Friday, February 15, 2013

Tightening OUR belts... we saw it coming, didn't we

So, the honest taxpayer will be forced to lose a lot of money.  Not those on the dole;  they'll pick up their gov't money at ATMs in lap dance clubs;  they'll get their free cell phones from Obama;  they'll get their housing paid for; their food stamp money can still be spent on lobster........They will not have to tighten their belts, but we will.  I'm all for tightening of belts if we're going to save the economy Obama's created for us, but US FIRST?   How's about meaningfully looking into FRAUD...WE are being cheated BIG TIME.  Think how much money we could save if we found those who won't work because they get better money NOT working.   But,'s easier to SCREW US.  We're on the record, we can't hide.   Some of these losses of deductions are REALLY going to hurt our Middle Class.  The cheaters are free to use us, folks:

5 Tax Breaks on the Chopping Block

As Congress wrangles over the deficit, these deductions may get the ax.
Health insurance
The tax hikes Congress passed to solve the fiscal-cliff mess won’t raise enough revenue to keep the nation’s budget woes in check. But rather than raise rates further, President Obama hinted Sunday that lawmakers’ next round of deficit-reduction talks will probably revolve around closing tax loopholes and eliminating deductions. Though no specifics are on the table, experts say there are several likely candidates for the chopping block. One profitable option: making employer-sponsored health benefits taxable, says Roberton Williams, an economist at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center based in Washington. More than 150 million Americans get health insurance through their employers tax-free. But taxing those benefits could reduce federal spending by an average of $150 billion a year over the next five years, according to estimates from the Joint Committee on Taxation. The average health-insurance premium costs about $16,000 a family, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. If those perks suddenly became taxable, some families might try to reduce costs by moving into lower premium plans, which often come with higher deductibles and co-payments, says Williams. The government is already drawing more attention to these benefits by requiring employers to break out how much the company and the employee spent on insurance coverage on W-2 forms, which report annual wage and salary figures. (See also “Is Taxing Health Plans Next?”) — By Jonnelle Marte
The mortgage-interest deduction (Z: I bought my first home on my own almost entirely for this deduction.  Look for the housing market to tank)
Though it’s one of the more popular tax breaks, the mortgage-interest deduction frequently comes up in conversations about raising revenue. Given the state of the housing market, it’s unlikely this break would disappear completely, but lawmakers could decide to scale it back in a number of ways, says Keith Gumbinger, a mortgage analyst at HSH. One option is to reduce the cap on the amount of mortgage debt that can be factored into the deduction from $1 million to, say, $500,000. Congress might also limit the deduction to one’s primary residence, and not allow it to be used for second homes. And Congress could decide to phase out the interest deduction for those earning above a certain income. The tax savings for those who take advantage of the perk can be significant: The first-year deduction on a $400,000 30-year mortgage with a fixed rate of 3.75% is $14,874, says Gumbinger. As with other itemized deductions, changes here would impact higher earners more than low- to middle-income households, which are more likely to use the standard deduction, he says.
State and local tax deductions
Those who itemize can generally deduct the state and local taxes they pay. The perk is vulnerable given its size: Taxpayers deducted $260 billion of such taxes in 2010, according to the most recent data from the Internal Revenue Service. The tax break may also be targeted because it’s already denied to the roughly 4 million Americans subject to the alternative-minimum tax, says Williams, of the Tax Policy Center, potentially making it easier for Congress to do away with this break for all taxpayers.
Charitable deductions  (Z: the next will be churches losing tax exemption; I promise;  with charitable deductions gone, the poor will be going to the government; just what the Left wants)
Lawmakers may be hesitant to tax altruism, but experts say the break for charitable donations could be at risk. The Congressional Budget Office examined eliminating it, as a possible option for reducing the federal deficit, estimating that curtailing the deduction for such contributions could increase federal revenue by approximately $20 billion in 2014. One proposal that could reappear in budget talks is to set an income threshold, allowing taxpayers to only deduct contributions that exceed 2% — or some other percentage — of their income, economists say. Critics argue that such a threshold could encourage donors to bundle their contributions — meaning they’d give every other year instead of annually, to increase their chances of meeting the minimum. But proponents say it could also encourage people to boost their overall donations.
Municipal bond interest
Municipal bonds are favored by investors in high tax brackets because their interest is exempt from federal taxes, as well as many state and local taxes. Obama has proposed limiting this tax break for the wealthiest Americans by capping the exemption at 28%. Under such rules, taxpayers in the 35% bracket would effectively pay a 7% tax on their municipal-bond interest. Municipalities argue that reducing or eliminating the tax exemption would push up their borrowing costs because investors would demand higher interest rates for owning the bonds. But Congress may be tempted to cut back on this large federal expense: The exclusion of municipal-bond interest income from federal taxes will cost the government an estimated $50 billion this year, and $300 billion over the next five years, according to the Office of Management and Budget.

WHICH ONE OF THESE WILL HURT YOU THE MOST?   And do you agree that FRAUD in entitlements should be looked into first?



Always On Watch said...

One profitable option: making employer-sponsored health benefits taxable

As a household without employer-based health insurance since February 2008, when Mr. AOW got laid off, that one won't affect this household at all.

Government employees -- be they federal, state, or local will get one helluva reality check.

mortgage-interest deduction

As one who has never had a mortgage, I've watched my neighbors, all of whom have high mortgages, enjoy the deduction and pay less in taxes than I do -- never mind that my income has always been far less than half of theirs.

If the mortgage-interest deduction disappears, that one will affect a lot of people -- including the elderly and the retired.

Fraud in entitlements is rampant. Most of us know someone committing that fraud -- believe it or not. For example, I know of some people collecting SSDI and still working; their paychecks are made payable to someone else. I kid you not!

Anonymous said...

Flat tax, period. No deductions, period.

Ducky's here said...

Losing municipal bond interest would give my tax bill a pretty good boost.

It would also cause panic in the muni market. Don't think it will happen.

Anonymous said...

Government greed at work. I hate those jerks. Useless to society aside from taxing.

Shows that the tax code needs to be simplified. We wouldn't be here today if they didn't spend their time creating more rules, more taxes and exemptions for it. Let's all pay a set % and be done with it. Tired of this grosse merde.


Anonymous said...

I propose on tax on gov workers and federal employees that I would call the "job security tax". If they want to start taxing benefits, we may as well tax people in government who have job security and higher wages than I do for the same type of job that I do.

So sick of this crap.


Joe Conservative said...

The Government has "de facto" set interest rates at zero. One can therefore gain "nothing" from investing one's money. The "future" will be all work, as "savings" are worthless. Diminishing Government handouts are all Americans can look forward to.

Thanks, Democrats!

Z said...

Joe, I couldn't agree with you more.
I was mostly hit because interest is, for all intents and purposes, ZERO.
What I COULD HAVE BEEN MAKING on INTEREST even 5 years ago on what I've got would have been quite a good paying part-time job income.

I've gone back to work mostly to keep myself busy and I LOVE what I'm doing, but part time would have been very nice! And I am still too young and able-bodied at this point not to get that nest-egg higher and higher in savings.

Ducky's here said...

What the hell are you investing in, Farmer?

Fredd said...

The Obama administration is unlike any other Democrat gang we have seen in the past: tax and spend on steroids. His tax policy and ever increasing thirst for 'revenues' to fund his 'investments,' must be opposed on principle.

I like Dr. Carson's plan: if a flat tax was good enough to promote in the Bible, and it was good enough for Jesus, who indeed are we to pooh pooh the concept?

Anonymous said...

Joe, it's the gov and the Federal Reserves. It feeds the banks nicely. They don't have to give us money on our savings while money gets diverted to Wall Street where they can use our money to make some big money. In the meantime, we pay through our taxes and inflation for the money the Fed is printing to lend to the Federal Gov, which must pay it back.

It's a major scam. Banks should compete without this central reserve. And the gov could not rely on this either. It would either print money through Congress or borrow to the best banks and the ones that really want to lend to a high risk borrower. That would cleanse the system.


Anonymous said...

What the hell are you investing in, Farmer?

Ducky is about to play investing guru now. Run away, people.


JonBerg said...

OBAMANOMICS (in a nutshell):

Print,tax and borrow; expand the 'Dependant Class', reduce the 'Productive, Investment Class'; garner more support from the former and destroy the latter, along with the entire economy. As I've said before this is just tantamount to a surpent attempting to sustain itself by consuming its own tail!

Z said...

Frog...I smelled that coming, too. CRACKED ME UP! Let's see what ensues...

Ducky, there are SOME things paying interest but not like the good ol' days.

Fredd..Amen to that, brother :-)

Z said...

JonBerg..and we are IN that serpent somewhere! the way "no CENTRAL BANK?" I believe that's what has caused all our woes..the Central Bank is Bilderburg and all the rest of the craziness put together. I'm with you!

Anonymous said...

The European central bank is what is killing Europe on top of the welfare state. Countries can't manage their own economy. Competing currencies wasn't that bad.

Plus doesn't something like the Federal Reserve go against antitrust laws?

Two businesses of the same industry trying to agree on prices would get a federal lawsuit on their butt.
Even Microsoft because of a stupid browser got problem with the feds.


FreeThinke said...

Get your tips from Threau's WALDEN.

I think he had the right idea.

Most of us have too much and only IMAGINE we NEED most of it.

If you don't believe me, take a look at the Home and Garden channel, and watch the endless parade of whiny Young Modern House Hunters who are firmly convinced they will DIE without hardwood floors, granite countertops, stainless steel appliances and an OPEN CONCEPT floor plan!

Then listen to them rail on about how they couldn't POSSIBLY live with those awful POPCORN CEILINGS, and that DATED WALLPAPER!

Really, it's enough to make you want to VOMIT.

I'm pro freedom of choice, but totally against MINDLESS CONSUMERISM fed by the BRAINWASHING MACINE we kw as TV.

Anonymous said...

I'm pro freedom of choice, but totally against MINDLESS CONSUMERISM fed by the BRAINWASHING MACINE we kw as TV.


It's like people who think they can't live without an expensive cell phones, Facebook, Twitter, etc...

I switched from Verizon to ConsumerCellular and drastically cut my cell phone cost. I have to watch my data usage but like you said, I'm done believing I need to do apps and other time wasting activities on my cell phone. The more I see people staring at their phone constantly, the more I want to VOMIT as well.

And I'm in tech but tech that makes sheep out of people and promotes group think isn't my cup of tea.


FreeThinke said...

Thanks, Froggie. I'm glad someone understands.

We may not be as decadent as ancient Rome -- yet -- but I feel we're getting closer every day.

What we suffer from most is a crisis in values.

A bientot,


Anonymous said...

We may not be as decadent as ancient Rome -- yet -- but I feel we're getting closer every day.

I do feel guilt when I watch a lot of football. I think about the gladiators and compare it to the end of Rome.


Anonymous said...

What we suffer from most is a crisis in values.

Yes. Especially when is see commercials or trailer for movies where a guy beats up an overweight woman and vice versa.

I see more and more of that stuff.


Z said...

Frog...I saw a commercial with old people that I found repugnent...I think it was a Super Bowl commercial? WOW.

Remember the ones for, I think, Burger King, where practically naked models smeared their bodies all over the glass windshield of a car as if they're washing it? This is an AD?

We're really getting crasser and crasser and there are so many Americans who don't understand how really dangerous that their feeble and disgusting attempts at "not censoring".
When we had more who believed in God and goodness and conscience and honor/dignity, nobody had to even wonder what should be censored. They just knew.

It's a VERY fine line...and I'm tired of apologizing for my crossing that line from time to time; I'm doing it for the future; our kids deserve better. Our little girls deserve to know that giving a 14 yr old boy oral sex wasn't always expected of them.

Our English teacher here has her Freshmen read Pride and Prejudice..and she holds a tea for them after the book is read and they talk about the gentility of the day; whether it was exploitive or not...all opinions welcome, but at least the goodness of the day is known..

Ducky's here said...

@z --- and they talk about the gentility of the day

Imagine what they do after reading Tom Jones.

Z said...

Ducky...stop. Not many lived like Tom Jones. I think most people know that women were more cherished and deserved that back in the day.
There were always whores; there will always be whores. And I think that's a good thing, by the way.

Also, I don't think culture's changed THAT much, but some ridiculous PC thing happened where it's a badge of honor now to have lousy morals and bad character.

And, believe me, Ducky, it's scary that you're so frequently suggesting it's MY VALUES I'm basing these terms on.
They're not MINE, but it's GOOD VALUES, HEALTHY (physically, mentally and spiritually) VALUES which help people prosper.

Z said...


I'm kind of impressed by the Assoc. Press today (shock of shocks)..they printed a story today about the funeral of the NYC woman who was killed in Turkey and never once mentioned the possible questions toward her character, being that she was travelinbg alone and might very well have had an affair (evidence apparently backs that up).

I only mention that point here because AP could have made a very dicey, provocative story and they didn't. That's really nice because her two little boys might keep articles about her death/funeral and this was a touching story instead of the kind of story most news venues do today.

Chapeau, AP.

Right Truth said...

Yes, but it is beneath Nancy Pelosi to have a pay cut, or not to have a pay increase.

Right Truth

Anonymous said...


"where it's a badge of honor now to have lousy morals and bad character."

Spot on...and the richer you are or notorious / "famous" like Lohan, Brittany or those awful Kardashian whores...the more out of wedlock births and affairs you have...the more you wreck marriages ( if they have one ) like Jolie / Pitt..the more honored and newsworthy you are.

Once scum...always scum. So much for the womens liberation movement....setting women so far back that a cave man wouldn't bed them.

Anonymous said...

It's amazing a sad that too many women today accept exploitation and rendered as objects for use.

When in the "old days" they were really honored, revered and sat at the top of the proverbial pedestal....the Ivory tower did exist. But today...women trade womanhood for a few bucks...and "success".

Measured by how many balls they bust and testosterone they've adopted.

Z said...

Imp...exactly right! many "baby bumps" they can sport in skimpy bikinis, walking hand in hand with their lover of the moment...featured as headlines like KIM'S BABY BUMP instead of N KOREA HAS NUKES AND COULD SELL TO IRAN (after all, what's more important?).

Anyway...many women celebs are SO revered for such bad behavior, aren't they. And our young girls see that and want to emulate.
Thank GOD I know plenty of girls who wouldn't consider this.

So many women today DESERVE the crap they're getting from men now. Who'd open a door for a woman saying "*uck" every two seconds ..or wearing sloppy men's clothes like they do today?

I think I mentioned here once that a Senior at the high school told the liberal college counselor that "I don't mean any disrespect but you keep pushing colleges with women's studies as the featured classes and I personally think women's studies and women's lib has set us women back 100 mother's raised me knowing I can do anything I want to do...I don't need a class in lesbian studies, trust me!"
(paranthetically, this girl is a distant cousin to the loathsome Kardashian girls whose father I knew fairly well and adored).

Anonymous said...

Here's "fame" in America....not what it should be ...shame. But sluttiness is rewarded.

"Kim" Kardashian (born October 21, 1980) is an American socialite and television personality. In 2006, she gained notoriety as the subject of a sex tape that subsequently resulted in a court awarding her $5 million.

In 2007, she and her family rose to prominence with their E! reality television series Keeping Up with the Kardashians...

In 2010, Kardashian was the highest-earning reality star, with estimated earnings of $6 million.

In August 2011, Kardashian married basketball player Kris Humphries in a widely publicized ceremony.

That October, Kardashian filed for divorce following 72 days of marriage. The move garnered significant backlash from the media, who labeled it a "publicity stunt".

Rather then calling her a publicity slut.

Z said...

Imp, good point about what she should be called.

I've watched exactly ten minutes of any of these Kardashian reality shows, and what I saw was that one of the girls had done some racy poses for her boyfriend and created a calendar for him; her mother Kris apparently got hold of it, had thousands published, and was brandishing them around LA Kyosks selling them for profit.


That was enough to me to understand Kris Jenner!

By the way, she used to belong to the large bible study I was a leader in...way before I joined/went into leadership.
She sure has changed, huh?$$$$

I'm not calling into question her faith or lack of it,'s worth mentioning.

Anonymous said...

One more piece..

"On December 31, 2012, Kardashian and Kanye West announced that she is pregnant with the couple's first child."

Great...she's still married to the 72 day wonder though...PIG...slut and a Glam whore.

Liberalmann said...

Really now, where do you get this bullshit? Glenn Beck? Lol!

Anonymous said...

No libshit....from one of your favorite sources.

Salon and Kos. FO....clown

Z said...

Anything Libjerk doesn't like is BS.
This is why we got Obama.
Congratulation yourself, you dope.