Pelosi on Unemployment Benefits Extension: I’d rather not pay for it

Yeah, but since she “speaks lib” she gets a pass, or thinks she should.

Funny how these people impute righteousness on themselves.
[Real] Christians understand that our righteousness is imputed on us by faith in Christ.
Most religions of the world “earn” righteousness by their works.
And liberals impute righteousness by mere advocacy.

I like the idea of imposing a “congressional inverse tax” on members of Congress. It would work like this:

For every percent the tax rate of ANY segment of the American taxpaying populace is increased, the salary of each member of Congress WHO VOTED FOR IT and of each of their staff is reduced by like percentage. The only vote counted for this purpose is the final vote and excludes any previous votes on measures later amended prior to the final vote.

Conversely, To be “fair” and to provide an incentive for tax cuts, the same would result in the reverse, with a “twist”. For every percent the tax rate of EVERY segment of the American taxpaying populace (across the board) is decreased, the salary of each member of Congress and of each of their staff is increased by like percentage

So, for example, a 6% increase in capital gains tax (from 15% to 21%) would result in a 6% decrease in salary of each member of Congress who voted for it (and a 6% decrease in salary of the members of their staff).

Alternatively, for example, a 6% decrease in capital gains tax (from 15% to 9%) would result in a 6% increase in salary of each member of Congress WHO VOTED FOR IT as well as a 6% increase in salary of each member of their staff (those who voted against the cut, and their staff, would receive a decrease in salary).

For example, if the capital gains tax rate is eliminated altogether would result in a 15% increase in salary for those who voted for the reduction (and a 15% decrease in salary for those who voted against the cut).

This would apply only when a tax measure is actually enacted into law. If Congress has to overrides a presidential veto to enact such a tax measure, the President would have his/her salary increased or decreased accordingly (effective the date of the veto override vote). If the President simply signs the measure, then his/her salary remains unchanged and we thank him/her for cooperating.

This bold plan would mean that when Congress enacts a tax measure that benefits the people, they are rewarded. And, when Congress enacts a tax measure that harms the people, they are harmed financially as well.

I realize that most Democrats (and many RINOs) would never agree to such a notion (and the law of unintended consequences would probably be invoked in a way that would cause me to pull down this proposal), but it is fun to contemplate such a scenario.

Raleigh area, which I hear is fairly liberal, but that can’t possibly be more liberal than the Gay Area.

If that’s true, I’m sure the FTC has been told they will look the other way if they want to keep their jobs.

"No problem. That's why we have the SCOTUS--to show us what we missed!"

Democrat voters below:

Click the Flames

Your Conservative Source of News and Information

Abolish FReepathons
Donate Monthly

Sponsors will contribute $10
For each new monthly sign-up!