Category Archives: Taxation

Updated: Hand-Out Hussein

Barack Obama, Democrats, Economy, Political Philosophy, Taxation

Obama is right; the Bush administration has been one of the most fiscally reckless administrations in American history. Obama pointed today, in particular, to the never-ending spending on the occupation of Iraq.

What is Obama’s antidote to these wrack and ruin policies that have given us deficits and an upward of $9 trillion in national debt, causing prices of all commodities, gas included, to soar?

Hussein’s solution is not to stop spending, but to spend that money AT HOME. What money? Didn’t you just say, Sir, that there is no money to spend?

Of course, “A debased dollar, price inflation, dwindling availability of seed capital, malinvestment and speculation (bubbles)—these are some of the consequences of the government’s promiscuous spending and inflationary practices.”

“The first stage on the road to recovery is to pinpoint the problem and take responsibility for it. You’ve spent more than you’ve produced and have switched to living on credit. Having exhausted your creditor’s good will, but not your insatiable appetites, you turn to counterfeiting cash in the basement—that’s where the U.S. finds itself today.”

“The second stage in getting solvent is to quit spending and borrowing, live within your means, and start paying down what you owe.”

Yet deficit spending is the centerpiece of Obama’s domestic policies.

And the band of fools plays on…

Update (June 11): On who ought to have the vote:

“A sizeable majority of the people ‘receives in disbursements more than it pays in taxes.’ The minority funding the orgy ‘pays in taxes more than it receives back in disbursements.’ The latter, not the former, should have the vote.”—ILANA (April 24, 2007)

&

“Taxpayers ought to have the vote, not so tax consumers. And that goes for politicians, who pay taxes out of what they loot from the taxpayer.”—ILANA (April 24, 2007)

Updated: Elections Fatigue (& A Shout-Out To An Anti-Politician)

America, Education, Elections 2008, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Media, Taxation

What’s there to say about the interminable electioneering we’re being subjected to? I have less and less to say by the day.

For one, the candidates do not represent me or uphold my rights. If anything; they promise to violate them. The Hillary-Hussein-McCain unholy trinity caters in one way or another to the burgeoning American welfariate.

I’m also repulsed by the unchecked chauvinism of the elections coverage. Not a word about world events have I heard in weeks, perhaps months. America’s pathological, election-time self-absorption makes a mockery of the idea that the US is suited to lead the world. Shouldn’t a world leader take an interest in the world?

I believe the last debate between Hillary and Barack was actually worth watching if only for the performance of a journalist whom I’ve praised in the past: Charles Gibson. Gibson actually flouted the common consensus about his job description and asked the messiah some tough questions. He has a pattern of such subversion.

Alas, by that time, I was so thoroughly fatigued, I failed to watch.

Let me take the time, however, to give a shout-out to an anti-politician: Actor Wesley Snipes, who “was sentenced to three years in prison for a “history of contempt over a period of time” for U.S. tax laws.” Snipes got bad legal advice, but he’s a hero for acting on his contempt for legalized theft.

Update (April 26): MSM, which is seldom to be trusted, keeps reporting that the American people cannot tolerate the scrappy competition between Hillary and Barack. We are led to believe that, as I put it, Americans are so delicate they cannot stomach “a vigorous race for the highest office in the land because it is, well, vigorous.”

Presuming this is true and Americans are as soft as MSM portrays them—at least the ones that aren’t brewing with bitterness and bigotry and doodling with guns—why do you think this is so?

Could it be that the emphasis in schools on cooperative as opposed competitive endeavors—on the girlie over the boyish mindset—has something to do with it? The fact that everyone gets a prize at school for something, rather than for winning or being the best—could this be a factor in crippling the competitive spirit?

If the media is to be believed, Americans will soon be assuming the fetal position and whimpering in the corner if Hill and B. Hussein don’t stop exchanging barbs.

Boohoo.

Updated: Elections Fatigue (& A Shout-Out To An Anti-Politician)

America, Education, Elections 2008, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Media, Taxation

What’s there to say about the interminable electioneering we’re being subjected to? I have less and less to say by the day.

For one, the candidates do not represent me or uphold my rights. If anything; they promise to violate them. The Hillary-Hussein-McCain unholy trinity caters in one way or another to the burgeoning American welfariate.

I’m also repulsed by the unchecked chauvinism of the elections coverage. Not a word about world events have I heard in weeks, perhaps months. America’s pathological, election-time self-absorption makes a mockery of the idea that the US is suited to lead the world. Shouldn’t a world leader take an interest in the world?

I believe the last debate between Hillary and Barack was actually worth watching if only for the performance of a journalist whom I’ve praised in the past: Charles Gibson. Gibson actually flouted the common consensus about his job description and asked the messiah some tough questions. He has a pattern of such subversion.

Alas, by that time, I was so thoroughly fatigued, I failed to watch.

Let me take the time, however, to give a shout-out to an anti-politician: Actor Wesley Snipes, who “was sentenced to three years in prison for a “history of contempt over a period of time” for U.S. tax laws.” Snipes got bad legal advice, but he’s a hero for acting on his contempt for legalized theft.

Update (April 26): MSM, which is seldom to be trusted, keeps reporting that the American people cannot tolerate the scrappy competition between Hillary and Barack. We are led to believe that, as I put it, Americans are so delicate they cannot stomach “a vigorous race for the highest office in the land because it is, well, vigorous.”

Presuming this is true and Americans are as soft as MSM portrays them—at least the ones that aren’t brewing with bitterness and bigotry and doodling with guns—why do you think this is so?

Could it be that the emphasis in schools on cooperative as opposed competitive endeavors—on the girlie over the boyish mindset—has something to do with it? The fact that everyone gets a prize at school for something, rather than for winning or being the best—could this be a factor in crippling the competitive spirit?

If the media is to be believed, Americans will soon be assuming the fetal position and whimpering in the corner if Hill and B. Hussein don’t stop exchanging barbs.

Boohoo.

Choosing Forms of Slavery

Economy, Taxation

‘No Tax’ then ‘Flat Tax’

Repealing the income tax is the fairest “system” possible. You own yourself, your labor, and the rewards therefrom, lock-stock-and-barrel. But if we have to choose between forms of enslavement, as we indeed do, then the flat tax is the best.

I disagree with the “Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation” for laboring to allay the “fears” of thieving politicians about the decrease in revenues a flat tax rate portends. Let the parasites live within their means.

Still, this information about the global flat tax trend from the CF & P Foundation is important–it relays the degree to which the US will be left in the dust if it doesn’t begin to play economic catch up. (But the band plays on, and the ship of fools keeps featuring the Huckster’s or Neal Boortz’s Fair Tax fatuity.

This from the CF & P Foundation:

“… The number will probably be higher by the time you are reading this, but as this article went to press, 24 nations have adopted some form of single-rate tax regime. These reforms have generated impressive results, including faster growth, more jobs, and increased competitiveness. While politicians generally are most concerned about losing tax revenue, they should not worry. Flat tax systems oftentimes generate higher tax revenues because of more income and better compliance.

The economic consequences of tax reform are positive, but the political implications also are profound. Governments are deciding – in part because labor and capital can cross national borders to escape punitive tax rates – that it no longer makes sense to discriminate against highly-productive taxpayers. Thanks to tax competition, expect the number of flat tax countries to continue to grow.”