WND Exclusive – ALL INCOME IS 1ST THE GOVERNMENT’S

The Republican tax plan has finally made its debut. At first blush it appears pretty good. At its heart the plan is populist, but what can we expect in these times?

As one might expect of populists, it is geared toward the lower income scale, but does have a few cut-outs for the wealthier among us – and is certainly more business-friendly than the status quo.

However, we must remember that all tax legislation begins in the House, so this is just a starting point, and what we see is as good as it will be.

The bill isn’t going to improve from here out. It will only get worse – more watered down, as the Democrats’ long-knives predictably start tearing into it. read more

Tax Cuts and Discounts are Really the Same Thing

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

As the tax debate in Washington heats up, we’re hearing the same tired old refrain of, “The rich don’t deserve nor do they need a tax cut.” It’s an absurdly populist statement. However, this time it’s coming from both the dems and republicans.

In defense of tax cuts for all, the rich included, let me first quote some boring facts and figures. Then I will attempt to inject some business sense into an otherwise senseless argument.

Tax cuts will in fact grow the economy, yet I heard the leftist billionaire Tom Steyer say that since the 1980’s, the top tax rate has been cut from 70% to under 40%. He adds that during that time wages for workers have stagnated. I won’t argue that point here.

I heard him say he got rich on Wall Street, so he knows all about the economy. If this is so, and we’ll assume it is – it would mean he’s lying by omission and knows he is. But he knows most aren’t schooled enough to catch him in the lie.

In fact the economy did grow massively after Reagan’s huge tax cuts. But wages are just a portion of economic growth. And wages, like almost everything else, do not occur in a bubble. Other things affect wages – not just growth, or lack of it.

First, would you rather have a job at slightly lower wages, or no job at all, which occurred during the Carter years? And of course wages often don’t tell the whole story. read more

EU Targets Another American Company – Because They Are American

from IBD:

The European Union has once again kicked a giant U.S. tech firm in the shins in yet another pathetic fit of jealous pique. Last time, it was Apple (AAPL), supposedly because it didn’t pay enough taxes. This time, it’s Google, largely because, well, European companies just can’t compete.

The EU’s so-called Competition Commission — whose name suggests the same level of irony as the Ministry of Truth did in George Orwell’s “1984” — says that Alphabet(GOOGL) subsidiary Google must cough up a record fine of $2.7 billion because Europe’s homegrown firms can’t compete.

“Google abused its market dominance as a search engine by promoting its own comparison shopping service in its search results, and demoting those of competitors,” said the EU’s top antitrust bureaucrat, Margrethe Vestager. “What Google has done is illegal under EU rules.” read more

Dick Durbin Bullies Walgreen

from IBD:

Well, the thugs and bullies in the White House and on Capitol Hill have scored another victory — if you can call it that — over a major American company.

After a month of assaults and threats from the D.C. political class, venerable drug retailer Walgreen Co. announced it will remain headquartered in Illinois for the time being instead of entering a tax-inversion merger with Europe’s Alliance Boots that would move it abroad to lower its tax bill.

Good news for Washington, but the millions of Walgreen shareholders aren’t partying it up. read more

Land of the Free?

from The American Thinker:

John M. Horne was born in 1813 in the Land of the Free, an inheritance from several distant uncles who fought against Cornwallis The home of the brave came before the land of the free. 

Shortly after John and Clarissa Warren married in 1843, they made the long journey from North Carolina to western Kentucky. Their simple farm life was free from any king or tyrant in a distant capital. In the land of the free, no one could tell them what to do with their property or how much of their money they could keep.

John died sometime between 1860 and 1870, perhaps in the Civil War. His teenage son, John C., took the responsibility of caring for Clarissa and his sister, and later had his own family and care for two orphaned grandchildren. Courage to take personal responsibility is required to live in the land of the free. 

An older John C. witnessed the “soak the rich” campaign resulting in the 16th Amendment, the income tax. For the first time in the nation’s history, government was positioned against the individual citizen. How much of that citizen’s property could be confiscated and for what purpose was limited only by the “wisdom” of Congress. Taxpayers later found their funds going to subsidize indolence, to groups with political connections, and for other uses outside the limits on the federal government the Founders clearly wrote into the Constitution. read more

The Liberal “States of the World”

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Recently Mark Levin suggested, as has Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and even little old me, to allow the liberals of this country to pick the states of their choosing and form their own leftist nation – The Liberal States of the World”.

Mark suggested that they pick 10 states, all move there, and have a ball. They can even pick the nicest states – the coastal ones, although with the sure onset of global warming, maybe not. We wouldn’t want all those lefties to be washed out to sea.

So let’s just say they will occupy both coasts and we conservatives will move into the crappy flyover states. We’ll even throw in Washington DC as a bonus.

They would now be free to do anything they want – enact any legislation – raise any tax – mandate any regulation and pack any court, with no unreasonable conservatives to stop them with their religious dogma.

They may rewrite the Constitution, or better yet, scrap the whole thing and replace it with FDR’s Second Bill of Rights.

If you’re unfamiliar with them or need a review, here are a few of the real standouts:

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.

The right of every family to a decent home.

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.

The right to adequate protection from economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment.

The right to a good education.

Wow – where do I sign? That sounds great and completely reasonable and workable. It sounds like manna from heaven, except there is no heaven – so manna from Mother Earth. read more

David Axelrod is Right

by: the Common Constitutionalist

 

We have been presented with the opportunity of a lifetime and that’s not hyperbole.

To paraphrase David Axelrod: the government is so “vast” it’s impossible to know what’s going on.

That’s probably the only intelligent thing he has ever uttered.

Well, he’s absolutely right. It’s gotten so large and out-of-control that it requires storm trooper like tactics to control the flow of the vast amount of money collected to run it.

Now we’ve learned that the collection department, the IRS, has been targeting groups that oppose the administration.

As an aside – if this scandal is what has surfaced, it’s a cinch there is much more that hasn’t. Just an observation.

Anyone who has been audited knows it may be the most stressful and painful experience this side of childbirth (or so I’ve heard). I thought the government was supposed to work for and be accountable to us, not the other way around.

So for this and a myriad of other reasons, the IRS should be abolished.

We on the right have been putting forth this tired refrain for decades, but there will never be a better chance than now to start advancing this notion.

We could learn a little from the left. “Never let a good crisis go to waste”. Well, this is a crisis we must not squander.

But the government needs money to operate, you say. You might add that without the threat of IRS persecution (and I do mean persecution), no one would ever pay their taxes.

Nonsense. Other than the most rabid antigovernment lunatics, virtually all citizens are willing to pay.

Most citizens just want the collection to be fair and transparent. The current system is neither (and that is deliberate). As Marco Rubio might say: “let’s bring those who do not pay taxes ‘out of the shadows’.”

The only truly fair and transparent tax is the consumption tax, not the flat tax. Yes, a national sales tax, but let’s not call it that. People already dislike sales taxes.

A flat tax is still based on income thus is not fair. Not everyone will pay and everyone should pay, at least a little. Skin in the game at all that.

One can still cheat the flat tax system by simply hiding their income. The consumption tax is fair and less apt to be corrupted. Black markets will only spring up if the rate is too high.

Of course the consumption tax would have to be an amendment, not just simply a law and take the place of the 16th amendment, which would have to be repealed first.

The consumption tax is also the epitome of a free-market system. It is also, with few exceptions, the only purely an absolutely voluntary tax. If you don’t wish to pay the tax, don’t purchase the item or service.

It would also take care of those pesky nonprofit tax-free organizations. No one would be tax-free because everyone and every organization must purchase things.

And how much money could corporations and organizations save by simply closing up K Street and not having to beg and bribe Congress for tax breaks?

Simply put, the lefty wizards of smart have admitted that the government has become too large to manage. They have also admitted that they are a bunch of bungling incompetents. Of course they did so, figuring no one will demand change. I’m sure they think; give it a couple of weeks and the scandals will be forgotten.

The current tax system is tyranny and the IRS tyrannical. However, impossible as the task may sound, it must commence sometime. As I stated; there may never be a better opportunity.

“Tyranny, like Hell, is not easily conquered, yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph”, Thomas Paine, 1776.

Just Look to the Government

Changing Definitions Doesn’t Change Reality

 by: the Common Constitutionalist

I’ve decided to change the name of some words and thus their meaning. Anyone having a problem with it or tells me I can’t is a bigot, racist, homophobe, etc.

From now on, the word dog will be asteroid, because I’ve always wanted to walk an asteroid. Wow, that was easy. Let’s do another. I will change the word walk to can opener. Why? Because I want to. Ok, this is working so well, let’s do one more. Let’s change crap to Obama. Now let us use them in a sentence. “Son; make sure when you take the asteroid out for his can opener, you pick up his Obama. I like it.

But, you may say, the old words perfectly describe the act and objects quite well. They’ve been called dog, walk and crap for a long time. Everyone already knows and accepts them as their original names. It’s tradition. Why change them now? Because I want to and if you don’t let me I’ll sue to get the names changed.

Well, obviously that scenario is ridiculous, but is it anymore absurd than changing a tradition that is thousands of years old?

Of course I’m speaking of the term homosexual marriage. I believe the reason homosexuals wish to marry, is not for love, but due to the tax code. Now, don’t you your panties in a bunch. I’m not saying that two women or two men or six men and three women or five men and a penguin can’t love one another. I suppose they can and frankly it’s none of my or your damn business.

What I am saying is that marriage is a tradition reserved for the union of one man and one woman. That’s what God intended and far be it from me to countermand his desire. Men and women have been marrying for thousands of years and not until relatively recently has that marriage had to be sanctioned and interfered with by the almighty government.

I contend that without government meddling in every facet of people’s lives, this would not be an issue.

We all realize that government, through the tax code, have been picking winners and losers. Through tweaking the code they are able to grant favor to one group while disenfranchising another.

What do homosexuals really want? Is it really about the love or is it the benefits? Is it the hospital visitation rights, the transfer of wealth free of taxation or the many other government giveaways that benefit those who have married, have children, day care, own a home or the dozens of other tax breaks.

As if no one would have children, buy a home, or select the correct beneficiary for their estate without financial coercion of the state. Ridiculous!

It is my contention that homosexuals would have never made such a fuss over marriage if the government hadn’t stepped in long ago to promote what they felt was beneficial to society.

It’s like virtually everything else that is wrong with this country. Progressives in government meddle in private citizens’ affairs, attempt to legislate the perfect society and voila, we get the housing collapse, banking problems, gas prices, CAFE standards and on and on. And now we have homosexual marriage. To find the genesis of any problem this country has faced  just look back to when our federal government initially involved itself.

Civil Unions, ok, but marriage, no. That’s one tradition that should be upheld for as long as we inhabit this earth.

Mickelson Retiring??

LA QUINTA, Calif. (TheBlaze/AP) — Phil Mickelson said he will make “drastic changes” because of federal and California state tax increases.

“It’s been an interesting offseason,” Mickelson said Sunday after the final round of the Humana Challenge. “And I’m going to have to make some drastic changes. I’m not going to jump the gun and do it right away, but I will be making some drastic changes.”

The 42-year-old golfer said he would talk in more detail about his plans – possibly moving away from California or even retiring from golf – before his hometown Farmers Insurance Open, the San Diego-area event that starts Thursday at Torrey Pines.

“I’m not sure what exactly, you know, I’m going to do yet,” Mickelson said. “I’ll probably talk about it more in depth next week. I’m not going to jump the gun, but there are going to be some. There are going to be some drastic changes for me because I happen to be in that zone that has been targeted both federally and by the state and, you know, it doesn’t work for me right now. So I’m going to have to make some changes.”  Continue Reading