Tag: Wall Street Journal

Categories
Elections Mitt Romney Politics Tax taxes

Mitt Romney’s Plan Will Raise Your Taxes

Unless you’re earning over $1 million a year that is, then you will see your taxes cut by as much as $146,000 a year. But for the middle class Americans struggling to make ends meet, prepare to pay more in taxes if Mitt Romney becomes your president.

The non-partisan Tax Policy Center analyzed Mitt Romney’s tax proposals and, according to the Wall Street Journal, “concluded that Mr. Romney’s plan would reduce taxes significantly for high-income earners (by 6.9% or $146,000 for households making more than $1 million), and increase federal deficits by $180 billion in 2015 compared to current tax levels.”

And despite Romney’s claims, his plan would also raise taxes slightly for low-income families.

Associated Press: “Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 would get small tax cuts, averaging 2.2 percent, or about $250, the study said. People making more than $1 million would get tax cuts averaging 15 percent, or about $146,000.”

Categories
Politics Ronald Reagan United States

Bachmann Lies – Blames Carter And Clinton For 2008 Recession

Republican Michele Bachmann thinks Jimmy Carter is responsible for the 2008 financial recession and the state of today’s economy. In a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal, the 2012 presidential hopeful was asked to explain the 2008 financial meltdown, to which she said;

“There were a lot of bad actors involved, but it started with the Community Reinvestment Act under Jimmy Carter and then the enhanced amendments that Bill Clinton made to force, in effect, banks to make loans to people who lacked creditworthiness. If you want to come down to a bottom line of ‘How did we get in the mess?’ I think it was a reduction in standards.”

Just for reference, Jimmy Carter was the 39th President of the United States, and served from 1977 to 1981 when he was succeeded by Ronald Reagan. Bill Clinton was the 42nd President – who, when he left office had created over 22 million jobs during his eight years and left a budget surplus of $127 billion, – served from 1993 to 2001 when George Bush took over. Both Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were Democratic presidents, and Ronald Reagan and George Bush were Republicans.

So not surprisingly, Mrs. Bachmann’s blame will be placed on last the two Democratic presidents over the last 35 years. She didn’t include Barack Obama, because he was sworn in in 2009. But are there any truths to this claim? According to an article written on Bloomberg’s Business Week back in 2008, the answer is “no”. Bachmann’s claim of putting the blame of the 2008 economic mess on Carter and Clinton and the Community Reinvestment Act is totally inaccurate. In fact, Bloomberg’s article called Bachmann’s claim, “silly.”

The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), passed in 1977, requires banks to lend in the low-income neighborhoods where they take deposits. Just the idea that a lending crisis created from 2004 to 2007 was caused by a 1977 law is silly. But it’s even more ridiculous when you consider that most subprime loans were made by firms that aren’t subject to the CRA. University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations. As former Fed Governor Ned Gramlich said in an August, 2007, speech shortly before he passed away: “In the subprime market where we badly need supervision, a majority of loans are made with very little supervision. It is like a city with a murder law, but no cops on the beat.”

No surprise here. Bachmann is still pushing false statements that were debunked over 3 years ago. And the fact that she didn’t include Ronald Reagan and George Bush in her blame game shows the true meaning of her claim – politics as usual.

Not only is Ronald Reagan’s trickle down economics one direct reason for what this economy is going through today, but consider the video below,  George Bush’s interpretation of the Community Reinvestment Act, where he asked, in fact demanded, that home ownership be increased by millions “by the end of this decade.” George Bush even went as far as to say that everyone, regardless of their income, should be able to own a home no matter the price, saying “the first time home buyers, the low income home buyer can have just as nice a house as anybody else.”

Bachmann is trying to get your vote. She is interested in running for President of the United States in 2012. Shouldn’t Americans stand up and demand that these candidates tell the truth, no matter what the politics of the moment dictates?

Categories
Democratic Illinois Indiana Politics Republican Wisconsin

Democrats Win One. Controversial Union Language in Bill Dropped

No, I’m not talking about the language against unions in Wisconsin, I’m talking about the language against unions in Indiana. After the Republican majority in Indiana tried to pass the same anti-union bill being debated in Wisconsin, Indiana Democrats fled the state to avoid the vote. Well, it will appear that their antics worked, because according to reporting from The Wall Street Journal, House Republicans in Indiana have decided to dropped the language in the bill that would have reduced the amount of union members in the state. The Wall Street Jorunal Reports;

The speaker of Indiana’s House of Representatives said he and Republican colleagues are dropping a controversial labor bill that caused Democratic representatives to flee to Illinois, but the Democrats said they’re not returning to Indiana for now. Republican House Speaker Brian Bosma said the so-called right-to-work legislation is dead and will not be reintroduced during this session of the Indiana House. Democrats felt so strongly about that bill that they went to Urbana, Ill., Tuesday so that Republicans couldn’t achieve a quorum to vote on the bill.

But then again.  This could very well be a ploy by House Republicans to get the Democratic congress back in an effort to trick them into voting for the bill. Read the Wall Street Report Here

Categories
childhood obesity Michelle Obama Mike Huckabee Politics Republican Sarah Palin

Palin Vs. Michelle Obama. Conservatives say Palin Loses

Image via Wikipedia

You can’t turn on the television or radio, or pick up a news- paper these days without seeing or hearing the name  “Sarah Palin” plastered throughout an article, or her name being discussed as the potential next presidential candidate for the Republican party. But over the last few weeks, Mrs. Palin has decided to engage in a fight that has upset both Democrats and Republicans alike.

Mrs. Palin’s obsession-like paranoia with Mrs. Michelle Obama’s efforts to show kids a healthier way to eat has put her at odds with her own words in the 2009 State of the State address and the views of her own party.

The program the First Lady is advocating is voluntary and geared towards schools and parents to encourage kids to eat better and to make exercise a daily part of their routine.

Mrs. Obama’s childhood antiobesity campaign has received the approval of members of both sides of the political spectrum, except Mrs. Palin, who see these efforts as “too much government” and a “government take-over.”

In an interview with conservative host Laura Ingraham, Palin said the First Lady’s effort to curb childhood obesity amounts to a lack of trust that parents can make the right decisions for their children. Palin said;

Take her anti-obesity thing that she’s on. She is on this kick, right. What she is telling us is she cannot trust parents to make decisions for their own children, for their own families in what we should eat. And..and..and I know I’m going to be again criticized for bringing this up, but instead of a government thinking that they need to take over and make decisions for us according to some politician or politician’s wife priorities, just leave us alone, get off our back, and allow us as individuals to exercise our own God-given rights to make our own decisions and then our country gets back on the right track.

But these are not Palin’s first comments against Mrs. Obama’s campaign. She previously called Pennsylvania a “nanny state run amok,” when some schools in the state decided to serve more healthier foods to their students. Then, to show her disgust in these schools, Palin proceeded to hand 200 sugar cookies to a Bucks County school fundraiser. In her most annoying voice yet, Palin then said;

“I had to shake it up a little bit because I heard there is a debate going on in Pennsylvania over whether most schools condemn sweets, cakes, cookies, that type of thing. I brought dozens and dozens of cookies to these students.”

Palin’s On The Wrong Side

The Wall Street Journal, a conservative opinion page is often critical of the Obama administration on various policy decisions, but on the Palin vs. Michelle Obama issue, the Journal recalls Palin’s own words in her 2009 State of the State address, when referring to Health Care reform. She said;

” ‘Health-care reform on an individual basis is often just this simple: we could save a lot of money and a lot of grief by making smarter choices. It starts by ending destructive habits and beginning healthy habits in eating and exercise.’ “

The Journal continues;

“Mrs. Obama’s campaign is grounded in similar sentiments, and in that sense is unusual for this White House in emphasizing personal responsibility. Mrs. Palin would be more effective if she made some distinctions among the Obama policies that really are worth opposing.”

Even the conservative 2008 Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, is siding with Michelle Obama on this one. Asked on a recent radio show what he thought about Palin’s desire to attack childhood obesity, Huckabee said;

“With all due respect to my colleague and friend Sarah Palin, I think she’s misunderstood what Michelle Obama is trying to do, Michelle Obama’s not trying to tell people what to eat or trying to force the government’s desires on people, but she’s stating the obvious: that we do have an obesity crisis in this country … The first lady’s campaign is on target. It’s not saying that you can’t or should never eat a dessert.”

Sarah Palin has been the Republican golden child since John McCain anointed her the 2008 vice presidential candidate. She has since taken on a lot of policies decision by this administration and question, even lie about the effect of those policies. She has never been rebuked as a liar, except that one time when her “death panel” explanation was called lie of the year by PolitiFact – a political fact checking organization.

Now, Mrs. Palin is at it again and this time, she’s on her own.  She was for healthy eating in her State of the State address, but now is against it because a Democrat in the White House is trying to educate children on healthy eating.

The politics of the moment dictates her moves. And the $100,000.00 speaking fees for criticizing the White House doesn’t hurt either.

Exit mobile version