, as we know, for economic growth).  This is the genesis of my “wealth tax” proposal – a tax aimed at the very richest and not at productive capital, but at money just squirreled away in tax shelters of various types.  Had we come out with a wealth tax for the 2012 campaign it would have been us attacking Democrats and deflecting their attack on us – at worst, it would have been a wash and it may have worked out to our credit…and we’d be in a much stronger position right now to fight for lower marginal rates to be maintained.

Our failure on entitlement reform stems from the failure on taxes – as a party which has been successfully painted as defending low taxes for the rich, any and all reasonable reforms of entitlements can be (and have been) cast by the Democrats as a callous disregard for the poor and middle class by a party which is only interested in defending low taxes for the rich.  Yes, I know this isn’t true, at all – but it is how we’ve been painted and it is something we must change if we are to succeed.  Remember, Obama won’t be President forever – eventually we will be back in power.  When we get there if we haven’t convinced a majority of Americans to back us on entitlement reform then there’s no point in winning.  If we don’t reform entitlements then even if we some how manage to avoid fiscal collapse in the next five years or so then we are still absolutely stuck with the fact that entitlements will soon eat up almost all government revenues.  That is unsustainable.  But we can’t offer ourselves as reformers of entitlements until the people trust us as defenders of the poor and the middle class.  That we already are (no greater enemy of the poor and middle class than a tax hiking, entitlement expanding liberal who pretends there is no crisis), but the people don’t know it – don’t understand it; don’t buy it.

To get the people firmly on our side we have to be seen as firmly on their side.  To be sure, it is almost certain that things will just get worse and worse as Obama’s 2nd term unfolds.  Nothing which was wrong in 2008 has been fixed and nothing will be fixed as long as Obama is President – he’s apparently unaware of the problems or just doesn’t care about them.  Whatever the case, the problems won’t be solved.  But it won’t be enough for us to just be “not the Democrats”…we have to be seen as something which will change the course from the Democrats and in a manner which is easily understood as helping the poor and middle class.  This, in turn, requires a ruthless turning away from big business, from those who have, and a relentless pointing out of the plight of the poor and the middle class and a relentless education of the same that it is the Democrats who have, on purpose, done all this to them.  My “wealth tax” proposal is one method.  Another is to go gangbusters, once again, for school choice.  Yet another is to point out that Uncle Sam can use Medicare money to help people take care of their old folks rather than shoving them off – at twice the cost – to sub-standard nursing homes (and telling oldsters and their kids that we’re going to keep them at home will resonate as more and more people get old).  On and on like that – show them that we are not for the rich, that we are for the poor and the middle class…that we will get them better results without taking anything away (do not campaign against “free stuff” – in time, with rational economic policies, less and less free stuff will be needed until we reach a tipping point where only a tiny minority is getting free stuff…but if you go out there and complain about the free stuff then all you do is automatically alienate everyone who is getting free stuff…including those who would rather not but just don’t see any other way: really, we have to stop being the Stupid Party and learn how to play a long game).

Its either become the party of the people, or perish. Our choice.  We’ll see what we decide.

Is Obama Serious About Avoiding the “Fiscal Cliff”?

There is an argument to be made that he doesn’t care if it does happen – from Zero Hedge:

…Here is why our leader has no desire to settle this affair before it gets put into effect.

  • It will impose tax hikes on everyone who pays federal income taxes (not just the 2%)
  • It will cut entitlements without his having to support the actions
  • It will reduce defense spending without him ‘looking soft’ as Commander-in-Chief
  • It will end the ‘Bush Tax Cuts’ automatically
  • It will probably slow economic growth (GDP)

Why would our President want these things to take place?

  • He would get the extra tax revenues to use without being blamed
  • He could not be held accountable for breaking his ubiquitous pledge to never raise taxes on the bottom 98%
  • He would not be the one cutting entitlements, it would be ‘out of his hands’
  • He prefers to cut defense spending rather than social programs
  • He can later ‘give back’ tax cuts to the Middle Class
  • He can then call them the ‘Obama Tax Cuts’
  • He can blame those damn ‘Obstructionist Republicans’ for the next recession

For B-Rock the Sequestration is a ‘Dream Act’ to accomplish many of his goals and dreams without any accountability. Every negative can be blamed on the Republicans even as he allows his stated preferences to be overridden by the forced actions imposed on him…

There is some sense to that.  Especially if, as I believe, we’re heading in to recession, anyway.  Perhaps Obama’s number-crunchers have told him that a period of recession in 2013 is unavoidable, cliff or no, and so might as well make certain a crisis never goes to waste.  Deadlock now means the Bush tax are gone for good, defense is heavily cut and we actually do reduce our deficit all without Obama taking the blame.  You know the MSM would spend the next year blaming every last thing on the GOP.

We’ll have to see, of course – if Obama actually does give in some meaningful way on tax and entitlement reform then we’ll know he’s interested in the fate of the nation.  If he stands firm and won’t do anything unless the GOP agrees to specifically increase tax rates without any serious entitlement or tax reform, then we’ll know he’s ok with us going over the cliff.