Middle Class Tax Increase On The Way

Matt Burden of Blackfive will run for office in the Illinois House of Representatives. See announcement at end of post.

I have said all along that Obama’s pledge to not raise taxes on 95% of the population was a pipe dream. He already raised them when tobacco taxes were elevated which affected the middle and lower classes. However, there are those who claim he meant income taxes. He said all of our taxes but we can focus on income.

The plan to tax only the wealthy will not work. If the government confiscated ALL of the money the wealthy earn (100% tax) there would not be enough money to pay the bills. This is a mathematical fact.

Therefore, the bills will be paid by raising the taxes on the middle class. This might mean that the 40% of wage earners who pay no tax will start contributing to the cause.

Congressman Jay Rockefeller is concerned about this (a Democrat worried about a tax increase, say it isn’t so) and he stated that the newest iteration of a health care bill will certainly cause an increase on the taxes of the middle class.

The West Virginia Democrat worries, however, that a lot of middle class workers, like the coal miners in his state, will end up facing “a big, big tax” under the Baucus bill because they currently enjoy generous employer-provided health care benefits which they receive tax free.

Referring to Baucus, Rockefeller said, “He should understand that (his proposal) means that virtually every single coal miner is going to have a big, big tax put on them because the tax will be put on the company and the company will immediately pass it down and lower benefits because they are self insured, most of them, because they are larger. They will pass it down, lower benefits, and probably this will mean higher premiums for coal miners who are getting very good health care benefits for a very good reason. That is, like steelworkers and others, they are doing about the most dangerous job that can be done in America.” ABC News

This is not unique to West Virgina coal miners. The plan will cause an increase in the taxes of middle class Americans all over the country and they will end up paying for the health care for others.

The health care bill is not the only thing that will increase the burden to Americans. Recent estimates now show that cap and trade will cost each family $1761 per year. This is in stark contrast to the official claims of $175. The $1761 number came from the Obama people and was kept under wraps. It was obtained under a Freedom of Information request and it shows that despite what they are saying publicly, they knew back in November that the cost would be much higher.

These financial burdens keep adding up. Obama claims that he will have a deficit neutral health care plan but this claim is hollow. Medicare is not deficit neutral and it pays out more than it takes in. It has been a monetary black hole for a very long time and it will continue to be one just as all other government programs are.

As the bills keep piling up Obama will be forced to raise the taxes of everyone and that includes the 95% he vowed not to harm. His only hope is that he can get reelected before he has to raise taxes. Better yet, he would like to leave office and leave the mess to the next person.

In any event, we cannot keep spending like we have unlimited funds and we cannot keep enacting social welfare reform that causes increases in what families have to pay.

Americans are tired of having their money forcefully confiscated in order to fund politicians and their social programs.

Time to take the country back.

It starts at the local level and that leads me to this. Matt Burden of the website Blackfive has announced he will run for state office in Illinois:

September 4, 2009 – 41st District resident, Matthew Burden, announced today his campaign for the Illinois House of Representatives. Matt will fill the position vacated by the retirement of longtime Representative Bob Biggins. Campaign Site

Matt is raising campaign capital in small amounts from average citizens. You can read all of this at Blackfive.

If you can donate it would help Matt and it would be nice to see a man of his integrity hold office.

We can take back America one seat at a time, one office at a time and one district at a time.

Big Dog

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

13 Responses to “Middle Class Tax Increase On The Way”

  1. Darrel says:

    Bigd: “Obama’s pledge to not raise taxes on 95% of the population was a pipe dream.>>

    Wouldn’t it be best to wait for that to happen before you claim it? I think so.

    Bigd: He already raised them when tobacco taxes were elevated…>>

    Not relevant to “income taxes,” as you know.

    Bigd: However, there are those who claim he meant income taxes.>>

    Only because he was referring to income taxes. Note:

    “Obama has promised that he won’t increase taxes on Americans earning less than $250,000 and said he will delay increases for high-income earners until 2011.”
    –Bloomberg. etc.

    Bigd: He said all of our taxes but we can focus on income.>>

    No, when you cite a lowering of taxes based upon income, this is the big shiny clue that you are referring to “income taxes.”

    And anyway, he has already Cut Taxes for 98.6 Percent of Working* Households**.

    “I also dropped the bottom rate from fifteen percent to ten percent, because, by far, the vast majority of the help goes to the people at the bottom end of the economic ladder.”

    –G.W. Bush, blatantly fibbing during the first Gore debate. The bottom 60 percent got 14.7 percent. The top one fifth got 71% of the tax cuts.

    • Big Dog says:

      Bush’s tax cuts benefitted the middle class more than the wealthy:

      Popular mythology also suggests that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts shifted more of the tax burden toward the poor. While high-income households did save more in actual dollars than low-income households, they did so because low-income house­holds pay so little in income taxes in the first place. The same 1 percent tax cut will save more dollars for a millionaire than it will for a middle-class worker simply because the millionaire paid more taxes before the tax cut.

      In 2000, the top 60 percent of taxpayers paid 100 percent of all income taxes. The bottom 40 percent collectively paid no income taxes. Lawmakers writing the 2001 tax cuts faced quite a challenge in giving the bulk of the income tax savings to a population that was already paying no income taxes.

      Rather than exclude these Americans, lawmak­ers used the tax code to subsidize them. (Some economists would say this made that group’s col­lective tax burden negative.)First, lawmakers low­ered the initial tax brackets from 15 percent to 10 percent and then expanded the refundable child tax credit, which, along with the refundable earned income tax credit (EITC), reduced the typical low-income tax burden to well below zero. As a result, the U.S. Treasury now mails tax “refunds” to a large proportion of these Americans that exceed the amounts of tax that they actually paid. All in all, the number of tax filers with zero or negative income tax liability rose from 30 million to 40 million, or about 30 percent of all tax filers.[17] The remaining 70 percent of tax filers received lower income tax rates, lower investment taxes, and lower estate taxes from the 2001 legislation.

      Consequently, from 2000 to 2004, the share of all individual income taxes paid by the bottom 40 per­cent dropped from zero percent to –4 percent, mean­ing that the average family in those quintiles received a subsidy from the IRS. (See Chart 6.) By contrast, the share paid by the top quintile of households (by income) increased from 81 percent to 85 percent.

      Expanding the data to include all federal taxes, the share paid by the top quintile edged up from 66.6 percent in 2000 to 67.1 percent in 2004, while the bottom 40 percent’s share dipped from 5.9 per­cent to 5.4 percent. Clearly, the tax cuts have led to the rich shouldering more of the income tax burden and the poor shouldering less. Heritage

      And this:

      The report also shows that Bush’s tax cuts have been “progressive” — that is, they have shifted the share of the overall federal income-tax burden toward the wealthy, and away from lower-income earners. Without the Bush tax cuts, the highest-earning 20 percent of households this year would have paid 78.4 percent of all federal income taxes. Now, after the Bush tax cutes, their share of the burden has risen to 82.1 percent. Every other quintile now pays a smaller share of the total income-tax burden. NRO

      98.6%, I think not. The Making Work Pay is not a tax cut, it is a tax credit only applicable to 2009 and 2010. It is not a tax cut as it gives a credit to people under a certain income, many of whom paid NO taxes. This will not extend, was designed to offset the economic woes and could end up costing people when they file their returns next year. Additionally, when these are gone Obama will let the Bush tax cuts expire which will raise taxes on the middle class. They got the break, as I showed. IRS

      • Darrel says:

        [quote] “While high-income households did save more in actual dollars than low-income households,”>>

        Bingo. Thus proving Bush’s claim above, false. Or as Blake would say, that he’s a liar.

        “The bottom 60 percent got 14.7 percent. The top one fifth got 71% of the tax cuts.”

        Bigd: “The bottom 40 percent collectively paid no income taxes.”>>

        This is terribly misleading because it completely ignores the fact that these people pay vast amounts of payroll taxes which go into general revenue. And the rich receive a huge break on this because of the cap. That should be changed (and probably will). Watch for it.

        [quote] “the tax cuts have led to the rich shouldering more of the income tax burden”

        That’s how math works in Heritage spin land. The top 20% get 71% of the tax cuts and this is shouldering more of the burden. Amazing word games. But who could fall for such an obvious ruse? Bigd?

        “President Bush’s three tax-cut laws will reduce this year’s income taxes for the richest 1% of taxpayers by an average of $78,460, more than 70 times the average benefit for the middle 20% of taxpayers, congressional analysts found.”
        –Wall Street Journal, not lying this time, your link

        “Fully one-third of President Bush’s tax cuts in the last three years have gone to people with the top 1 percent of income,…” –NYT’s

        That doesn’t sound like a tax cut for the rich does it? Sure does.

        God I hope Obama hammers the rich. Maybe even make the taxes as high as under Reagan. We’ve got bills to pay.

        And they are finally getting those thousands of republican tax cheats hiding their money with the Swiss. About time. Good job!

        Bigd: “The Making Work Pay is not a tax cut, it is a tax credit only applicable to 2009 and 2010.”>>

        Don’t care. It effectively cuts taxes for 98.6% of working families. Your blind and irrational hatred of all things Obama doesn’t even allow you to acknowledge when he cuts taxes. Amazing.

        Bigd: “many of whom paid NO taxes.”>>

        Every single one of them did. No exceptions.

        Bigd: “this will not extend,>>

        Doesn’t need to.

        Bigd: was designed to offset the economic woes>>


        Bigd: Obama will let the Bush tax cuts expire which will raise taxes on the middle class.>>

        Everyone under $250k gets a cut. Deal with it. Those over, get hammered, but not nearly enough.

        As I have shown, the rich made out like bandits in the tax department under Bush (not to mention the huge subsidy to purchase extra heavy SUV’s). But in the end, they lost a whole lot of it when his complete ineptitude and policies destroyed the market making tens of trillions disappear. The rich, the poor, the middle, did far better under Clinton.


        • Blake says:

          And the rich should do well- that is the whole purpose of a Capitalist Society is to enrich people, and thus make their lives better- this doesn’t happen without money, and that is a fact.
          he whole idea should be to give everyone the OPPORTUNITY to succeed- however, if some people fail, that is life in the big city- some people set themselves up for failure. Should we prop these people up, or allow them to actually learn from their mistakes? I guess if you are a liberal, you coddle the failure, and punish the success- doesn’t sound like a winning formula to me- perhaps you could explain the liberal philosophy to me, Darrel, since you are so indoctrinated.
          Tell me how much better being coddled is than actually having success in life.
          Staying a child is NOT a good business plan.
          And everyone under $250,000 will be hammered by taxes, but Nobama lies- plain and simple.

        • Blake says:

          To your first paragraph- the “high- income” homes “saved” more, because they didn’t have to immediately have to spend it- face facts, D- there will always be rich and poor people- no one even Nobama can fix that. That is life- if you don’t like it you can opt out.

    • Blake says:

      Nobamma never said “income taxes”- he just said taxes, plain and simple- you having a spot of trouble understanding plain and simple, D?

  2. Barbara says:

    Hey Big Dog, why don’t we shake the government up and all apply for welfare and Medicaid. Do you think they would get the message then?

  3. Big Dog says:

    You are absolutely wrong Darrel. The wealthy received less of a percentage in cuts than the middle class. You do not know what you are talking about.

    The dollar amounts were more because the wealthy pay more in taxes than most people make.

    The wealthy shoulder a huge burden of the taxes and you hope they get hammered? Suppose someone like Bill Gates said OK, then I am shutting down my Business.

    Suppose the wealthy decided to move their money to non taxable assets (like many of the Dems do). They could just buy into non taxable securities and they could move their business to other countries like they have done in the past (the result of an unfair tax climate).

    You have shown nothing, absolutely nothing. You look at raw dollars and figure the rich made out. The middle class pay NO income taxes (and that is what we are talking about) and they are not unfairly burdened with the non income taxes they do pay. The cap works both ways. SS payments are capped no matter what you paid in. Some wealthy will not be eligible for SS because of their income and taxes will wipe out what they should get. If you pay it in you should get it back.

    You are too blinded by your desire for Socialism to see the truth. You cannot make people richer by making the rich poorer.

    Keep that in mind. The rich know how to survive. This is why rich people have salary of $1 a year. Little taxes on income.

    The rich get soaked plenty. The middle class pay NO income taxes. Funny how when Obama mentions tax cuts you say he was talking about income (he did not mention it) but when I talk about income taxes you throw in the non income taxes that the bottom 40% pay.

    Bottom line is the wealthy paid more in income taxes than the poor. This is shown from Treasury numbers and it is shown by who shoulders the tax burden.

    If the rich pay and the poor do not then we need to change the laws so that people who do not pay taxes cannot vote. You don’t have skin in the game you can’t play.

    Then we need to allow people one vote for each $5000 in taxes they pay so the wealthy have more say in how the country they are paying for is run. Like stock, more you own the more votes you get.

    That should keep the bottom 40% from continually voting to get more money that does not belong to them.

    Once again, Obama did not CUT taxes. He gave a credit. That is not a tax cut.

    • Darrel says:

      Sorry, all I saw was:

      “The middle class pay NO income taxes.”

      I can’t even make fun of that, and I am pretty good at making fun of foolishness.

      Why would anyone take you seriously?

      “New CBO estimates show that between 1979 and 2006, average pre-tax income of the top one percent of earners more than tripled, even after accounting for inflation. Their average income went from half a million dollars to $1.7 million even as incomes were basically flat for all households. At the same time, effective federal tax rates for the rich plunged from 37 percent to 31 percent while they barely budged for taxpayers as a whole. Bottom line: after-tax income at the very top increased from $330,000 to $1.2 million.”


  4. Blake says:

    I have always said that in order to vote you should be employed, because if you are not, why should you have a say in where money THAT IS NOT YOURS goes? You should not- if you want to platy the game, ante up, or step back.

  5. Big Dog says:

    Certainly a small decrease in the tax rate will mean a lot in raw dollars when one is talking about a huge sum of money.

    The rich, like John Kerry’s wife, are not stupid. They know how to avoid paying excessive taxes. She put her money in tax free bonds.

    They still pay more in taxes than we earn in a year and some of us in a lifetime.

    Funny though, all the people who claim to want more taxes avoid paying them. Rangel, Kerry, Geithner and the list goes on.

    The wealthy paid more in taxes and received less of a decrease than the middle class. Of course, when one pays no INCOME (to make it clear for you) taxes then it is hard to have much of a change so their level stays flat.

    The government even sent those who paid NO INCOME taxes a rebate check. The money came form others who actually paid taxes.

    The middle class had the greatest benefit.

    • Blake says:

      The government sent dead people tax rebate checks- and convicts also- just how stupid IS this administration?
      I al afraid we haven’t seen the low in stupidity on their pat yet.
      More to come, unfortunately.

  6. […] Government will continue to raise taxes on business and […]