ObaMarxist


Barack on Taxes
September 5, 2008, 2:08 pm
Filed under: Obama doesn't quite get it, Obama is a Marxist, video | Tags: , , ,
Advertisements


Which Way to Prosperity? – Obama vs. McCain.
August 21, 2008, 11:34 pm
Filed under: Obama doesn't quite get it, Obama is a Marxist | Tags: , , , ,

By Jack Kemp & Peter Ferrara, NRO

The central question in this election is, Which candidate can most improve our wobbly economy? Here, the McCain-Obama contrast could not be sharper.
Obama has proposed increases in every major federal tax. He has proposed to increase individual income taxes, with the top rate to rise to almost 40 percent. He has proposed to increase the top capital-gains tax rate by 33 percent. He has proposed the same for the top tax rate on dividends. He has proposed to increase payroll taxes, with a rate increase of 16 percent to 32 percent for workers earning over $250,000 a year. He has proposed to reinstate the death tax (estate tax), now phasing out under current law, with a top rate of 45 percent. He has proposed several increases in corporate taxes, including a so-called windfall-profits tax on oil.

Nobel Prize-winning economist Robert Mundell has written that if such tax increases are adopted, the U.S. economy will suffer “a deep recession, a nosedive,” and the dollar will decline further. Amity Shlaes, author of The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression, claims Obama has proposed the exact same policy mix that led to the depression of the 1930s. During the primaries, Obama railed against free trade, proposing even to renegotiate free-trade agreements with our top two trading partners, Canada and Mexico. He has opposed the Columbian Free Trade Agreement, even though it primarily removes tariffs on American exports to that country, with barriers to Columbian exports to America already almost all removed under the Andean Trade Preferences Act.
Continue reading



Obama economics: New taxes, more regulations
August 16, 2008, 8:40 pm
Filed under: Obama doesn't quite get it, Obama is a Marxist | Tags: , , , ,

by Donald Lambro, Townhall

WASHINGTON — There’s a big difference between listening to one of Barack Obama’s speeches, as inspiring as they may sound, and carefully reading them and weighing each passage.

There is less there than meets the ear. Maybe it sounds good to the unquestioning mind, but much of his thinking doesn’t hold up to even the most cursory scrutiny. Many of his suggestions are disturbing because they would move the country in old directions that have never worked in the past.

He gave a speech about the economy the other day in Titusville, Fla., that contained many of the thoughts he has expressed repeatedly over the course of this campaign. But they raise obvious questions that cry out to be asked. He is fond of dropping “the Great Depression” into his speeches, such as when he says, “We’ve seen more foreclosures than at any time since the Great Depression” — as if to suggest the country is in a depression.

But we are not. We are in the midst of a slowdown, but our economy is still growing by nearly 2 percent a year in the second quarter. He doesn’t mention this in his speeches because he wants people to believe things are worse than they are.

Continue reading



Obama answers McCain on deficit with a shrug

John McCain pledged yesterday to balance the budget by 2013.  Barack Obama responded by claiming that it can’t be balanced, and he can’t be bothered to try:

Not only does Obama say he won’t eliminate the deficit in his first term, as McCain aims to do, he frankly says he’s not sure he’d bring it down at all in four years, considering his own spending plans.

“I do not make a promise that we can reduce it by 2013 because I think it is important for us to make some critical investments right now in America’s families,” Obama told reporters this week when asked if he’d match McCain’s pledge.

So what is more important in tough economic times? For the government to spend more to help hard-hit Americans or to eliminate a deficit that can lead to higher borrowing costs and slow the economy?

The best policy would be to keep government from interfering with capital that can create new opportunities.  In this particular slowdown, strengthening the dollar would also be a good idea.  Blithely ignoring the deficit — and in fact proposing massive expansions of federal spending — will both weaken the dollar and burden Americans even more than now.

Democrats have complained for years about the Bush administration deficits.  In fact, they routinely use that as one argument against the Iraq war, claiming that it has exploded the deficit.  Now are the Democrats about to say that the deficit is of no consequence at all, and that spending shouldn’t rely on financing?  They insisted on pay-go in 2007, although they broke their own rules in the 2008 budget.

Continue reading



Carter-Obama Taxes