In his weekly radio address to the nation today, Obama announced that he was fulfilling his campaign promise to provide tax relief to 95% of Americans. This is rather disingenuous since 40% of Americans do not pay income taxes.
So what he is really doing is providing tax relief to 55% of Americans and another form of welfare to the other 40%. This is to begin April1, 2009.
"I'm pleased to announce that this morning the Treasury Department began directing employers to reduce the amount of taxes withheld from paychecks, meaning that by April 1st, a typical family will begin taking home at least $65 more every month," Obama said in his weekly radio address.
"Never before in our history has a tax cut taken effect faster or gone to so many hard-working Americans," he said.
The measures have received a mixed early reaction from gloomy financial markets uncertain whether they will succeed in arresting the downward economic spiral. Since Obama has been leading America's economic efforts, the market has hit lows that surpass that obtained after the attacks of 9/11.
His announcement on the tax cuts capped a week that saw him sign the stimulus package into law and announce new measures to help families facing foreclosure and those struggling to make mortgage payments. The latter is Obama's life-line to reward poor judgement.
In essence, Obama is telling me that if I exercised good judgement in acquiring a mortgage that I could afford and saved for, make my mortgage payment, and live within my means; I am now expected to pay for those who did not.
Obama will kick it up a notch next week when he holds a summit at the White House on Monday to look at how to rein in the country's ballooning deficit and bring government spending under control as the economy starts to recover. While not an economist, I might suggest that he take the approach my family follows. If you do not have it, do not spend it.
Many Americans fail to recognize that you do not spend yourself out of a recession. FDR and Japan demonstrated that years ago.
As we continue to borrow money from communist China (with their false economy), we continue to reduce the value of the dollar. In other words, that foreign made Television that costs $1500 today, will cost $1700 after you borrow more money from foreign investors. All the money in the stimulus/spending bills has to be borrowed, and the more we borrow, the lower the value of the dollar.
My friends here in DC tell me all this spending and talk of doom and glom is not so much about the economy as it is about the administrations social agenda. Granted the economy is in recession. The talk of Depression is a bit of a stretch.
During the Depression, unemployment was well into the 20+% levels. Interest rates were sky high. Even when Reagan came into office, unemployment and interest rates were double-digit. That is not the case now.
Obama is a polished speaker and persuader. However, his talk of "stimulus" is a smoke-screen. How else do you explain the fact that his "stimulus bill" was more social engineering than stimulus?
He is a masterful politican and knew that Americans would not support his social agenda were they not sold on the idea that the sky was falling and massive spending was the only way to the promised land of recovery. He does not speak of hope today. He plays on our fear and foreboding of what lies ahead.
If you take time to look closer at the Stimulus Bill that was passed, you will find a social agenda bill passed off as a much sought after economic stimulus.
The Charltan of Chicago is playing Americans like a drum!!
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Global Government & Taxation advances in DAVOS.
Months ago I brought up Obama's 'Global Poverty Act', (you can look through the blog to find the article), and I was met with some skepticism. It was sponsored by then Senator Obama. I pointed out that it will cede too much of America's sovereignty to the United Nations. I also demonstrated that it will result in a 'Global' tax, and 'Global' government.
Can the American public truly be so easily distracted as to miss something of this magnitude?
This past week and weekend the World Economic Forum met in Davos, Switzerland. Many of it's members are concurrent members of the Bilderberg Group. I would suggest that those who are not familiar with the 'Bilderberg Group' take a moment and "google' it.
Cliff Kincaid, of Accuracy In Media, reported on this meeting. I am including his report as an FYI.
Global Taxes and Global TV Now on the Agenda
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | January 26, 2009
In addition to global taxes, “The Global Agenda 2009” report urges creation of a global television channel.
President Obama’s pick for Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, is being urged to lay the foundation for “global governance” by considering “international taxation” measures to loot more money from U.S. taxpayers.
The recommendation is included in the report, “The Global Agenda 2009,” which is being considered by the World Economic Forum (WEF), meeting in Davos, Switzerland, January 28 - February 1. The WEF is not an official government group but does include dozens of government, corporate and labor leaders at its annual meetings.
Media companies such as News Corporation (parent of Fox News, the Fox Business Network, and the Wall Street Journal), CNBC, and Forbes are official sponsors of the WEF meeting. News Corporation is listed as one of about 100 “strategic partners” of the World Economic Forum.
“Look for live coverage on CNBC, all day every day,” reports CNBC “Squawk Box” co-anchor Becky Quick. “We kick things off at 6 a.m. Eastern time Wednesday on Squawk, with serious interviews from the headliners.” Her report, however, fails to disclose that CNBC is an “industry partner” of the World Economic Forum this week.
CNBC is a subsidiary of General Electric, whose GE Capital is receiving a $139-billion taxpayer-financed loan guarantee as part of the Wall Street bailout. CNBC’s sister networks are NBC and MSNBC.
Other “industry partners” of the WEF include Reuters, the British-based news agency. A Reuters story about the meeting that starts on Wednesday sounds like a press release from the organization, hailing its “achievements” over time but failing to note that Reuters is a sponsor of this year’s event.
CNBC is advertising a “No Way Back – the Road to Recovery” debate hosted at the conference by CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo. One of the participants is Steve Schwarzman, Chairman, CEO and co-founder of the Chinese-funded and partly owned Blackstone Group.
Representing Chinese economic dominance in what Henry Kissinger has labeled a “New World Order,” Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao is speaking to a special session of the conference on its first day.
The event’s corporate sponsors, which pay about half a million dollars each to participate, include several failing institutions that have received tens of billions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers. They include Bank of America, Citi, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase & Co., and Morgan Stanley. These entities are termed “Strategic Partners” of the World Economic Forum.
But will CNBC highlight this kind of extravagant spending when the cable business network is helping sponsor the event?
In a major embarrassment, the WEF has released a report, “The Future of the Global Financial System,” which acknowledges “intellectual stewardship and guidance” provided by a steering committee co-chaired by John Thain, the former Merrill Lynch & Co. chief executive officer who was recently ousted from Bank of America in a scandal. Thain oversaw the disastrous sale of Merrill Lynch to Bank of America and was criticized for lavish spending on office decorations, including a $1,405 waste basket and $87,784 rug.
The other co-chair of the committee was David Rubenstein, co-founder and managing director of The Carlyle Group, who has been quoted as saying that China holds the key to the world economy’s future. One report notes that Rubenstein says Carlyle “was an early investor in the Chinese marketplace,” that its China office “has hired many native-born Chinese, and the company is seeking to build its buyout and growth-capital businesses there.”
“The Global Agenda 2009” report says that “sovereign states do not adequately address problems reaching across borders” and that “international taxation” may be needed to generate the “additional resources” for “global governance.”
Could this become a source of new bailout money here and abroad?
“As current global governance problems come from market failures, sovereign failures and intergovernmental failures that cross boundaries, sacrificing sovereignty for greater gain may become an option,” the report says.
The report says the U.N.’s Law of the Sea Treaty, which is a top priority for Senate ratification under the Obama Administration, is a measure that has “earned the acceptance and compliance” of most nations. The treaty would turn over oil, gas, and mineral resources to the U.N. and authorize access to them through payment of a global tax to a U.N. body.
The so-called “Council on Global Governance” of the World Economic Forum includes Anne-Marie Slaughter, dean of the Princeton University Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs who has been picked by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to run the State Department’s Office of Policy Planning. Slaughter wrote the 2004 book, A New World Order.
In terms of media interest and backing for the controversial event, one of the co-chairs is Rupert Murdoch, chairman of News Corporation, the Fox News Channel parent company. Another co-chair is Kofi Annan, the disgraced former U.N. Secretary-General. As director of U.N. peacekeeping, Annan was accused of ignoring genocide in Rwanda. As Secretary-General, he was investigated for presiding over the oil-for-food corruption scandal involving Saddam Hussein’s Iraq regime.
Annan, however, claimed that he was “exonerated” by a report issued by Paul Volcker, the former U.S. Federal Reserve chairman and now one of Obama’s chief economic advisers.
In the past U.S. officials have been major participants in the World Economic Forum. But it’s not clear if any of Obama’s top officials will be going to this year’s event. However, some of his labor backers, including Andrew Stern of the Service Employees International Union, and John Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO, are listed as participants.
In addition to global taxes, “The Global Agenda 2009” report urges creation of a global television channel.
“Media has the capacity to connect the world, bridging cultures and peoples, and telling us who we are and what we mean to each other. The media can also ensure that no voice goes unheard,” it says. “We believe that this new moment also calls for a new media platform, across all media channels, a global non-profit ‘CNN’ providing a new form of independent journalism to inform, illuminate and deepen knowledge about issues that improve the state of the world.”
The report doesn’t explain how this new global TV channel will be financed. But global taxes cannot be ruled out.
Perhaps this new era of transparency and disclosure can start with disclosing details about media sponsorship and backing of the World Economic Forum and its plans for “global governance.”
Can the American public truly be so easily distracted as to miss something of this magnitude?
This past week and weekend the World Economic Forum met in Davos, Switzerland. Many of it's members are concurrent members of the Bilderberg Group. I would suggest that those who are not familiar with the 'Bilderberg Group' take a moment and "google' it.
Cliff Kincaid, of Accuracy In Media, reported on this meeting. I am including his report as an FYI.
Global Taxes and Global TV Now on the Agenda
AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | January 26, 2009
In addition to global taxes, “The Global Agenda 2009” report urges creation of a global television channel.
President Obama’s pick for Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, is being urged to lay the foundation for “global governance” by considering “international taxation” measures to loot more money from U.S. taxpayers.
The recommendation is included in the report, “The Global Agenda 2009,” which is being considered by the World Economic Forum (WEF), meeting in Davos, Switzerland, January 28 - February 1. The WEF is not an official government group but does include dozens of government, corporate and labor leaders at its annual meetings.
Media companies such as News Corporation (parent of Fox News, the Fox Business Network, and the Wall Street Journal), CNBC, and Forbes are official sponsors of the WEF meeting. News Corporation is listed as one of about 100 “strategic partners” of the World Economic Forum.
“Look for live coverage on CNBC, all day every day,” reports CNBC “Squawk Box” co-anchor Becky Quick. “We kick things off at 6 a.m. Eastern time Wednesday on Squawk, with serious interviews from the headliners.” Her report, however, fails to disclose that CNBC is an “industry partner” of the World Economic Forum this week.
CNBC is a subsidiary of General Electric, whose GE Capital is receiving a $139-billion taxpayer-financed loan guarantee as part of the Wall Street bailout. CNBC’s sister networks are NBC and MSNBC.
Other “industry partners” of the WEF include Reuters, the British-based news agency. A Reuters story about the meeting that starts on Wednesday sounds like a press release from the organization, hailing its “achievements” over time but failing to note that Reuters is a sponsor of this year’s event.
CNBC is advertising a “No Way Back – the Road to Recovery” debate hosted at the conference by CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo. One of the participants is Steve Schwarzman, Chairman, CEO and co-founder of the Chinese-funded and partly owned Blackstone Group.
Representing Chinese economic dominance in what Henry Kissinger has labeled a “New World Order,” Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao is speaking to a special session of the conference on its first day.
The event’s corporate sponsors, which pay about half a million dollars each to participate, include several failing institutions that have received tens of billions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers. They include Bank of America, Citi, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase & Co., and Morgan Stanley. These entities are termed “Strategic Partners” of the World Economic Forum.
But will CNBC highlight this kind of extravagant spending when the cable business network is helping sponsor the event?
In a major embarrassment, the WEF has released a report, “The Future of the Global Financial System,” which acknowledges “intellectual stewardship and guidance” provided by a steering committee co-chaired by John Thain, the former Merrill Lynch & Co. chief executive officer who was recently ousted from Bank of America in a scandal. Thain oversaw the disastrous sale of Merrill Lynch to Bank of America and was criticized for lavish spending on office decorations, including a $1,405 waste basket and $87,784 rug.
The other co-chair of the committee was David Rubenstein, co-founder and managing director of The Carlyle Group, who has been quoted as saying that China holds the key to the world economy’s future. One report notes that Rubenstein says Carlyle “was an early investor in the Chinese marketplace,” that its China office “has hired many native-born Chinese, and the company is seeking to build its buyout and growth-capital businesses there.”
“The Global Agenda 2009” report says that “sovereign states do not adequately address problems reaching across borders” and that “international taxation” may be needed to generate the “additional resources” for “global governance.”
Could this become a source of new bailout money here and abroad?
“As current global governance problems come from market failures, sovereign failures and intergovernmental failures that cross boundaries, sacrificing sovereignty for greater gain may become an option,” the report says.
The report says the U.N.’s Law of the Sea Treaty, which is a top priority for Senate ratification under the Obama Administration, is a measure that has “earned the acceptance and compliance” of most nations. The treaty would turn over oil, gas, and mineral resources to the U.N. and authorize access to them through payment of a global tax to a U.N. body.
The so-called “Council on Global Governance” of the World Economic Forum includes Anne-Marie Slaughter, dean of the Princeton University Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs who has been picked by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to run the State Department’s Office of Policy Planning. Slaughter wrote the 2004 book, A New World Order.
In terms of media interest and backing for the controversial event, one of the co-chairs is Rupert Murdoch, chairman of News Corporation, the Fox News Channel parent company. Another co-chair is Kofi Annan, the disgraced former U.N. Secretary-General. As director of U.N. peacekeeping, Annan was accused of ignoring genocide in Rwanda. As Secretary-General, he was investigated for presiding over the oil-for-food corruption scandal involving Saddam Hussein’s Iraq regime.
Annan, however, claimed that he was “exonerated” by a report issued by Paul Volcker, the former U.S. Federal Reserve chairman and now one of Obama’s chief economic advisers.
In the past U.S. officials have been major participants in the World Economic Forum. But it’s not clear if any of Obama’s top officials will be going to this year’s event. However, some of his labor backers, including Andrew Stern of the Service Employees International Union, and John Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO, are listed as participants.
In addition to global taxes, “The Global Agenda 2009” report urges creation of a global television channel.
“Media has the capacity to connect the world, bridging cultures and peoples, and telling us who we are and what we mean to each other. The media can also ensure that no voice goes unheard,” it says. “We believe that this new moment also calls for a new media platform, across all media channels, a global non-profit ‘CNN’ providing a new form of independent journalism to inform, illuminate and deepen knowledge about issues that improve the state of the world.”
The report doesn’t explain how this new global TV channel will be financed. But global taxes cannot be ruled out.
Perhaps this new era of transparency and disclosure can start with disclosing details about media sponsorship and backing of the World Economic Forum and its plans for “global governance.”
OBAMA STYLED "CHANGE" & "STIMULUS"
On November 4Th, the American electorate voted for "Change". Throughout the campaign Barack Obama convinced enough voters to not look to close, and trust his untested leadership.
Now barely two weeks into this administration that promised hope and change, we find ourselves with exactly what the electorate deserves. We have been given cabinet nominees, many of which feel above having to pay their taxes. This of course includes our new Treasury Secretary who will oversee the IRS. He did cough up the $34,000 after receiving the Treasury nomination. He had no intention of doing so prior to that time. This is 'change'?
Under the guise of a "stimulus package", the Democrats have usurped the legitimacy of such a noble cause, and instead, put forth a pork laden bill catered to the 'no accountability' left wing.
This attempt to borrow and spend our way out of a recession is not a new idea. Roosevelt tried in the 30's, and when he ran for his third term in 1940, our unemployment rate still hovered around 20%. That was after eight years of the same style stimulus programs. If not for the war clouds of Europe his reelection was in question. He went on to win because of promising to keep America out of the war, in spite of his dismal economic policies.
Japan tried the Roosevelt model during their prolonged recession of the 90's. It failed to work that time as well.
Now the Rain Man of Chicago politics appears to be attempting to imitate Bullwinkle. We all remember Bullwinkle trying to pull a rabbit out of a hat. Having pulled out a Rhinoceros, and then a lion by mistake, Bullwinkle exclaims "this time for sure".
According to the democratic controlled Congressional Budget Office, only one fifth of this stimulus would be felt in 2009. Most of the money is scheduled to be spent after the recession is predicted to end.
Obama claims to want this bill to pass in order to create jobs. It falls far short according to estimates. The Endowment for the Arts employs how many people? Contraception? How about $650 million for 'Digital TV.coupons'?
Less than 10% of the bill could be considered true stimulus, if one assumes tax credits and infrastructure spending will jolt the economy. The other 90% of the bill represents one of the most egregious acts of generational theft in our nation's history, with taxpayer money going to special-interest earmarks, an ill-conceived bailout to states, and permanent spending increases that expand government's reach in areas like health care and education.
The bill's selling point is that three million jobs will be created or saved by this package. What's alarming is that each job will cost $286,000 to create or save. Moreover, one in five will be a government job....I start my new government job next Tuesday!!
One of the more egregious provisions in the Senate bill is a $166 billion bailout plan for the states that rewards bad budgeting at the state level. Simply sending cash to states without asking for appropriate sacrifices is grossly irresponsible. States will no longer have the incentive to live within their means, because they'll assume the federal government will be there to bail them out.
Instead of a bailout, Congress could offer states an emergency loan that could be repaid at a low interest rate. This approach apparently wasn't considered because the members who wrote the bill aren't simply interested in saving jobs -- they want to push their agenda along the way.
A key example is health care. The Senate bill doubles the amount of the Medicaid bailout requested by governors and lays the groundwork for government-run health care, which invariably leads to rationing. This ideological overreach has led even some Democrats, like Nebraska's Ben Nelson, to express concern that various "sacred cows" in the package are hurting the bill's overall goals.
The bill is also loaded with old-fashioned pork, despite President Barack Obama's insistence that members of Congress refrain from adding earmarks. In fact, the bill contains the most expensive earmark in history: $2 billion for the FutureGen near-zero emission power plant in Matoon, Ill.
Of course Obama has no problem with a $5 billion earmark for his friends at ACORN. We all remember ACORN. This is the organization that had it's offices raided by the FBI after it became evident that the organization was blatantly involved with voter registration fraud, registering people multiple times, and registering fictitious names. Why punish them? Under this administration we will reward them. They not only drank the kool-aid, they helped pass it out!
Other non stimulative pork provisions include $88 million for a new polar icebreaker for the Coast Guard, $600 million to buy hybrid vehicles for federal employees, and $850 million for Amtrak.
What is not in the bill is as troubling as what is. The package does nothing to clear the toxic assets and bad mortgages that helped trigger the credit crisis. These are some of the same scam mortgage products that Congressman Barney Frank D-MA defended when attempts were made to add more regulation to Fannie Mae. Why wouldn't Barney block re regulation? His lover, Herb Moses was the architect at Fannie Mae who was selling these mortgages and bringing home the resulting bonuses to Barney and keeping him draped in gold lame'.
It also contains very little meaningful tax relief to make small businesses and American companies more competitive. Instead, the tax provisions of the stimulus are essentially a modest cash handout that repeats the failed policy of George W. Bush's rebate-check stimulus.
The only thing that will be "stimulated" with this bill, is America's collective sphincter!
Now barely two weeks into this administration that promised hope and change, we find ourselves with exactly what the electorate deserves. We have been given cabinet nominees, many of which feel above having to pay their taxes. This of course includes our new Treasury Secretary who will oversee the IRS. He did cough up the $34,000 after receiving the Treasury nomination. He had no intention of doing so prior to that time. This is 'change'?
Under the guise of a "stimulus package", the Democrats have usurped the legitimacy of such a noble cause, and instead, put forth a pork laden bill catered to the 'no accountability' left wing.
This attempt to borrow and spend our way out of a recession is not a new idea. Roosevelt tried in the 30's, and when he ran for his third term in 1940, our unemployment rate still hovered around 20%. That was after eight years of the same style stimulus programs. If not for the war clouds of Europe his reelection was in question. He went on to win because of promising to keep America out of the war, in spite of his dismal economic policies.
Japan tried the Roosevelt model during their prolonged recession of the 90's. It failed to work that time as well.
Now the Rain Man of Chicago politics appears to be attempting to imitate Bullwinkle. We all remember Bullwinkle trying to pull a rabbit out of a hat. Having pulled out a Rhinoceros, and then a lion by mistake, Bullwinkle exclaims "this time for sure".
According to the democratic controlled Congressional Budget Office, only one fifth of this stimulus would be felt in 2009. Most of the money is scheduled to be spent after the recession is predicted to end.
Obama claims to want this bill to pass in order to create jobs. It falls far short according to estimates. The Endowment for the Arts employs how many people? Contraception? How about $650 million for 'Digital TV.coupons'?
Less than 10% of the bill could be considered true stimulus, if one assumes tax credits and infrastructure spending will jolt the economy. The other 90% of the bill represents one of the most egregious acts of generational theft in our nation's history, with taxpayer money going to special-interest earmarks, an ill-conceived bailout to states, and permanent spending increases that expand government's reach in areas like health care and education.
The bill's selling point is that three million jobs will be created or saved by this package. What's alarming is that each job will cost $286,000 to create or save. Moreover, one in five will be a government job....I start my new government job next Tuesday!!
One of the more egregious provisions in the Senate bill is a $166 billion bailout plan for the states that rewards bad budgeting at the state level. Simply sending cash to states without asking for appropriate sacrifices is grossly irresponsible. States will no longer have the incentive to live within their means, because they'll assume the federal government will be there to bail them out.
Instead of a bailout, Congress could offer states an emergency loan that could be repaid at a low interest rate. This approach apparently wasn't considered because the members who wrote the bill aren't simply interested in saving jobs -- they want to push their agenda along the way.
A key example is health care. The Senate bill doubles the amount of the Medicaid bailout requested by governors and lays the groundwork for government-run health care, which invariably leads to rationing. This ideological overreach has led even some Democrats, like Nebraska's Ben Nelson, to express concern that various "sacred cows" in the package are hurting the bill's overall goals.
The bill is also loaded with old-fashioned pork, despite President Barack Obama's insistence that members of Congress refrain from adding earmarks. In fact, the bill contains the most expensive earmark in history: $2 billion for the FutureGen near-zero emission power plant in Matoon, Ill.
Of course Obama has no problem with a $5 billion earmark for his friends at ACORN. We all remember ACORN. This is the organization that had it's offices raided by the FBI after it became evident that the organization was blatantly involved with voter registration fraud, registering people multiple times, and registering fictitious names. Why punish them? Under this administration we will reward them. They not only drank the kool-aid, they helped pass it out!
Other non stimulative pork provisions include $88 million for a new polar icebreaker for the Coast Guard, $600 million to buy hybrid vehicles for federal employees, and $850 million for Amtrak.
What is not in the bill is as troubling as what is. The package does nothing to clear the toxic assets and bad mortgages that helped trigger the credit crisis. These are some of the same scam mortgage products that Congressman Barney Frank D-MA defended when attempts were made to add more regulation to Fannie Mae. Why wouldn't Barney block re regulation? His lover, Herb Moses was the architect at Fannie Mae who was selling these mortgages and bringing home the resulting bonuses to Barney and keeping him draped in gold lame'.
It also contains very little meaningful tax relief to make small businesses and American companies more competitive. Instead, the tax provisions of the stimulus are essentially a modest cash handout that repeats the failed policy of George W. Bush's rebate-check stimulus.
The only thing that will be "stimulated" with this bill, is America's collective sphincter!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
