Tag Archives: taxes

TAXMAGEDDON (Be afraid; be very afraid…)

I abhor repeating myself, but some things bear repeating.

Therefore, I’m once again linking a brief description from Heritage.com on the imminent threat of Taxmageddon, which is the half-trillion-dollar tax tsunami slated to hit our shores in January, 2013. Also included is a new, bold, easy-to-understand graphic.

If you like paying more of your income in taxes, you’re simply gonna love this.

There is only one way for us to avoid this, boys & girls….and giving Obama 4 more years ain’t it.

Please share.


Taxmageddon Is Huge – 

  • Unprecedented Tax Hike For 2013: Starting January 1, 2013, Americans will face a $494 billion tax increase, the highest ever in one year. Obamacare’s tax increase over 10 years barely edges ahead of Taxmageddon at $502 billion. The average American household would see its taxes rise by $3,800 in 2013 alone. And this is just for one year. Taxpayers would see even higher tax hikes in succeeding years.
  • Expiring Tax Cuts and Obamacare’s New TaxesAlmost 34% of the tax increases from Taxmageddon come from the expiration of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts. Another 25% comes from the expiration of the payroll tax cut. Most of the remaining increases come from Obamacare, notably from the start of the hospital insurance 3.8% surtax on all forms of income over $250,000.
  • Taxmageddon Hits the Middle ClassTaxmageddon falls primarily on middle- and low-income Americans. That’s because 60 percent of the Bush tax cuts went to middle and low-income taxpayers. The expiration of the patch on the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) will cause these taxpayers to pay a tax they were never supposed to be hit with, and the expiration of the payroll tax cut is a tax hike almost exclusively on middle- and low-income families. That’s just the direct impact. Americans at all income levels will feel the pain of Taxmageddon because it will slow job creation and wage growth.





UPDATE: Please see a friend of ours’ post on this, as well.



Taxes and Charity: Why the Left has lost Its Mind

When Mitt Romney released his 2011 tax returns last week, along with a 3rd party summary of his returns dating back to 1990, I thought that would finally put this entire faux-issue to rest. After all, Mitt’s taxes were not only completely within reason, they highlighted his charitable contributions were far in excess of the societal norm:

“The Romneys donated $4,020,772 to charity in 2011, amounting to nearly 30% of their income.”

What was I thinking? My apologies for being so stupid…

No, no, the Left will never be satisfied with any answer, because they do not WISH to be satisfied. And in this case, they spun on a dime from their “Romney didn’t pay his taxes” mantra and immediately started bleating, “Well, Romney probably gave most of their money to the Mormon Church, and that doesn’t really count”.

Don’t believe me? Here’s a taste, from Michelle Malkin’s TWITCHY blog:

Stormye Weather@Nuclear_Wynter

I wonder how much of Mitt Romney ‘s charity was to LDS?


Again, reminder: ‘s “charity” bankrolled hate legislation Prop 8 in CA.motherjones.com/politics/2012/…

Jason Byrne@geekwithsoul

I really wish news organizations would quit lumping Romney’s LDS tithe in with his “charity” contributions. Not quite the same thing IMO.

Ben Adler@badler

any story that talks about Romney’s charitable contributions as if the Mormon Church were a real charity is misleading its readers


Reminder that Mormons are bound by religious doctrine to give 10% of income to church. Romney calls this ‘charity.’ 

So, since Romney is Mormon, his charity isn’t really charity? And since Mormons ‘must’ donate at least 10%, that doesn’t count, either.

That isn’t an argument; it’s a temper tantrum.

Quick question: Who among us donates to charities that DON”T espouse our values?  You won’t see me donate to Planned Parenthood, and I doubt very much that you’ll see any of the Atheist Left donate to a Christian college or a retirement home for Catholic nuns. Also, most churches believe in tithing. The fact that Romney is actually making good on his faith’s stated beliefs should be viewed as a positive, not brushed off or ignored.

This line of so-called reasoning is devoid of any/all logic.

More intolerance from the “tolerant” Left, this time from the despicable rag, The Nation (…and no, I’m not linking them. I refuse. Feel free to look it up, if you so desire):

“As you can see, the majority of the funding goes to the Mormon church. The second-biggest recipient is the Mormon university that Romney attended. Other recipients include Romney’s former business school, and the library of the former president he has an incentive to curry favor with.

In all, it is clear that Romney’s donations are about taking care of his own and advancing his personal interests. Relative to his vast wealth, he has given relatively little to programs that assist those truly in need.”

Let me make sure I follow this: Mormons in general don’t count, because they already receive donations from …other Mormons. And Romney’s alma mater doesn’t count specifically because it’s Mormon.

Got it.

In that case, what about PBS? NPR? Planned Parenthood? These groups actually receive federal government subsidies, and don’t appear to be in dire need of money. Yet, they regularly put out the call for contributions. I don’t hear anyone on the Left saying that donating to THEM doesn’t count as “charity”.

What about Media Matters for America (MMfA)? They are a non-profit, are explicitly Progressive and actively campaign for the Democrats and other political Liberals. Good luck in finding the Left on record anywhere discounting contributions to them as not being “real” charity.

This is religious intolerance, but ultimately it smacks of being desperate and petty. Those on the Left just had their rear-end handed to them, so they have no recourse but to stomp their collective feet & cry “unfair”.

Hidden in all of this is a bigger topic of Charity-vs.-Taxation as the superior way to support those in need. Friend of the blog, Dapper Dan, had a blog post the other day which quoted Alexis de Tocqueville from back in 1835:

Individual alms-giving established valuable ties between the rich and the poor. The deed itself involves the giver in the fate of the one whose poverty he has undertaken to alleviate. The latter, supported by aid which he had no right to demand and which he may have had no hope of getting, feels inspired by gratitude. A moral tie is established between those two classes whose interests and passions so often conspire to separate them from each other, and although divided by circumstance they are willingly reconciled.

This is not the case with legal charity. The latter allows the alms to persist, but removes its morality. The law strips the man of wealth of a part of his surplus without consulting him and he sees the poor man only as a greedy stranger invited by the legislator to share his wealth. The poor man, on the other hand, feels no gratitude for a benefit which no one can refuse him and which could not satisfy him in any case.”

That should be the crucial aspect to remember in this whole discussion. When we, the rich and the poor alike, are allowed to keep our own money, we can direct it where we wish. When the government confiscates it, regardless of where it is directed, it is no longer charity: it’s theft. And theft doesn’t inspire gratitude in either the “giver” or the recipient.

Romney’s charity should be an inspiration to us all to do more for the institutions we love. Not that long ago, it would have been. But now, in Obama’s America, it is used as a point of derision and ridicule, at least among an annoyingly vocal minority.

Just another reason, in a very long list, that President Empty Chair has to go. Now.

ROMNEY: “Here’s my taxes. Now, you were saying?”

Only have a few minutes here, so I’m just copying/linking this. But it’s as important a development as we’ll get this week, and needs to be seen.

This just made me smile. Big.

From Guy Benson over at Townhall.com:

It’s official: The Romney campaign possesses a wicked sense of humor and an enviable degree of patience.  After months of caterwauling, breathless innuendo and baseless slander, the Democrats and their media allies are being treated to a Friday feast of piping hot crow.  The Romney campaign has released a detailed report of the the candidate’s 2011 tax returns, as well as an extensive summary of the Romneys’ taxes over the last two decades, prepared by analysts at PricewaterhouseCoopers.  What do these documents contain?  Brad Malt, the Romney family’s trustee, summarizes the 2011 data:

– In 2011, the Romneys paid $1,935,708 in taxes on $13,696,951 in mostly investment income.

– The Romneys’ effective tax rate for 2011 was 14.1%.

-The Romneys donated $4,020,772 to charity in 2011, amounting to nearly 30% of their income.

-The Romneys claimed a deduction for $2.25 million of those charitable contributions. The Romneys’ generous charitable donations in 2011 would have significantly reduced their tax obligation for the year. The Romneys thus limited their deduction of charitable contributions to conform to the Governor’s statement in August, based upon the January estimate of income, that he paid at least 13% in income taxes in each of the last 10 years.

In short, and as Kevin noted, Romney forked over nearly $2 million to Uncle Sam last year and donated more than $4 million to charity.  He overpaid his taxes by limiting the charitable deductions he chose to claim, which could have driven his obligations to government even lower.  

This, in short, is just too delicious. I’d never have suspected Romney to have that sort of patience. My respect for him just doubled.

One more section from Benson:

In the last two decades, the Romney’s donated 13.45 percent of their adjusted gross income to charity.  This totally dwarfs the long-term giving of the Obamas and the Bidens, in case anyone in the class warfare camp is keeping score.  But remember, Mitt Romney is callously dismissive and uncaring toward poor people and the ’47 percent.’  Overall, the Romney family paid every cent they owed — and more — forking over nearly 40 percent of their income to either the government or charitable organizations, including their church.  I’ve got to hand it to the Romney campaign: They played a long game here, and did so masterfully.  One of the most obnoxious and relentless arrows in Democrats’ attack quiver has been the tax returns issue.  “See how greedy and secretive Romney is?  Even his own father released 12 years of returns!  He’s probably a tax cheat!” 

That’s all gone now, and the whiners look petty, small, and stupid.  And Mitt Romney looks like the remarkably generous, law-abiding, productive member of society that he is. 



Bravo, indeed.

I know Romney doesn’t gamble, but still: I’d sure hate to play poker against a guy who could pull this off.

No such thing as a Free Lunch

Saw this initially over at That Mr. G Guy’s Blog, and almost didn’t believe it. Even as jaded as I am, I’m still kinda shocked once in a while, when something just seems ludicrous.

And this is one of those times.

From NBCPhiladelphia.com:

A local lunch lady says she may no longer be able to serve free food to her community due to a law in her town.

For weeks, Angela Prattis has run a free lunch program in the Toby Farms community of Chester Township. As many as 60 children a day receive a free sandwich, fruit and milk during the summer. The program is funded by the state department of education and administered by the archdiocese of Philadelphia which drops off the boxed lunches daily.

Prattis tells NBC10 she was just put on notice by the township however and received a letter telling her that she needs a variance to run the program in the residential area.

“It’s a letter stating, ‘shut it down or face a $600 fine,’” said Prattis.

“Apparently the township has said there was one more hurdle that she had to jump from their point of view,” said Anne Ayella of the Archdiocese. “But from our point of view she’s done everything right.”


NBC10 spoke with Bill Pisarek, the Chester Township business manager, to find out what exactly she’s in violation of.

“Basically the property is in an R3 residential zone,” said Pisarek.

According to the town, Prattis is zoned residential and therefore needs a variance to offer free lunches. Pisarek told NBC10 she can apply for a variance. It costs $1,000 just to apply however.

“We’re not here to go after her, to hurt her, to take money from her or to prevent her from feeding kids that need the food,” said Pisarek.

Of course they’re not there to take her money or prevent her from feeding kids….which is why they threatened her with the fines and to shut her down. They’re just trying to help her.


Remember the article from yesterday, where the neighbors of the lady in Virginia showed up with pitchforks to illustrate their “displeasure” with the local government’s arbitrary rules? I’m wondering if we need to send some pitchforks over to Philly.

Here’s just a little bit more, this time from Mr. G’s post:

“You have houses here, the roofs are falling in, and they could be focused on a lot of more serious issues than me feeding children,” (Prattis) said.

Chester Township, which has a per capita income of $19,000 a year, says Prattis lives in a residential zone, hence handing out food to children is not allowed. The township says she needs to go before a zoning board to ask for a variance, which would cost her up to $1,000 in administrative fees.

I don’t think it’s my responsibility to go to her to say, ‘why don’t you come to talk to me to see if there’s something that we can do to help your program,’” William Pisarek, the Chester Township business manager, said.

Back a couple hundred years ago, I may have agreed with Mr. Pisarek. Once, when laws were simple, ignorance of the law was not an excuse for not adhering to the law. But now? It’s absolutely Mr. Pisarek’s responsibility to contact Angela Prattis. Even the archdiocese thinks she is in compliance. Let’s face it: with the Labyrinthian zoning laws, the layer upon layer of permits, and all the blankety-blank fees (which only serve to prevent anyone from doing anything at anytime without the government’s imprimatur), EVERYONE is ignorant of most of the laws on the books, including most of the politicians.

However, I have an additional problem with this. At the beginning of the article, did you happen to notice who “funds” this program? That’s right, boys and girls: it’s funded by the “state department of education”, which means, by US. Now I’m not saying that this is a bad program; far from it. But look at the issue: one level of government “funds” the program (with taxes), it takes its share (always), then lets the archdiocese administer it. I’m sure the archdiocese has some administrative costs as well. Then, with the remaining money they buy food for the poor….except that the folks like Angela Prattis then have to pay MORE taxes/fees/dues for the privilege of doing something which she ALREADY PAID FOR WITH HER TAXES once.

It’s times like this when I realize (for about the gazillionth time) that our government looks at us like a farmer does a cow, …minus the affection and pride, of course.

Taxmageddon, made easy

***Full credit to Stix Blog Backup for finding the attached poster***

The graphic below pretty much says it all, but if you have NOT been following along, you can find out just what “Taxmageddon” is by clicking right here.

Go ahead; we’ll wait.


All set? Now, why don’t you help out your neighbor and just show them this:

Then, you could even make a call to your representatives in Congress. It’s crazy, I know, but they do have phones and emails. And as long as it’s more than just me calling them, they might actually be inspired to do something other than use this as a political football.

Just a suggestion….