ObamaCare Flatlines: ObamaCare Taxes Home Sales – Clobbers Middle-Class Americans

ObamaCare Flatlines: ObamaCare Taxes Home Sales – Clobbers Middle-Class Americans

“I can make a firm pledge.  Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase.  Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes,”
President Obama, September 12, 2008

Beginning January 1, 2013, ObamaCare imposes a 3.8% Medicare tax on unearned income, including the sale of single family homes, townhouses, co-ops, condominiums, and even rental income.

In February 2010, 5.02 million homes were sold, according to the National Association of Realtors.  On any given day, the sale of a house, townhome, condominium, co-op, or income from a rental property can push middle-income families over the $250,000 threshold and slam them with a new tax they can’t afford.

This new ObamaCare tax is the first time the government will apply a 3.8 percent tax on unearned income.  This new tax on home sales and unearned income and other Medicare taxes raise taxes more than $210 billion to pay for ObamaCare.   The National Association of Realtors called this new Medicare tax on unearned income “destructive” and “ill-advised” and warned it would hurt job creation.

For previous ObamaCare Flatlines, visit click here.

Additional Document: The Costly Consequences of Health Care Reform (Courtesy of the Budget Committee)

State of the Union: Mammoth Government is the New Normal

State of the Union: Mammoth Government is the New
Normal

January 27th, 2011

Ben Johnson, FloydReports.com

In his 2011
State of the Union Address
, Barack Obama gave himself five more years of
trillion-dollar deficit spending, a $678 billion income tax hike, a Social
Security tax increase, and the permanent extension of ObamaCare – and he gave
Republicans medical malpractice reform and a joke about a salmon.
Since his inauguration, the president has gone on a two-year spending orgy
unrivaled since the days of Lyndon Johnson or FDR. Faced with a national
backlash against towering debt, he has come up with a “compromise”: Americans
should accept the big government expansion he has forced down their throats and
move on. This follows the president’s familiar pattern of forcing through costly
and unpopular measures, then promising “discipline” after the fact.
The most reported aspect of the speech was Obama’s pledge to freeze
discretionary, non-military spending at their current levels – exempting such
major programs as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Homeland
Security.
At the risk of stating the obvious, which perhaps no one has yet stated,
there is no “savings.” As President Obama would say, “Let’s be
clear”: Savings is when you reduce the amount of money you are spending. The
president’s proposal is to spend the same amount of money. The only “savings”
would come from the fact that inflation
unleashed by deficit
spending
and quantitative
easing
will devalue the dollar – but this is hardly a cause for cheer.
History shows that spending freezes rarely freeze anything. The most
ambitious attempt was the 1985 Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act, which attempted to
control deficit spending by future Congresses, but many of the same politicians
who voted for the bill decided they would not abide by its terms the next year.
Deficits continued to mount. To give a more recent example, last year Congress
approved slightly more
than half
of the whopping $11.5 billion in spending cuts Obama requested
last year.
The amount of the budget actually affected is rather modest, indeed. It would
apply to approximately
12 percent of the budget
. Alec Phillips, an analyst with Goldman Sachs,
estimates that if every Congress for the next five years holds to current
levels, it would “save” $200 billion. The New York Times noted its
higher estimate of “$250 billion in savings over 10 years would be less than 3
percent of the roughly $9 trillion in additional deficits the government is
expected to accumulate
over that time.” Obama’s plan would cost
half-a-trillion dollars more
than returning
to 2008 spending levels
, as proposed by the most moderate Republicans. Sen.
Rand Paul has proposed a half-a-trillion
dollar spending cut
this year, which includes cutting food stamps
and eliminating the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the National
Endowment for the Arts. Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan and Senator Jim DeMint
introduced a bill to cut
$2.5 trillion
over ten years, eliminating the aforementioned programs as
well as Amtrak and the president’s “high-speed rail” and rolling back spending
to 2006 levels. Obama’s freeze is small beer in its own terms and hypocritical
when paired with his calls for new spending.
The State of the Union made only passing reference to the greatest budgetary
crisis facing us: out of control entitlements (and most of his “solutions” are
bad ideas; see below). “Mandatory” spending alone exceeds projected federal
revenues – the amount of money the government took in all year. If we eliminated
100 percent of discretionary spending – privatized the Post Office, dismantled
the military, and fired every federal prosecutor and judge – we would still run a
deficit
.
Nonetheless, the president instructed us, “The final step to winning the
future is to make sure we aren’t buried under a mountain of debt.” As though we
are not already buried under a mountain of debt. As though this were not a
mountain of his own making. As though it were not one he wished to greatly
enlarge
.
What Obama intends to freeze is big government. His proposal to hold-the-line
comes after he jacked
up federal spending by 84 percent
. After inflating the federal government
beyond the free market’s carrying capacity, he now wishes to maintain the status
quo.
As usual Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-AL, had the best analysis of Obama’s spending
freeze, calling it “a plan for deficit preservation.” The day
after the State of the Union speech, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)
predicted the deficit for 2011 will be….
Read
more
.

Christmas is About Jesus, Not More Debt

Christmas is About Jesus, Not More Debt

November 29th, 2010

Floyd and Mary Beth Brown, FloydReports.com

During  this  Christmas season of cheer and good tidings, a  universal message  is going  forth.  They are all united — from Barack  Obama, to Martha  Stewart, to Wall  Street banks, to the Federal Reserve  — and even your  local mall agrees:  please borrow to spend more this  Christmas.

Americans  since 2008  have been tightening their belts, and they have  paid down  more than $150 billion in consumer debt.  This is a  remarkable feat and  a  testimony to the diligence, hard work, and  frugality of the  American  citizen. In contrast to the people, we are  embarrassed that  our  government is encouraging irresponsible and  spendthrift behavior.

Little   wonder the finances of the U.S. government and the Federal  Reserve  are in  a shambles. When times are tight, overspending and  excessive  debt is  never the answer. Americans intuitively understand  this and  they are  making tough choices to avoid bankruptcy.  Barack  Obama would  be smart  to follow their example.

But governments never really  tighten  the budget. We all learned  years ago the idiocy of government  accounting  when they proclaimed they  were making “budget cuts” when  spending and  borrowing was going up  every year.  This would be akin to  us saying, “We  want a Porsche, so we  will cut the budget and get a  Corvette,” when our  salary could only  cover payments on a Toyota  Corolla.

This upside-down idea was in the news again this week with the bailout of Ireland….

Read more.

The Most Important Decision You’ll Ever Make

The Most Important Decision You’ll Ever Make

October 25th, 2010

Don Feder, GrassTopsUSA.com

When you step into the  voting booth on November 2, you will make the  most important decision  of your life. You’ll literally be voting on your  future – or, more  precisely, whether or not you and your country will  have one.

Would you like to live in Cuba, own a business in Venezuela or have the   civil liberties of an Iranian? Without a radical reversal of course,   those happy fates could be yours.

Think of the watershed elections of our lifetime – Nixon-McGovern   (1972), Reagan-Carter (1980), The Contract With America (1994), and   Bush-Gore (2000). None even comes close to the importance of what will   happen in less than two weeks.

You won’t just be voting for a House member and, in some cases, a   Senator. You won’t just be voting on whether Nancy Pelosi (“We have to   pass the bill so you can find out what’s in it”) remains Speaker of the   House, or whether Harry Reid (town meeting protestors are   “evil-mongers”) is still the Senate Majority Leader.

You will be voting on whether Obama will still have a rubber-stamp   Congress on January 3, 2011 – where a Democratic majority (liberal pod   people) vote robotically for whatever economy-annihilating measures the   administration dreams up.

If you want a snapshot of Obama’s vision of America (a Kodak moment  from  Hell), consider the political mutants who descended on our  nation’s  capital on October 2 to push his agenda.

Along with the usual assortment of labor hacks, educrats and racial   guilt-mongers, One Nation Working Together included the Communist Party   USA, the Democratic Socialists of America, the American Muslim   Association (People for the Jihad Way), the U.S. Campaign to End the   (alleged) Israeli Occupation, and the National Council of La Raza (The   Race).

Read more.