advertisement

The world-famous Internet site of the Nationally Syndicated Neal Boortz Show!

Search Boortz.com
Enter search terms:
Browse Boortz.com
Today's Nuze

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."

Frederic Bastiat

ANOTHER TAX ON THE ACHIEVERS

By
Neal Boortz
@ November 23, 2009 8:59 AM
Permalink | Comments (46) | TrackBacks (0)

Senator Carl Levin has come up with a solution to funding our troops in Afghanistan ... tax the rich. That seems to be about the only solution the Democrats can come up with these days. Levin says that an "additional income tax to the upper brackets, folks earning more than $200,000 or $250,000" a year, could fund more troops." Levin explains, "They have done incredibly well, and I think that it's important that we pay for it if we possibly can" instead of increasing the federal debt load.

So now we have two increases in income taxes on those making over $200,000 a year ... one for the war in Afghanistan and the other to pay for healthcare reform. Oh ... and let's not forget the 5 percent income tax these producers are going to suffer when the Democrats kill off the Bush tax cuts.

We're worried about jobs now, right? Well, what the Democrats won't acknowledge, and the ObamaMedia won't tell you, is that the people who produce the jobs this country needs so badly will be the people hit by these tax increases. Eighty percent of all jobs are provided by small businessmen; the individuals with the incomes being targeted by the tax-and spend Democrats. What's more, 70 percent of all new jobs in our economy are coming from these small businessmen.

Now ... let me ask you. If you were a small businessman, and if you knew that the Democrats were planning all sorts of tax increases that will hit you hard:

  • Eliminating the Bush tax cuts ... +5%
  • Pelosi healthcare tax ... +5.4%
  • Eliminating the earnings cap for Social Security taxes ... +?%
  • Surtax to pay for the war in Afghanistan ... +?%
  • Tax on high-value health insurance policies ... +?%

Come on, folks. Think for a second. If you're a businessman facing all these tax increases.. and more; if you're squarely in the crosshairs of the Democrat "tax the rich" schemes; are you really going to take your cash and invest it in expanding your business and hiring more people? Hell no, you won't! You're going to sit on that cash. You're going to put it away where it will be safe. With Democrats playing the class warfare game on tax policy now is no time to stick your neck out. Doing "incredibly well" evidently makes you ripe for some nifty income seizure and redistribution.

Elections have consequences. Good luck on these new jobs.

Categories:



0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: ANOTHER TAX ON THE ACHIEVERS.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://boortz.com/blogging/mt-tb.cgi/52023

Jamie Dupree's Blog

If you enjoy Neal's daily chat with Jamie Dupree, you'll love Jamie's Blog! Check it out for analysis of the campaigns and goings on in Washington D.C.

Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!


Avg. rating: N/A

What others are saying

  • Safe soldiers
    "the people who want the troops safe at home w/ their families."

    - that's not what soldiers are for.
  • Re: mattisben The question is what will happen when all this taxation throws a wrench into an already weak economy – a weak economy caused by government intervention.
    The Statist think that people will turn TO them.

    They had better think about the distinct possibility that the people will turn Against them.

    Then, to quote Dr. Brown in 'Back to the future': You're going to see some serious sheet.
  • RE: Tom Ace / Optimus Prime / Jimmy Dolan
    You guys keep trying to reason with this waste of oxygen...but it is a waste of time. This is a classic example of the ideal liberal voter: Braindead, ignorant, filled with hate, not willing to listen to anything but Comedy Central, and dumber than a box of rocks.

    You are wasting your time trying to explain anything to this moron.
  • Doc
    Now I know you've been to my blog and seen the Oath-Keepers link. Those are active and retired military and law enforcement. They will obey the constitution even if they have to disobey a direct order.

    http://oathkeepers.org/oath/
  • Re Ace
    Again, I hope you are right. I just think that, sometimes, ripping the band-aid off is preferable to slowly pulling it off.
  • @Jack Smythe
    Tarp is just yet another example of government ineptitude at work. No one here likes it either.

    You've asked this same question several times in the past with the same answer....not sure what you're looking for here.
  • Taxing the producers
    The looters could take all the money the producers make & it would still not be enough to fund their fantasies.
    FYI I have been slowy withdrawing money out of my accounts, just so the gov't can't get to the savings/pension/IRA's/401Ks. And they will try, you can bet on it.
  • By tshirt-doctor.com @ 11/23/09 02:35:02 PM
    Plenty of time has been made available to challenge the constitutionality of those congressional acts. I am trying to remember who the service member was that intentionally missed shipping out and attempted to claim lack of constitutional authority for the conflict and the Supreme Court would not hear the case. The guy received a court martial maybe. I apologize up front for failing to have my facts in order. But, I do believe that time has been there for challenges to the constitutional basis.

    Bottom line, if Congress authorizes the President to conduct a conflict then a soldier has a constitutional obligation.

    The other thing to think about regarding orders and where things can go awry. If as a soldier I get an order to take a town what are the implications? Burn down the town with every civilian man, woman, and child? One can argue that I "took the town" and followed orders. I am glad to say that soldiers do not work that way.

    All sorts of things come in to play, rules of engagement, UCMJ, Military Code of Conduct, Geneva Convention, etc., when I carry out an order. Yep, you have to worry that I have ethics and morals. I am glad to say that almost 100% of those people over there do. And the ones that do not? They get their fair day in a military court.
  • Taxes and Fees
    Neal,

    You forgot the fees the congrssional nitwits are going to charge the health providers with. The amount we pay will have to go up to reimburse the comapies and doctors for their fees.
  • By tshirt-doctor.com @ 11/23/09 02:08:12 PM
    "you have two options. take an order that you THINK might be illegal, or spend the rest of your tour in jail with a dishonorable discharge when you get out?"

    I feel very sad for you and I pity you. You think this poorly of our military. I am afraid that you are portraying a great deal of ignorance born of the distortions from the liberal media.

    I have been there. When orders are issued, there is review and assessment. If my situation warrants it, I ask for clarification and include pertinent information as to why I believe that something is unlawful. Sometimes, "higher-ups" just do not have the information they need and adjustments are made regarding my concerns. Further, it is my duty to ensure that an order is interpreted and executed according to military and civilian law. If a final direct confrontation is called for then I would gladly accept relief from my post. Certainly, it may end my career but the other option is GOING TO JAIL FOR COMMITTING A CRIME.

    Long ago, I wrote my obituary. After that, everything became a lot clearer. What matters is how I live my life not how I cover my ass. You should understand that a lot of soldiers sign up to do the hardest job on this planet and make hard choices. Sometimes, a few go bad and we take care of them too.
  • OTR
    i have heard of that. and i believe its unconstitutional. but that's just me thinking.

    i thought you said after lt. calley's court martial "In the end, officers in the military take their oath to the Constitution VERY seriously.".

    i guess they forget the UCMJ because they didn't want to break their oath.
  • Neil asks. "If you're a businessman facing all these tax increases.. and more; if you're squarely in the crosshairs of the Democrat "tax the rich" schemes; are you really going to take your cash and invest it in expanding your business and hiring more people?"

    I'll do you one better. Not only are we not planning in hiring any new employees, because of the new taxes, we will probably have to let a few go in order to meet our expected EBITA projections. Thanks, Obama.
  • By tshirt-doctor.com @ 11/23/09 01:49:12 PM
    Oh, let me guess, a bunch of our guys just decided to put their BDUs on, pick up their weapons and just go take a walk over there? Cause we know military people are just loaded with money to spend on the ships and tanks to take with them....

    Did War Powers Act ever come to mind?

    Let me try another one from Congress: Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists?

    So it would appear that the Constitutional requirement was met.

    As for Abu Ghraib, I think there was a trial for all that business? I seem to recall some folks were relieved. Lets see, something like 12 soldiers tried and convicted????? A general was demoted I think????

    Do you need me to start spelling out????
  • OTR
    you have two options. take an order that you THINK might be illegal, or spend the rest of your tour in jail with a dishonorable discharge when you get out?
  • Bent Over
    like those soldiers at Abu Ghraib?

    if they worried about the constitution so much then why are they deploying without a state of war coming out of congress, where, according to the constitution, it has to come from?
  • Tom Ace - Troops home
    You want the troops home, but you also want them to protect you. Why don't you go over there and ask the Al Qaeda pigs, pretty please, not to attack anyone in America so we can bring them home without worry.

    Bet they just laugh and cut your sorry head off!
  • By tshirt-doctor.com @ 11/23/09 12:46:50 PM
    Some days I start to warm up to you and then like today, you throw a bucket full of ice water on it.

    I can excuse your remark for ignorance. I sincerely doubt that you ever spent any time in the military. The media does a wonderful job of portraying the scarce bad apples in the military like 2LT William Calley. As you might recall he was convicted by a 6-officer jury on multiple counts of murder, based on an investigation by an Army officer conducting an Article 32 investigation.

    Regrettably, not more officers were charged/convicted. I can tell you that those others involved were quietly dealt with. In the end, officers in the military take their oath to the Constitution VERY seriously.

    Yes, it is your opinion. However, you speak as an ignorant man.
  • wet t-shirt nurse
    once again, you know not of what you speak.

    Our military thinks for themselves. They don't just follow orders. Yes, they follow orders, but only lawful ones.

    It will not be long before they are asked to do something against which they believe and then we will see.

    And they MOST DEFINITELY worry about the Constitution AND the oath they took. Their word means everything to them.

    I used to be one of them myself. 20 years worth...
  • Does anyone think that once the war is over that this tax would be removed? Yeah, right. A tax never goes away and that's the first lesson about government.
  • mattisben
    i don't think our soldiers worry about the constitution or the oath they've taken. they just do what the higher ups tell them what to do.
  • Hey Doc
    If our jobs were still going to Mexico, they wouldn't be coming here looking for jobs! Our jobs went mostly to India and Japan.

    TARP will take a heck of a lot longer than the savings & loan to pay off!!! Especially since Geithner wants to keep "recycling" the funds.
  • Re: mattisben I wouldn't go that far, but those on the Left should really think long and hard about where their side is taking this country.
    Before the Statist in the National Socialist Democrat Party blithely ignore the Constitution on healthcare and the First and Second Amendments and everything else.

    They had better take stock and look at the fact that a temporary political 'victory' for them will ultimately mean the destruction of their party.

    They are rapidly “Progressing” towards a system that has always, and will always FAIL.

    That means that if they keep on this course towards a Statist system no matter what they do, it WILL FAIL.

    The National Socialist Democrat Party is in a convertible heading for a cliff – it doesn't matter where they go off the cliff, or where they land, they are going to pancake when they hit.

    They're only choice is to turn back.

    Whether they have the good sense to do so is another question.
  • How to pay for that war....
    The Dem's would be wise to follow the GWBush method. Pass the necessary funding as emergency legislation, outside the budget, issue the debt to pay for it, and call it a day.

    Except that we have been doing that for eight years and the national debt has gotten a little out of hand!
  • tom acedolanfontain
    Got that "this is a gun free trailer" in front of your section 8 housing yet?
  • Jack Smythe
    i've got something worse than TARP.

    i was callled NAFTA.
    does anybody remember that? i remember when ross perot make that sucking sould telling us that's the sound of jobs going to mexico.

    the parties, neither one of them, care about the american citizen.

    i should've voted for ross perot

    do you remember the saving & loan scandal? it happen around 1985-1989. we're still paying that one off. i think it will be 2013 before that one is paid off.
  • gonna tax my as...............................
    well if they (who the hell is they) think that they (there they are agin) can tax and regulate my ass out of bizniss...........

    hahahahahahaha.....too late!!!!
  • Boortz is Wrong...Backwards
    Neal, you say that small business men are being targeted by the "tax and spend-Democrats." you've got it backwards. I believe they're more aptly described as the "spend and tax-Democrats." In reality, you could probably substitue "Republicans" in there as well. Nevertheless, the bottom line is that if they were to do it in the correct order, some of what lies ahead for my children may have been avoided...Probably not.
  • edit
    Should read "oath". Though most of our horses ass politicians would be happier with oats.
  • Re Ace
    You have stated the situation well. The other group that has sworn to uphold the Constitution is our military. Are they not bound by that oat to purge the intestinal tract that is Washington? Coup anyone?
  • How can the Statist Democrats claim to following the Constitution and not be limited by it at the same time?
    Clearly the Leftists cannot resolve the dichotomy between the government having unlimited power and yet somehow still being limited.

    When the question is brought up about the Statists Democrats being able to compel everyone to buy their insurance, the answer is always that somehow that power is contained under section 8 of the Constitution, and that there is case law to back that up.

    And then when the question of the government having unlimited power is advanced, the answer is that it is indeed limited by the Constitution.


    The real answer is that the Statists don't really recognize any limited on their power, but re 'Using' the cover of Constitutional accountability when necessary.


    snarkybird keeps on incessantly stating that “we get the government we deserve” - IF the current government is not following their Constitution limits, that is not longer true.

    The election and the running of the government is supposed to be run under the auspices of the founding documents. That is the 'Social' contract that the Statist Democrats ran under, that what people expected them to follow.


    If they cannot contain themselves within the limitations built into this system of government it isn't the government we deserve' it is working beyond those limits.

    Parenthetically speaking, if Fauxbama and the rest of the Statists from the National Socialist Party had stated flatly that they weren't going follow that silly old 'Constitution', do you really think they would have won the election?

    A fair number of people voted for them based on the assumption that they WOULD follow the Constitution and clearly they are not.

    Look at it as the biggest “Bait and Switch” scam in the history of mankind.
  • Tom Ace
    Let's add one more item to your little list. Since the people that support the war have to pay for it and those that don't support it don't have to pay for it - can we say that same thing about all of O-slammy's policies? I don't agree with bailouts, free healthcare, welfare, or any of the other liberal schemes. So, by your logic, I can deduct the amount that currently (an all future amounts) goes to fund those programs?

    Or how about since you don't want out military abroad - you have to give up your liberty and freedom? You don't want the military out there protecting you - you want them home with their families instead.

    You're just like Obama - you couldn't find a coherent thought (or your butt) with both hands and a flashlight.
  • Cowards Flee
    This is why Oprah is quitting - she wants to take her money elsewhere before the hope & change kicks in and takes 40% of it
  • Tax on achievers
    It makes perfect sense when you add one more little fact.. He is a senator form "Business killing" Michigan. No hope or change here.
  • Tom Ace
    I guess then, we can start with your boy, the Thief in Chief. He supports this disasterous war, so he should pay for it. I'm sure no matter what he wants, you'll be right behind him. So, I guess we should tax you too.
  • Tom Ace/Jimmy Dolan
    that's interesting, so you are saying that the young men and women who are lining up to serve in the Military are from a majority of "evil rich" households?
  • What about Obama's promise?
    In light of His "promise", how can these folks entertain the possibility of increasing taxes on those making under $250k per year? Are they not on the same page as their exalted leader?

    It is quite interesting how the "floor" on which individuals will become victims of proposed tax increases is continually lowered - incrementalism at its finest.

    Suppose it's no big deal since this promise has long since been chalked up in the "Broken" column.
  • Your not kidding!
    I am a partner in a small business employing about 20 people. I'm classified as 'Evil Rich' as the profits of my company are reported as personal income every year. We made the decision to sell the company when Obama got elected based on his rhetoric. We sped it up to have it done by January when it became obvious we were entering a 'Soak the Rich' atmosphere. I'm betting that it will be around for some time.
    Personally, I'm going to hold onto my evil money I have earned, while making myself look as poor as possible. It is only fair, right?
    I'm thinking about going and doing something such as police work that ironically does not make enough money and is less stressful. Why? I don't have to hire lawyers and accountants to identify who is after my money! I'd rather go fight the good fight on the street. Better hours than entrepreneurship anyway.
  • Tax the Rich
    Each and every one of these taxes will eventually hit the "non-rich", in one way or another, but the politicians will keep telling us they haven't increased our taxes. An alarming number of people will fall for this. Those with working brain cells will not.

    I'll be keeping that in mind as I review my investments that have tanked the 0.7% interest that I get from what I've managed to save in a bank account, and as I see the price of everything around me increasing.
  • Another tax
    Rather than worrying about what some boring senator suggested that wont actually go through, how about taxing the people who want the war to still go on rather than the people who want the troops safe at home w/ their families.
  • small business
    Ground zero...My mother owns a small business and, based what is seemed destined to come in tax increases, etc. she has already decided that bottom line, employees will be headed for the government plan. Thanks Obama...
  • I'm thinking Jack
    ...still thinking.....nope nothing coming to me..... trying to think of something.... naw. Can't think of one good thing to come out of TARP.
  • It's not to get funding
    The point of all this taxation is not to get funding for anything, it's to hamstring the economy,make more people dependent on government, and get more votes for the libs.

    "The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."
    Margaret Thatcher

    If you don't get that, look up the story about the goose that laid the golden eggs, since you're on the internet.
  • You forgot to mention TARP?
    The Bush and Obama administration has spent (gifted) trillions of our dollars to bailout private and public banks, holding companies, insurance companies, and of course the UAW. And many have announced that they will not be repaying a large part of these TARP handouts. And of course the treasury continues to provide interest free loans to holding companies like Goldman Sachs. They then make billions in profit, which they then distribute as employee bonuses instead of paying it as dividends to mutual fund holders, or paying back to the taxpayers.

    What did we get for these trillions seized from us? Absolutely nothing.

    What will we all get for TARP? Massive future tax increases. We all gotta pay for these gifts to the banks and their "talented" executives. And small businesses weren't helped at all by TARP or the Wall Street banks that benefited from our involuntary gift to them. TARP, to me, is the biggest sin committed by our governments this decade.

    Can anyone think of anything good that came out of TARP that benefited the taxpayers?
  • Does "taxing the rich" constitute a "bill of attainder"?
    Just asking ...
  • Tax The Rich
    How come the Dems want always want to tax the rich, when most of them don't even pay the taxes that they owe? Then there are the Congress critters who don't even pay taxes. All they do is rake it off the people to line their own pockets.
  • Hey Levin...and Pelosi...and Reid...et al...
    2010......tick-tock...tick-tock...tick-tock...y'all just keep talking....tick-tock...tick-tock....
send to a friend  view as printer-friendly  RSS feeds
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement