Posted on 09/25/2009 10:11:32 AM PDT by reaganaut1
New reports from the Tax Foundation show that President Obama's policy proposals will increase the financial dependence of middle-income Americans on the federal government.
"Attempts to put 'price tags' on health care and cap-and-trade proposals vary among government agencies and think tanks," said Tax Foundation President Scott Hodge, "but one vital question has been left unanswered: Counting all federal taxes and spending, how would these policies affect American families' financial ties to the government? The foundation's new 'fiscal incidence model' answers that question."
"Currently the bottom 60 percent of the income spectrum receives more in federal spending than they pay in federal taxes," said Hodge. "By 2012, if President Obama's proposals on taxes, health care and climate change become law, the bottom 70 percent of American families will, as a group, be receiving more in federal spending than they pay in federal tax."
Even if none of Obama's policies becomes law, the extent of current income redistribution is remarkable: The top-earning 40 percent of families will transfer $826 billion to the bottom 60 percent in 2012. If Obama's policies become law, the federal government will redistribute nearly $1 trillion from the top-earning 30 percent of families to the bottom 70 percent (those earning up to $109,000).
Incorporating new data from the Mid-Session Review of the President's Budget, as well as recently released aggregate economic data from BEA and new income tax statistics from the IRS, Hodge has authored two new analyses in the Tax Foundation Fiscal Fact series: "Accounting for What Families Pay in Taxes and What They Receive in Government Spending" and "Basic Facts on Redistribution and the Impact of Obama's Policies." The two publications are available online at http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/25195.html and http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/25196.html, respectively.
(Excerpt) Read more at taxfoundation.org ...
And to think a few years ago, folks on this board were downplaying the risk of deficits.
Obama will raise so many taxes, you will not be able to keep up with them.
70% of the 2%.
Which will have the result that anybody attempting to reduce government will have that 70% being told that doing so will result in their benefits being cut. This is the plan for Dem long-term dominance.
Benefits! Benefits for Everybody!
When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. — Benjamin Franklin
Don’t forget the now famous saying by Obama....”Our time has come!” Who do people think he was talking about?
Liberalism is organized crime, robbing Peter to bribe Paul.
The rich have tax-exempt, "charitable" foundations from which to buy influence in the Congress and the courts.
Note to self:
*No overtime pay next spring; you’re not gaining anything compared to what you’re losing in confiscatory taxes from the local, state and federal b@stards.
*Barter and trade for what you need. No spending beyond the very basics for the next 1,213 days.
*Earn as much cash under the table as possible.
*All money out of the market except the small 401K from work that is acting solely as a hedge for now. (See below.) Keep on track with gold and silver purchase/sale plan.
*Increase tax exemptions on W-4 form.
*Increase payments into 401K, medical slush fund, etc. through employer. Make as much of my earnings pre-tax as possible while I meet my few financial obligations.
*CCs are paid off and no car payment, so throw extra on the mortgage each month.
*Buy more ammo.
*Pray.
It happened under Bush as well. Not defending it, but I blame them all....
Everyone pays much more in taxes then they realize. The Govt just collects it from the businesses that make the products. We pay those taxes by paying higher prices for every single good and service we purchase
Also, everyone who works pays payroll and medicare taxes. So the notion that “70%” don't pay taxes” is highly misleading at best.
The list, ping
No it did not. Bush did not raise taxes. He cut everyones taxes.
Atlas Shrugs.
That's not the notion, though. If you pay me $12 for every $100 you make, but I give you back $20 in services, food, and direct cash payments, are you better off for it?
This trend really started rolling when Reagan expanded the EITC against all advice that this very thing would happen. The Gipper blew very few calls in his time, but this was certainly one of them. (Withdrawl of Marines from Lebanon and Sandra Day O’Connor the only others that come to mind)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.