Check out "Where's the Change" for an idea on how to register our displeasure at Tim Geithner's hypocrisy.
Tampilkan postingan dengan label taxes. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label taxes. Tampilkan semua postingan
Rabu, 18 Februari 2009
Tim Geithner tax cheat stamp
Check out "Where's the Change" for an idea on how to register our displeasure at Tim Geithner's hypocrisy.
Sabtu, 07 Februari 2009
Obama cabinet nominee tax issues; Tom Daschle; Tim Geithner, Nancy Killefer, Hilda Solis; Porkulus
I have lost count of the number of Obama nominees that have been caught failing to report and/or pay taxes. Daschle, Geithner, Nancy Killefer, Hilda Solis are the names I remember. [Commerce secretary designate Bill Richardson withdrew because of a Blagojevich-like problem in New Mexico.] Upon the nomination being made public, all of these people suddenly paid their taxes.
Powerline commented on a supposedly positive result from these scandals:
Michelle Malkin posts more details.
I am not sure that I agree that the payment of these taxes is a good thing. We have seen how the federal government will spend the money. Free market principles would tell us that it is better for the Democrat cabinet nominees to keep the money and spend it themselves according to their own desires.
Would you rather that that the money be spent on (1) alchohol, adultery, prostitutes, illegal drugs, pornography, illegal campaign activities, etc. or on (2) honey insurance, fish barriers, green schools, walking trails, STD's and ACORN? While some of these categories are overlapping, your choice of where the money should be spent will determine whether you think it is best that Obama's cabinet nominees have finally paid their taxes.
Mark Steyn made a valid point yesterday:
Even though it is good to point out the hypocrisy of the Democrat nominees, we should not forget that we are opposed to taxation on principle. The Porkulus bill is a perfect example of why we are opposed to taxation.
Powerline commented on a supposedly positive result from these scandals:
Still, there is always a silver lining. One good thing about electing a Democrat as President is that, as he nominates fellow Democrats to senior positions in the Executive Branch, millions of dollars in unpaid tax liabilities come to light and are belatedly paid to the IRS, with interest. It is, perhaps, the most tangible advantage of electing Democrats to office.
Michelle Malkin posts more details.
I am not sure that I agree that the payment of these taxes is a good thing. We have seen how the federal government will spend the money. Free market principles would tell us that it is better for the Democrat cabinet nominees to keep the money and spend it themselves according to their own desires.
Would you rather that that the money be spent on (1) alchohol, adultery, prostitutes, illegal drugs, pornography, illegal campaign activities, etc. or on (2) honey insurance, fish barriers, green schools, walking trails, STD's and ACORN? While some of these categories are overlapping, your choice of where the money should be spent will determine whether you think it is best that Obama's cabinet nominees have finally paid their taxes.
Mark Steyn made a valid point yesterday:
The bloated nonstimulus and the undertaxed nominees are part of the same story. I'm with Tom Daschle: I understand why he had no desire to toss another six-figure sum into the great sucking maw of the federal Treasury. Who knows better than a senator who's voted for every tax increase to cross his desk that all this dough is entirely wasted? Tom and Tim Geithner and Charlie Rangel and all the rest are right: They can do more good with the money than the United States government can. I only wish they followed the logic of their behavior and recognized that what works for them would also work for every other citizen. Instead, they insist that the sole solution to our woes is a record-setting wasteful government spending spree.
Even though it is good to point out the hypocrisy of the Democrat nominees, we should not forget that we are opposed to taxation on principle. The Porkulus bill is a perfect example of why we are opposed to taxation.
Selasa, 28 Oktober 2008
Predictions for an Obama administration; taxes; Egypt under the Ptolemies
Sometimes it is not sufficient for voters to hear merely that a candidate will raise their taxes. Voters often do not care unless the specifics of the tax burden are set forth in detail.
In the third century B.C., Egypt was ruled by Macedonians in the Ptolemy line who imposed a socialist style tyranny on their subjects. Their tax package sounds familiar:
While U.S. taxes are already quite burdensome, they will get worse and more oppressive under an Obama regime (and his successors). There will be very little left of our lives that is free from government taxation and scrutiny.
As is always the case in history, the story of oppressive government ends badly. Taxation and socialism eroded the industriousness of the people and the productivity of the land. Agriculture and industry decayed. By the end of the third century B.C., Egypt had been made "a Roman protectorate" [Durant, p. 587]. Roman emperors later fully absorbed Egypt into the Roman empire.
Ptolemy I of Egypt
Egypt would not reemerge as an independent nation until after World War I. [For those of you that rely on Oprah or the Today Show for your information, that time span equals roughly 2000 years - give or take a century depending on when you consider Egypt's independence to have finally ended.] 2000 years of subjugation is a long time. Taxation has consequences.
In the third century B.C., Egypt was ruled by Macedonians in the Ptolemy line who imposed a socialist style tyranny on their subjects. Their tax package sounds familiar:
Everywhere the government took rentals, taxes, customs, and tolls, sometimes labor and life itself. The peasant paid a fee to the state for the right to keep cattle, for the fodder that he fed them, and for the privilege of grazing them on the common pasture land. The private owner of gardens, vineyards, or orchards paid a sixth - under Ptolemy II half - of his produce to the state. All persons except soldiers, priests, and government officials paid a poll tax. There were taxes on salt, legal documents, and bequests; a five per cent tax on rentals, a ten per cent tax on sales, a twenty-five per cent levy on all fish caught in Egyptian waters, a toll on goods passing from village to town, or along the Nile; there were high export as well as import duties at all Egyptian ports; there were special taxes to maintain the fleet and the lighthouse, to keep the municipal physicians and police in good humor, and to buy a gold crown for every new king; nothing was overlooked that could fatten the state. To keep track of all taxable products, income, and transactions the government maintained a swarm of scribes, and a vast system of personal and property registration; to collect the taxes it farmed them out to specialists, supervised their operations, and held their possessions as security till the returns were in.Will Durant, Life of Greece, pp. 591-592
While U.S. taxes are already quite burdensome, they will get worse and more oppressive under an Obama regime (and his successors). There will be very little left of our lives that is free from government taxation and scrutiny.
As is always the case in history, the story of oppressive government ends badly. Taxation and socialism eroded the industriousness of the people and the productivity of the land. Agriculture and industry decayed. By the end of the third century B.C., Egypt had been made "a Roman protectorate" [Durant, p. 587]. Roman emperors later fully absorbed Egypt into the Roman empire.
Egypt would not reemerge as an independent nation until after World War I. [For those of you that rely on Oprah or the Today Show for your information, that time span equals roughly 2000 years - give or take a century depending on when you consider Egypt's independence to have finally ended.] 2000 years of subjugation is a long time. Taxation has consequences.
Senin, 16 Juni 2008
Quote of the day - Joe Sobran [socialism, Francois Mitterand]
I recall a news item about an indignant middle-
class Frenchwoman some years ago, during the presidency
of the Socialist Francois Mitterand. "Mitterand told us
he was going to tax the rich," she complained. "Now he
tells us that we are the rich!" It's called the
"slippery slope," madame. If you set fire to your
neighbor's house, the flames may spread to your own home.
And once you support violations of your neighbor's
rights, your own rights may become the next target.
Joe Sobran
class Frenchwoman some years ago, during the presidency
of the Socialist Francois Mitterand. "Mitterand told us
he was going to tax the rich," she complained. "Now he
tells us that we are the rich!" It's called the
"slippery slope," madame. If you set fire to your
neighbor's house, the flames may spread to your own home.
And once you support violations of your neighbor's
rights, your own rights may become the next target.
Joe Sobran
Senin, 06 Agustus 2007
Quote of the day - Milton Friedman
We have a system that increasingly taxes work and subsidizes nonwork.
Milton Friedman
Milton Friedman
Rabu, 30 Mei 2007
Quote of the day - Milton Friedman
"The most important ways in which I think the Internet will affect the big issue is that it will make it more difficult for government to collect taxes."
Milton Friedman
[For those readers who have reached only "entry level" conservatism, I believe that the above quote points out one of the biggest BENEFITS of the internet - Salt]
Milton Friedman
[For those readers who have reached only "entry level" conservatism, I believe that the above quote points out one of the biggest BENEFITS of the internet - Salt]
Label:
economics,
Milton Friedman,
Quote,
taxes,
Tyranny
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)