In keeping with the President’s penchant for hanging around with tax cheats who also preach higher taxes, such as Warren Buffett, the New York Post says:
This one’s truly, uh … rich: Billionaire Warren Buffett says folks like him should have to pay more taxes — but it turns out his firm, Berkshire Hathaway, hasn’t paid what it’s already owed for years.
That’s right: As Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson notes, the company openly admits that it owes back taxes since as long ago as 2002.
“We anticipate that we will resolve all adjustments proposed by the US Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for the 2002 through 2004 tax years … within the next 12 months,” the firm’s annual report says.
It also cites outstanding tax issues for 2005 through 2009.
From a business standpoint I can sympathize. Doing whatever it takes to protect one’s capital from government confiscation makes good sense. To make tax paying some kind of moral obligation is idiotic nonsense.
We now have an able and articulate challenger to replace the marxist madman Raul Grijalva in Congressional District 7 of Tucson, Arizona. Please play this video and get acquainted with our most articulate and sensible candidate, Gabriela Saucido Mercer.
Rep. Grijalva has been an embarrassment and and insult to our city, our state and our country. It’s past time to retire him.
The president and his political advisors apparently decided that their political advantage takes precedence over the dignity of fallen heroes and their families.
Pentagon officials had said that because 19 of 30 of the American families of the dead had objected to media coverage of the remains coming off a plane at Dover Air Force Base, no images could be taken. In addition, the Pentagon rejected media requests to take photos that showed officials at the ceremony but did not depict caskets.
President Barack Obama attended the ceremony, called a “dignified transfer,” for those killed in the worst single loss of the nearly 10-year war. An official White House photo of a saluting Obama was distributed to news media and published widely. It also was posted on the White House website as the “Photo of the Day.” It showed Obama and other officials in silhouette and did not depict caskets.
They couldn’t pass up an opportunity to portray their sun-god as a patriot. But I guess this kind of shameful, disgusting behavior is normal within the ranks of the Obama low-life crowd.
These Pictures of Chaos and Rioting in England show some consequences of multi-culturalism in a welfare society. (A subject I’ve blogged about here before.) When people become dependents on the government, and that government can no longer provide for them the comforts and benies they think they are owed, then they resort to mindless violence against “they system,” “the man” the “rich and privileged.”
A cohesive and homogeneous society, on the other hand, may provide ways for the dissatisfied to cope and overcome. And it will usually have a means of discouraging the kind of self-destructive behavior we see in London and elsewhere this week.
The dependency and sense of helplessness engendered by the welfare state is no less a sponsor of self-destructive outrage. People not responsible for themselves don’t consider themselves responsible for the property or rights of others.
Take a look at the photos linked above and think about it. Do you have sympathy or contempt for the rioters? Does anything excuse this behavior? Do you think it has meaning in the context of our own society’s race toward multi-culturalism and socialism?
It’s not about spending cuts or debt limitation. Congress has just given President Obama and his regime the go-ahead to indulge in an additional $2.4 Trillion drinking spending binge. That’s the bottom line and it stinks.
The American people have, once again, been screwed by their elected representatives. A concoction of lies, false promises and unrestrained spending passes for a “compromise” solution to a real problem. The government spends and promises too much year after year. The debt ceiling deal continues this tradition unchanged.
So what went wrong this time? Shouldn’t we be happy there were no obvious tax increases in the “compromise”? I don’t think so. In fact, I think the Tea Party and the Republicans blew it this time by not joining the Dems and asking for massive new taxes. Now, just hear me out.
The argument made by Dems is that there would be “massive pain and suffering” if valuable government programs were cut, so just raise taxes on the “rich”. The Reps demanded spending cuts and said the economy would suffer if taxes were raised. So what happened is what always happens. The Dems promised candy and the Reps promised ipecac. Guess what sways voters? Not discipline. Not logic. Avoidance of pain is a more powerful persuader than disciplined reform. So what’s to be done?
What about the Reps one-upping the Dems and demanding tax increases large enough to match the current yearly deficits? If these tax increases were a flat 10% of all economic activity, hitting rich and poor alike, no exceptions, then it would theoretically raise the $1.5 Trillion needed to pay the year’s deficit. The tax should be called the “Political Irresponsibility Tax” or “Obama’s Social Services Tax” or something. And this is important: The tax should be collected in cash, not withheld. Every citizen should be required to cough up the tax each year. Would that be painful? You bet it would. Would citizens question its value and necessity? Of course, that’s what we need and want.
We need citizens to suffer the actual consequences of the out of control spending. Currently nobody can summon up an image of the useless government programs financed by deficit spending. But a $5,000 to $10,000 check written to the IRS each year might focus their attention to reality. Only then will Washington’s drunken binge be brought under control. And, furthermore, we could call this a bi-partisan solution.