No Runny Eggs

During the campaign:

“Not any of your taxes!”

Today:

The cigarette excise tax that tobacco companies must pay the federal government rose Wednesday by 61.6 cents per pack, or $6.16 per carton. The tax now comes to about $10.10 per carton, or $1.01 per pack.

According to Gallup:

Looks like a pretty substantial tax increase, especially for those with the lowest incomes.

I’m beginning to wonder if when the Keynesians talk about the “multiplier effect,” they are referring to the number of times that people will need to spend the $12 per week that they got just to pay for the “No tax increases” that Obama promised.

Looks like not all is quiet on the Leftist front.

With President Obama umming and ahhhing his way through multiple justifications for tripling the country’s debt, his campaign homies are mobilizing to go after those who don’t support his vision of The Banana Republic of America.  The odd part is that the non believers in question do not have a R behind their name, they have a D.

From Jonathon Martin at the Politico:

Americans United for Change (AUC), the labor-backed organization that has produced a steady stream of pro-White House ads, is going up on the air Wednesday in 11 states and Washington, D.C. The goal is to push Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) and members of a new group of centrist Democrats to get behind a spending blueprint that many of them have already criticized.

“This ad is designed to engage the American people in the process of bringing about the transformational change they voted for in November by contacting their elected representatives and asking for their help in putting our country on the road to prosperity,” said AUC’s acting executive director Tom McMahon.

Um no, Tom.  It’s becoming clearer and clearer that the American people did not vote for the “transformational change” that Obama is attempting to implement!

Also, MoveON.org is planning radio ads against fiscally conservative Democrats.

There’s not a lot of hope for the House to put even a bump in Obama’s budget.  Nancy Pelosi has shown a desire to out Obama, Obama when it comes to irresponsible spending.  The Senate is where we have a chance to reinstate some common sense.

If you live in Indiana, New Hampshire or Viriginia, make sure and call your Senators and give them positive reinforcement on their conservative fiscal stances.  If you live elsewhere, start providing your feedback now to your elected officials.  The budget battle will be a challenge but it is a battle we can, and must win!

We may not agree with these Democrats on every issue.  Heck, we don’t agree with Republicans on every issue.  That said, when it comes to saving the economic future of our country the old adage is best remembered:  The enemy of my enemy is my friend!

Throughout his campaign, President Barack Obama touted his tax plan that would “cut taxes for 95% of all taxpayers.” As he announced his stimulus package, Obama reiterated his promise for the tax reductions as he pointed to the “Making work pay” initiative that will provide the average worker $13 per week.

Good thing we’ve got that break but don’t go spending it all yet.

Between FY 2009 and 2010, Obama plans to increase debt by $2.9 Trillion. With around 115 Million US households, the debt alone amounts to over $25,000 per US household. If you add interest to it and amortize it over 30 years, the amount of debt that each household is now responsible for easily offsets the $13 per week in tax reductions. The problem is that the tax story doesn’t stop here.

Obama has several initiatives in his budget that are geared to not only offset any pittance of reductions that he has provided but, when taken together, will increase government imposed burdens in a dramatic fashion.

First on the increase your increased burden parade is the cap and trade program. Cap and trade will impose significant new taxes on the utilities that use carbon based fuels to provide energy, particularly electric. Depending upon whose estimate you use, Cap and trade will increase your energy costs by about $80 billion annually. That $80 billion translates to nearly $700 per year per US household.

Next in your increased burden parade are mortgage costs.  The Obama administration is supporting the ability for judges to be able to unilaterally reduce the balances owned on mortgages.  If the procedure, known as a cram down, is approved by the Senate, this will be the first time that mortgage holders will be told that they must take a reduced principle amount and not have the option of foreclosing on the property.  The net result, if this is passed, is that it will put additional risk into mortgage loans.  The reason that mortgage loans rates have traditionally been low relative to other types of loans, has been that the mortgagor always had the value of the home to go after if the mortgagee defaulted.  With this new twist, the risk of not only not being able to foreclose but to be forced to take a write down on your loan amount, lenders will respond by increasing their rates to offset the additional risk of getting hammered in a cram down.  This will be especially true for anyone who has credit that is not a+.  What’s the cost of this?  I have no idea.  However, you can bet Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and others will be crying to high heaven about the evil mortgage lenders as they see rates that had been traditionally 1% to 1.5% above 30 year Treasuries move to 3% or better, beyond the treasuries.

Our final example today is this article from the NY Times.  According to the Times, President Obama now believes that the way to solve the high cost of our medical insurance is to make us pay more for that medical insurance.  President Obama has floated the idea of removing the non taxable status of the medical premiums that many Americans receive from their employer.  Don’t think it’s a big deal?  Think again!  The NY Times article says that as much as $246 Billion, over $2,000 per year per family!

President Obama’s claim of providing tax cuts for 95% of Americans is about as genuine as some of those low cost airfares you see advertised.  You know the ones that show you a price but add taxes, a fee for this, a fee for that…oh just watch the video and imagine Obama answering a low tax line:

Can you tell the difference between this:

And this:

H.R.1

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Amendment in Senate)

Answer: While they’re both piles of crap, the manure will actually stimulate growth!

Revisions/extensions (12:10 pm 2/7/2009, steveegg) – Fixed the link. I agree; only the item hauled by Ford would stimulate growth.

Barack Obama was on Meet The Press with Tom Brokaw this weekend.   Obama provided the following perspective on the auto bail out during the interview:

MR. BROKAW:   …should the current management be allowed to stay in their jobs?

PRES.-ELECT OBAMA:   Here’s what I’ll, I’ll say, that it may not be the same for all the, all the companies, but what I think we have to put an end to is the head-in-the-sand approach to the auto industry that has been prevalent for decades now.   I think, in fairness, you have seen some progress made incrementally in many of these companies.   You know, they have been building better cars now than they were 10 or 15 or 20 years ago.   They are making some investments in the kind of green technologies and, and the new batteries that would allow us to create plug-in hybrids.   What we haven’t seen is a sense of urgency and the willingness to make tough decisions.   And what we still see are executive compensation packages for the auto industry that are out of line compared to their competitors, their Japanese competitors who are doing a lot better.

Now, it’s not unique to the auto industry.   We have seen that across the board.   Certainly, we saw it on Wall Street.   And part of what I’m hoping to introduce as the next president is a new ethic of responsibility where we say that, if you’re laying off workers, the least you can do, when you’re making $25 million a year, is give up some of your compensation and some of your bonuses.   Figure out ways in which workers maybe have to take a haircut, but they can still keep their jobs, they can still keep their health care and they can still stay in their homes.   That kind of notion of shared benefits and burdens is something that I think has been lost for too long, and it’s something that I’d like to see restored. (Emphasis mine)

Today, Nancy Pelosi echoed the meme  of “shared sacrifice:”

Pelosi said that everyone involved in the U.S. auto industry, including management, labor unions, parts suppliers, investors and dealers, would have to make a sacrifice to ensure the continuing viability of the industry.

“We call this a barber shop: everyone’s getting a hair cut,” said Pelosi, speaking at a press conference in the U.S. Capitol.

According to these Democrat leaders, the threshold for determining when a sharing of sacrifice should occur is when you are leader who has been fiscally irresponsible with your charge.   You should share even more if your irresponsibility requires the American taxpayer to bail you out.

Hey wait!

Hasn’t Congress been irresponsible with their financial responsibilities?

• Leaving Fannie and Freddie unchecked and unsupervised.
• Ignoring the risk of leverage on exotic financial instruments and leaving them completely unregulated or over seen.
• Constricting energy exploration which resulted in a 24 month hyper price speculation.
• Giving Hank Paulson nearly completely unchecked ability to spend $700 billion entirely on his whim.
• Adding over $100 billion of pork to the TARP bill….just because.

And who is now bailing out Congress’ financial irresponsibility?   That’s right, you and me, the American taxpayers.

If sharing the pain is what Pelosi and Obama think should happen to leaders who rely on the American taxpayers for a bailout,  Democrat and Republican Congress people alike,  ought to be answering the door and the American taxpayer ought to be knocking….

Shave and a haircut, two bits!