Opinion Forum

A Tax By Any Other Name Still Stinks

August 5th, 2009

When candidate Obama promised, over and over again, not to raise taxes on the “middle class” it was a clear warning sign to business and industry — a sign that was totally ignored by millions — that he was about to wage a personal war against the free enterprise system. At the same time Obama was preparing for this war he was displaying his total ignorance of how the government and the economy work.

Every new tax and every new regulation that is imposed on business represents a cost that will eventually be paid for by the taxpayers (including the middle class) through the increased costs of goods and services.

Every dollar that goes to some senator’s or congressman’s pet project (and there have been trillions spent in that way) is a cost to the government that will be paid for by taxpayers — all the taxpayers.

Every day, some number of companies in every industry reach the point where they are about to close their doors due to mismanagement, inadequate response to changes in the marketplace, or government over-regulation in the name of a “greener tomorrow”. Every company that is “bailed out” of this eminent collapse is a huge cost to government and, since the government has no money except ours, it is a huge cost to taxpayers — yes, including those in the middle class. Attack the crooks, the frauds, and the phonies who steal peoples’ money to line their own pockets but leave the rest of business and industry alone. Just as in the jungle, in business the strongest will survive, the weakest will surrender and die. That’s one natural selection process that can’t even be debated.

The Obama administration inherited a weak economy and a huge deficit, no argument there. George Bush’s administration was strong on national defense but failed terribly on economic matters. Be that as it may, it is a total mystery to me (and many others) why the government decided to attack this problem by massively increasing that deficit or by making it harder for business and industry — the very engines of our economy — to do what they do best.

Perhaps I shouldn’t imply that it is a total mystery to me why this is happening. President Obama is a firm and strong believer in large government and total control. It is imperative that everyone understand what Obama believes and where that belief system will lead the United States.

A Bit Of Good News

Obama’s plan for health care Reform is also a plan that will cost middle class Americans, although it has not been framed like that by the Obama administration, but here’s some good news: A Charles Krauthammer article, reprinted in the Kansas City Star (linked below) predicts that Obama’s plans for a massive overhaul (upheaval) in the health care system may be all but dead. Here’s an excerpt from the article:

By year’s end, President Barack Obama will emerge with something he can call health care reform. The Democrats in Congress will pass it because they must. Otherwise, they’ll have slain their own savior in his first year in office.

But that bill will look nothing like the massive reform Obama originally intended. The beginning of the retreat was signaled by Obama’s reference — made five times — to “health-insurance reform” in his July 22 news conference.

Reforming the health care system is dead. Cause of death? Blunt trauma administered by the green eyeshades at the Congressional Budget Office.

Links:

Obama’s tax promise: Too tall an order, CNNMoney.com
Obama’s tax increase hammers middle-income Americans, OneNewsNow
Obamacare developing into insurance changes, Kansas City Star

(This article was also posted at My View from the Center.)

Articles written by Harvey Grund
Tags: business, health care, Obama, taxes
Categories: Economics, News, Politics | Comments (7) | Home

7 Responses to “A Tax By Any Other Name Still Stinks”

Clarissa | August 5th, 2009 at 8:58 pm

“Every company that is “bailed out” of this eminent collapse is a huge cost to government and, since the government has no money except ours, it is a huge cost to taxpayers — yes, including those in the middle class. ”

-If you remember, Obama and the Democrats were not the ones who started this insanity with the bailouts. When the bailouts started I had a huge sense of a deja vu. Where is capitalism? I asked. the bailout business is exactly what the Soviet government would do to its failing companies. But it seems that both parties are for some reason dedicated to this stupid practice.

Tom | August 6th, 2009 at 5:52 am

I agree, Clarissa. Both administrations and both parties have responded poorly in terms of both the causes of the economic crisis and the government’s response. From what I can see so far, we would be better off if the government had just stepped back and let things take their course.

Brian | August 8th, 2009 at 6:01 am

Clarisa, wouldn’t nationalized health care also be a “bailout”?

Harvey | August 8th, 2009 at 9:19 am

Clarissa,

Agree! I hope I gave the Bush administration enough “credit” for the bad economy.

Tom,

Yours is the perfect solution: let the government back off to a great degree and let the markets fix themselves. Some “policing” of business (government controls) are definitely needed because, as we’ve all seen, many CEOs and high-rollers are as irresponsible as the worst of our legislators.

As much as I’d like to delude myself into thinking the free-market can police itself, I just can’t escape that far from reality.

Brian Bagent | August 8th, 2009 at 2:45 pm

Harvey, the more Wesley Mouch’s in government, the more likely there will be Orren Boyles and Fred Kinnans in the world to take advantage of the “freebies” offered.

There are Hank Reardens in this world. T.J. Rodgers is one of them. Traders do not need the assistance of the government. They generally hold in contempt those so-called businessmen that do.

Contrast Rodgers with that reprehensible character Bob Nardelli (current CEO of Chrysler and former CEO of once-great Home Depot). Nardelli masquerades as a trader, but is in fact a looter.

Tom | August 8th, 2009 at 3:48 pm

I had to look up Wesley Mouch. OK, fine. It’s been a very long time since I read Atlas Shrugged.

There are a lot of nominees for the Wesley Mouch role these days. Barney Frank, for example, should be right near the top of any list.

Generally, I agree. The good guys in business and finance, who far outnumber the rascals, function best when least regulated. Some regulation will always be required, but it should be as distant and as hands-off as reasonably possible. What’s going on these days is just plain nuts, and I say that as one who is by no means an ardent free-marketeer.

Brian | August 8th, 2009 at 11:44 pm

Tom, there are loads of them. And, much to my chagrin, I realized that there are nearly as many with “Rs” behind their names as there are “Ds.” Every congresscritter that “brings home the bacon” is in that class. But, having said that, I would also add that the republicans are mere pikers in this game. The democrats are the pros. It will be the death of the republic if the GOP ever get as good at the game as the democrats.

The more power the government has (read that as “ability to confiscate money”), the more likely it will be for the Mouch’s to show up. Following closely on their heels will be those posing as businessmen but that are mostly unproductive, unimaginative lice. They’re parasites that, like the cop on the take, give legitimate businessman a bad name, a name that mostly liberal Democrats, socialists, and Marxists are all too willing to exploit.

Not one of these “protectors of liberty” would think about disparaging Jews, blacks, or hispanics with the broad brush with which businessmen and women are tarnished regularly. I cannot comprehend how it is that mentally competent people can listen to and find credible the likes of Pelosi and Reid when they trash business owners in one breath, then in the very next are promising programs to increase employment, to be provided, of course, by the businessmen and women that they just ran down.