posted July 18, 2011 09:03 AM            

"Whatever we can make others believe"

Five Falsehoods of the Debt Debate
Daniel J. Flynn
07/18/2011

Incontinent spending put America $14 trillion in debt. The politicians who borrowed and spent us into debt want permission to borrow more so that they can spend more. And if they don’t get permission to borrow more money, they assure us that our debt woes will worsen.

Does this seem like a solution or a rationalization?

Washington is hooked on spending. Like other addicts, politicians tell lies to get their fix. Jonesing for more money, they insist that raising the debt limit is the best way to limit America’s debt.

Bad habits are tough to break. Surely, dishonesty about the problem doesn’t bring us any closer to a solution.

In the spirit of providing clarity through the haze of deceit, here are the five big lies the spending addicts tell to satiate their cravings for more of your money:

Lie #5
Americans Want a Tax Increase

“Eighty percent of the American people support an approach that includes revenues and cuts,” the president claimed Friday. “So the notion that somehow the American people aren’t sold is not the problem. The problem is members of Congress are dug in ideologically into various positions because they boxed themselves in with previous statements.” A poll released the previous day by Rasmussen showed that while a majority of Democrats want a tax increase as part of the deal, just 34 percent of Americans favor one in conjunction with raising the debt ceiling.

Lie #4
The Rich Don’t Pay Their Fair Share

Obama contended in his Saturday radio address that he merely planned on “asking the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share” and that “we have to ask corporations and the wealthiest Americans to share in that sacrifice.” Leaving aside whether Obama intends to merely “ask” wealthy Americans for more of their money, there is the subjective question of what constitutes a “fair share.” A study by the Tax Foundation found that America’s richest tenth pays a higher percentage of income taxes than their counterparts in Germany, Japan, Great Britain, and every other similar industrialized nation. According to the Internal Revenue Service, the wealthiest five percent of Americans pays 59 percent of income taxes and the bottom fifty percent pays three percent of income taxes. Who, precisely, isn’t paying their “fair” share?

Lie #3
The U.S. Will Default If Congress Doesn’t Raise the Debt Ceiling

The president has repeatedly referred to a failure to raise the debt limit as “Armageddon.” But if the debt ceiling is not raised before it expires the first week of August, it’s not the end of Washington’s money—let alone the end of the world. The U.S. Treasury will claim revenues of about $172 billion for the remainder of the month. Even practitioners of fuzzy math understand that revenues of $172 billion are enough to cover an interest payment of $29 billion. Not only are the revenues sufficient to pay the interest on the debt, but military salaries, Social Security, and Medicare, too. Dramatic spending cuts would necessarily follow a decision not to raise the debt ceiling. But it’s a lie to equate an act of fiscal responsibility (refusing to allow more borrowing) with one of recklessness (default).

Lie #2
The Bush Tax Cuts Caused the Debt

“It turns out that our problem is we cut taxes without paying for them over the last decade,” Obama claimed during Friday’s press conference. But revenues, which had been in decline immediately prior to the enactment of the Bush tax cuts, increased by more than a third soon after the top rates fell from 40 percent to 35 percent. While receipts declined dramatically in the aftermath of the financial/housing crisis, they had increased even more dramatically—$1.8 trillion in 2003 to $2.6 trillion in 2007—in the wake of the Bush tax cuts. As with the Harding/Coolidge, Kennedy/Johnson, and Reagan rate reductions, revenue counterintuitively increased following the Bush tax cuts.

Lie #1
Conservatives Who Oppose Raising the Debt Ceiling Are (Insert Insult Here)

posted July 18, 2011 12:41 PM            

i wonder why all those "socialist" countries are doing better than us?? and why their wealthy pay a smaller percentage than ours? could it be that their general public is making a better living and are willing to pay taxes for ALL THE SERVICES THEY GET IN RETURN?

i'm no economist. i don't have a word of wisdom about the debt ceiling so i will butt out of that argument!

but considering that we have CEOS EARNING 500 times what their workers do, considering they only pay 15% on their dividend income, which is considerable in that class, there is a lot not being said in the argument above.

heard someone the other day complaining that a certain extremely wealthy individual who died last year was fortunate that his estate did not have to pay hundreds of millions in "death tax"...making it sound like his heirs would be "cheated" by only receiving hundreds of millions instead of a billion dollars. sorry, but to someone on the breadline that doesn't really sound like hardship! personally i agree that death taxes should be low, but NONEXISTENT? why should someone who gets a million dollar gift just for existing quarrel with having to pay some tax to live in a civilized society instead of in a bubble to protect him from the havenots?

as i heard it we are no longer talking about the 200K+ crowd but those earning a good deal more. and while i understand 200K isn't what it used to be, coming from a family that had plenty in the 90% top bracket years, - and though we were in the top bracket we were not the richest people i knew by a long shot! - i would say there's not really much to complain about there.

and as i understand it during the bush administration those tax cuts did NOT translate into any more jobs, in fact the job market SHRANK throughout his term. a good part of that syndrome is the FREE TRADE agreements signed by clinton AND bush, but let us not forget that REAGAN's response to a recession was the BIGGEST CORPORATE TAX HIKE in our history...

posted July 18, 2011 02:03 PM            

In fact, Billions of American taxpayer dollars have gone to Europe to prop up their failed and failing Socialist governments and economies.

The Bush tax cuts produced jobs for about 7 years.

The last few months of the Bush administration saw job losses due to the recession caused by the collapse of the housing market.

Who in the hell ever thought the government was due any part of a deceased's accumulated wealth?

Oh, now I remember. That 5th rate, 19th century idiot leftists like to put forth as a "Thinker"...Karl Marx.

As to the cost of 2 wars...let me remind you that the most expensive part of military spending is payroll, housing, food, medical and clothing for 1.3 million service personnel..and their families. In addition to active military personnel, there are about 670,000 civilian government employees connected to the US military and all the retired military persons drawing military pensions.

ALL of that spending would be going on with or without any wars.

Strange how fast leftists forget.

Iraq was called...by leftists...the Bush War of Choice.

posted July 18, 2011 05:45 PM            

sorry if i misread your comparison with the "socialist" countries who ARE pulling OUT of recession faster than us, who do tax their lower brackets more but give them a great deal for their tax dollars (or francs or whatever) and if they are charging their wealthiest less than we do, how is RAISING the top bracket percentage a "socialist" ploy???????

posted July 18, 2011 06:45 PM            

Guess who is funding this current spin cycle---The Heritage Foundation with major by the Koch Bros

just off the top though McCain stated (when running) that the Bush's tax cuts have increased federal revenues. But revenues would have been even higher without them.

cuts in general increase revenues. That’s highly misleading.

In fact, the last half-dozen years have shown us that we can't have both lower taxes and fatter government coffers. The Congressional Budget Office, the Treasury Department, the Joint Committee on Taxation, the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers and a former Bush administration economist all say that tax cuts lead to revenues that are lower than they otherwise would have been – even if they spur some economic growth. And federal revenues actually declined at the beginning of this decade before rebounding. The growth in the past three years that McCain refers to brings revenues back in line with the 40-year historical average as a percentage of gross domestic product.

quote:

---

It’s unclear how much of the growth can be attributed to the tax cuts. Capital gains tax receipts did increase greatly from 2003 to 2006, but the CBO estimates that they will level off and decrease in the next few years. The growth overwhelmingly resulted from a sharp rise in corporate tax receipts, the cause of which is a topic of debate.

At the May 15 Republican presidential debate, Arizona Sen. John McCain was asked about his opposition to President’s Bush 2001 tax cuts. (Also, the senator voted against the 2003 tax cuts.)



Fox News Channel's Wendell Goler: Sen. McCain, you opposed President Bush’s 2001 tax cuts. Now you say you were wrong. How can you convince Republican voters you will push a Democratic Congress hard enough to make those tax cuts permanent, sir?

---

Sen. McCain: Well, first of all, I didn't say that I was wrong. I said that the reason why I opposed those tax cuts was because we didn't rein in spending.
And the fact is the tax cuts have dramatically increased revenues.

1. Republican Leaders Agree U.S. Default Would Be a "Financial Disaster"
2. Ronald Reagan Tripled the National Debt
3. George W. Bush Doubled the National Debt
4. Republicans Voted Seven Times to Raise Debt Ceiling for President Bush
5. Federal Taxes Are Now at a 60 Year Low
6. Bush Tax Cuts Didn't Pay for Themselves or Spur "Job Creators"
7. Ryan Budget Delivers Another Tax Cut Windfall for Wealthy
8. Ryan Budget Will Require Raising Debt Ceiling - Repeatedly
9. Tax Cuts Drive the Next Decade of Debt
10. $3 Trillion Tab for Unfunded Wars Remains Unpaid

How do you explain that your own party leaders agree that default will lead to financial disaster??????

posted July 18, 2011 06:48 PM            

WHATEVER IT IS, I'M AGAINST IT
From the Marx Bros. film "Horse Feathers" (1932)
(Harry Ruby / Bert Kalmar)

I don't know what they have to say
It makes no difference anyway
Whatever it is, I'm against it!
No matter what it is
Or who commenced it
I'm against it!

Your proposition may be good
But let's have one thing understood
Whatever it is, I'm against it!
And even when you've changed it
Or condensed it
I'm against it!

I'm opposed to it
On general principles
I'm opposed to it!
(He's opposed to it)
(In fact, he says he's opposed to it!)

For months before my son was born
I used to yell from night to morn
"Whatever it is, I'm against it!"
And I've kept yelling
Since I first commenced it
"I'm against it!"

posted July 18, 2011 11:36 PM            

There are sufficient revenues to make all those payments with money left over.

The Bush tax cuts increased revenues to the federal government.

The O'Bomber failed economic policies have reduced federal revenues by reducing economic activity in the private sector.

Faulty logic suggests that raising taxes produces more revenue to the federal government. That's proved to be untrue over and over while reducing taxes have proved over and over to produce more revenue to the federal government...especially when those tax cuts are aimed at businesses and investors in America.

The suggestion that we should increase taxes and increase spending is utter nonsense and always has been.

posted July 19, 2011 04:40 AM            

Others have the patience to repeat facts to you for years. I do not.

once the mind is made up, little will change it.

posted July 19, 2011 10:07 AM            

We always get these Socialist ninnies crawling out of the woodwork anytime the size, scope, power and cost of the federal government is under discussion. They always want to raise taxes and increase federal government spending.

But, there are elected members of Congress who were elected or re-elected to reduce the size, scope, power and cost of the federal government. They are the majority in the House of Representatives AND they sure as hell better do the job they were elected to do.

If not, there will be...as Sarah Palin says...a do-over on November 2, 2012.

Wynn CEO Goes On Epic Anti-Obama Rant On Company Conference Call
Joe Weisenthal
July 18, 2011

Who doesn't love a good rant?

We certainly do, and as usual, Steve Wynn, the CEO of casino company Wynn Resorts, delivered on his company's quarterly conference call today.

Via Seeking Alpha, here's the crux of it:

I believe in Las Vegas. I think its best days are ahead of it. But I'm afraid to do anything in the current political environment in the United States. You watch television and see what's going on on this debt ceiling issue. And what I consider to be a total lack of leadership from the President and nothing's going to get fixed until the President himself steps up and wrangles both parties in Congress. But everybody is so political, so focused on holding their job for the next year that the discussion in Washington is nauseating.

And I'm saying it bluntly, that this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business, and progress and job creation in my lifetime. And I can prove it and I could spend the next 3 hours giving you examples of all of us in this market place that are frightened to death about all the new regulations, our healthcare costs escalate, regulations coming from left and right. A President that seems, that keeps using that word redistribution. Well, my customers and the companies that provide the vitality for the hospitality and restaurant industry, in the United States of America, they are frightened of this administration.And it makes you slow down and not invest your money. Everybody complains about how much money is on the side in America.

You bet and until we change the tempo and the conversation from Washington, it's not going to change. And those of us who have business opportunities and the capital to do it are going to sit in fear of the President. And a lot of people don't want to say that. They'll say, God, don't be attacking Obama. Well, this is Obama's deal and it's Obama that's responsible for this fear in America.

The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution and maybe we ought to do something to businesses that don't invest, their holding too much money. We haven't heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists. Everybody's afraid of the government and there's no need soft peddling it, it's the truth. It is the truth. And that's true of Democratic businessman and Republican businessman, and I am a Democratic businessman and I support Harry Reid. I support Democrats and Republicans. And I'm telling you that the business community in this company is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the President of the United States. And until he's gone, everybody's going to be sitting on their thumbs.

posted July 19, 2011 12:22 PM            

Wall Street TRADES equities (stocks), bonds and commodities.

posted July 19, 2011 05:16 PM            

i realize a lot of people are losing their jobs or have lost them, jwhop. i have been here the whole time. HOWEVER as i keep saying and FOX and your other buds like to IGNORE, many of those jobs are lost to AUTOMATION, the example i have posted more than once being NETFLIX, which has been expanding big time over the past couple of years, and FIRING people by the thousands, and now raising their prices too. this is ALL down to automation and NOT to the recession. in fact the recession helps companies like netflix who can capitalize on people's downtime and inability to go OUT to entertainment.

posted July 19, 2011 11:29 PM            

as to what "THE PEOPLE" want, it seems that there is a big divide, with dems and independents overwhelmingly FAVOURING compromise on both sides of the budget/debt ceiling debate, and repubs and tea partiers wanting the republicans to stand still where they are.

i wonder...which is the larger "half"...since so many more people identify as Independents these days..?

posted July 20, 2011 09:25 AM            

These Socialists point to polls or a poll where respondents said the government should "raise revenues" to help solve the debt problem. But, Socialists can't think of any other way to RAISE revenues except to RAISE TAXES.

When the American people talk about raising revenues, they understand that to mean putting people back to work, broadening the TAX BASE to include more taxpayers and encouraging risk takers to start new businesses or expand existing businesses..putting more Americans to work or back to work which BROADENS THE TAX BASE AND RAISES REVENUES.

Raising taxes on the American people is the only track in the one track minds of Socialists..oh, and also the "political class" who have never in their lives had a job where they actually contributed to producing those TAX REVENUES by making something of value in the private sector of the economy.

So, when O'Bomber stands in front of the press cameras and says...the American people are on the same page I am....He's lying through his teeth...again.

It's time to BROADEN THE TAX BASE and RAISE REVENUES by demanding the 47% of Americans who are getting a free ride in America at the expense of productive citizens...PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE OF TAXES.

55% Oppose Tax Hike In Debt Ceiling Deal
Thursday, July 14, 2011

As the Beltway politicians try to figure out how they will raise the debt ceiling and for how long, most voters oppose including tax hikes in the deal.

Just 34% think a tax hike should be included in any legislation to raise the debt ceiling. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 55% disagree and say it should not. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

There is a huge partisan divide on the question. Fifty-eight percent (58%) of Democrats want a tax hike in the deal while 82% of Republicans do not. Among those not affiliated with either major political party, 35% favor a tax hike and 51% are opposed.

Americans who earn more than $75,000 a year are evenly divided as to whether a tax hike should be included in the debt ceiling deal. Those who earn less are opposed to including tax hikes.

Voters remain very concerned about the debt ceiling issue. Sixty-nine percent (69%) believe that it would be bad for the economy if a failure to raise the debt ceiling led to government defaults. Only 6% believe it would be good for theeconomy. Fourteen percent (14%) believe it would have no impact and 11% are notsure. These figures are little changed from a few weeks ago.

At the same time, however, 52% believe it would beeven more dangerous to raise the debt ceiling without making significant cuts in government spending. Thirty-seven percent (37%) take the opposite view and believe a government default would be more dangerous.

The national telephone survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on July 12-13, 2011 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points witha 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC.See methodology.

Eighty-five percent (85%) of voters are following the debt ceiling story at least Somewhat Closely. That figure includes 48% who are following it Very Closely. Older voters are following the story more closely than younger voters.

Thirty-eight percent (38%) believe the president has done a good or an excellent job handling the debt ceiling debate while 41% say he has done a poor job. Predictably, 74% of Democrats give him good or excellent marks while 71% of Republicans say he’s doing a poor job. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 31% give the president good or excellent marks on this topic while 42% say he’s doing a poor job.

By a 59% to 19% margin, Political Class voters favor a tax hike in the debt ceiling deal. By a 68% to 22% margin, Mainstream voters take the opposite view(for more on the Political Class-Mainstream classification, click here.

Data released earlier shows that most Americans believe tax hikes are bad for the economy and spending cuts are good.

posted July 20, 2011 09:41 AM            

Don`t spend more than is earned, make spending for the citizens paycheck feasible ie don`t add to our tax burden and take a paycut/benefits slash before raising taxes on the public...

Let them clean up their backyard before they start in mine

posted July 20, 2011 12:54 PM            

yes it is harder to borrow capital these days, though the banks are doing just fine thanks! but if you HAVE capital, this is the PERFECT time to take a risk and make even more. whatever the govt.

posted July 20, 2011 10:30 PM            

"i wonder why all those "socialist" countries are doing better than us??"...katatonic

What's that you say katatonic? Socialist countries are doing better than us?

Euro meltdown: Debt crisis threatens interest rates, says Bank of England
Nicholas Sarkozy holds crisis talks with Angela Merkel in Berlin

Bankers fear collapse worse than Wall Street 1929
Greek, Spain and Italy need to tackle their debt
Euro closes at 1.13 against the pound - same as at the start of the day

By James Chapman and Hugo Duncan

Last updated at 1:44 AM on 21st July 2011
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2016775/Europ ean-debt-crisis-Nicolas-Sarkozy-jets-Berlin-talks-Angela-Merkel.html

posted July 21, 2011 09:51 AM            

Those so called Independents you cite OPPOSE a tax hike by 51% to 35%.

posted July 21, 2011 11:12 AM            

But his overall point is correct that polls show most Americans support a balanced approach when given a choice between cutting spending or raising taxes. So we rate his statement Mostly True. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jul/15/barack-obama/barack-obama-said-80-percent-americans-favor-both-/

posted July 21, 2011 12:04 PM            

Btw, anyone who thinks Steve Wynn is the only CEO who recognizes O'Bomber's lunacy visa vie the US economy, there are more and they're not cowed by O'Bomber legion of leftist mushrooms.

July 21, 2011
Executive truth-tellers about Obama's disastrous policies
Thomas Lifson

Two billionaire magnates, the founds of huge successful enterprises, have dramatically spoken out against President Obama's management of the economy. They have been joined in criticizing the president by several CEOs of big companies. Normally, the heads of huge enterprises are cautious about offending presidents, but the magnitude of the disaster apparently has caused these men to speak truth to power.

Home Depot founder Bernie Marcus did not mince words speaking with Investor's Business Daily:

Having built a small business into a big one, I can tell you that today the impediments that the government imposes are impossible to deal with. Home Depot would never have succeeded if we'd tried to start it today. Every day you see rules and regulations from a group of Washington bureaucrats who know nothing about running a business. And I mean every day. It's become stifling.

If you're a small businessman, the only way to deal with it is to work harder, put in more hours, and let people go. When you consider that something like 70% of the American people work for small businesses, you are talking about a big economic impact.

and

[Obama has] never really worked a day outside the political or legal area. He doesn't know how to make a payroll, he doesn't understand the problems businesses face. I would try to explain that the plight of the busi nessman is very reactive to Washington. As Washington piles on regulations and mandates, the impact is tremendous. I don't think he's a bad guy. I just think he has no knowledge of this.

Meanwhile, IBD tallies the magnates, including billionaire Steve Wynn and non-founder CEOs, who are blasting Obama's economy.

Wynn has been a staunch supporter of the Obama administration from the beginning and still considers himself a Democrat. But even more remarkable, it's been out of character for CEOs such as Wynn to express their views in such blunt terms on political matters.

"A lot of people don't want to say that," he said. "They'll say, 'Oh God, don't be attacking Obama.' Well, this is Obama's deal, and it's Obama that's responsible for this fear in America," said Wynn. "The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution, and maybe 'we ought to do something to businesses that don't invest or (are) holding too much money.' We haven't heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists."

Business is being hammered, he said. "And I'm telling you that the business community in this country is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the president of the United States."

Others speaking out include:

•3M's George Buckley, who blasted Obama last February as anti-business. "We know what his instincts are," Buckley said. "We've got a real choice between manufacturing in Canada or Mexico - which tends to be more pro-business - and America," he told the Financial Times.
•Boeing's Jim McNerney, who in the Wall Street Journal last May called Obama's handpicked National Labor Relations Board's suit against his company a "fundamental assault on the capitalist principles that have sustained America's competitiveness since it became the world's largest economy nearly 140 years ago."
•Intel's Paul Otellini, who told CNET last August that the U.S. legal environment has become so hostile to business that there is likely to be "an inevitable erosion and shift of wealth, much like we're seeing today in Europe - this is the bitter truth."
There are others. read the whole thing.

posted July 21, 2011 04:37 PM            

Good place to st5art anyhow.