Obama Proposing to Tax the 1%…Again.

Obama-Shrinks-2In The Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx theorized that a social class is formed when its members achieve class consciousness and solidarity. This happens when those who make up the social class decide that they are being used and abused by those who hold power over them, by means of money or station in life.  That is when the class conflict, or class warfare begins.

That social class will then bond together over their shared interests and form a common identity.

Per Marx, that lower or working class (the Proletariat) will then rise up against those that are exploiting them (the bourgeoisie).

In Marxist theory, the stage after the proletarian revolution when a society is changing from capitalism to communism, marked by pay distributed according to work done rather than need, is called socialism.

Norman Mattoon Thomas, six-time Socialist candidate for president, said the following in a 1944 speech:

The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But, under the name of “liberalism,” they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened … The Democratic Party has adopted our (Socialist) platform.

With the support of a once-noble political party that has been taken over by Far Left Radicals, and a once-objective Fourth Estate, which has morphed into a government-backed propaganda arm, flooding television, radio, internet, and print sources with Obama worship, misinformation, and downright lies, about both the Lightbringer’s accomplishments and anyone who dares to oppose him (ask Sarah Palin…and Mitt Romney), that the shear audacity of it all would make Goebbels blush, Obama has been on a mission to turn “the Shining City on a Hill” into a third-world barrio, and the transformation of the Greatest Country in the World into just another Democratic Socialist nation, such as can be found in Europe.

However, there may be hope that the brakes will be put on Obama’s Crazy Train.

Foxnews.com reports that

Congressional Republicans on Sunday pummeled President Obama’s plan to increase taxes on America’s highest wage earners, dismissing the proposal as not serious and a “non-starter.”

The plan was released late Saturday by the White House and attempts to increase taxes on the top earners and others to pay for cuts for the middle class.

The president is scheduled to further explain the plan on Tuesday night in his State of the Union address.

“The notion … that in order for some people to do better, someone has to do worse is just not true,” Florida GOP Sen. Marco Rubio told CBS’ “Face the Nation.” “Raising taxes on people that are successful is not going to make people that are struggling more successful. … It would also be counter-productive.”

Among the other Obama proposals are increasing the investment tax rate, eliminating a tax break on inheritances, giving a tax credit to working families and expanding the child care tax credit — in total roughly $320 billion in tax hikes over the next 10 years.

The president also wants to impose a financial fee on some of the country’s largest financial firms. His full fiscal 2016 budget is scheduled to be released to the GOP-led Congress next month.

However, the centerpiece of the proposal is to increase to 28 percent the capital gains and dividends rate on couples making more than $500,000 a year. The top capital gains rate has already been raised from 15 percent to 23.8 percent during Obama’s presidency.

Rubio on Sunday also criticized Obama’s recent proposal to offer some Americans free community college tuition.

“I’m all for reforming our higher education system,” said Rubio, a potential 2016 presidential candidate. “In the 21st century, to have the skills you need for a middle-class job, you need higher education of some form or fashion. It may not be a four-year degree. The problem is he just wants to pour that additional money into the broken, existing system.”

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, called the plan “a non-starter.”

“We’re not just one good tax increase away from prosperity in this nation,” Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, told CNN’s “State of the Union.”

He also argued that elected officials need to “quit spending this money that we don’t have.”

As Bill Flax wrote back in March of 2012, on americanthinker.org, Obama’s political philosophy speaks for itself,

Every fiscal policy from sundry stimulus programs to tax credits is steeply progressive. Obama champions wealth-redistribution and punitively taxing the affluent, even as political reality prevents implementing his complete agenda. Still, spending relentlessly rises long after the recession’s end, propelling government dependency to record heights. Meanwhile, regulatory impositions grow ever more invasive, further extending Leviathan’s lurching grasp.

The administration’s rhetorical assaults on business and repeated allusions to Republicans or the rich as “enemies” betray Marxist moorings. To Obama, profits represent not satisfied customers, but swindles; businesses are “greedy” until proven innocent. Acquittals come via campaign contributions or penance to progressive causes. Those who cooperate obtain ObamaCare waivers and lucrative public contracts; those who won’t get vilification from the presidential bully pulpit.

The desensitization and placating of the Middle Class, as it was in classic Marxist Theory, has been a key element, of both the Obama Administration and the Modern Democratic Party.

By taking the ambition of the Middle Class away, by offering a “safe and comfortable” cradle-to-grave Nanny-State, “Uncle Sugar” Federal Government, Obama and the Democrats have tried to buy American voters by giving them bribes of free Obamaphones, paychecks for not working, free food, etc.

Unfortunately, even with Obama’s Presidency swirling around the proverbial porcelain receptacle, there is still a great percentage of American voters who will buy Obama’s con game and be content with this “Mother’s milk”, instead of yearning for the thrill and the challenge of the hunt for American Individual Success and Freedom.

As has always been the case, the will and exceptionalism of the American people will be the way out of our woeful economic plight and into a bright future for our children and grandchildren, not Obama and his Administration’s “benevolent” bribery.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Obama’s Tax Plan: America’s New Kulaks

obamamyworkA while back, on April 30, 2011, I wrote a post titled, “The New Politboro”. In it, I compared the propaganda and total media control of the Obama Administration to the rise of Lenin and the Soviet Politboro. Little did I know how right I was.

Word came out last night that Income Tax Rates are going to exceed 50% in California, Hawaii, and New York City!

The word came out through a paper written by Gerald T. Prante & Austin John, both of Lynchburg College, School of Business and Economics,Top Marginal Effective Tax Rates by State and by Source of Income, 2012 Tax Law vs. 2013 Scheduled Tax Law. The Abstract (Summary) states that

This paper compares state-by-state estimates of the top marginal effective tax rates (METRs) on wages, interest, dividends, capital gains, and business income for tax year 2012 to the rates scheduled for 2013 under scheduled law. Scheduled tax law for 2013 assumes the expiration of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and the new PPACA taxes. Overall, the average top METR on wage income is scheduled to increase by approximately six percentage points (41.8 percent to 47.8 perent), while taxes on dividends would increase the greatest (19.0 percent to 47.9 percent). The top METRs on wages, dividends, interest, and partnership/sole proprietor income would exceed 50 percent in California, Hawaii, and New York City.

However, it’s not the uber-rich, that will be hurt. 

Per newgeography.com:

Ironically the new taxes will have relatively little effect on the detested Romney uber-class, who derive most of their income from capital gains, taxed at a much lower rate. They also have access to all manner of offshore dodges. Nor will it have much impact on Silicon Valley millionaires and billionaires, or the Hollywood moguls and urban land speculators who constitute the Democratic Party’s “good rich,” and enjoy many of the same privileges as their wealthy conservative counterparts.

The people whose wallets will be drained in the new war on “the rich” are high-earning, but hardly plutocratic professionals like engineers, doctors, lawyers, small business owners and the like. Once seen as the bastion of the middle class, and exemplars of upward mobility, these people are emerging as the modern day “kulaks,” the affluent peasants ruthlessly targeted by Stalin in the early 1930s.

The war against the kulaks (successful people, a class known in Russia, as the bourgeoisie) actually started before “Uncle Joe” Stalin.

Britannica.com explains:

kulak, (Russian: “fist”), in Russian and Soviet history, a wealthy or prosperous peasant, generally characterized as one who owned a relatively large farm and several head of cattle and horses and who was financially capable of employing hired labour and leasing land. Before the Russian Revolution of 1917, the kulaks were major figures in the peasant villages. They often lent money, provided mortgages, and played central roles in the villages’ social and administrative affairs.

During the War Communism period (1918–21), the Soviet government undermined the kulaks’ position by organizing committees of poor peasants to administer the villages and to supervise the requisitioning of grain from the richer peasants. But the introduction in 1921 of the New Economic Policy favoured the kulaks. Although the Soviet government considered the kulaks to be capitalists and, therefore, enemies of socialism, it adopted various incentives to encourage peasants to increase agricultural production and enrich themselves. The most successful peasants (less than 4 percent) became kulaks and assumed traditional roles in the village social structure, often rivaling the authority of the new Soviet officials in village affairs.

In 1927 the Soviet government began to shift its peasant policy by increasing the kulaks’ taxes and restricting their right to lease land; in 1929 it began a drive for rapid collectivization of agriculture. The kulaks vigorously opposed the efforts to force the peasants to give up their small privately owned farms and join large cooperative agricultural establishments. At the end of 1929 a campaign to “liquidate the kulaks as a class” (“dekulakization”) was launched by the government. By 1934, when approximately 75 percent of the farms in the Soviet Union had been collectivized, most kulaks—as well as millions of other peasants who had opposed collectivization—had been deported to remote regions of the Soviet Union or arrested and their land and property confiscated.

The similarities between the Bolshevik Revolution and rise of Lenin’s Soviet Union and Obama’s Economic Policy are frightening, aren’t they?

The aim of Obama’s drive to increase taxes on “the wealthy”, is actually nothing but a plan, inadvertent or well-thought-out, to “radically change” OUR country and create a new cradle-to-grave nanny state, or Politboro, and to overtax America’s successful citizens (i.e., the Job Creators), thereby, creating a new Proletariat Class, totally dependent on the state for its very existence.

Elections have consequences.

Please allow me to leave you with some quotes from Vladimir Lenin.  Their relevancy is amazing.

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.

Democracy is indispensable to socialism.

Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.

It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.

One man with a gun can control 100 without one.

Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism.

Sometimes – history needs a push.The best way to destroy the capitalist system is to debauch the currency.

The goal of socialism is communism.

The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses.

The way to crush the bourgeoisie (kulaks) is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.

Until He comes,

KJ

Obama: Style Over Substance

Yesterday, a desperate-looking 44th President of the United States, one Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm), delivered a speech that was supposed to turn around his rapidly-tanking presidency.

To say that he failed is an understatement.  Even the Liberals were disappointed in their messiah.

Politicker.com reports that

Despite the hype, the speech was mainly a rehash of themes and ideas from the president’s recent stump speeches and his remarks were widely panned as overly long by the political press corps.

In the speech, President Obama outlined his view that this election is a choice between “two fundamentally different views of which direction America should take.” He characterized Mitt Romney’s vision as being the same as the “policies of the last decade,” specifically deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy while he described his own “vision for America” as boiling down to five things: “Education. Energy. Innovation. Infrastructure. And a tax code focused on American job creation and balanced deficit reduction.” President Obama also stressed that the economic crisis began during the Bush administration and that is “started growing again” after he took office and has since “continued to grow.”

All of these points have already been featured in the president’s other recent speeches. Between the pre-speech hype from the campaign, the lack of new material and the overall length of the speech reporters were clearly dissatisfied with end result. Read on for a sampling of Tweets from the political press slamming the president’s speech.

Before the speech was over, Politico’s Mike O’Brien begged the president to stop.

Evidently, ol’ Scooter is now an embarrassment to the Liberals.

But, hey, Libs…there’s good news!  What Obama lacks in substance, he makes up for in style. Yeah, right…

Anna Wintour is becoming quite the fashionable fixture on President Obama’s campaign team this election season.

The Vogue editrix hit Chicago on Tuesday – flanked by supermodels Iman and Chanel Iman, designer Rachel Roy and Obama campaign manager Jim Messina – for an evening of haute fund-raising at Oprah Winfrey’s Harpo Studios.

Wintour was on hand to preside over the Windy City debut of the “Runway to Win” collection, a line of Obama-themed clothes and accessories by designers like Prabal Gurung, Jason Wu, Marc Jacobs, Beyoncé & Tina Knowles, Tory Burch, Tracy Reese and Narcisco Rodriguez – several of whom are favorites of First Lady Michelle Obama.

Tickets ran from $150 for a guest pass to sip cocktails and shop the collection to $1,000 for a VIP package, including a photo reception with Wintour and Iman (aka Mrs. David Bowie) and a limited edition bag, to $2,500 for access to the show, the reception and an exclusive dinner party at Oprah’s Harpo headquarters. Donations benefited the Obama Victory Fund, according to a dedicated page on Obama’s website.

The “Runway to Win” line is also being promoted on the site, with most tops, bags and accessories going for under $100 – a much lower price point than those designers’ creations typically command.

Wintour has been ramping up her involvement, and her visibility, in the president’s reelection effort of late. Proving she’s good for far more than dispensing fashion tips to FLOTUS, Vogue’s longtime editor-in-chief has emerged as one of President Obama’s top boldfaced bundlers, raising over $500,000 for his second run on the White House.

The British-born Wintour’s rising profile in the American political arena has stirred up rumors that the 62-year-old fashion doyenne could be in the running to become America’s next ambassador to the United Kingdom, replacing the outgoing Louis Susman. However, an individual with knowledge of the situation told TheWrap that Wintour is happy at her current job.

Tuesday’s summit for Chicago-area fashionistas was a repeat of a “Runway to Win” campaign event co-hosted by Wintour and Scarlett Johansson in New York on February 7. On Thursday, Wintour will return to Manhattan for yet another fund-raiser, this time with the high-end asking price of $40,000 per guest to join Barack and Michelle Obama and Sarah Jessica Parker at the “Sex and the City” star’s home.

Okaaaay…let me try to get a handle on this:  Obama gives an speech on the economy , sporting all the gravitas of Peter Noone of Herman’s Hermits singing “I’m Henry VIII I Am”.

Second verse, same as the first…

Meanwhile, Mr. Class Warfare himself is hanging out and begging money from the nation’s Liberal Elite…the 1%, if you will, while Moochelle is picking out her Fall Wardrobe while clutching the White House Credit Card in her hot little hands.

Remember back in October of 2008, Presidential Candidate Obama urged Joe the Plumber to “spread the wealth around”?

Well, hypocrite thy name is Soetoro…errr…Obama.

UPI.com reported on 5/16/11 that

President Barack Obama’s wealth reaches upward of $3.8 million and possibly much higher, financial disclosure reports issued by the White House Monday show.

The forms, which only provide wide ranges for each category, show most of his assets are tied up in treasury notes and bills — $1 million to $5 million each, with another $1 million to $5 million in book royalties. Obama and his wife, Michelle, also have at least hundreds of thousands of dollars more tucked away in retirement funds and education funds for their two daughters.

At the lower level, Obama probably is worth $3.8 million and at the upper end would have as much as $16.8 million, the reports indicate.

Huh.  I wonder why OWS didn’t Occupy the White House Lawn?

Oh, yeah.  The Proletariat never picketed the Politboro, either.