2-17-2010
Virginia will sue over health care
Idaho first to sign law aimed at health care plan
Levin’s Landmark Legal Foundation to File Immediate Constitutional Challenge If House Dems Try to Pass Health-Care Without Actually Voting on It
Read MoreThere’s a reason he refuses to accept repayment of TARP money
By STUART VARNEY
I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn’t much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street’s black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?
My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell ‘em what to do. Control. Direct. Command.
Read More
Friday, 27 Feb 2009 | 4:39 PM ETText Size
Posted By: Larry Kudlow
Anchor
Let me be very clear on the economics of President Obama’s State of the Union speech and his budget.
He is declaring war on investors, entrepreneurs, small businesses, large corporations, and private-equity and venture-capital funds.
That is the meaning of his anti-growth tax-hike proposals, which make absolutely no sense at all — either for this recession or from the standpoint of expanding our economy’s long-run potential to grow.
Raising the marginal tax rate on successful earners, capital, dividends, and all the private funds is a function of Obama’s left-wing social vision, and a repudiation of his economic-recovery statements. Ditto for his sweeping government-planning-and-spending program, which will wind up raising federal outlays as a share of GDP to at least 30 percent, if not more, over the next 10 years.
$25, 573.48 – what Barack Obama’s budget will cost each taxpayer
Posted By: Toby Harnden at Feb 26, 2009 at 19:06:47 [General]So how much will President Barack Obama’s budget cost us? The projected 2010 budget of $3.552 trillion can be found on page 114 of the “New Era of Responsibility” budget here.
The US Census bureau estimates that the current US population is 304,059,724. Dividing the $3.552 trillion by that gives us close to the $11,833 that Drudge came up with. ABC’s Jake Tapper reports that there wil be $989 billion in new taxes over the next decade.
I’m an American taxpayer and the starkest figure is what this could cost me. The latest figure I could find for the number of US taxpayers is 138,893,908 returns in 2007 here. By my reckoning, that’s $25, 573.48 each.
Read More
Flabbergasted that our country is about to sign itself away from freedom and prosperity to debt and slavery, ($800,000,000,000+ spending bill) I just did some quick calculations. Do you realize how big a bill this is? Do you realize the amount of money our Democratic senators and President Obama (“The One”) are campaigning to stick each one of us with? Every single US taxpayer will owe the government $5800 to pay for this bill! This is the biggest waste of money I have heard of in a long time. Lets just go over some numbers:
For ease of figuring, lets round the false “Stimulus Bill” to $800 Billion (that’s $800,000,000,000 so you can see how big it really is again)
-Size of Bill: $800,000,000,000
-US Population: 303,000,000 people
-US Tax Paying Population: 138,000,000 people
Supposedly, this is to stimulate the economy and create jobs for those loosing them right?
-Total unemployed in the US is about 10,000,000 (Latest numbers say 7.2%)
-Total Jobs lost in 2008: 2,590,000
-or-
More government spending by Hoover and Roosevelt did not pull the United States economy out of the Great Depression in the 1930s. More government spending did not solve Japan’s “lost decade†in the 1990s. As such, it is a triumph of hope over experience to believe that more government spending will help the U.S. today. To improve the economy, policymakers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth. Signed:
Read More| Posted: 01/20/09 06:12 PM [ET] | |
| 2009-2010 will rank with 1913-14, 1933-36, 1964-65 and 1981-82 as years that will permanently change our government, politics and lives. Just as the stars were aligned for Wilson, Roosevelt, Johnson and Reagan, they are aligned for Obama. Simply put, we enter his administration as free-enterprise, market-dominated, laissez-faire America. We will shortly become like Germany, France, the United Kingdom, or Sweden — a socialist democracy in which the government dominates the economy, determines private-sector priorities and offers a vastly expanded range of services to many more people at much higher taxes.
Obama will accomplish his agenda of “reform†under the rubric of “recovery.†Using the electoral mandate bestowed |
