Video: Reality
House Republicans - See our plan for jobs and economic growth: http://jobs.GOP.gov
Showing posts with label Middle America. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Middle America. Show all posts
Friday, August 2, 2013
Sunday, July 1, 2012
Some Noteworthy Facts….
A recent "Investor's Business Daily" article provided very interesting statistics from a survey by the United Nations International Health Organization.
Percentage of men and women who survived cancer five years after diagnosis:
U.S................................. 65%
England.......................... 46%
Canada........................... 42%
Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months:
U.S................................. 93%
England.......................... 15%
Canada........................... 43%
Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months:
U.S................................. 90%
England.......................... 15%
Canada........................... 43%
Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month:
U.S................................. 77%
England.......................... 40%
Canada........................... 43%
Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:
U.S................................. 71
England.......................... 14
Canada........................... 18
Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are in "excellent health":
U.S................................. 12%
England.......................... 02%
Canada........................... 06%
And now for the last statistic: National Health Insurance?
U.S................................. NO
England.......................... YES
Canada........................... YES
Check this last set of statistics: The percentage of each past president's cabinet who had worked in the private business sector prior to their appointment to the cabinet. (You know that the private business sector is a real-life business, not a government job.) Here are the percentages.
T. Roosevelt.................. 38%
Taft................................ 40%
Wilson........................... 52%
Harding.......................... 49%
Coolidge........................ 48%
Hoover........................... 42%
F. Roosevelt................... 50%
Truman.......................... 50%
Eisenhower.................... 57%
Kennedy......................... 30%
Johnson.......................... 47%
Nixon............................. 53%
Ford................................ 42%
Carter............................. 32%
Reagan........................... 56%
G. H. Bush..................... 51%
Clinton........................... 39%
G. W. Bush.................... 55%
Obama........................... 08%
This helps to explain the incompetence of this administration: only 8% of them have ever worked in private business! That's right! Only eight percent; the least, by far, of the last 19 presidents! And these people are trying to tell our big corporations how to run their business?
How can the president of a major nation and society, the one with the most successful economic system in world history, stand and talk about business when he's never worked for one? Or about jobs when he has never really had one? And when it's the same for 92% of his senior staff and closest advisers? They've spent most of their time in academia, government and/or non-profit jobs or as "community organizers”. They should have been in an employment line.
Share this because we'll NEVER see these facts in the main stream media.
h/t to Ron and Lynne Skinner
Plus…. Obamacare: Seven New Taxes on Citizens Earning Less than $250,000
While we were all debating the cost to our liberty due to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), we were ignoring the cost to our pockets. If there ever was a reason for bipartisan rage about this law, it should be on the twenty - yes, twenty - hidden new taxes of this law. Making matters even more relevant is that seven of these taxes are levied on all citizens regardless of income. Hence, Mr. Obama’s promise not to raise taxes on anyone earning less than $250,000 is just another falsehood associated with this legislation.
The first, and best known, of these seven taxes that will hit all Americans as a result of Obamacare is the Individual Mandate Tax (no longer concealed as a penalty). This provision will require a couple to pay the higher of a base tax of $1,360 per year, or 2.5% of adjusted growth income starting with lower base tax and rising to this level by 2016. Individuals will see a base tax of $695 and families a base tax of $2,085 per year by 2016.
Next up is the Medicine Cabinet Tax that took effect in 2011. This tax prohibits reimbursement of expenses for over-the-counter medicine, with the lone exception of insulin, from an employee’s pre-tax dollar funded Health Saving Account (HSA), Flexible Spending Account (FSA) or Health Reimbursement Account (HRA). This provision hurts middle class earners particularly hard since they earn enough to actually pay federal taxes, but not enough to make this restriction negligible.
The Flexible Spending Account (FSA) Cap, which will begin in 2013, is perhaps the most hurtful provision to the middle class. This part of the law imposes a cap of $2,500 per year (which is now unlimited) on the amount of pre-tax dollars that could be deposited into these accounts. Why is this particularly hurtful to the middle class? It is because funds in these accounts may be used to pay for special needs education for special needs children in the United States. Tuition rates for this type of special education can easily exceed $14,000 per year and the use of pre-tax dollars has helped many middle income families.
Another direct hit to the middle class is the Medical Itemized Deduction Hurdle which is currently 7.5% of adjusted gross income. This is the hurdle that must be met before medical expenses over that hurdle can be taken as a deduction on federal income taxes. Obamacare raises this hurdle to 10% of adjusted gross income beginning in 2013. Consider the middle class family with $80,000 of adjusted gross income and $8,000 of medical expenses. Currently, that family can get some relief from being able to take a $2,000 deduction (7.5% X $80,000 = $6,000; $8,000 –$6,000 = $2,000). An increase to 10% would eliminate the deduction in this example and if that family was paying a 25% federal tax rate, the real cost of that lost deduction would be $500.
The fifth new tax on the middle class, and all Americans, is the Health Savings Account (HSA) Withdrawal Tax Hike. This provision increases the additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10% currently to 20% beginning in 2013. This provision actually sets these accounts apart from Investment Retirement Accounts (IRAs) and other tax advantaged accounts, all of which remain with a 10% early withdrawal tax.
Another regressive tax that is part of this law began in 2010 and that is the Indoor Tanning Services Tax, which places a 10% excise tax on people using tanning salons. While some may regard this as insignificant, the broader implication is that this act of taxation is a blatant move by the federal government to control the behavior of citizens. This provision, as does the Individual Mandate and as Justice Kennedy said during the oral arguments on the constitutionality of the law said, “….fundamentally changes the relationship between the federal government and the citizen.”
The seventh new tax that directly impacts the middle class, along with all citizens, is the Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans or the “Cadillac” Health Insurance Plan Tax. These are plans that provide extensive coverage and that are generally fully paid for, or largely paid for, by employers. This provision imposes a 40% excise tax on the employer-paid premium on taxpayers who are covered by such plans, beginning in 2018. The reason it begins in 2018 is because most unionized workers are covered by plans that fall under this definition and a deferral was made to spare union members from this tax for at least a period of time.
There are thirteen other taxes that apply to businesses and that apply to high income (over $250,000 per year) households. While these additional provisions will not impact the middle class directly, they can have serious indirect consequences for middle and low income earners. Beginning in 2014, the Employer Mandate Tax will impose an annual non-deductible tax on employers with more than 50 employees who do not provide health insurance for their employees.
The impact of this provision on low and middle income earners, and really all working Americans, is that employers will be confronted with three choices. The first is provide some level of health insurance, as many do today, and there would be no impact on employees. The second choice is to pay the penalty, which would most likely be less expensive than providing health insurance, and force employees to seek their own health insurance or purchase it through federal government controlled state exchanges. Studies have estimated that 20 million Americans will lose their employee funded health insurance as a result of this provision and employers electing this option. The third choice is for employers to lay off employees, or not hire additional employees, because Obamacare forces them to either provide health insurance or pay the new tax.
Another new tax, the Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers that begins in 2013, places a 2.3% excise tax on all items retailing for more than $100. This provision will not only drive up the cost of various medical devices ranging from mobility assistance devices to personal testing supplies, but will also impact an industry that employs 360,000 people in 6,000 plants across our country. This tax, while not a direct tax, would have significant negative impact on the middle class.
The Surtax on Investment Income for households earning $250,000 and more, beginning in 2013, will raise the Capital Gains Tax from 15% to 23.8% on investment income for these households and will raise Taxes on Dividends from 15% to 43.4% for the same households. Aside from the impact on retired citizens dependent on dividends, this provision will pull income from the private economy. In addition, the tax rate on Other Investment Income earned by Subchapter S Corporation (which many small business are organized as, allowing the owners to claim all business income as personal income) will rise from 35% to 43.4%. This part of the provision would place additional pressure on small businesses resulting in more layoffs and less hiring, impacting all American workers.
All but one of the remaining new taxes in Obamacare are directed at health industry businesses and while they will not impact middle income families directly, the additional costs will most likely be passed on to the public. The last new tax is really interesting, it is a tax on certain biofuels!
These are the facts. It does not matter if you support Mr. Obama and his new law or if you oppose it, the new taxes on the middle class or real and all Americans should understand their impact on their families and the economy. Citizens, regardless of political beliefs, should recognize that Obamacare was passed with almost no sunlight shined on these middle class tax increases and need to understand that the new law was sold with the promise that there would be no new middle class taxes. This is not partisan, it is simply the reality of politics.
For more information, read ATR's analysis of the Affordable Care Act's taxes here.
h/t to Victoria Baer and Anglo at Sovereignty in Colorado
Monday, December 5, 2011
Business Insider: ‘Obama Is About to Give a Huge Class Warfare Speech’
Obama will travel to Osawatomie, Kansas to make the remarks — the site of the progressive Republican Roosevelt’s “New Nationalism” speech in 1910.
The White House confirmed the Roosevelt connection in a press release, stating, “Just over one hundred years ago, President Teddy Roosevelt came to Osawatomie, Kansas and called for a New Nationalism, where everyone gets a fair chance, a square deal, and an equal opportunity to succeed.”
Obama will “talk about how he sees this as a make-or-break moment for the middle class and all those working to join it,” the statement said. “He’ll lay out the choice we face between a country in which too few do well while too many struggle to get by, and one where we’re all in it together – where everyone engages in fair play, everyone does their fair share, and everyone gets a fair shot.”
Business Insider, which described it as “a huge class warfare speech,” has more on the Obama-Roosevelt connection:
Roosevelt‘s ’New Nationalism’ speech on August 31, 1910 called for new government reforms to level the playing field for average Americans against a class of industrial barons.
“The essence of any struggle for healthy liberty has always been, and must always be, to take from some one man or class of men the right to enjoy power, or wealth, or position, or immunity, which has not been earned by service to his or their fellows,” Roosevelt said. “That is what you fought for in the Civil War, and that is what we strive for now.”
Roosevelt called out special interests who pulled the strings of government — a message we’ll likely hear Obama adopt.
“Class warfare” became a buzzword in September after Obama proposed the “Buffett rule” tax rate on the wealthy. As Republican opposition rang in, Obama responded by declaring, “This is not class warfare. It’s math.” He shifted positions just two days later, saying of the class warfare jab, “I wear that charge as a badge of honor.”
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Time to Cowboy-up to Main Street
Last week, Main Street received an opportunity to sit in the front seat of the election, thanks to John McCain’s decision to suspend his campaign to go to Washington to help Congress fix the financial meltdown.
Whether that was an admirable decision by a man who once said he “would rather lose an election than a war” or a political stunt to boost his economic muscle, (and I personally think it was an admirable decision) it did accomplish one thing: The rhetoric of both candidates pivoted to Middle America and working families.
Let’s hope it stays there.
Until now, chin-wagging by the political elite and endless e-mails from the campaigns and the national parties have driven the hour’s story.
“Those clowns make it difficult for those elected ultimately to govern, because governing is reality -- it isn't campaigning,” says Purdue University political science professor Bert Rockman.
Rockman says a lot of focus has been on the wrong things -- sort of like looking at the zookeepers, not the animals.
Voters lose ultimately when politics consumes governing, when style overrides substance, when tough -- usually stupid -- words override reflective thought that might prevent you from being painted into a corner.
Politics is gut stuff. Good government and serious policy-making, in contrast, engage the brain.
“We didn't get to the top of the food chain by out-muscling some of the larger mammals,” Rockman points out. “We got there by outwitting them.”
Now that the campaigns have paused (and perhaps realized that they aren’t just preaching to their respective choirs), what should they be saying?
First, the candidates should ask without preconditions why the current economic crisis happened -- and then not respond with stock answers.
They can't just shout “Regulate more!” without knowing what it is they need to regulate, and under what framework and oversight Most Americans understand that you must balance your checkbook. They want to know that the guy they’re electing operates the same way; they want to hear that, under his administration, the Federal Reserve will be more incremental in managing the nation’s money supply.
No ideological themes sung to finger-wagging -- Middle America wants to know what political commitments we can and cannot afford.
For its part, the press should ask much better questions, departing from “gotcha” or silly questions and leaping into reality, such as “What are you actually going to do?” or “What’s the basis for the claim you’re making?”
Federal Reserve historian and Carnegie Mellon professor Allan Meltzer says we have faced serious problems such as this before, most recently the banking problems of the early 1990s.
Meltzer says that because banks lend long-term and borrow short-term, “Crises occur when the market changes.”
What most people want is to understand the problem, how it affects their pocketbook and what each candidate will do to clean up the mess.
University of Arkansas political science professor Rob Maranto says that because the press focuses on such things as intercepted e-mails, pregnant daughters, Obama's slickness or McCain's temper, we all understand the candidates’ personal characteristics and can make some sense of them.
But the larger issue is, who understands today’s financial meltdown?
Only time (short-term time, since we are now just 30-odd days from Election Day) will tell if McCain cowboy-upped during his “suspended” campaign and achieved something worthwhile or if he and Obama simply picked up where they left off -- allowing the chin-waggers to frame the campaign’s final month and leaving Main Street in suspended animation. I will give McCain that he headed right back to Washington after the debate, while Obama went back to the campaign trail and phoning in to check on the 'real stuff'.
by
Source: NewsMax
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)