Insane Obama Budget

[Andy]

Obama Officials Defend Budget

Two of the administration's top economic officials defended President Obama's $3.6 trillion budget plan yesterday, arguing that the proposal would finance a historic investment in critical economic priorities while restoring balance to a tax code tipped in favor of the wealthy.

Right....

Ok let's think this through a little bit.
Last year, for the entire year, government revenue was only $2.7 Trillion dollars.
Now, since we're in the middle of a fairly good size resession, what are the chances our tax revenues are going to increase by $1 Trillion in under a years time? Any guesses?

So what's the new "hope & change" plan? $3.6 Trillion in government spending. And this doesn't include the $1 Trillion in porkulus additional spending.

Oh and about that tax code tipped in favor of the wealthy...

Top 1% pays 39.89% of all taxes

Top 5% pays 60.14% of all taxes

Top 25% pays 86.27% of all taxes

Top 50% pays 97.01% of all taxes

Bottom 50% pays 2.99% of all taxes

How awful! Those evil top 5% of wage earners are paying 60% of all taxes! Darn those rich people. How could this be anymore tipped in favor of them! 5% of America ONLY paying 60% of all taxes. Awful I tell you!

 

[Pandora]

Obama Officials Defend Budget

​

Right....

Ok let's think this through a little bit.
Last year, for the entire year, government revenue was only $2.7 Trillion dollars.
Now, since we're in the middle of a fairly good size resession, what are the chances our tax revenues are going to increase by $1 Trillion in under a years time? Any guesses?

So what's the new "hope & change" plan? $3.6 Trillion in government spending. And this doesn't include the $1 Trillion in porkulus additional spending.

Oh and about that tax code tipped in favor of the wealthy...

Top 1% pays 39.89% of all taxes

Top 5% pays 60.14% of all taxes

Top 25% pays 86.27% of all taxes

Top 50% pays 97.01% of all taxes

Bottom 50% pays 2.99% of all taxes

How awful! Those evil top 5% of wage earners are paying 60% of all taxes! Darn those rich people. How could this be anymore tipped in favor of them! 5% of America ONLY paying 60% of all taxes. Awful I tell you!

you know there is another group. those who not only do not pay taxes they actually get money instead. EIC

 

[Andy]

you know there is another group. those who not only do not pay taxes they actually get money instead. EIC

Yes depending on how you look at it. On a purely base level, everyone pays tons of taxes. But from a political stand point there are those that pays zero tax, and get money back.

The reality is everyone is paying tons of taxes. We pay taxes on our cell phones, taxes on our cars, taxes on our food, taxes on our 401Ks. We even pay taxes on money we never had. I had to pay off a credit card, and they let me out of $3000 I owed. Guess what! The IRS considers that income! I had to pay an extra $450 in taxes!

But even with payroll taxes, everyone still pays much more than they get back, even if they pay zero "income" tax. Social Security sucked more than $1000 in taxes, even though I only made $20,000. And that doesn't include Medicare. Not to mention that Social Security takes money from you on the Employer side of the check.

So really, everyone pays taxes... a lot of taxes. And soon we'll be paying more taxes! $787 Billion, plus an extra $400 Billion budget in taxes!

I read an article recently that talked about a state that was way over budget, and the governor said "we have to think up new creative ways to raise money!"... er... whatever happen to "new creative ways to cut spending!"????

 

[Pidgey]

You might find this one interesting--did this graph based on the WIKI data here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States

What the graph below:

...illustrates is that the lower down you are in the economic strata, the more you convert your personal energy allotment to... making more children! I'm sure there's a correlation with education but I'm not drawing it here. What we may conclude is that "sharing the wealth" programs ultimately generate more mouths to feed and in a world with depleting agricultural resources...

The x-axis of the graph is essentially household income with poorest on the left going to the richest on the right. The y-axis is the ratio of the total number in the household to the number of actual wage earners in said household. Therefore, incontrovertible proof that wealthier households ultimately concentrate wealth by way of having less and less heirs with the inverse occurring in the lower economic classes.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Top 1% pays 39.89% of all taxes

Top 5% pays 60.14% of all taxes

Top 25% pays 86.27% of all taxes

Top 50% pays 97.01% of all taxes

Bottom 50% pays 2.99% of all taxes

All taxes? Or just personal income taxes?

 

[PLC1]

3.6 trillion is an incomprehensible number. Divide it between 200 million inhabitants (more or less), and you get $18,000 apiece, up from the 2.9 trillion, or $14,500 per person spent last year, and $8,500 spent under the "tax and spend" Clinton administration.

$18,000 is $72,000 for a family of four.

Since a lot of those families of four have lost at least one job among the breadwinners, it's going to be hard for them to come up with that $72 grand, especially when most jobs don't pay that much even before taxes.

So, we continue to live on our credit card, just as we have been doing for years, increasing that 10 trillion, or $33,000 per person, credit card debt even faster than it has been done in the past.

Oh, yes, and 3.6 trillion in hundred dollar bills would weigh 36 thousand tons. Crank up those presses, we'll need them running day and night.

Oh, if you're thinking that $18,000 is a doable figure, based on your personal income, remember that you also have to pay for that welfare mom and her ten children by nine different deadbeat daddies. That adds up to 20 non payers, owing a total of $360,000 this year, and $666,000 in accumulated debt so far. Someone has to pay for their share, too, as they have no money of their own.

 

[Dr.Who]

All taxes? Or just personal income taxes?

That was just personal income taxes.

If you count sales tax then those who spend more would pay more and that would mean that rich people in general pay more there too. But at least that is fair.

 

[Andy]

All taxes? Or just personal income taxes?

Income taxes. Does not include all the other income taxes that are theoretically "investments".

 

[Andy]

3.6 trillion is an incomprehensible number. Divide it between 200 million inhabitants (more or less), and you get $18,000 apiece, up from the 2.9 trillion, or $14,500 per person spent last year, and $8,500 spent under the "tax and spend" Clinton administration.

$18,000 is $72,000 for a family of four.

Since a lot of those families of four have lost at least one job among the breadwinners, it's going to be hard for them to come up with that $72 grand, especially when most jobs don't pay that much even before taxes.

So, we continue to live on our credit card, just as we have been doing for years, increasing that 10 trillion, or $33,000 per person, credit card debt even faster than it has been done in the past.

Oh, yes, and 3.6 trillion in hundred dollar bills would weigh 36 thousand tons. Crank up those presses, we'll need them running day and night.

Oh, if you're thinking that $18,000 is a doable figure, based on your personal income, remember that you also have to pay for that welfare mom and her ten children by nine different deadbeat daddies. That adds up to 20 non payers, owing a total of $360,000 this year, and $666,000 in accumulated debt so far. Someone has to pay for their share, too, as they have no money of their own.

The problem is most do not realize, nor care, how government spending effects them. For example, if you are living in publicly funded housing, and getting food stamps, what do you care if government is blowing trillions?

Also, too many times that people on the right, have screamed the sky is falling for ages, and of course it hasn't yet. Or at least it hasn't in a visible way. Sort of like charging up credit cards and taking out loans you can't afford. People can warn you it's a bad idea, but until you lose everything and your home, you don't realize it's a very bad idea.

Basically, America is full of idiots right now. No one knows or cares about the economic down turn, paying for these trillions of blown dollars is going to cause.

 

[Pidgey]

Well, they're about to find out in one helluva' big way.

 

[Andy]

You might find this one interesting--did this graph based on the WIKI data here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States

What the graph below:

...illustrates is that the lower down you are in the economic strata, the more you convert your personal energy allotment to... making more children! I'm sure there's a correlation with education but I'm not drawing it here. What we may conclude is that "sharing the wealth" programs ultimately generate more mouths to feed and in a world with depleting agricultural resources...

The x-axis of the graph is essentially household income with poorest on the left going to the richest on the right. The y-axis is the ratio of the total number in the household to the number of actual wage earners in said household. Therefore, incontrovertible proof that wealthier households ultimately concentrate wealth by way of having less and less heirs with the inverse occurring in the lower economic classes.

You seem to be implying that the wealthy do this as a matter of greed, and the poor do this because they are poor or un-educated. But correllation does not equal causation.

For example, the Rockefellers have a fairly large family. The Kennedys have a large family. Many other very wealth families are very large.

I know this will go over like a rock, but in my estimation, the connection between low income, low education, and high reproduction, has to do with morality.

People with low moral standards tend to have less interest in getting educated, or put less effort into their education. Further, low morals tend to see no problem with being lazy and collecting government pay outs. Finely, people with low morals tend to have no problem with sleeping around unmarried, or before marriage, which leads to single parent households.

For example, I was taught that I should work for what I need and have. That I should not simply take whatever I can get with the smallest amount of effort. Therefore, since my first year in high school, the longest I have ever gone without a job is two months.

There is a book out that goes over some research done on multi-millionaires, and what traits they have in common. One is most are not devoriced. Most are married and have a family. Most are very honest. In short, character and integrety are some of the hallmarks of multi-millionaires.

Which is also why so of the poorest areas lack these qualities. Dave Thomas for example, dropped out of high school, but he had character and a work ethic. Results, he became a multi-millionaire owner of Wendy's.

See, I think we get the idea that wealth exist, and simply moves around from person to person. This is a miss-understanding of wealth. Wealth is created. Which is why most of the wealth are first generation rich. Very few are like the Kennedy Clan with massive trust funds that are invested, and grow no matter what they do.

For example the Jackson family made millions, but now the Jacksons are nearly broke. They blew all the money, and now don't have much at all.