Wednesday, April 15, 2009

A tax by any other name would stink as bad

I can tell by the comments to my last post that some people don't understand my philosphy. When I say that high taxes are morally wrong I don't just mean if they apply to me. Just like I think that ALL theft is wrong, not just theft of my property.

It doesn't matter if I'm in the top bracket or not. That's not the point. And please keep in mind that you are only thinking INCOME TAX when you talk like that. If Obama gives me a small INCOME TAX break and then raises an ENERGY TAX am I giving less of my paycheck to government?

Politicians want to spend your money. They can't get it all from the top income tax bracket. The attitude of "rape anyone you want as long as it's not my wife or daughter" sickens me but in this case it shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the tentacles that our ruling elite have in our wallets.

Oregon House tax bills for this session:

HB 2009: Creates tax on health insurance
HB 2014: Increases construction tax.
HB 2067: Increases personal income tax .
HB 2068: Increases income tax
HB 2069: Increases tax for seniors
HB2070: Increases tax on businesses
HB 2071: Increases document filling fees
HB 2075: Increases cigarette tax.
HB 2077: Increases income tax
HB 2078: Increases income tax.
HB 2119: Increases tax on businesses
HB 2120: Increases customized plate fee.
HB 2122: Increases tax on tobacco
HB 2159: Increases tax on business
HB 2160: Increases cigarette tax
HB 2379: Creates tax on cigarette distribution
HB 2393: Increase fees for serving legal documents
HB 2431: Increases tax on airplane fuel
HB 2436: Increases fees for deed and mortgage records
HB 2461: Tax on beer and wine coolers
HB 2471: Increases tax for seniors
HB 2472: Increase tax on energy bills
HB 2473: Increase tax on real estate
HB 2474: Increases property taxes
HB 2616: Increases cigarette tax
HB 2648: Increases federal income tax
HB 2649: Increases income tax
HB 2650: Increases income tax
HB 2651: Increases income tax
HB 2652: Increases income tax
HB 2672: Increases tax on tobacco
HB 2696: Tax on bartering exchanges
HB 2697: Increases personal income tax
HB 2698: Increase tax on employee stock options
HB 2711: Tax on civilian federal employees
HB 2712: Increases income tax
HB 2749 :Increases tax on video game devices
HB 2769: Increases tax for farm worker housing
HB 2771: Increasestax for small wineries
HB 2772: Increases tax for seniors
HB 2773: Increases business tax
HB 2774: Increases income tax
HB 2785: Ceases tax credit for political contributions
HB 2807: Increases tax on businesses
HB 2818: Increases tax on car rentals
HB 2843: Increases tax on income
HB 2844: Creates tax for filing documents
HB 2854: Increases tax on capitol gains
HB 2913 Increases tax on businesses
HB 2934: Creates tax on health insurance
HB 2935: Increases tax on income for shareholders
HB 3049: Increases tax on business
HB 3115: Increases tax on tangible or intangible property
HB 3146: Creates a luxury tax
HB 3148: Increases registration fees for cars.
HB 3272: Increases personal income tax
HB 3291: Increases tax on renewable energy
HB 3303: Creates tax on birdseed.
HB 3309: Increases tax on life insurance
HB 3312: Increases income tax
HB 3398: Creates sales tax
HB 3405: Increases tax on businesses
HB 3406: Increases cigarette tax
HB 3407: Increases tax on alcohol
HB 3411 Tax increase on construction
HB 3412: Increases income tax
HB 3413: Increases tax on businesses
HB 3415: Increases tax on gasoline
HJR 27: Increases income tax
HJR 29: Increases income tax
HJR 48: Increases tax on carbon emissions
HJR 49: Increases tax on oil and natural gas

23 comments:

BEAR said...

Mr. Daniel, the lefties don't understand the concept of "over-taxation," or the consequences of disincentives to productivity, since very few of them actually pay any taxes. The obamster's own cabinet have shown themselves foreign to the concept of paying taxes, even though most of them are worth millions. The obamster makes over 40 times what I do, but gives half of what I do to charity (in % of income). Lefties are as cheap as the proverbial $2.00 suitcase, unless they can use other people's money. Then, even the sky is no limit.

We recently purchased the book "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand, a refugee from Russian totalitarianism. My son knows the precise word to say when the lefties come begging for help....NO!

The name "JOHN GALT" will be showing up on telephone poles and buildings across this once great land. If anyone asks me who JOHN GALT is, I'll just smile and say, "ME!"

bullshit police said...

First of all, a big shout-out to Daniel for finally, actually responding directly (more or less) to a question and comment. Could make for an actual conversation. I'll spare you a citation for spreading bullshit, for now.

However: This latest post raises another question, to clarify. I'm being totally serious here, trying to understand your philosophy. It sounds to me like you're opposed to ALL taxes of any kind, for anything. True? Also: Do you count yourself among the tax resistor movement, where you refuse to pay any, or some of your tax bill? And if that's the case, how do you reconcile this with your "rule of law" philosophy.

Oh ... did you participate in any Tea parties today? If so, I'm just curious: Was the event you attended held at a taxpayer-built and maintained public park, or did you just stay on the taxpayer built- and maintained sidewalk?

Anonymous said...

I'll let Daniel speak for himself, but barring a reply from him, here's my take...

Most fiscal conservatives understand the need for paying taxes and don't mind the contribution - within reason and for reasonable purposes.

Public safety, education, roads, and other worthy programs that are a bedrock of our society must be maintained and paid for via taxation.

What most of us are concerned with is paying for programs that use our tax money to help bail out billion dollar corporations, people that are in the country illegally in the first place, $20,000 for a state poet laureate, and other non essentials.

I think all families can relate to having to curb spending on entertainment, eating out, taking overseas vacations, etc. when times are tough financially. All we're asking for is some responsible spending from our government. Presently, we're not getting that, which is why hundreds of thousands of people across the nation have been protesting the out of control spending and subsequent taxation going on.

Bobkatt said...

Bear-I'm half way through the audio-book and we all need to ride the John Galt Railway.

Kaelri said...

Would it blow your mind to learn that I read Atlas Shrugged and loved it?

Regarding the "subsequent taxation": I really need someone here to respond to the fact that Obama's plan constitutes a net tax cut, both for 19 out of 20 families, and for the federal budget as a whole - the increase on the wealthiest 2% (back to Clinton-era rates, which apparently entails "socialism" nowadays) is less than the decrease in the other brackets. The following is taken directly from his website: "No family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase. The typical middle class family will receive well over $1,000 in tax relief under the Obama plan, and will pay tax rates that are 20% lower than they faced under President Reagan." There's even a calculator widget which tells what you're saving. So the notion that this is in any way about unreasonable taxation is absurd. I know BEAR mentioned something about a $400 deferment, but frankly, that was the first I've heard of it.

As for the spending issue, though, I'm more sympathetic. On the face of it, I can understand why it looks like racking up all this debt will come back to bite us. I'm not an economist by trade, so take my devil's advocacy here with a grain of salt:

We are in a recession. Deficit spending by the government has an extraordinary stimulative power which individuals obviously don't have. (Government spending accounts for over 40% of our GDP, so any significant cuts - such as, say, defense spending - will necessarily have a negative impact on the economy, and vice versa.) Our experience with the Great Depression taught us that taxing more and spending less is exactly what we should not do. Stimulus spending is vital for our long-term growth.

Now, yes, if we spend more than we earn, then eventually we'll have to pay it back via tax hikes and spending cuts. Or rather, our children will have to pay it back. That's a legitimate concern, and naturally, if paying our dues in the long run cancels out the growth we're getting in the short run, then there's no point. That's the worry of a theory called Ricardian Equivalence, which is, simply put, questionable. (Ricardo himself actually proposed the idea, and then rejected it.) The answer lies in the fact that the "growth" of the economy is not simply about how much we spend, but how quickly we spend it. We measure not how how fat our wallets are, but how much we use them. So all of this "out of control" spending is justified as long as it ultimately gets us out of the recession before it cripples us with respect to the world economy. After that, we can begin paying back the debt, but more gradually; meanwhile, the natural growth yielded by a stable, well-regulated economy will mitigate the depressive effects. This is why a little bit of inflation is actually a good thing - in terms of real value, the debt we're accruing now will actually cost less for our descendents to pay back.

Needless to say, this depends on the fiscal responsibility of many future presidents, and I'm not naive enough to believe that an economic agenda spanning half a century or more will all go according to plan. But from our perspective here in the present, it seems to me that we're doing the right thing.

innominatus said...

Gotta love all those tax increase bills! Especially how so many of them are numerically sequential - like they just sat around and brainstormed more and more ways to try to wring a little more out of us without even hesitating to consider other issues.

Scottiebill said...

There are 72 (count 'em. I did.) tax bills on Daniel's list. There is the problem. The Oregon Dems are so in love with taxes that they resort to the legislative equivalent of overkill.

And Kaelri mentioned that Obama "promised" that no one earning less than $25,000.00 per year would get a tax increase. If anyone believes that, or much of anything else Obama "promises", then I would really like to talk to you about buying the Fremont Bridge that I have for sale at bargain rates.

Anonymous said...

some of us might get a small tax break, very small at that . then they raise the rate for everything else , like the cost for energy , the cost to drive your car , the cost to breath will one day have a fee on it . these fees amount to nothing more than yaxes with new names !!!!!!!
so no more taxes, and stop spending . cut back just like we have to do when our income goes down. we don't run out and get another credit card when it gets tough we cut back . and that is what the goverment should be doing !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

dems are a one trick pony.

taxes and fees...taxes and fees...bring those citizens to their knees...

more...taxes and fees...taxes and fees...we almost have them on their knees...

taxes and fees...cuz that is all a dumbocrate knows.

Dont they have "budgets for dummies" yet? The author could make a fortune in any dem run state.

Pinkie

DAVE01 said...

Kaelri, do you believe Obama will honestly hold himself to that pledge? He has broken a lot of his promises. I'm sorry, bet he is the biggest liar we have in government now. I can't keep track of his lies anymore and every time he breaks one.

Kaelri said...

...heh. So that's the argument, eh? I say "Obama plans to cut your taxes," you say "he's lying!"

I mean, I was thinking one of the reasons conservatives were so afraid of President Obama is that he is doing what he promised to do. He promised us a bipartisan Cabinet, the release of Bush's presidential records, a withdrawal policy in Iraq and increased troop levels in Afghanistan, the relaxation of stem cell restrictions, improved diplomatic relations with Iran, and lowering travel barriers with Cuba. Among others. I apologize if the idea of a Democratic president who keeps his word is a critical hit to your worldview.

Anonymous said...

Kaelri, the problem is, it's all a big shell game. The list of tax increases scheduled to be voted on will more than make up for any income tax decrease we may or may not see (Lord knows the next generation won't see one any time soon).

Please keep in mind that nearly 60,000,000 Americans perhaps didn't want Obama to keep all of his campaign promises so his word means less to us than it does for you. He is our president, and I do hope he does good things for the country, but unfairly taxing a segment of our population and allowing increases in taxes on one hand while reducing them somewhere else doesn't count as keeping a promise to me.

Bobkatt said...

Kaelri- Your grasp of Keynesian economics is good but isn't it the same group of micromanaging disciples that got us into this problem that are offering the solutions?
Just as the Kennedy, Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy assassinations robbed an entire generation of their innocence, that good leaders could be silenced by agents of our own government, this latest economic fiasco has robbed the American public of something they can never repair. That is the faith that if they do the right thing, work hard, save, make prudent decisions in their life, that they will be rewarded with a decent, dignified retirement.
Rewarding the greedy with bailouts and refinancing mortgages for people that should have never borrowed that much money (up to $750,000) can only eat at those that live within their means.

While there are many that believe that the economic machination of Roosevelt helped to shorten the Great Depression, I believe it may have actually prolonged it and instead it was our introduction into WWII that actually made the difference. And also things were very different in the 1930's and 40's. Then we had almost unlimited natural resources and production facilities just gearing up to be the most industrious nation in the world. Now-not so much. We also had a group of Americans that were willing to sacrifice and unite in a war effort. Now-not so much. We had a group of Americans that believed in a fair wage for a hard days work. Now-not so much.
Please don't bore me with it's the Republicans fault or the Democrats fault. It's all of ours fault.

Sorry to wax nostalgic but I think the real American Dream may be dead.

DAVE01 said...

kaelri, who are the republicans in his cabinet? Do you mean bipartisan in that there are democrats and fascist liberals. Don't forget the lobbyists that he promised would not be in his cabinet. I stopped counting at seventeen lobbyists. What about the tax cheats. Is that bipartisanship? I'm sorry, he is the biggest liar. He also said he wouldn't take our guns. Don't forget Eric Holder wanted to reinstate the assault weapons ban. Obama's whole history shows he hates guns in the hands of citizens. Kind of like Hitler. We all know from facts that that ban did not do squat.

Be careful of the change you wish for.

Kaelri said...

Bobkatt: I haven't assigned partisan blame here. I happen to think that those who place the whole of the responsibility on George Bush are indulging in a bit of scapegoating. Mind you, the deregulation frenzy that began in the 90s was spearheaded by Republicans, and it's kind of pathetic to see them now pushing for the same policies which, if they didn't cause the problem, certainly made it worse. But believe me, I don't deify Democratic economists either. In fact, having studied it for three years now, I can't say I hold the field of economics in particularly high regard.

As for the American people, though, I wouldn't turn so quickly to pessimism. We have undeniably been through worse. We suffered 80-hour work weeks, child labor and lead poisoning when the Industrial Revolution outgunned labor legislation by sixty years. We saw one out of every four Americans unemployed, and people's savings wiped out literally overnight, during the Great Depression. The American Dream has survived a great deal.

As for the bailout, I think most people have a good understanding that the money is not for the lenders and the CEOs who got themselves into the mess (as Congress made quite clear with the AIG bonus tax). It's for their employees. It's easy to spin a narrative where it looks like the "greedy" are being handed a Get Out Of Jail Free card, but if they fail, so do their hundreds of thousands of employees. Government is necessarily an instrument of the lesser of two evils.

Hope is not a campaign slogan. It's a necessity. People are most successful, productive and well-intentioned when they believe that the group they are a part of - be it a family, a religion, or a country - is headed in the right direction and serving a meaningful purpose. I realize most people around here aren't exactly fans, but to the majority of Americans, President Obama represents a strong leader with a coherent vision for the country, and in an economic system where optimism and confidence literally define the tides of prosperity and depression, that psychological impact is incredibly important. Leaders like Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt are some of our most fondly-remembered presidents partly because they were able to command that magnitude of good will and channel it into tangible action, whether for economic recovery or for a war effort. So I hope you don't think that any lapse in the faith of the American people is irreparable.

Kaelri said...

DAVE01: Robert Gates, Ray LaHood, and Judd Gregg, before he turned it down at the last minute, of course.

I'm not sure what "lobbyists" you're referring to. The only controversial figure I've heard of by name is William Lynn, who is not a Cabinet official. Likewise with the "fascists," given that fascism is an extreme right-wing ideology, so the idea of a "liberal fascist" strikes me as an oxymoron. As for tax evasion, I recall Tom Daschle, who withdrew himself from the nomination because of it (the responsible thing to do, wouldn't you say?) and Timothy Geithner. Neither case suggests any kind of egregious criminal intent.

So, to recap, you think Obama is "the biggest liar" in government because he has zero lobbyists in his Cabinet, one undetermined case of tax evasion, and he wants to bring back the AWB, which he's been talking about for two years. Lemme tell you, I can live with that.

Scottiebill said...

Dave said to be careful of what you wish for. Too bad the libs and RINOs didn't do just that in November. Maybe, just maybe, the country would not be in the hole it is in today. The libs voted for "change". They damn sure got it, in the shorts, as did all the rest of us. %3% of the people voted this incompetent into office, but 100% of us are having to suffer the consequences of this huge mistake.

And, of course, it didn't help that the libs in central California voted Czarina Pelosi back into office. We can only hope that they will have seen the error of their ways in November of next year.

Scottiebill said...

Oops! That should be "53%", not "%3%".

DAVE01 said...

kaelri
jan 24, 2009 a dozen lobbyists. Don't forget lynne as you mentioned. He said "no lobbyists in his administration". He did not say anything about cabinet positions.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/ll_20090124_2562.php

Here is the change in his statement:
In November 2007, Obama boasted at a campaign event that lobbyists "won't find a job in my White House." He later softened that rhetoric to say that lobbyists "won't dominate" the White House.

Here is another article with 17 lobbyists.
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/20471.asp

You are telling me that two Republicans is bipartisanship? That dog don't hunt with me.

The only thing he is changing is his story.

All you can remember is Daschle for a tax cheat. There is more than one tax cheat:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/03/31/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry4908247.shtml

I hate to say it but you have the memory of a typical American. About two weeks at most.

He will be worse than Jimmy Carter.
He is breaking the bank. Don't worry, I'm also mad at Bush and the Republicans for spending like fools.

Don't you remember during his campaigns, he said he wouldn't take our guns. I bet you along with the rest of the Dems nutjobs, Pelosi, Reid, Feinstein (not the blue dog dems), they will try to register guns first. Then they will confiscate certain guns. Then they will confiscate all guns. Then the killings will start. We all know how that went for the Jews during Hitler's reign of terror. Obama will not personally take the guns, his administration will. Aren't the so called assault weapons guns too?

However, our Bill of Rights guarantees the God given right to keep and bear arms. That rights has already been violated in DC. If he was standing on his word, he should have slapped Holder down when he made that remark about the AWB.

I think I will celebrate my 2nd amendment rights this weekend and shoot some of those evil looking semi-automatic assault style with cosmetic feature guns that scare liberals. I mights even ask a friend with a real full auto to go too. Then I will be shooting a real machine gun. That would set the liberals into orbit.

I have one question for you. Since long guns, rifles, shotguns and so called assault rifles are involved in less than four percent of the gun crimes, what in the hell difference would it make to ban all of assault rifles. I am speaking from knowledge. I have done a lot of reading in the past about gun crimes. Most of the media and government is full of shit when they talk about gun crimes. Just like when Hillary and Obama tell the mexicans that over ninety percent of the guns down in mexico come from the US. Let me tell you one fact about the RPG's that they also mentioned. There aren't any out there at gun shows. When Obama is speaking, he is lying.

Have a nice weekend.

Daniel said...

Civil debate? Here? It's like the good old days again.

Thanks guys.

Scottiebill said...

All the libs here need to recognize on thing and one thing only: Obama is a lying, Marxist sumbitch. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Single said...

I am SOOOOO glad that my wife convinced me to leave the state after I was laid off in January. We sold everything and moved and so far, the mere fact that we are out of the state is ... great. My wife just found a new job and I have two interviews this week and lots of hope (not the nonsense that Obama spouts either). I check back on Oregon every now and then and all I see are more and more good reasons to have left the state. All this from two people over the age of 50 who were both born and raised in Oregon. Once it was a great state, that is a description that can no longer be used when describing Oregon.

Blogger said...

You might qualify for a new government solar program.
Determine if you're eligble now!