Income Tax

Here begins my little rant:

I always put off rounding up my income tax information to take to the CPA because we always have to pay.  I avoid it as long as possible. I don't mind paying the government for their job of governing and the freedoms we enjoy in this country.  

BUT...

I don't like the idea of redistributing my wealth to bailout Wall Street and whatever else the government tacks on to it.  My husband and I work hard for our money and I don't mind sharing with the poor and needy, but I don't enjoy paying for unnecessary spending and funding people who buy houses above their means and expect the government to bail them out.  (or banks that were predators in lending)

We are very fortunate to have our house paid off.  Our vehicles are paid in full.  We do not have credit card debt.  Two of our children are in college and that is paid in full.  Our oldest daughter has graduated from private college and that is paid in full.  We are very fortunate to be in this position.  

When I think of the term "paid in full", I must tell you that I am reminded of our salvation which is paid in full.  I also must admit that everything we have been given is from God.  

Deuteronomy 8:18 NIV
But remember the LORD your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth, and so confirms his covenant, which he swore to your forefathers, as it is today.

So there you have it.  A political and religious post all in one!  What is the world coming to?  It makes me wonder how far down the road to socialism is the United States?  We may find our tax bracket increasing to 39.6% with the Obama administration this year.  We already pay 5.7% state income tax in Oklahoma.  We also pay 9.25% sales tax on most everything we buy, including groceries.  Our gasoline is taxed at a rate I don't even know.  We give at least 10% of our money to the church and a few charities.  We also pay for all of our own health insurance and health care.  We can't even deduct that 100%.  We find ourselves in the middle where we make too much to get any breaks or tax credits and not enough to get any breaks or loopholes like the rich.    Adding together federal and state and contributions we get about 44.7% left for ourselves.  I hope that President Obama does not retroactively take back our tax cuts (?) from the last few years we supposedly received from the Bush administration.  I read in Obama's programs listed before he was elected that he intended on asking Americans to give back those tax cuts.  If he is asking, then I guess I will just say "no."  

Does anyone understand why everyone paying the same percentage of their income on taxes wouldn't work?  Just a flat rate for everyone?  

I apologize for the soap box.  I will now step off it.

Wordless Wednesday-President Obama Takes Oath

History maker!  

Wordless Wednesday Here.

U2 Live at the Lincoln Memorial

What a very great tribute today! Enjoyed all the speaker and singers.

Honestly, the world could be a better place if people only tried harder.  And at the same time.  

Obama-Cheney

Obama, who has been receiving intelligence briefings for weeks, already knows what a scary world it is out there. It is unlikely he will wildly overcorrect for the Bush administration's abuses. A very senior incoming official, who refused to be quoted discussing internal policy debates, indicated that the new administration will try to find a middle road that will protect civil liberties without leaving the nation defenseless.
Excerpt from: Newsweek

*Edit: Cheney pushed for expanded presidential powers. Now that he's leaving, what will come of his efforts? The new president won't have to wait long to tip his hand.

Redistribution of Wealth-Will it Work?

I found this article in Newsweek magazine, written by Robert J. Samuelson.  You can go to Newsweek.com for the complete article.

Judgment Calls

As The Rich Gets Poorer

Making the rich poorer doesn't make everyone else richer

For years, we've debated rising economic inequality. On one side, liberals denounce it as unjust. Redistribute wealth to the poor and middle class, they say. On the other, conservatives minimize its importance. What matters most is overall economic growth, they retort. Well, the conjunction of the presidential campaign and the financial crisis is giving the debate a curious twist. Liberals have triumphed politically; soaking the rich has become more acceptable. But conservatives may have won the intellectual argument; making the rich poorer doesn't make everyone else richer.

If Barack Obama and John McCain agreed on anything, it was this: Greed is bad. They competed in denunciations of reckless investment bankers and avaricious CEOs. Obama proposed raising taxes on higher incomes (couples making more than $250,000); though McCain didn't, he suggested that much recent wealth accumulation was ill-gotten. Unintentionally, perhaps, he buttressed the moral case for more redistribution. Let's tap the gold mine of the rich.

Judged only by economic inequality, the financial crisis is a godsend. It will probably narrow the gap—though still vast—between the rich and everybody else. But what good will that do? Economic inequality also declined in the Great Depression. The country wasn't better off. By and large, the poor aren't poor because the rich are rich. They're usually poor for their own reasons: family breakdown, low skills, destructive personal habits and plain bad luck.

The presumption implicit in the criticism of growing economic inequality is that society's income is a given and, if the rich have less, others will have more.

Americans legitimately resent Wall Street types who profited from dubious investment strategies that aggravated today's crisis. And government properly redistributes income to reduce hardship and poverty. But that's different from attempting to deduce and engineer some optimal distribution of income. Government can't do that and shouldn't try. Scapegoating and punishing all of the rich won't do us any good if the resulting taxes dull investment and risk-taking, discouraging economic growth that benefits everyone.

But the redistributionist argument is at best a half-truth. The larger truth is that much of the income of the rich and well-to-do comes from what they do. If they stop doing it, then the income and wealth vanish. No one gets it. It can't be redistributed because it doesn't exist. Everyone's poorer.

To read the full story go to Newsweek.com

Congratulations Senator John McCain

Congratulations!  Senator John McCain.  You were so gracious in your concession speech.  God bless you!

Congratulations!  President-elect Barack Obama.  Your acceptance speech was gracious too.  May God bless you.  I hope you turn out to be the best President America has ever had.  Yes, you can!

This is actually my Wordless Wednesday post.  Go here for more.

Halloween Art?

Such "tasteful" art!  Halloween brings out the best...

*I hope you noted my sarcasm.  I find this extremely

offensive for any race, color, nationality, denomination,

political party, language, gender, or lifestyle.  **I wonder

who they are voting for?**sarcasm again**

Redistribution of Wealth

I'm sorry but this is too much for me not to share.



You can think for yourselves.  

Definition of redistribute:

verb [trans.]

distribute (something) differently or again,

typically to achieve greater social equality:

their primary concern was to redistribute income

from rich to poor  (source Dictionary)

Ron Paul

My son ordered me a yard sign.  I voted for him in the

primary.  

President Bush

"I have examined all the Democratic

candidates and have decided on these

two guys." -George W. Bush (not!)

"I don't particularly like it when people

put words in my mouth, either, by the way,

unless I say it."  -George W. Bush