Federal Debt Per Household Has Gone Up By $43,000

Federal debt per household has gone up by $43,000 since Senate’s last budget three and a half year ago

Posted By Nicholas Ballasy On 4:32 PM 11/01/2012 @ 4:32 PM In DC Exclusives,DC Exclusives – Blurb,Politics,Uncategorized | No Comments

Federal debt per household has increased by nearly $43,000 to $133,8

69 in the three and a half years since Senate Democrats last passed a budget, according to an analysis of Treasury data by the Senate Budget Committee’s Republican staff.

“The last time the United States Senate adopted a budget resolution was

April 29th, 2009. Every year, federal law requires the Senate to present a budget in the Budget Committee for adoption, and to then bri
“Yet, in a time of record deficits, weak economic growth, and an historic surge in federal welfare, it has now been more than three and half years since the Senate’s Democrat majority has put forward a budget. In that time, the government has spent $12.1 trillion and added an additional $5 trillion to the gross federal debt.” (RELATED: Senate Democrats fail to pass budget after three years)ng that budget to the Senate floor for open and public amendment, debate, and eventual adoption,” said a Senate Budget Committee Republican staff press release on Thursday.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Democrats “refused to even write a budget,” said the release. “Thus, in 2011 and in 2012, the mandated Budget Committee mark-ups to work on a budget were cancelled by the Senate Majority—in violation of federal law—and no plan was ever presented to the American people by the party controlling the Senate chamber.”

Federal per-household debt also soared under former President George W. Bush. Government debt per household increased sharply to nearly $87,000 in 2008, according to a study by the Economic Freedom Network.

Follow Nicholas on Twitter

---

Article printed from The Daily Caller: http://dailycaller.com

URL to article: http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/01/debt-per-household-has-gone-up-by-43000-since-senates-last-budget-3-and-a-half-year-ago/

 

Unemployment Rate for Young Women: 11.6%

Obamacare No Help To Women

Stop Congress From Telling You How To Run Your Life

Stop Congress from telling you what you which of your possessions you can sell and whose permission you have to get. From what kind of health care you should have to which toilets and light bulbs you should buy to what you can do with your stuff when your done with it…enough is enough. Click the link above and find out what they are trying to put past you now while we’re paying attention to the election and world affairs.

John F. Kennedy Speaks On the Path to Prosperity

This video is an excerpt from President John F. Kennedy’s speech delivered on December 14, 1962 to the Economic Club of New York. It is a timeless plan for how to cause a prosperous economy to grow and flourish, and one we desperately need now. President Kennedy states,

The federal government’s most useful role is not to rush into a program of excessive increases of public expenditures, but to expand the incentives and opportunities for private expenditures.

He continues on to list three tests a new tax legislation for the next year should meet:

1. Reduce net taxes where “the greatest danger is a tax cut too little or too late to be effective.”
2. A new tax bill should “increase private consumption and investment…corporate tax rates must be cut.”
3. “The new tax bill should improve both the inequity and simplicity of the present tax system.”

Our Founding Fathers were ingenuous in knowing that only by working with the nature of man, including his self-interest and self-preservation, would the country be prosperous and have opportunity for all. President Kennedy points out that when an individual has more spending power, companies produce more, more jobs are available, there’s a larger tax base and around it cycles. It also means that there are more new inventions ranging from technology to medicine due to the fact that people are buying more and want new things and companies have more more to invest in their ideas.

Listen for yourself. (I had the video here but for some reason I can’t keep them embedded, the videos just become a link. Let me know if you know what I’m doing wrong. Thanks.)

http://youtu.be/v4S5nM8BjwM

The $5 Trillion Tax Cut That Isn’t

Robert J. Samuelson

Opinion Writer

Published October 10

Let’s review again the math of Mitt Romney’s proposed tax cuts to show why — contrary to the rhetoric from President Obama’s campaign — they do not amount to a $5 trillion tax cut for the rich. We all understand that campaigns involve self-serving exaggerations, simplifications and partial truths. But if politics is to retain any integrity, a line must be drawn at statements and innuendoes that are demonstrably false.

That’s happened here. The Obama campaign has distorted the results of a study by the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan research group, and created a fictitious $5 trillion tax cut. Some news organizations have embraced the distortion. The TPC should issue a statement saying its results have been twisted, leaving no doubt. News organizations that bought into the fabrication should retract their previous reporting. Topping the list is NBC News, which is in the awkward position of having one of its broadcasts inserted in an Obama TV spot.

Let me emphasize that my criticism of Obama’s campaign is not an endorsement of Romney’s tax plan, many of whose features I oppose. Among other items, I dislike his proposals (a) to continue taxing “capital income” (dividends and capital gains) at lower rates than labor income; (b) to abolish taxes on capital income for taxpayers with incomes less than $200,000; (c) to eliminate the estate tax. Ditching these proposals might make it possible to achieve a simpler income tax system with a top rate of 30 percent.

The Tax Policy Center report concluded that Romney can’t cut tax rates 20 percent while raising the same amount of tax revenue and not increasing taxes on the middle class. Something would have to give, the TPC said, because Romney has put too many loopholes for the rich off-limits. But even if the TPC is broadly correct — as I think it is — it does not follow that Romney plans a $5 trillion tax cut for the rich.

The $5 trillion figure never appears in the report. Rather, the report estimates the cost of Romney’s plan for 2015. Altogether in 2015, his proposed rate cuts would reduce tax revenues by $456 billion, the TPC reckons. Multiplying that by 10, and assuming some inflation and economic growth, gives a roughly $5 trillion estimate for a decade.

Here’s why this isn’t a $5 trillion cut for the rich. Start with the $456 billion in 2015. Only $360 billion of that reflects reductions in individual tax rates. The rest involves the corporate tax and isn’t analyzed by the TPC. The study assumes — perhaps implausibly — that any lost revenues from lower corporate rates would be offset by fewer corporate tax breaks. Over a decade, that’s slightly more than $1 trillion of the $5 trillion off the table.

It’s true that most individual rate reductions would go to wealthier taxpayers, because the wealthy pay most federal taxes. (In 2012, the 4 percent of taxpayers with incomes exceeding $200,000 paid nearly 45 percent of federal taxes, the TPC says.) Still, Romney’s proposed rate cuts also benefit those with incomes of $200,000 or less; that’s one dividing line between upper-middle class and wealthy. The TPC estimates that these rate cuts are worth $109 billion for 2015. Over a decade, that’s slightly more than another $1 trillion not going to the rich.

The remaining rate cuts for the wealthy equal about 60 percent of the $5 trillion over a decade, or $3 trillion. Romney contends that closing existing tax breaks would recoup lost revenues. Not so, says the TPC. There aren’t enough. Still, the TPC estimates that two-thirds of the lost revenues might be offset by fewer tax breaks. If so, this eliminates another $2 trillion over a decade available for tax cuts for the rich.

The remaining $1 trillion is still a lot of money, and Romney can be harshly criticized for making more promises than he can keep. Which ones would he break? In the first debate, he was emphatic. He wouldn’t propose any tax cut that increased the deficit or the middle class’s tax burden. One way to keep these pledges is to pare back rate cuts for the rich or attack some tax preferences put off-limits by Romney. Then, the net tax cut for the rich would be zero.

The TPC never claimed to find a $5 trillion giveaway to the rich. News organizations peddling this line have unwittingly enlisted in the Obama campaign.

Voices Without A Vote

Show this video to your family and friends. Their whole future rests on this election—your vote can make all the difference.

PETA Plays Pokemon

ANDY CHALK | 8 OCTOBER 2012 6:05 PM

The minds that brought you Mama Kills Animals and Super Tofu Boy are at it
again with Pokemon: Black and Blue.

Have you ever really thought about what actually goes on in Pokemon? It’s basically dogfighting for kids. You trap the little beasts, stuff them into tiny cages, “train” them to make them more powerful and dangerous, and only let them out when you want them to fight for your entertainment. Nasty stuff, really.

So it is that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has decided to celebrate the recent release of Pokemon Black 2 and White 2 with Pokemon: Black and Blue, a short online game in which you’ll help Pikachu, Oshawott, Tepig and Snively beat down their oppressors and make their way to freedom. Gotta free ’em all, baby!

The game features a reasonably accurate (for a PETA parody) representation of Pokemon battles between the four battered, mutilated Pokemon and their former masters, like Professor Juniper and Ash Ketchum, who probably don’t appear quite as you remember them. As a reward for your efforts, you’ll help Team Plasma set the Pokemon free, change the mindsets of their former trainers and of course get the usual PETA payoffs: a wallpaper, downloadable PETA Pokemon cards and a music video featuring horrific clips of animals suffering unspeakable cruelties and deprivation.

It’s not what I’d call truckloads of fun, but it’s not a terrible parody either. Just do yourself a favor and skip that video.

Source: PETA

How Will You Answer?

No, You Can’t