moonbattery.gif


« Media's Obamunist Bias Visible From Russia | Main | Within the First Six Months »


October 28, 2008

Obama Is Already Defining "Rich" Downward

Obamanomics is based on the morally repugnant class warfare principle of setting aside a group of people called "the rich," who are to be pillaged and exploited for the sake of everyone else. Under Stalin, to qualify as rich you only needed to own more than one samovar (a device for brewing tea found in most Russian homes); people were actually shot if government inspectors found a second samovar in the home of a "kulak" ("rich peasant").

Obviously imposing excessive taxation on "the rich," however they are defined, will cripple the economy as a whole, making everyone more miserable. It isn't the poor who invest and employ — it is the demonized rich.

But before we even reach that point, there is the problem that the grandiose schemes of egomaniacal socialist dictators tend to cost more than even the rich can pay. This is why the definition of "rich" slides downward until you find yourself dragged off by thugs over a samovar.

Obama has promised that he will only loot families that make more than $250,000 per year, showering their money down upon the rest of us by offering "tax cuts" even to people who don't pay any federal taxes. But what's this? The Moonbat Messiah hasn't even been elected and already the mark has been moved down to $200,000:

Meanwhile, Plugs Biden has lowered the mark to $150,000.

Once in office, Obama bin Biden would inevitably continue to adjust the definition of rich until it covers anyone gainfully employed. Those who actually think their tax burden would be reduced under these socialists are morbidly gullible — although I don't doubt that some who don't even pay taxes will be getting tax credit handouts at the expense of a dwindling class of people who work for a living.

Hat tip: Say Anything; on tips from nanc and J.

Posted by Van Helsing at October 28, 2008 10:14 AM

Comments

There is simply no way for Obama to pay for his gargantuan expansion of health care entitlements, education spending, infrastructure "investment," tax welfare checks to people who don't pay taxes, universal Pre-K and 85 billion a year to third world dictators... without massive tax increases.

Not even the Obamunist trolls who come here to shill for their Messiah can explain how he intends to pay for it all without massive tax increases. Not even gutting the military will cover it.

Posted by: V the K at October 28, 2008 10:38 AM

Next move will be that $200,000 applies to familys while single people are rich at $100,000.

Then to finance all the new social programs he has in mind, it will likely be lowered to $100,000 for families and $50,000 for singles. And when costs spiral out of control.... you get the picture.

All this doesnt include raising the caps on Social Security.

One wonders why so many wealthy liberals support Obama - they use tax accountants who already cooking up ways to evade the new tax increases. Its all for show. Its why when maximum tax rates were double what they are now (back in the 70s), the upper income groups paid half of the tax burden they do now. The higher the tax rates the greater the incentive to come up with creative ways to shelter income. It will be great times for tax accountants.

Posted by: Anonymous at October 28, 2008 10:43 AM

Also, a lot of Obama's young and naive supporters don't remember that BJ Clinton also promised a tax-cut, and broke the promise before he was even sworn in. Instead, he forced through the largest tax increase in history.

Of course, Clinton's tax increase only tamped down a growing economy. A massive tax increase in the teeth of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression will have a rather different impact.

Posted by: V the K at October 28, 2008 10:43 AM

Also, the fact the rich have accountants will also be the reason why the $250,000 level was always BS. They will have to reach down to the $30,000 - $70,000 level to get the majority of Americans who dont have high paid tax accountants cooking their books.

Posted by: Anonymous at October 28, 2008 10:46 AM

One thing they don't consider, money is worthless when the engine of wealth is destroyed.

Posted by: Kevin R at October 28, 2008 11:14 AM

Don't forget to figure into all this smoke and mirrors the fact that he will raise taxes when he rolls back the Bush tax cuts. I guess his minions don't want to point out that little nuance since they never do a full disclosure on that aspect of his tax plan.

Posted by: IOpian at October 28, 2008 11:18 AM

What is anything really worth. How would a huge diamond be worth to a man in the middle of a desert dying of thirst? Would the diamond be worth more or less than a gallon of water?

I bought 2 $50 BILLION bank notes from Zimbabwe on EBAY. How much is it worth? About $3 on Ebay (the price they are selling for). As currency they are worthless. Though at one time you could buy 2 or 3 eggs with it - before they knocked all the zeroes off over the summer. Kind of makes US inflation seem tame by comparison.

Posted by: Anonymous at October 28, 2008 11:28 AM

Anon: with that $50 billion note you could have bought at least one AK round to put in the head of that worthless piece of Obama-ass-kissing shit, Mugabe.

Posted by: Anonymous at October 28, 2008 11:34 AM

Really? I never went bullet shopping in Zimbabwe. In any case that country is totally FUBAR'd. That what they get for kicking the producers off their farms and handing the land over to a bunch of spear chuckers that have no idea how to grow anything.

Posted by: Anonymous at October 28, 2008 11:52 AM

did anybody catch spike lee's "pre-deortained" comment at msnbc?

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!

Posted by: nanc at October 28, 2008 1:10 PM

Considering that almost everthing that comes out of his pie hole is a lie, it doesn't much matter what he says, does it? $100K, $500K, it's all the same to me.

I just bought one of those Zimbabwe dollar, I mean 500 million dollar, bills. I intend to use it as an object lesson in socialism for my family and friends. Thanks for mentioning it!

Posted by: ent at October 28, 2008 1:34 PM

Anon, you touched on the fundamental fallacious phantasy (how's that for alliteration?) of Socialism... that somehow, something would be worth something other than what someone else is willing to pay for it.

That's how you get price controls, rent controls, minimum wage hikes, etc.

Posted by: hiram at October 28, 2008 1:45 PM

I got a Zimbabwe 1 million dollar note, a 100 billion dollar note (the highest denomination ever issued by any government), and a 1 cent (!) note a while back. At the beginning of August, they revalued their currency by dropping TEN ZEROES, making the 100 billion note into 10 dollars. Last I checked, as money it had dropped below 2 cents US. I have a hard time getting peoples' minds wrapped around this, and that the 1 million dollar note would actually be worth more if it didn't have anything printed on it, as at least you could use it as notepaper. You have to be able to contemplate your own insignificance in the universe to even consider 1 cent.

Posted by: Mr Evilwrench at October 28, 2008 2:04 PM

" fundamental fallacious phantasy (how's that for alliteration?)"--hiram

That's a fine example of alliteration, sir.
And clever, too.
As for the anon, he doesn't know what he touched on. I think he was just swinging away until he hit something.

Posted by: theQUICK at October 28, 2008 2:14 PM

My apologies, anon.
I had you mixed up with another anon in another post.

Posted by: theQUICK at October 28, 2008 2:18 PM

I'm considering quitting my job, cashing in my 401K and other investments, and retiring at my tender age of 53.

I don't have a lot - just enough to pay cash for a small rural place. But growing my own chickens and vegetables would beat working for Obama and feeding his idiots. Of course, if all other experienced senior engineers do the same after being Obamaraped America's infrastructure will fail within 5 years.

I wonder what part of "Socialism spawns apathy, apathy spawns failure" the Obaminists don't understand?

Posted by: Jimbo at October 28, 2008 3:42 PM

I always wanted to be rich, but this wasn't quite the way I pictured getting there.

Posted by: CoderInCrisis at October 28, 2008 4:54 PM

IOpian
I was going to mention THE ONE'S promass to repeal Bush's tax cuts. So he'll RAISE taxes on all of us then lower them for SOME of us, PLUS he has said that he will raise the capital gains tax, which will hit many middle and LOWER income people who have invested in stocks and bonds as a nest egg for their retirement. That's mighty "white" of him.

Liberal scconomics reminds me of the Wizard Of Id comic where "Robbing Hood" gives money to a pennyless peasant, then robs him because the peasant now has money!

Posted by: KHarn at October 28, 2008 6:19 PM

KHarn. There are no Bush tax cuts to repeal. The tax cuts were temporary and due to expire. Capital gains tax increases will hit the rich more than the middle class and the poor and will not affect 401k earnings where more of the middle class and poor have their retirement money. Why does someone who sits on his ass and collects dividends pay a lower tax rate than someone who works for a living?

On a separate note, why are you so in favor of a tax reduction policy that gives most of the benefits to the rich? I'm still waiting for it to trickle down to me.

Posted by: roald at October 28, 2008 8:04 PM

KHarn -
Speaking of the Capital Gains Tax - I just watched on FOX that the owner of the Miami Dolphins will put the team up for sale if the Big Empty 'O' wins - the reason? The Big Empty 'O's capital gains tax increase will cost him millions (and millions) of $$ that he would rather be able to give to charity.

The only charity that Obamaraper wants anyone to give to is HIM.

Posted by: Jimbo at October 28, 2008 8:24 PM

Jimbo - the little farm on the prairie sounds nice until The One decides to borrow a page from Mugabe's playbook and "redistribute" your farmland to the peasants.
Just make sure your farm house is on the high ground, with a good choke-point.

Posted by: PabloD at October 28, 2008 8:30 PM

I have lots and lots of ammo, Pablo. If they take it from me, it will be because I won't be using it any longer.

They'll have quite a mess to clean up, though.

Posted by: Jimbo at October 28, 2008 8:34 PM

SQUAWK SQUAWK TAKE YOUR GRUBBY RED MITTS OUT OF MY WALLET OBAMA

Posted by: Spurwing Plover at October 28, 2008 9:15 PM

KHarn. There are no Bush tax cuts to repeal. The tax cuts were temporary and due to expire. Capital gains tax increases will hit the rich more than the middle class and the poor and will not affect 401k earnings where more of the middle class and poor have their retirement money. Why does someone who sits on his ass and collects dividends pay a lower tax rate than someone who works for a living?

On a separate note, why are you so in favor of a tax reduction policy that gives most of the benefits to the rich? I'm still waiting for it to trickle down to me.

Posted by: roald at October 28, 2008 8:04 PM
==================================================

LMAO "I am still waiting for it to trickle down to me"

That is exactly what is wrong with this country...get off your ass moonbat and start producing.

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take from you everything you have." Gerald Ford, August 12, 1974.

Posted by: straightline at October 29, 2008 4:42 AM

People in general just dont understand that when the taxes of "the rich" go up, they pass along that tax increase to those who arent rich via cuts in pay, cuts in benefits and price increases whenever possible. In countries like Cuba there are no rich (other than top government officials) - has that made life good for the average Cuban? Check out www.therealcuba.com for details. Theres a good commentary on the US Presidential race.

As for tax cuts going to "the rich". Alot depends on how you define "rich". To a person making $10,000/year, rich might be $50,000 - but to someone living in California, rich might be $250,000 or $500,000 or even $1 million+ Regular houses cost $500,000. In any case when the top 1% pay 40% of the taxes, Id say they are paying their fair share - probably more than their fair share.

All I know is that a poor man never provided me with a job.

Posted by: Anonymous at October 29, 2008 5:24 AM

In the words of Shephard Smith "Man...it just gets frightening sometimes."


Look for the Shepherd Smith interview of Joe the Plumber on YouTube.

Posted by: Anonymous at October 29, 2008 6:09 AM

Thanks gang, you saved me a post.

Posted by: KHarn at October 29, 2008 2:26 PM

Anon, you forgot that when the rich's taxes go up, they also frequently cut jobs in order to lessen their losses.

Posted by: Adam at October 30, 2008 9:26 AM

Posted by: Anonymous at October 30, 2008 12:19 PM

I dare remind that all modern dictatorships were established on the base of appeal to "abased and aggrieved" (aka: the poor): Bolsheviks, Nazis, Communits, all promised to their electorate the immediate bliss by governmental making the rich poorer and the poor richer.
This scheme never went further than another one mess of pottage.
The reason?
If all those power-seekers would make their electorate happy as promised, their electorate will be eliminated since it will be "abased and aggrieved" no more.
History had clearly proven how foolish would be expect from Commies/Nazis to be honestly wanting real life improvements.
Good life means no dependence on government. Therefore, good life and Commies are mutually excluding notions.

Posted by: Constantine Ivanov at November 1, 2008 10:28 AM

I dare remind that all modern dictatorships were established on the base of appeal to "abased and aggrieved" (aka: the poor): Bolsheviks, Nazis, Communits, all promised to their electorate the immediate bliss by governmental making the rich poorer and the poor richer.
This scheme never went further than another one mess of pottage.
The reason?
If all those power-seekers would make their electorate happy as promised, their electorate will be eliminated since it will be "abased and aggrieved" no more.
History had clearly proven how foolish would be expect from Commies/Nazis to be honestly wanting real life improvements.
Good life means no dependence on government. Therefore, good life and Commies are mutually excluding notions.
Hello from a person who's got personal experience of living under them almost 50 years.

Posted by: Constantine Ivanov at November 1, 2008 12:47 PM