Obama's meaningless tax "cuts"
By ParaTed2k
@ParaTed2k (22940)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
February 14, 2011 7:01am CST
Sorry to the Big Obama, but a decrease in what you wanted do spend is not a "cut", it's just a smaller increase. Oh, and it's meaningless to say you're "cutting" $1.1 trillion if a big portion of that is tax increases (which, by definition, aren't "cuts" at all). Especially when you are spreading that over 10 years.
Then when you make it part of a bloated $3.73 billion dollar budget (for a single year budget), you further show your inability to be honest or ethical.
In fact, all you are doing is showing yourself for the lying Chicago thug, and Washington Royalty Wannabee we already know you are.
Change, HA! Just another corrupt politician. No change at all.
4 people like this
8 responses
@dragon54u (31634)
• United States
14 Feb 11
Yeah, we're not going to get any real progress because nobody is willing to touch the sacred cows of entitlement programs and useless cash-suckers like the Dept of Energy or the Dept of Education. When it hurts, we'll know that someone is doing something truly useful.
My stepmother's adopted son was saying yesterday that the army is cutting 46,000 men and women over the next 3 years. Good example of false economy, especially with the Middle East on fire and North and South Korea so precarious, not to mention our own border under attack.
1 person likes this
@laglen (19759)
• United States
14 Feb 11
I just read about this and was heading to mylot to vent. He really is unbelievable.
[i]
spending increases in selected areas of education, biomedical research, energy efficiency, high-speed rail[/i]
[i]
budget would support Obama's goal of putting 1 million electric vehicles on the road by 2015[/i]
Obama's budget avoided painful choices in entitlement programs, it did call for $78 billion in reductions to Pentagon spending over the next decade good to see we have priorities.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/14/obama-sends-trillion-budget-congress/#ixzz1DwHkoacZ
ok, here is the devil's advocate here - maybe this is where he starts to negotiate?
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
14 Feb 11
What really gets me about these sorts of things is that WE ALREADY HAVE ELECTRIC CARS AND TRAINS!!
These products fail, and government thinking political minds best creative minds just wastes more and more and more and more money.
The problem with electric cars isn't that we don't have enough electric cars and that private business doesn't have enough money wrapped up in electric cars.
If they can't figure out where to take it from there, they're really stupid. No other way to put it.
2 people like this
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
14 Feb 11
Electric cars will catch on when there's no other choice. When there really isn't any gasoline to be had, or when the price is prohibitive. Obama is working on the latter. Don't worry, he's going to make sure through regulation and manipulation that there will be a market for his cars.
2 people like this
@sierras236 (2739)
• United States
14 Feb 11
I have always wondered how "tax raises" are categorized as "cuts." Anyone know? Seriously, did he forget the meaning of the word "cut?" Well, it appears to be business as usual for the President. Well, he certainly will earn a place in the Guinness World Book Of Records for the President who spent the most. Maybe someone outside of his administration could explain the difference. Although, I seriously doubt that he will learn to distinguish between the two.
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
15 Feb 11
Come on...did you really think he was really going to tackle the problem of our budget deficits and national debt? I mean really. I would have thought you would have learned by now that they are going to pay lip service to it and make it LOOK like they are doing something when in fact they aren't...and fact making things worse. Haven't you learned the game by now?
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
16 Feb 11
Which means you were not disappointed. YOu got exactly what you exspected. I wonder how many people will still try to defend this move?
@whiteheather39 (24403)
• United States
14 Feb 11
Well said! Everyday he is proving just how corrupt he is. It is almost as if he is getting real pleasure in running our country into the ground and showing the "Chicago thug" side of his character.
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
14 Feb 11
I love the "freeze" concept. First he spends an obscene amount leading to a bloated budget and an unbearable deficit, then he says, okay freeze that. That's like saying "I will stop running after I get over that cliff". We need to back up, before we hit the cliff.
Then we go back to the old bugaboo of Social Security and Medicare. This is the same strong arm tactics that cities and towns use when they want more taxes. They say they will cut the police and fire. Anyone who can't find a way to cut the waste before they cut necessary expenditures needs to be voted out of office.
There's plenty of waste in every federally administered program. This is because governments don't work the way a business in the private sector works. Government can propose to spend more than they have and have very little to show for it. In the private sector, this would mean utter failure. In the public sector, it means you get elected again because you delivered some nice perks to your district.
They need to be held accountable. This is why polls show people want someone from the private sector, someone with business experience, to run in 2012.