Skip to main content

Poor people understand deficit spending, too

The consequences of long-term deficit spending--whether by the previous administration or this one--are a choice between a crashing currency or significantly higher taxes.

President Obama has repeatedly promised that we can have it all: stimulus spending, two foreign wars, bail-outs for banks and entire industry sectors, and health insurance reform without raising taxes on anybody but Americans who make over $250K.

He's still saying it:

"I have not proposed any plan that would put the burden on middle-class families in order to deal with this'' healthcare plan, Obama told the audience Saturday at a "town hall'' meeting in Grand Junction, Colo. "So when you hear people talking about I'm raising your taxes, the only tax policies I've implemented for middle-class families is a tax cut for 95 percent of working families.'' ...

"When I was campaigning,'' Obama replied, "I made a promise that I would not raise your taxes if you made $250,000 a year or less. That's what I said. But I said that for people like myself, who make more than that, there's nothing wrong with me paying a little bit more in order to help people who've got a little bit less. That was my commitment.''


Nearly 70% of American citizens, however, appear to think he's full of it:

The apparently pervasive fear of higher taxes – with 68 percent of all Americans surveyed by the Gallup Poll saying they expect higher taxes by the end of Obama's term – could help explain widespread uncertainty about the president's plans for overhauling the delivery of health care and insurance.


What's more significant is that poor Americans [including a lot of Democrats, apparently] also understand what the President apparently does not: you cannot continually toss out money without eventually paying for it--one way or the other:

Even though the Obama administration has advanced no plans to raise taxes "on any but the wealthiest Americans,'' Jones notes, the newest Gallup Poll shows that "even a majority of Americans in the lowest income group -- whose annual household incomes are less than $30,000 -- believe their taxes will go up.

"Much larger majorities of middle- and upper-income Americans expect their taxes to be raised,'' Jones adds, noting that this might in part be explained by the fact that "upper-income Americans tend to be more Republican in their party orientation.''

Among those with an annual household income of $75,000 or more, 80 percent have told Gallup's pollsters that they believe they will pay higher income taxes by the end of Obama's term.

"But even Obama's political base has doubts about his being able to hold the line on income taxes,'' Jones reports, noting that 48 percent of Democrats expect their taxes to rise during his term.


Under President Reagan, the saying among small-government believers was Starve the Beast--the idea that the very best way to reduce the size of government was simply to take away its funding.

Under President Obama we are now feeding it.

Comments

Nancy Willing said…
You probably don't live in NCC where we have had 5 years running of deficit spending. The WNJ regurgitated yet another Coons' presser today about how proud he was in cutting his deficit in half. Too bad he's mainly doing it by raising our taxes each year splitting the difference with huge water and sewer increases and not reducing staff.

He had Cassandra write him a propaganda post on how everyone was fine with paying more. That was a big lie.
Mike W. said…
I'm glad people are waking up, but where was this skepticism during the campaign? Obama was promising us everything under the sun while simultaneously saying "no new taxes."

Anyone who wasn't blinded by "hope & change" could see what he kept saying didn't fit with reality.

Popular posts from this blog

Comment Rescue (?) and child-related gun violence in Delaware

In my post about the idiotic over-reaction to a New Jersey 10-year-old posing with his new squirrel rifle , Dana Garrett left me this response: One waits, apparently in vain, for you to post the annual rates of children who either shoot themselves or someone else with a gun. But then you Libertarians are notoriously ambivalent to and silent about data and facts and would rather talk abstract principles and fear monger (like the government will confiscate your guns). It doesn't require any degree of subtlety to see why you are data and fact adverse. The facts indicate we have a crisis with gun violence and accidents in the USA, and Libertarians offer nothing credible to address it. Lives, even the lives of children, get sacrificed to the fetishism of liberty. That's intellectual cowardice. OK, Dana, let's talk facts. According to the Children's Defense Fund , which is itself only querying the CDCP data base, fewer than 10 children/teens were killed per year in Delaw

With apologies to Hube: dopey WNJ comments of the week

(Well, Hube, at least I'm pulling out Facebook comments and not poaching on your preserve in the Letters.) You will all remember the case this week of the photo of the young man posing with the .22LR squirrel rifle that his Dad got him for his birthday with resulted in Family Services and the local police attempting to search his house.  The story itself is a travesty since neither the father nor the boy had done anything remotely illegal (and check out the picture for how careful the son is being not to have his finger inside the trigger guard when the photo was taken). But the incident is chiefly important for revealing in the Comments Section--within Delaware--the fact that many backers of "common sense gun laws" really do have the elimination of 2nd Amendment rights and eventual outright confiscation of all privately held firearms as their objective: Let's run that by again: Elliot Jacobson says, This instance is not a case of a father bonding with h

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?