Posts Tagged ‘budget’

Obama Cuts 0.47% from Budget

May 6, 2009

Today, word came out that President Obama has cut $17 billion from the 2010 budget.  While that is a lot of money to you and me, it is a measly 0.47% of the $3.55 trillion budget that has been proposed for this year.  Surely, with the way things are going, the 2010 budget figures to be even bigger, so the $17 billion will become an even smaller percentage.

During his campaign, Obama promised to go through the budget, line by line and cut programs that weren’t working or were not necessary.  Looks like he thinks 99.53% of all the government spending is necessary.  And he’ll probably tout this as the “change” he promised and the media and all of his supporters will eat it up.  They’ll just blame the Republicans and Bush for making all the spending “absolutely necessary.”

Just when I think Obama can’t be more of a hypocrite, he does something like this.  Why even announce you’re “cutting” less than one-half of one percent of the budget?  This country is going off a cliff, and Obama isn’t putting on the brakes, he’s flooring the gas.

Obama’s Self-Serving Budget

February 26, 2009

I read somewhere once, this theory:

“If you took all the money in the world and gave an equal amount to each person, within a decade, the same people would end up with all the money again.”

Then, today, I read about Obama’s budget proposal, where he wants to increase taxes on people earning more than $100,000 a year, while giving 80% of the population an $800 a year tax break.  I really do not understand Obama and other socialist(or “progressive”) thinkers where $66 a month is going to change things.  It’s mostly a symbolic, self-serving gesture by Obama, where he wants to take from the rich and give to the poor.

The funny thing, though, is that those receiving the $66 (me included) will probably spend the money and not save it.  Then they will have goods they don’t need, but the money will be transferred back to those that own the stores or make the products.  It will go right back into the hands of the wealthy.

How about a real change in the tax policy?  How about we cut taxes across the board by half?  If you make $40,000, you would pay $10,000 in taxes now, but would pay only $5,000 a year if we cut taxes.  What do you think will help more?  Obama’s 800 bucks or five grand in your pocket?

That’s the problem with Obama’s thinking.  Rather than letting us keep more of our hard earned money, he would rather give us a nominal tax cut and call it “change.”

I know, you’re probably saying, “If we cut taxes by half, how will the government make money to fund all our programs?”

This tax cut would have to come with an even bigger spending cut.  In 2007, our government spent about $2.7 trillion and took in about $2.4 trillion in taxes and fees.  So, if we cut taxes in half, you could say we would have about $1.2 trillion to spend.  Our spending on our military empire totals about $600 billion, and social security and medicare costs almost $1.2 trillion.  You can do the math that if we end our empire and bring our troops home, and stop or cut some of the welfare programs, we could easily balance the budget.

The point of this post though, is that Obama’s goals are for his own devices only, and not for the good of the American people.  He says he wants to cut taxes, but the cuts aren’t enough to make a difference.  All he really wants to do is shift the tax burden around, but not really bring any change or hope to the government.  It’s all a sham, and everyone is falling for it, hook, line and sinker.

Balancing the California Budget

November 7, 2008

I have no idea how we got so far into this mess, but I do know that there is an $11.7 billion hole in the California budget.  The easy answer is that we spent too much money and didn’t make enough to make it balance  However, $11.7 billion is more than ten percent of the $103 billion state budget, so someone did some serious miscalculating.

Today, our Governator, Arnold Schwarzenegger revealed a plan to raise the sales tax by 1.5% and some other new taxes to raise about $4 billion.  In this same plan, he proposes cuts of around $7 billion to state programs.  Now there is an uproar about how we don’t need new taxes and how it’s going to kill our economy.

While I don’t agree with big government and over-taxation, at least Schwarzenegger has put a plan out there to balance the budget.  The state legislature had months to do this and they just sat there bickering and not working anything out.

On top of all this, the voters just approved almost $3 billion in new debt that will be issued as bonds.  So not only are we not meeting the budget now, but we just added to it!  Somewhere along the line, we need to increase taxes to meet this new spending.

I also believe that if we are going to have taxes, they should be at the state and local level.  At least we know what programs our taxes to go towards in the state.  There might be waste and inefficiency, but at least we know they aren’t going to an entirely different part of the country.  

So while people bitch and moan about a 1.5% sales tax increase and a tax on golf green fees, they should be complaining about all the taxes we pay towards the federal government to fund social security, welfare, medicare, two wars, and farm subsidies.  If those programs were better managed, we would be taxed less by the feds and could afford to pay more to the state.

People are always so serious about curbing spending and balancing the budget, but when push comes to shove, they want to keep spending while lowering taxes.  That doesn’t work for our household budgets, why do we think it will work for the government’s?  While the Governator’s plan might not be perfect, it at least it is the rare example of a politician actually trying to make things work.