Stuff My Brain Says #87

"Who do you think you're kidding?!?"

Remember when Congress wanted then candidate Donald Trump to turn over his tax returns? Yeah. Fun times.

Now Congress is telling us that the multi-trillion dollar infrastructure spending bill will be paid for by making companies and the rich pay their fair share. You know, "The middle class won't be left holding the bag. The rich who haven't been paying their fair share will cover the bill." 

To quote Dana Carvey: "Isn't that special?"

(Side note: when Social Security was first "sold" to us, we were told only the very rich would pay for it. Have you looked at your paystub to see the lump that goes out for Social Security? Welcome to the very rich ... )

Did you see the commonality of the above two statements? Yup. Congress. Now, here's the funny part: Congress is the very entity that created the tax code that ALLOWS people like Donald Trump to not pay taxes.

IF those "evil" rich aren't paying their "fair share", wouldn't there be charges brought up against them? Ask folks like Wesley Snipes, Nicolas Cage, and Willie Nelson about what happens when you don't pay your "fair share". Sounds to me that if a rich person or company isn't already paying their taxes, they would have been caught by now.

Maybe Congress has been watching too many Tim Misny commercials. Of course, the reason he can "make them pay" is that they've done something illegal. You'd think since Congress is made up of a bunch of lawyers, they'd already know that.

Would somebody please ask those folks who've been in D.C. seemingly forever what changes to the tax code they plan on making? After all, one of the reasons that a lot of these companies aren't "paying", is that a POLITICIAN promises tax cuts/abatements for opening a business in their district. NOW they are crying that these very companies actually embrace those cuts and abatements?

Even if Congress were able to get more money from the rich and businesses, they would simply outspend it. It's been their modus operandi for decades. They have an addiction: other people's money.

Maybe Congress should live by this simple financial code: If your outgo exceeds your income, your upkeep will be your downfall.

© Emittravel 2021

Stuff My Brain Says #45

I've read quite a few articles concerning how our government wants to know/control after-tax money held in foreign banks. Apparently our "evil rich" store money there and our government believes that it needs to get its hands on it.  Understand, if you are an American citizen working over seas, many banks will not allow you to open an account to manage your after-tax income. In a lot of cases, people are giving up their citizenship because the hassle to live there is not worth keeping the American "label". It is only "so convenient" to keep your money in mason jars behind the cereal in the kitchen cupboard (and no, that's not where I keep it . . . )

So why does this line of thinking, the government's insatiable appetite for your money, exist? Because our government outspends every dollar it gets, it is constantly looking for sources of revenue to outspend. Are you one of those who believe that the "evil rich" are not paying their fair share and should be punished? Than understand that you are dangerously close to the camp that believes that the government owns it all. The line that says "net income" on your pay stub is the amount the government LETS you keep (albeit, temporarily). They can take that (back) anytime they please.

Now, think about running a business with THAT in the back of your mind.

© Emittravel 2012

It's broke. Time to fix it. Article #5

It's broke . . .

When it comes to eliminating the nation's debt and balancing the budget there has been nothing but a stalemate in Congress. * Conservatives want cuts without tax increases. Liberals want tax increases without cuts. Both won't give an inch.

Now, as a fiscal-conservative, I have to sympathize with the conservatives here. Both Presidents Reagan and Bush (senior) agreed to a congressional plan to raise taxes $1 for every $3 in cuts. Both Presidents were blasted (and rightfully so) for this move, and they both regretted making it. Why? Because the tax increases took effect immediately, and the cuts were to future spending. None of the cuts have ever come to fruition. Why? Because you can't force a future Congress to abide by budgets set under previous congresses.

The solution is simple: put in a stipulation that states that if the tax cuts do not take place by a certain date, the tax increases are AUTOMATICALLY rescinded, including reimbursement to those affected (including those evil rich people). Make it a hard and fast law that a future Congress can't break.

 

Now THAT'S what you call a compromise we can live with!

. . . time to fix it!

* Generalization - both conservatives AND liberals have not been too keen on spending cuts

© Emittravel 2011