The Hypocrisy of The Tax Debate: Romney's Real Tax Rate Is 55%.

Free - News and Commentary Early Previews HERE

Comments
By John Galt for Robbing America Chronicle

An example of how "Unfair" is our tax system to those that are paying taxes.

In The American Version:  
The Ones At The
Bottom Pay No Taxes

Much is being made of the announced tax rate paid by Republican candidate Mitt Romney. The liberal attack, as well as the Republican populist attack of Newt Gingrich, is hypocritical to the extreme. First, they know very well that this rate of 15% cannot be compared to earned income rates simply because Mr. Romney had no earned income. This is a rate paid on investment income. Second, they know that this investment income already paid taxes when it was earned, and that the tax rate in the corporations that earned it was 35% (by the way, the highest in the world tied with Japan). Be aware that this capital is being taxed twice. Let us repeat it - all together Mr. Gingrich -  "Mr. Romney's earned capital is being taxed two times". Yes, as in twice.

We calculate that the total taxation rate of Mr. Romney, including the original tax paid when the income was earned, plus the present taxation on investment income, plus his personal State income tax and sales tax, was a total of a little over 56%. And that is not counting myriad other hidden taxes along the route.

This kind of incomprehension about the American tax system and its manipulation for political purposes is the main obstacle standing on the way for creating economic growth. Now should be a great opportunity to shine the light of tax reform proposals, including specially those that suggest a simplified flat tax in replacement of the convoluted system we have now, and one that will allow more Americans to participate in paying taxes, regardless of how little they would pay. The real problem of the American tax system is not whether somebody like Mr. Romney paid enough taxes - even though he actually paid more than his "fair" share - but whether it is "fair" that 50% of Americans pay no taxes at all.

Now, watch President Obama suggest exactly the opposite in the State of the Union by using the concept of "fairness" backwards.

Comments:

Free - News and Commentary Early Previews HERE

The Creation Of The "Conservative-Populist"

Free - News and Commentary Early Previews HERE

Comments
By John Galt for Robbing America Chronicle

The Press rivals Congress in unpopularity.

This pre-election season has had many twists and turns that will soon be forgotten, but what will stay and become the model and new alternative for Republican candidates for national office in the future is undoubtedly the creation - or discovery if you wish - of the new electoral tool - the Populist conservative candidate - that will allow them to reach a larger audience with a populist message right out of the Democratic electoral book - but with a conservative flavor.

Newt Gingrich, in this primary campaign, has brought to us the new model - a Conservative-Populist - that will promote conservative ideas with a twist of populism which for the typical party activist, perhaps won't sound so conservative at times, but which will go unnoticed by the public. Newt has discovered the formula for that populism - the anti-media, anti-press stand, sprinkled with a daring pre selected anti-capitalist deviations - as he has done in the Bain Capital issue. The later has already been tried by George W. Bush in his so called "compassionate Conservatism". Newt's new version is much more restricted and selective to those cases where he can make hash of the inevitable downside of the free market, and convert it into a populist appeal. Nevertheless, it is, ultimately, populism at the cost of capitalism. One has to thread carefully there.

But the core of Gingrich's new populism is now that old nemesis of the conservative politician - the press. Until now, Republican politicians have lived in constant fear but compliance of the so called "liberal press". They denounce it but they mostly play ball, afraid of turning their public power even more drastically against them. Gingrich has demonstrated that such fears were unnecessary and exaggerated. That is because Republican politicians forgot one simple fact all this time, how much the press is derided and hated and mistrusted by the American people. With polls indicating a severe unpopularity of the press with the American public where they score approval ratings competing with Congress in the low 20%, is safe to conclude that an anti-press candidate is a pro-public candidate.

For the same reasons that Mr. Obama has chosen to run his electoral campaign against Congress, a republican candidate can run his campaign against the Press. As the Press attempts to deliver the President's message against Congress it would be neutralized and turned against the President as the Republican candidate delivers its message against the Press - an institution that nobody believes what it says.

In short, if the press needed to get

 elected, we would not have one.

 Gingrich is the first conservative politician that has persistently exploited the unpopularity of the Press to win debates and increase his own following. He has become untouchable by scandals or negative exposure, or erroneous policy suggestions, no matter how true they are, by simply replying with skillful and powerful rhetorical attacks against the carriers of the message, the press. Instantly and by magic, the people forget who the target was, what the accusation consisted of, and side with Gingrich against the Press.

The beauty and great advantage of this new found strategy is that his Democratic opposition cannot do the same. Democrats don't get attacked by the press, and if they were to by some rogue member or rare conservative journalist, they will never dare turn against their most valuable political allies. They cannot; they are tied to the unpopularity of their hosts. They will never blame the messenger. This is a populist tool that is out of bounds for Democrats. The attack on the press is now an exclusive popular tool of the Conservative movement. Gingrich is our first Populist-Conservative. Enjoy it!! There should soon be more to follow him.

Comments

Get Connected With Our Members HERE

Only Career Politicians Should Be President.

Get Connected With Our Members HERE

Comments
By Frank J. Fleming, IMAO.

[We dedicate this humble piece to our self-proclaimed (with exceptions) conservative Republican, Professor Newt Gingrich. Robbing America Chronicle]

People have started to learn some disturbing facts about likely Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney: He once worked for Bain Capital — which is what’s known as a private-sector business. Harmless as the term sounds, it’s much scarier once you understand how such outfits operate.

A private-sector business doesn’t even pretend to make decisions based on how to best help people or what creates the most jobs or even on what will most equally distribute income. It makes decisions based only on what creates a profit.

Yes, it’s frightening to think that something so mercenary even exists — even worse that someone who worked for something like that could actually become president. Of course, the only people who should lead our country and manage our economy are those who remain unsullied by the private sector’s for-profit mentality: career politicians.

Isn’t there something just so reassuring about a career politician? He has never worried about “profit” or “efficiency” or “success”; his every job has involved only helping people.

Look at President Obama. His first job was “community organizer.” Do you think that job made a profit for anybody? No way. Did it provide goods or services a consumer might want to pay for? No.
The purpose of a community organizer is . . . well, I’m still kind of vague on the specifics, but I’m pretty sure it’s about helping people. People who live in a community — a disorganized one.

The point is, while Obama was doing this, Romney was rubbing his hands together like Gollum, exclaiming, “Precious, precious money!” And to get that money, he worked hard to trim costs and do whatever else he could to make a business successful. If elected president, he might look on the economy with cold, cynical eyes that judge everything by how profitable it is — as opposed to Obama, who looks at the economy and says, “Yay, look at all this money I can take to help people!”

Also, Romney had to answer to investors — people who expected a return on their money. This made him very hesitant to spend money. That’s a completely different perspective from that of a career politician, who’s only ever spent the money of taxpayers — people who long ago learned never to expect any sort of return on their investment.

What if Romney brought that corrupt perspective to Washington and, instead of just helping people with tax money, worried about whether we could actually afford things?

No, we need to keep this for-profit mentality out of Washington. We need the government to be run by pure career politicians like Obama.

While others were managing businesses to create profit, Obama worked as a legislator, voting “yes,” “no” and, especially, “present,” which never profited anyone.
In fact, if Obama were put in charge of a business and pressured to make it profitable, he’d just stare back at us in confusion. He might even start crying. That’s how horrific he’d find that scenario. And it’s that innocence — that complete lack of basic economic knowledge — that he brings to leading our nation.

If we allowed Romney to bring his business sense to office, it would be horrific. He’d start slashing the government until it was lean and efficient and everything fit within the budget. What a cold and heartless way to look at government.

That won’t happen with Obama. There’s no chance he’ll let budgets or math be more important than helping people, because he’s never been corrupted by the knowledge of those concepts. He knows only two things: helping people and spending tax dollars. Any other knowledge would just slow him down.

Political satirist Frank J. Fleming’s e-book, “Obama: The Greatest President in the History of Everything,” is out from HarperCollins.

Comments

Get Connected With Our Members HERE

Ron Paul Wants 0% Tax Rate.

Get Connected With Our Members HERE

Comments

By John Galt for Robbing America Chronicle

What!!!

Don't we all?

A definitive moment for Ron Paul; he either is elected King for Life, or he is taken to a resting residence in a white jacket.

Ron Paul Lies:

Ron Paul Openly Lied in National TV about the Killing of Bin Laden. He denied having said that he would not have ordered the raid that killed Bin Laden.

Bret: You said you were against the operation that killed Bin Laden"

Paul: "Obviously not, I did not say that".

The following transcript from an interview with Simon Conway of The Blaze proves that Paul said exactly that:

Simon: "So President Ron Paul would therefore not have ordered the kill of bin Laden, which could have only have taken place by entering another sovereign nation?"

Paul: "I don't think it was necessary, no."

Simon, again: "So President Ron Paul would not have ordered the kill of Bin Laden , to take place, as it took place in Pakistan?"

Paul: "No the way it took place, no."

The Republican "nominating process from hell" is almost over, at least as far as the debates are concerned. Yes. my fellow Americans, freedom from debates has finally arrived.

Let us just give you the final judgment of our panel of experts which is a lot smarter than the Juan Williams' of the Fox world:

The Second Best of the Debate: "Gotch-you" questions at a minimum.

The most Cantankerous:  Ron Paul - who else?
The more Sustentative: Romney, Gingrich.
The most Trustworthy: Romney, Perry.
The less Trustworthy:  Ron Paul (Huntsman was absent)
The most Evasive:  Ron Paul - he made a pretzel out of the Osama killing.
The most Convoluted Double-Talk: Santorum (on the "Right to Work" vote)
The Hypocrite per-excellence:  Gingrich (on the Bain Capital issue).
The best Values: Perry, Romney
The worst question:  Juan Williams (Why is he at Fox?)
The worst Intentions: Juan Williams.
The biggest Applause:  Romney and Gingrich.
The best Laugh:  Romney.
The most Missed:  George W. Bush..
The most Wished: Christie, Rubio, Jeb Bush, Nikki Haley.
The best Economic plan: Gingrich, Romney.
The more stupid suggestion: Ron Paul (0% Tax)
The best Debater: Gingrich, Romney.
The best practical Vision:  Romney.

The winner:  Gingrich, Romney (Surprise!)
The Loser: Ron Paul.

Comments:

Get Connected With Our Members HERE

Europe Is Warning The US - Are We Listening?

Get Connected With Our Members HERE

Comments

By John Galt for Robbing America Chronicle

 

France Downgraded - Europe and The Euro Coming Apart.

Watch Out 2012!!! The consequences for the US and the Obama Administration.

We predicted accurately on both dénouements last November and December. With the Euro trading then at 1.38-1.42 per dollar we suggested that the real price of the Euro should be 0.90 to 1.10 per dollar due to an "overpriced Euro for the Southern economies", a "coming recession in Europe", and "significant withdrawals of retail Euro deposits...from the Eurozone banks" [See "The Euro - Tick, Tick, Tick, . . . . Boooooom!"]. The Euro traded today at 1.26 per dollar on its probable un-merry way to our predicted level. Further, we asserted two weeks later, in the piece "Who Will Defeat Obama In2012? Greece", that "Even if a miracle occurs and the unemployment rate in the US drops below 8%, the Greeks are still  coming to spoil the President's wishes". The Downgrades of France and Italy today, the largest holders of Greek debt, will imperil the arm twisting presently in place to make the bank holders of Greek debt to accept less than 50% face value on their debt - becoming obvious that even that hair cut of Greek creditors wasn't going to be enough to save it.

This is the entitlement debt mess that the Obama Administration wants to import to America.

Consequences for the United States.

We again like to point out that the American economy will be affected by a rise on the Dollar, the Eurozone recession, and the downgrade of the Euro debt of American banks.

(Billions)

Country           Gross Debt            GDP         Debt/GDP

USA (2011)             15,200         15,100          102.6%

France (2010)                                                   82.4%

Italy (2010)                                                     119.0%

Greece (2010)                                                  142.7%

Spain (2010)                                                     60.0%

Germany (2010)                                                83.4%

With the US 15.2 Trillion dollars in debt and rising - representing a higher ratio of debt to GDP than France, Spain, Portugal and Germany -  and the fiscal deficit growing to the tune of 1.2 trillion dollars a year, representing a growth in the US Deficit of 8% per year against a GDP growth of 2.0% (2012), which corresponds to a ratio of indebtedness four time faster than our economic growth, it is easy to deduct that S&P will take full notice of the American economic situation.

At Robbing America Chronicle we are estimating that by the end of a second Obama term in 2016, the US will have 22.3 Trillion in debt with a GDP of 16.7 Trillion, which represents a debt to GDP ratio of 133.5%, just where Greece is about now. Today we are between Italy and France, in just four years we will be like Greece, a country in technical bankruptcy being held alive by the good wishes of Germany.

It is easy to conclude that another USA downgrade in the near future cannot be ruled out.

All neatly packaged and delivered by November 2012!

Comments

Free previews and membership HERE