Turbo Timmy: Lift Debt Limit To Infinity… What could possibly go wrong? (CNSNews.com) – Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said Friday that Congress should stop placing legal limits on the amount of money the government can borrow and effectively lift the debt limit to infinity. On Bloomberg TV, “Political Capital” host Al Hunt asked Geithner if he believes “we ought to just eliminate the debt ceiling.” “Oh, absolutely,” Geithner said. “You do? Will you propose that?” Hunt asked. “Well, this is something only Congress can solve,” Geithner said. “Congress put it on itself. We’ve had 100 years of experience with it, and I think only once–last summer–did people decide to use it to threaten default on the American credit for the first time in history as a tool for political advantage. And that’s not a tenable strategy.”
Obama Admin Announces $6 Billion To Promote Clean Energy … In Asia… Our tax dollars hard at work. (CNSNews.com) – The White House announced the federal government will spend $6 billion over four years for a “sustainable energy future” plan with Asian countries that involves loaning tax dollars to other countries to increase their purchasing power for U.S. technology, services and equipment. “Recognizing that energy and the environment are among the most pressing issues confronting our region, President Obama, in partnership with Sultan Haji Hassanal Bolkiah of Brunei and President of the Republic of Indonesia Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, today proposed the U.S.-Asia Pacific Comprehensive Partnership for a Sustainable Energy Future,” the White House announced Tuesday as Obama visits Asian Pacific countries. The initiative comes after the Obama administration has been criticized for spending billions to subsidize U.S.-based green energy companies that went on to declare bankruptcy, including Solyndra, Ener1, A123, Beacon Power and other failed renewable energy ventures.
Fun Fact Of The Day: For Every 1.65 Employed Persons In The Private Sector, 1 Person Is On Welfare… When this comes to a head we’ll be lucky if we end up like Greece.
Adding government workers in as if they were on welfare is slightly disingenuous because the government workers do pay taxes... and a few of them even do productive work. :? But the point is well made. Sad to say but the second largest employer in my county is...the county government. And that doesn't even start to include city government(s), townships, federal workers, teachers, employees at the branch university, etc. etc. We also have a high jobless rate. I shudder to think about what the ratio would be for us.
Government workers are basically overhead. They produce little or nothing. Basically administrators and bureaucrats tasked with very little ; micro-managers. Very little is expected of them and their rewards are generally great. One of my best friends worked for the federal government in the Dept. of the Air Force.( Civilian ). He just "retired" four months ago. Actually his is on a prolonged sick leave. When his accumulated sick time expires he will return to the base for a small retirement ceremony. He has actually gotten a pay increase while sitting on his couch waiting to retire. His father held a similar position. All six kids did as well. Now there are 8 more of the next generation doing the same thing. IN fact, only one person in this entire extended family did not work for the USAF as a civilian employee. He worked for the post office.
Obama’s Fiscal Cliff Proposal: $1.6 Trillion In Tax Hikes, $50 Billion In Stimulus Spending, Obama Can Raise Debt Limit Without Congressional Approval – Update: McConnell “Burst Into Laughter” When Geithner Told Him Offer… At first I thought this was a joke, sadly, it is not. Via Guardian: The first serious proposals from the White House to solve the looming “fiscal cliff” of tax rises and budget cuts appear to have been rejected out of hand by Republican leaders in Congress. Treasury secretary Timothy Geithner is reported to have offered a set of proposals that include increasing tax rates on the wealthy, a one-year postponement of scheduled cuts in defence and domestic spending, and $400bn in savings from Medicare and other entitlement programmes. The proposals from the White House – the first to use hard numbers – include a $1.6tn tax increase, a $50bn stimulus package and new presidential powers to raise the federal debt limit without congressional approval. But based on public and private comments after their meetings, both House speaker John Boehner and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell – the two most senior Republicans in Congress – brushed aside the proposals as incomplete. Boehner said later: “No substantive progress has been made in the talks between the White House and the House over the last two weeks.” Boehner is said to have demanded matching spending cuts in return for raising the federal debt ceiling, which limits the total amount the US government can borrow. The Congressional Budget Office estimates it will be breached in February or March next year. USA Today reports that three Republican congressional aides familiar with the president’s offer cast it as an “outrageous” proposal that surprised the speaker and has set back negotiations on how to avoid the fiscal cliff coming at the end of the year, when all of the Bush-era tax rates expire and the first of $1.2tn in spending cuts over 10 years are triggered. Update: I doubt Geithner was surprised by McConnell’s reaction. (Weekly Standard) — Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, says he “burst into laughter” Thursday when Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner outlined the administration proposal for averting the fiscal cliff. He wasn’t trying to embarrass Geithner, McConnell says, only responding candidly to his one-sided plan, explicit on tax increases, vague on spending cuts… Geithner suggested $1.6 trillion in tax increases, McConnell says, but showed “minimal or no interest” in spending cuts. When congressional leaders went to the White House three days after the election, Obama talked of possible curbs on the explosive growth of food stamps and Social Security disability payments. But since Geithner didn’t mention them, those reductions appear to be off the table now, McConnell says.
White House: Obama “Will Not Sign” A Deal Unless It Increase Taxes… Yeah, we get it. (CNSNews.com) – White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said today that no matter what else happens President Barack Obama–who is the only modern president other than Franklin Roosevelt to serve in four years when federal spending topped 24 percent of GDP–will not sign a deal to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff that will arrive at the end of this year unless that deal increases taxes. “So the President made clear that he is not wedded to every detail of his plan,” said Carney. “The President has also made categorically and abundantly clear that he will not sign an extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for top earners. It’s bad economic policy and we cannot afford it. He will not sign that.” According to official calculations made by the White House Office of Management and Budget that go back to 1930, Barack Obama and Franklin Roosevelt are the only two presidents who have served in four fiscal years when federal spending exceeded 24 percent of GDP. Roosevelt did so in 1942, 1943, 1944, and 1945 (when he died in office). Obama did so in 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012.
Liberal House Democrats: Proposed Tax Hikes “Just The Beginning”… Brilliant, let’s commit national suicide! Via The Hill: A group of House Democrats has formed its own “Gang of Six” to push for progressive tax reform — in which the expiration of the Bush-era tax rates for the wealthiest Americans is “just the beginning.” “In response to the call for progressives to draw a red line in the fiscal cliff sand, here is our big picture stance on corporate and individual tax reform,” Rep. Michael Honda (D-Calif.) said in a statement. “Six progressive tax principles from a new Gang of Six. The expiration of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans is just the beginning of the discussion.” The progressive group also includes Reps. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), John Conyers (D-Mich.), Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), and Barbara Lee (D-Calif). The group says “low and moderate-income Americans are already contributing to deficit reduction,” and that “progressive tax reform is the only way that wealthy Americans can share significantly in that sacrifice.”
Obamanomics: American Households Net Worth Hit 43-Year Low… Hope and change. WASHINGTON (CBS DC) – The median net worth of American households has dropped to a 43-year low as the lower and middle classes appear poorer and less stable than they have been since 1969. According to a recent study by New York University economics professor Edward N. Wolff, median net worth is at the decades-low figure of $57,000 (in 2010 dollars). And as the numbers in his study reflect, the situation only appears worse when all the statistics are taken as a whole. According to Wolff, between 1983 and 2010, the percentage of households with less than $10,000 in assets (using constant 1995 dollars) rose from 29.7 percent to 37.1 percent. The “less than $10,000″ figure includes the numerous households that have no assets at all, or “negative assets,” which is otherwise known as “debt.” Over that same period of time, the wealthiest 1 percent of American households increased their average wealth by 71 percent.
Predatory Obama Administration Targets And Kills More American Workers Home - by BigFurHat - December 2, 2012 - 18:30 America/New_York - 48 Comments MarinJournal Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced Thursday the Drakes Bay Oyster Co.’s operating permit will expire at Point Reyes National Seashore on Friday, returning Drakes Estero to wilderness. “I’ve taken this matter very seriously,” Salazar said in a written statement. “We’ve undertaken a robust public process to review the matter from all sides, and I have personally visited the park to meet with the company and members of the community. “I believe it is the right decision for Point Reyes National Seashore and for future generations who will enjoy this treasured landscape.” Drakes Bay Oyster Co. Kevin Lunny received a call from Salazar at 9:40 a.m. informing him of the decision. “This is beyond imaginable,” Lunny said. “We felt confident the secretary would make a different decision.” Last week, Salazar came to tour the operation and to speak to Lunny and his supporters, as well as to meet with opponents of the oyster company. Lunny said he is not sure what will happen to the company’s 30 employees and the on-site housing where about half of them live. Also uncertain is the fate of some 8 million to 10 million oysters that are currently in the water, growing in various stages of development. The oysters would have a market value of about 50 cents each, but the last of them will not be ready to harvest for another two years, Lunny said.
Fun Fact Of The Day: US Could Give Every Poor American A Check For $20,000 With The Money Spent On Welfare Last Year… Long live the welfare state! (CNSNews.com) – Former Republican vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said Tuesday that over a trillion dollars was spent on welfare programs last year, and for that amount, “you could give every single poor American a check for $20,000.” “Just last year, total federal and state spending on means-tested programs came to over one trillion dollars. What does that mean in practical terms? For that amount of money, you could give every single poor American a check for $20,000 – every man, woman and child,” said Ryan in a speech at the Jack Kemp Award ceremony.
Oklahoma Versus Obamacare Home - by Cardigan - December 6, 2012 - 23:40 America/New_York - 1 Comment NRO Oklahoma attorney general Scott Pruitt The first legal challenges to Obamacare rested on constitutional principles, but a new effort out of Oklahoma goes after the cogs that make the law function. State attorney general Scott Pruitt is trying to block the Internal Revenue Service from imposing fees on employers and individuals who don’t comply with the law’s mandates. In doing so, he may create a way for other states to fight back against the federal government’s top-down management of health care. If the suit succeeds, the law will not be invalidated, but if enough states choose to opt out, the resulting lack of funds could make Obamacare’s financial structure untenable. “This is a very important case,” Pruitt tells National Review Online. “This is a challenge to the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and it matters.” Yesterday the federal government filed a motion to dismiss Pruitt’s case, challenging Oklahoma’s standing and also citing the Anti-Injunction Act, which prevents people from suing to avoid paying their taxes. The next step is for Pruitt to file a response, which is due December 31. Oklahoma’s legal argument is complex, a logical train that derives from the convoluted provisions of the law. The implications are worth the effort it takes to understand them, though it certainly takes some determination. Here we go. Point one: The ACA offers tax credits and subsidies to individuals and companies that buy insurance through a state-run exchange — if their state has set up such an exchange. Point two: The federal government establishes exchanges for states that do not set up their own. Point three: The section of the ACA that establishes these credits and subsidies says they are authorized only for exchanges “established by a state.” (Michael Cannon of the Cato Institute and Jonathan Adler of Case Western Reserve University Law School first noticed this provision of the ACA; the law’s defenders say it is a minor drafting error that courts will and should overlook.) Point four: The ACA also imposes fines and penalties on individuals who do not buy health insurance, and on businesses that do not buy it for their employees. (Insurance under Obamacare will be significantly more expensive than regular insurance, which is why they have to pay you to buy it and fine you if you don’t.) Now we get to point five, which is the real crux of the argument: The ACA specifies that these fines or penalties apply only to individuals or companies that are eligible to receive the tax credits and subsidies. Conclusion: If a state chooses not to set up an exchange of its own, residents of that state are not eligible to receive tax credits or subsidies for buying insurance, so there can also be no fines or penalties for not buying insurance, even if there is a federally run exchange in the state. In other words, the individual and employer mandates are nullified in that state.
Fact: 73% Of New Jobs Created In Last 5 Months Are In Government… (CNSNews.com) – Seventy-three percent of the new civilian jobs created in the United States over the last five months are in government, according to official data published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In June, a total of 142,415,000 people were employed in the U.S, according to the BLS, including 19,938,000 who were employed by federal, state and local governments. By November, according to data BLS released today, the total number of people employed had climbed to 143,262,000, an overall increase of 847,000 in the six months since June. In the same five-month period since June, the number of people employed by government increased by 621,000 to 20,559,000. These 621,000 new government jobs created in the last five months equals 73.3 percent of the 847,000 new jobs created overall.
From a friend on Facebook: you better not work. you better not try. you better not earn. I'm telling you why. Obama Claus is coming to town. He sees you when you're building. he wants what you all make. he'll tell the 47 per cent. that being rich is a mistake. oh you better not work. you better not try. you better not earn. I'm telling you why. Obama Claus is coming to town. he’ll tell you to be thankful. to bow down and give thanks. or he’ll send you to a FEMA camp. to get your thinking “straight”. oh you better not work. you better not try. you better not earn. I'm telling you why. Obama Claus is coming to town. he'll give you a free cell phone. say Obamacare is great. he'll tell you being a success. is something you should hate. oh you better not work. you better not try. you better not earn. I'm telling you why. Obama Claus is coooming tooo tooown!
Steny Hoyer Attempts The Jedi Mind Trick: The Debt Limit “Is Not Real”… If it’s a “phony political debate” then why did Barack Obama as a senator vote against raising it? (CNSNews.com) – House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said Tuesday that the debt limit is “not real” and should not be part of any negotiations to avert the fiscal cliff. “First of all, I again would urge the Speaker not to use the debt limit to the detriment of the credit-worthiness of the United States of America as a leverage point,” Hoyer said during his weekly pen and pad briefing with reporters on Capitol Hill. “It is not a leverage point.” “It is not real,” he said. “It is a phony political debate. We have incurred debt and the United States will meet its obligations, pure and simple.”
SENATE DEMOCRATS URGE UNDOING OF OBAMACARE Home - by Cardigan - December 13, 2012 - 22:00 America/New_York - 12 Comments Big Gov Many powerful Democrats, even some of the most liberal among them, are supporting what amounts to a dismantling of President Obama’s signature health care law. Using “Republican” language to make their case, these Democrats are attempting to repeal some of the funding mechanisms as well as the cost-containment measures that were purportedly inherent in the law. With some of their most influential constituent groups facing onerous tax increases that are slated to help fund the law’s mandates and regulations, Senators like Al Franken (D-MN), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Charles Schumer (D-NY), Patty Murray (D-WA), John Kerry (D-MA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), and others — all of whom voted in favor of the law — are aiming to delay or outright repeal parts of ObamaCare. A top Senate staffer explained (after ObamaCare passed), “This is a coverage bill, not a cost reduction bill.” David Bowen, who helped to craft the legislation, said that Senate Democrats had planned to follow in the path of Massachusetts’ RomneyCare plan by providing insurance coverage first, “knowing that that would bring on a cost battle second.” In fact, RomneyCare’s mandates and subsidies caused health care costs to dramatically increase in the Bay state, leading the current governor and state legislature to exert never-before-seen controls on insurers and health care providers as they also raised taxes. Not surprisingly, as Senate Democrats have gotten a look at what exactly is in ObamaCare, the parts of the law that were intended to control costs have gradually been stripped from the legislation.