Category: economy

Only One More Step to Forced Abortion in U.S.A.

~ Pharmer ~ 2 Comments

We can blame  the religious leaders (for one example, the USCCB)  who  supported the leftist  plan to make us into a socialist state.  We are only one step away from forced abortion in the United States.   That’s right…… only one step away from being just like China.

The CBO has announced that if we pass Trent Franks’ bill H.R. 1797 restricting late term abortions  it could add $ 400 billion  to the federal deficit.   Philip Hodges at Godfather politics points out that this might be the first time that the politicians ever cared about the deficit, now that it can be used to push abortion.

Why?   The Congressional Budget office  projects  that a good portion of the kids that we allow to live will need medicaid for the costs of their birth, and then more welfare benefits for the rest of their lives.    This was brought to you by the “compassionate” religious leaders who wanted to outsource charity to the government until most of the population became dependent on it.

The last step towards forcing women to kill their babies is to make the health care professionals do it.   Once participation in abortion is required for health care practice,  (and we’re already on our way in a number of states),  it will be easy for the government to coerce women to kill their babies.

Former Google Exec Reveals Elaborate UK Tax Avoidance Scheme

~ Pharmer

Barney Jones, employed by Google between 2002 and 2006, had a cache of emails which reveal an elaborate corporate scheme to move UK profits  to the Bahamas, by booking contracts with British customers through its Dublin office.   He claims that Google dodged hundreds of millions of pounds in taxes over a decade, using this diversion.

Google insider exposes ‘immoral’ tax scam | The Sunday Times.

We see that the lefties are quite attentive to minimizing their tax burdens.

 

GE Capital Cuts Off Gun Stores

~ Pharmer

GE Capital, the  financial division of General Electric, has ceased lending money to stores which exclusively sell guns and ammo.   They retain a  policy loophole which  allows them to retain their relationship with Walmart and Dicks  because those retailers sells other products in addition to shooting supplies.  Of note is the fact that the father of Sandy Hook shooter, Adam Lanza, is a big executive at GE capital.

This policy change is supposed to be done quietly, but conservative media has the job of making sure that everyone knows.

Your friendly Pharmer  has been boycotting General Electric  for years, first due to its earlier ownership of NBC, a leftie media outlet,  and later due to its position as an Obama crony and beneficiary.  Now there’s another reason to boycott.

Obama’s Economic Success – Foodstamps!

~ Pharmer ~ 1 Comment

January 2009  – 31,939,110 food stamp recipients.

October 2012   – 47,525,329 food stamp recipients

2009 food stamp expenditures 55.6 billion

2012 food stamp expenditures  80.4 billion

SNAP, the food stamp program, does not account for all of the 106 billion spent on food assistance in 2012.

Next time a leftie tells you that the economy is improving, ask him to account for these numbers, which show an average daily increase of 11,233 food stamp recipients during Obama’s first four years.

 

Sneak Attack Tax on Savings to Bail out Cyprus Banks

~ Pharmer ~ 1 Comment

Alert denizens of the Eurozone might take action after learning what’s in store for ordinary savers in Cyprus, after this weekend.  A tax, ranging from 6.5% to 9.9% will be levied on all deposits.   The money is intended to bail out the banks, as well as the government.

Cyprus, up until this time attracted a good deal of international banking business.   Things might change after depositors from elsewhere discover that they will be ‘receiving’  significant NEGATIVE interest on their savings.

The prospect of negative interest, and the example of Cyprus might increase the popularity of stuffing money into mattresses, throughout Europe.

UPDATE 3/19:    Amid the threat of a bank run, (which caused banks to be closed until Thursday),  legislators in Cyprus rejected the plan to tax bank savings up to 10 percent.   This leaves the nation to search for a more palatable way out of their financial woes.

Obama Administration is Committed to Making His Sequester as Painful As Possible

~ Pharmer

The Sequester is not really a cut in spending at all, but a reduction in the projected increase.  The spending in 2013 will still be larger than 2012.  However Obama promised a lot of pain to be associated with the sequester, and it would appear that federal officials are being ordered to make this happen.

And example comes from an internal email exchange by an Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service official, Charles Brown.  He asked if he could spread whatever cuts might affect his region to make them as painless as possible.  The answer was that he was not to do anything to lessen the impact on fish inspections,  so that the effects  would be as dire as Obama warned Congress they would be.  Cuts in his area are to eliminate aid to prevent wildlife damage  to the aquaculture industry in 24 states.

In other words,  we have direct evidence that Obama is going to make  HIS sequester painful, and blame the whole idea on the Republicans.

Obama also has threatened that he  has an ability to target cuts, eliminating meat inspectors, for example, so as to reduce the available food supply.  He might not remember that his supporters will be punished most of all, as this cut would  affect the inner city “food deserts” more than the most rural areas.   (Pharmer recalls to mind  the increasingly severe cuts in DRUG supply which the nation has been experienced during Obama’s tenure.)

Since this APHIS email  came to light, the  USDA is walking back the implications of the report, saying that they will try to mitigate the effects of the sequester as much as possible.

The Washington Times also noted that the White house was facing questions on the 50 million dollar order for new TSA uniforms that it made just before the sequestration took effect.

Obama is also closing the White house to tours, and blaming this on the sequester.  Perhaps he fears blowback from  his obviously vengeful attitude towards Americans.   Inside the beltway, people are asking why Obama can’t keep the White house open, noting that President Lincoln was able to do so throughout the time of the Civil War.

Barrie Obama is no Abe Lincoln.

Obama Vetos Himself on Sequestration

~ Pharmer

Obama and cronies invented this sequester, and he threatened to veto any bill which interrupted the automatic reductions in planned spending.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: “Already, some in Congress are trying to undo these automatic spending cuts. My message to them is simple: No. I will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts to domestic and defense spending. There will be no easy off ramps on this one. We need to keep the pressure up to compromise – not turn off the pressure”
Obama signed the Sequester bill on August 2, 2011, and this LAW started cutting in 2012.  It scheduled  additional reductions  (totalling 1.2 trillion) yearly over 10 years, with $85 billion in reduction planned for 2013. The president has a great deal of discretion in determining where the cuts will be.

Now Obama has turned against this plan that he originated way back in 2011, and is blaming it on the Republicans.

Sequestration amounts to about $85 billion reduction in the spending increase slated for this year. One half of that is for the defense dept. It means that spending for the affected areas will only go up about 6-8 percent instead of going up 8-10 percent as baseline budgeting dictates.

To put this 85 billion sequestration for 2013 in perspective:

The government spends $3.5 trillion per year.

The government spent $50 billion on Tropical Storm Sandy relief.

The government spent $30 billion on extension of unemployment.

There is an estimated 44 billion in improper medicare payments yearly.

The federal reserve  prints $85 billion per MONTH and props up Wall Street with it.

Taxing the “Rich” is Like Peeing into a Fan

~ Pharmer

The majority of people have envy of those who succeed in the financial world, to the extent that they would harm themselves in order to bring the “rich” people down a notch or ten.
This envy is utilized by the leftists in government to divide and conquer the people, and gather more power and influence for themselves.
Some people don’t realize that whenever taxes are raised on the “rich”, people in the middle and lower financial strata wind up paying the cost.
The truly rich people have the means to almost completely avoid the burden of taxes. They will pass the cost to the consumers of their products and services, streamline employment, and try to pay politicians to grant them exceptions. If these steps are insufficient, they simply move their money, their businesses, and themselves out of the country as the need arises.
Those who are not extremely rich, are more likely to suffer some harm from the tax burden, but they will shield themselves as long as they can. They will cut employment, cut costs, raise prices, perhaps move to another state, or close their business in an effort to preserve capital.
The smallest businesses will do the same, raise prices, and cut employment, and if the taxation becomes too burdensome, they will close down.

Note that in all cases, the business owners will pass the cost of taxation on to the consumers of their products. (If you are a leftist, read it again: the “RICH” business owners will pass the cost of taxation on to the consumers of their products. THAT IS YOU.)
Wanting the government to tax the rich is like peeing into a fan that is pointing back at YOU. It has increased the price on almost all of your necessities, and it has cut jobs!

Water-Misting-Fan

If you dislike a particular business or rich person, you can boycott. That will not affect your finances to the extent that telling the government to tax the rich does.

Yes boycotts work. Pharmer has joined boycotts of businesses and charities which are known for supporting abortion, and many of these boycotts have been effective in stopping the funding. Unfortunately Obama and the federal government have made up the shortfall. It also appears that Obama has made up the shortfall to Wall Street by printing money and propping up the corporations which lefties purport to hate.
Perhaps Obama should be boycotted!

Bob Woodward: Obama is Lying About the Sequester

~ Pharmer

Bob Woodward, leftie journalist of the Washington Post, in a “random act of Journalism”, has revealed the detailsabout the origin of the ‘sequester‘, which Obama is currently blaming on the Republicans.

Jack Lew and Obama cooked up the ‘sequester‘.  It’s automatically triggered reduction in projected spending, which was to prevent Obama from having to negotiate the issue during the campaign.

Says Woodward: “The president and Lew had this wrong. My extensive reporting for my book “The Price of Politics” shows that the automatic spending cuts were initiated by the White House and were the brainchild of Lew and White House congressional relations chief Rob Nabors — probably the foremost experts on budget issues in the senior ranks of the federal government.Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). They did so at 2:30 p.m. July 27, 2011, according to interviews with two senior White House aides who were directly involved.”

Do click on the paragraph above.    You will find out that  Bob Woodward is still a good leftie reporter, working for the Washington Post.  Hecouldn’t dance to the media tune, because Obama’s lie contradicted what he had already written in his own book.
Woodward still thinks that Obama is right to insist on more taxes and, most particularly taxing the rich, but he’s not going along with the lie that the Republicans invented the ‘sequester’.

By the way, the sequester is puny, not enough reduction in spending, and will not cause the projected disasters because very little money is involved, as a percentage of total spending. Since the sequester is Obama’s idea, it does contain disproportionate reductions in projected military expenditures, when compared to government dependency programs.