taxes

Carl’s Jr. HQ Moving From Calif. to Nashville; Press Avoids Saying Why. Taxes, regulations, more taxes, more regulations, high cost of living, the rent too high, Jerry Brown, Democrats, liberals, high fuel costs. Enough said? Pretty soon no one will be left in the state but leeches.

- by CO2Insanity | 7 comments | Share Link


The brilliant Charles Krauthammer riffs on Obama’s 17 minute, billion word answer to a woman who didn’t like higher taxes:

“I don’t know why your surprised. It’s only nine times longer than the Gettysburg Address. And, after all Lincoln was answering an easier question on the higher purpose of the union and soldiers that fall in battle. Look the president had an easy answer. He could have said, “Hey I wanted to make history with health care and to do it and to make the CBO numbers look OK I had to raise your taxes. Sure it’s not a good time economically in the middle of a recession but politically I had to because I have a window a majority in Congress and I’m going to lose in November.” End of answer.”

Can’t really remember what Mr. Hostettler said in history class. Did anyone go out to the kitchen and make a sandwich during the Gettysburg Address?

- by editor | 1 comment | Share Link


So what’s your point, Cramer? Isn’t that exactly what this whole exercise is all about?

Oh, and Jim, we haven’t forgotten you endorsed Obama for president.

- by editor | 6 comments | Share Link


It's just plain Fergalicious when you don't pay taxes for eight years

It's just plain Fergalicious when you don't pay taxes for eight years

Fergie, lead singer of the Black Eyed Peas, was a strange choice to entertain at the White House Easter Egg Hunt. And as we reported at the time, some parents in attendance were horrified by her performance.

But now it all makes sense. Based on the following story, she must have been there interviewing for a job for a top level job with the Obama administration. Considering the state of the group’s taxes, we’d say she’s a shoe-in for a top job with Tim “Turbo Tax” Geithner:

A lawyer for the Black Eyed Peas is accusing the hip-hop supergroup’s manager of failing to file income tax returns for its touring operation going back as far as eight years, and says he is only now getting around to doing their basic accounting.

The allegations were filed Monday in Superior Court by the group’s attorney, Helen Yu, as a response to a defamation lawsuit filed against her Nov. 30 by the Peas’ manager, Sean Larkin.

Larkin admits that, “due to an inadvertent oversight,” he failed to file income tax returns for the band and some of its individual members. He claims Yu used this lapse to send out letters “filled with venomous lies and fabricated accusations . . . that he engaged in criminal conduct.”

Larkin, who owns Sherman Oaks-based Larkin Business Management, is seeking $5 million in damages.

C’mon, our tax guy won’t let us deduct a paper clip if we can’t prove it was legit. And this guy “forgot” to file the group’s taxes for eight years?

That’s just Geithnerlicious.

Source: TheWrap.com

- by editor | 4 comments | Share Link


big-taxes Californians, don’t you worry about your state being bankrupt. Rest assured that your elected representatives in Sacramento are working tirelessly to spread the poverty around and make sure the entire citizenry is equally bereft.

If you work in California you may want to do a quick paycheck comparison and check this week’s pay stub against last week’s. Californians are beginning November with a 10% increase in their paycheck withholding.

The LA Times reassuringly reports that “Technically, it’s not a tax increase,” it’s “part of a bundle of budget patches.” So what does that mean? Lawmakers aren’t exactly sure, they just know they need the extra cash.

The Wall Street Journal reports that Sacramento’s Democrat legislature and the RINO Governator are trying to close a “gaping budget deficit, now estimated to be $7 billion this year and reach as high as $20 billion next.”

Will this little “loan” close the deficit? Well, no. “The extra withholding tax will reduce Californians’ take-home pay by about $1.7 billion for the year. But the lawmakers say this isn’t a tax increase. OK, how about calling it a compulsory interest-free loan from taxpayers to the state?”

The Journal also questions the reliability of the Golden State’s representatives to guard the gold, as it were. “And we almost hate to ask: What happens come April if the state doesn’t have enough money to pay the tax refunds it owes its citizens? Will taxpayers get IOUs the way state contractors did last year when Sacramento ran out of money?”

Have the pols in Sacramento thought that far ahead? We’re not going to hazard a prediction. But if we can achieve Universal Heath Care For All and a smaller carbon footprint by next year, then by god, whatever happens to taxpayers is going to be worth it.

Source: Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times

- by editor | 1 comment | Share Link


The Obama administration thinks you're simply not paying enough taxes

The Obama administration thinks you're simply not paying enough taxes

Uh-oh. Somebody at the Treasury screwed up. Really screwed up. Thanks to a Freedom of Information Act request from the Competitive Enterprise Institute, they were forced to release internal documents that call Cap-and-Trade exactly what it is. A job-killing tax.

Here’s how the Washington Times reports the story:

Officials at the Treasury Department think cap-and-trade legislation would cost taxpayers hundreds of billion in taxes, according to internal documents circulated within the agency and provided to The Washington Times.

These estimates were made in Treasury memos, obtained by the Competitive Enterprise Institute through a Freedom of Information Act request that sought information related to proposals originated by Treasury involving “cap-and-trade schemes” that deal with “carbon,” “carbon dioxide” or “greenhouse gases.” The memos were given to The Times by CEI.

The Times article continues:
[click to continue…]

- by editor | 4 comments | Share Link


Three American voters who still believe President Obama will cut their taxes

Three American voters who still believe President Obama will cut their taxes

Hmmmm. How best to sum up the results of the latest research from Rasmussen Reports. How’s this?

The latest research from Rasmussen Reports seems to indicate that 6% of American voters are possibly deaf, dumb and blind. And morons. They’re likely morons, too.

Just six percent (6%) of voters nationwide now expect their own taxes to go down during the Obama years. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 42% expect their taxes to go up while 40% expect little change. Another 12% are not sure.

This is the first time since last November’s election that the number expecting a tax cut has fallen to single digits. During Election 2008, then-candidate Barack Obama promised to cut taxes for 95% of Americans. When he was elected, 22% expected a tax cut. That number has been trending down ever since.

Maybe we’re being too harsh. Maybe we’re wrong.

Nah. They’re idiots.

Source: RasmussenReports.com

- by editor | 3 comments | Share Link


Michelle Obama likes pie. Especially your pie. Doesn’t matter how hard you worked to get your pie, she wants it. In fact, she thinks it would be a really good idea if everyone had a piece of your pie.

Here’s what the First Lady said on the campaign trail on April 8, 2008.

“The truth is most Americans don’t want much. Folks don’t want the whole pie. Most Americans feel blessed to thrive a little bit. But that’s out of reach for them. The truth is, in order to get things like universal healthcare and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.”

That someone, of course, does not include Michelle nor her brood. No, they’ll be grabbing pieces of everyone’s pies during their upcoming vacation at a plush Martha’s Vineyard estate. No one’s quite sure what this little getaway will cost the taxpayers, but similar properties in the area go for as much as $50,000 per week.

We don’t begrudge the Obamas their chance to live the lifestyle of the rich and famous.

We just wish they’d keep their hands off our pie.

Source: The Big Feed

- by editor | 5 comments | Share Link


Note: Go to minute 00:32 to begin. The original video we posted was disabled to a copyright claim by CBS. So far, this is all we have.

It just seems so simple. So reasonable. So damned obvious. So why don’t they get it?

H/t: Ace of Spades

- by editor | 5 comments | Share Link


Source: Burning Toast

- by editor | 2 comments | Share Link


ugly democrat women

The party that traditionally clings to power based on the votes of unattractive women is risking it all by proposing a tax on plastic surgery. Now that they’ve taxed everything else, they want to tax ugliness.

The Senate Finance Committee wants to tack a 10% excise tax on ”unnecessary” cosmetic surgery. Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus said it was one of the “interesting,” “creative,” and “kind of fun” ideas that had been discussed.

(Please continue with this story after pausing briefly to consider the fact that Democrats think taxes are “kind of fun.”)

The tax would target itemized deductions for medical expenses not covered by health insurance. According to current law, cosmetic surgery defined as “any procedure which is directed at improving the patient’s appearance and does not meaningfully promote the proper function of the body or prevent or treat illness or disease.”

Deductions for procedures such as lasik eye surgery or reconstructive surgery would still be legit. But elective procedures like nose jobs, liposuction, teeth-whitening and Botox injections would be slapped with the new tax.

Let’s call this proposal what it is: the Ugly American Revenue Enhancement Act of 2009.

Source: NationalJournal.com

- by editor | 6 comments | Share Link


Just say yes, California

by editor on July 23, 2009

California proudly introduces its new state plant marijuana

California proudly introduces its new state plant

It’s been suggested by a California Assemblyman that California could tax away its budget problems if only it would legalize marijuana.

The State Board of Equalization’s analysis says California could net $1.4 billion by taxing legal pot.

According to the Sacramento Bee, the bill introduced by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-People’s Republic of San Francisco) “would impose not only sales taxes but a $50 per ounce fee on marijuana sales, which would be licensed by the state much as alcoholic beverages are regulated…”

“We can no longer afford to keep our heads in the sand when it comes to marijuana,” Ammiano said in a statement.

“I’m friggin’ starving,” he reportedly added. “Are you going to finish those pork rinds? How about those cupcakes? And your Fritos look delicious.”

Source: Sacramento Bee

- by editor | 3 comments | Share Link


Cigarettes kill people. Taxes kill economies.

Cigarettes kill people. Taxes kill economies.

Josh Muszynski, a New Hampshire man, went down to his corner gas station and bought a pack of cigarettes with his debit card.

A few hours later he went online, checked his account, and was stunned to see that he had been charged an astronomical $23,148,855,308,184,500 for the ciggies.

After picking himself up off the floor, Muszynski spent two hours on the phone with Bank of America trying to solve the problem. Luckily, B of A corrected the error and even reversed their $15 overdraft fee.

We say if President Obama is smart he’ll act immediately and slap a $23 quadrillion tax on every pack of cigarettes sold.

In one stroke, he’ll wipe out smoking. And if he can just sell one pack, he’ll generate almost enough taxes to pay for ObamaCare.

Source: AP

- by editor | 1 comment | Share Link


John Stossel points out the dichotomy between Obama's words and actions

John Stossel points out the dichotomy between Obama's words and actions

Day in and day out, ABC’s John Stossel is brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. Here’s what he had to say about Obama and taxes:

Apparently President Obama wants America to lower taxes and shrink the regulatory state. After all, during his trip to Africa, he said: “No business wants to invest in a place where the government skims 20 percent off the top”.

But of course the American government skims off much more than 20%. Federal taxes alone are roughly that, and when you add in state and local levies, plus the burden of regulation, government in America eats at least 40% of GDP.

If African governments’ skimming off 20% is a bad thing, why is America’s 40% okay, and why is the President trying to make government bigger?

This is particularly timely since Democrats much-vaunted healthcare plan and is all built around tax increases or surcharges or whatever they’re calling them today.

Love you, John. In the manliest of manly ways, of course.

Source: John Stossel/ABC

- by editor | 4 comments | Share Link


(click to enlarge) What Obama Healthcare plan means to New Yorkers


(click to enlarge) What Obama Healthcare plan means to New Yorkers

No matter what President Obama may say, almost no one still believes taxes will only increase on those earning more than $250,000. Especially the New York Post:

Congressional plans to fund a massive health-care overhaul could have a job-killing effect on New York, creating a tax rate of nearly 60 percent for the state’s top earners and possibly pressuring small-business owners to shed workers.

New York’s top income bracket could reach as high as 57 percent — rates not seen in three decades — to pay for the massive health coverage proposed by House Democrats this week.

Three words: Trickle down taxes.

Source: New York Post, RasmussenReports.com

- by editor | 2 comments | Share Link


Arnold ain't what he used to be. Neither is California.

Arnold ain't what he used to be. Neither is California.

They always say, “As California goes, so goes the nation.” And California’s going bankrupt.

How could the ninth largest economy in the world go so wrong so fast? Here’s how RealClearPolitics.com sums it up:

“Ultimately, any honest assessment of California’s plight must assign responsibility for the state’s fiscal crisis – not to the taxpayers who voted for Prop. 13 three decades ago – but to the politicians who have subsequently exploited them without mercy. Indeed, if spending had simply reflected average population growth plus the average increase in the cost of living since 1991, there would now be a $15 billion surplus. After adjusting for inflation, the state now spends nearly 20% more per capita than it did 18 years ago; even as California’s tax revenues increased by 167% during that period, state spending exploded by 189%.”

We’d say they spent like drunken sailors, but we don’t want to insult any drunken sailors.

Source: RealClearPolitics.com

- by editor | 2 comments | Share Link


Open thread: Cap and Trade Discussion

by editor on June 26, 2009

Nancy Pelosi, Al Gore and the House of Representatives have been quietly, but furiously trying to slip Cap- and-trade (formally called the American Clean Energy and Security Act) through this week before anyone notices. This will be the largest tax-increasing, economy-killing bill in United States history, all based upon the biggest scam in the history: Global Warming Climate Change.

House Democrats must be incredibly pleased that Michael Jackson’s death is now dominating the news, further obfuscating their attempt to pass this bill in the dark of night without hearing any GOP amendments.

This is such an important topic that we’re opening this thread so you can share your thoughts and provide whatever information you hear about Cap-and-Trade today. Include phone numbers of House members on the fence so others can call and help convince them to vote no. IHateTheMedia.com had over 10,000 visitors yesterday, so you can make a difference here.

- by editor | 53 comments | Share Link


John Dingell (D-MI) said H.R. 2454 is “a tax and it’s a great big one.”

Charlie Melancon (D-LA) said, “I believe this bill would create an undue burden on families who are already paying too much in energy bills.”

Mike Ross (D-AR) said, “‘If you don’t like $4-a-gallon gasoline, you’re really not going to like your electric bill sometime between now and 2030.”

- by editor | 3 comments | Share Link


superman-taxman

“No new taxes on anyone earning less than $250,000 per year.” That’s what Obama claimed during the campaign.

C’mon, we all knew that was about as legit as an Iranian election.

Even the liberal Associated Press says the Democrats are getting ready to pay for their socialist agenda with a slew of new taxes. (OK, maybe AP didn’t call it a socialist agenda, but we can only assumee that was an oversight).

The list of options being weighed by the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, and obtained Thursday by The Associated Press, aims to raise some $600 billion over 10 years to partially pay for President Barack Obama’s goal of overhauling the nation’s health care system to tame costs and cover the 50 million uninsured.

The final price tag for that effort could top $1 trillion, with cuts to Medicare and Medicaid covering the rest of the cost.

The tax options include:

– Increasing the price of soda and other sugary drinks by 10 cents a can.

– Applying a potential 2 percent income tax increase to single taxpayers earning more than $200,000 a year and households earning more than $250,000.

– A new employer payroll tax could target 3 percent of employers’ health care expenditures.

– Taxing employer-provided health insurance benefits above certain levels – a less likely option but one that still is in the running.

To paraphrase George Harrison, “If you drive a car, I’ll tax the street. If you try to sit, I’ll tax your seat. If you get to cold, I’ll tax the heat. If you take a walk, I’ll tax your feet. ‘Cause I’m Obama. Yeah, I’m Obama.”

Source: The Associated Press

- by editor | 1 comment | Share Link


Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger personifies the sad decline of the state of California

Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger personifies the sad decline of the state of California

California’s sad excuse for a governor has come out in favor of a flat tax. Hah!

As the LA Times reports: “Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said today that he would like to see such ‘radical’ proposals come out of a commission now studying an overhaul of the state’s tax system. The governor told the editorial board of the Sacramento Bee that he hoped the commission would not be afraid to propose something like ‘a 15% straight tax.’”

“That’s the kind of radical, daring kind of a proposal that I want to see on the table so we can look at it and say, ‘Oh, let’s study this, maybe that is the way to go,’ ” Schwarzenegger said.

Don’t get us wrong. In theory, we love the flat tax concept: Everyone pays the same percentage of all income. Minimal or no deductions.

But here’s the problem with the Schwartzenegger’s scam. The current highest tax rate in California is 9.1% on taxable income over $91,000 (after all your deductions are considered), but under this bogus flat tax plan everyone would pay 15% with minimal or no deductions.

It’s going to be interesting to see how Schwartzenegger tries to convince the people of California that paying 15% with no deductions is better than paying 9.1% with deductions.

In the thoughts, if not the words of the Governor, “Keep your eye on the pea while I move these walnut shells around.”

Source: LA Times

- by editor | 1 comment | Share Link


Attorney General Eric Holder shrugs at the thought that taxpayers shouldn't pay for illegal alien attorneys.

Attorney General Eric Holder shrugs at the thought that taxpayers shouldn't pay for illegal alien attorneys.

In January, 2009, the Bush administration issued a ruling that said illegal immigrants facing deportation don’t have an automatic right to an attorney. That was soooo January.

Now Attorney General Eric Holder is vacating the order and instructing the Justice Department to determine if a new rule is needed. In other words, illegal aliens get free attorneys and you get the bill.

According to the Bush administration’s interpretation of the Constitution, illegal aliens were not entitled to have cases reopened because of shoddy work by their lawyers.

That sent immigrant rights groups to howling. Forget the fact that illegal aliens are criminals by virtue of the fact that they are in this country illegally. Or undocumentedly, as the activists would prefer.

After all, we are the world. We are the children. We are the taxpaying dopes.

Source: Hypocrisy.com

- by editor | 2 comments | Share Link


Alternate energy: Power the homes of several average American families for a year with the fat sucked out of Michael Moore's wattle.

Alternate energy: Power the homes of several average American families for a year with the fat sucked out of Michael Moore's wattle.

For some reason, we’re on corpulent corporate bashing Michael Moore’s email list. 

Yesterday we got an email from our pal Mike that proved he’s as good an economist as he is a film maker.

He presents a 9-point plan to revitalize America. It involves mass construction projects including bullet trains, light rail systems, fleets of electric cars, windmills and solar panels, and hybrid cars and busses.

But how, you may ask, can we possibly afford all this? Well, Michael has the answer to that, too.

“To help pay for this, impose a two-dollar tax on every gallon of gasoline. This will get people to switch to more energy saving cars or to use the new rail lines and rail cars the former autoworkers have built for them.”

Yes, $2 per gallon. Overnight. Bang. The price goes up more than 50% overnight.

We have a better idea. Enforced liposuction on all obese film makers. Burn it like they used to burn whale oil back in the 1800s. We’d cut our foreign energy dependence overnight.

The email letter on his website.

- by editor | 6 comments | Share Link


Save your pennies. Cap-and-Trade is coming.

Save your pennies. Cap-and-Trade is coming.

The Democrats’ Cap-and-Trade bill passed out of committee this week on a party line vote.

They passed it despite the fact that Cap-and-Trade has been a corruption-plagued failure in Europe. They passed it despite the fact that logic says you can’t pile billions of dollars of expenses on the economy without increasing costs. They passed it despite all logic and reason.

Heritage.org did an analysis that shows this preposterous program will cost the average American family $4,300 per year.

They predict that the direct impact on household energy bills will average $1500 per year. That includes the increases the increased costs of electricity, natural gas, home heating oil, and gasoline for your car.

“But the direct tax on household energy use is just the beginning,” Heritage reported. “The energy tax also hits producers. As the higher production costs ripple through the economy the household pocketbooks get hit again and again. When all the tax impacts have been added up, the average per-family-of-four costs rise by $4,300 per year.”

Heritge.org continued: “As President Obama warned us on his campaign trail, electricity prices will ‘necessarily skyrocket.’ So will everything else, except for our income and standard of living.”

After President Obama has finished his ‘Round the World Apology Tour 2009, perhaps he can come home and apologize to the American people for this Obamanation abomination.

Source: Heritage.org

- by editor | 2 comments | Share Link


A Tale of Two Headlines

by editor on May 15, 2009

graph_up

“Wholesale Prices Rise More Than Expected”
Source: FoxNews.com

“New Jobless Claims Rise More Than Expected”
Source: FoxNews.com

We predict the headline trifecta will be completed when the following headline runs about this time next year:

“Taxes Rise More Than Expected”

- by editor | 1 comment | Share Link


Yeah, but can she handle her liquor?

Yeah, but can she handle her liquor?

This is one of those stories that’s so friggin’ unbelievable that our initial inclination was to think it was a joke.

Unfortunately, the joke’s on us.

Here’s how CNSNews.com reports it:

“The National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, part of the National Institutes of Health, will pay $2.6 million in U.S. tax dollars to train Chinese prostitutes to drink responsibly on the job. ‘The purpose of the project is to try and develop an intervention program targeting HIV risk and alcohol use,’ Dr. Xiaoming Li, the researcher conducting the program, told CNSNews.com. The grant, made last November, is one of several ‘international initiatives’ sponsored by NIH.”

We had a story a few months ago about the U.S. government purchasing Chinese condoms. Now we’re teaching Chinese hookers how to drink responsibly.

We don’t really care if the Chinese whores are drunk. Nor do we care if the Chinese drunks are whores.

What bothers us is that we’re all getting screwed by the drunken whores in Washington, DC.

Source: CNSNews.com

- by editor | 8 comments | Share Link