Obama to embrace ‘the spirit of Glass-Steagall’ banking reforms

While Washington Democrats stare at each other and wonder what to do next in the health-care arena, the action shifts to economics.

From the Wall Street Journal:

WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama on Thursday is expected to propose new limits on the size and risk taken by the country’s biggest banks, marking the administration’s latest assault on Wall Street in what could mark a return, at least in spirit, to some of the curbs on finance put in place during the Great Depression, according to congressional sources and administration officials.

The past decade saw widespread consolidation among large financial institutions to create huge banking titans. If Congress approves the proposal, the White House plan could permanently impose government constraints on the size and nature of banking.

Mr. Obama’s proposal is expected to include new scale restrictions on the size of the country’s largest financial institutions. The goal would be to deter banks from becoming so large they put the broader economy at risk and to also prevent banks from becoming so large they distort normal competitive forces. It couldn’t be learned what precise limits the White House will endorse, or whether Mr. Obama will spell out the exact limits on Thursday.

Mr. Obama is also expected to endorse, for the first time publicly, measures pushed by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, which would place restrictions on the proprietary trading done by commercial banks, essentially limiting the way banks bet with their own capital. Administration officials say they want to place “firewalls” between different divisions of financial companies to ensure banks don’t indirectly subsidize “speculative” trading through other subsidiaries that hold federally insured deposits.

As the Journal notes, the problem of “too big to fail” has gotten even worse as this crisis has played out, with the four biggest banks becoming considerably larger as they swallow competitors. White House aides say the proposals don’t amount to a restoration of the Glass-Steagall Act repealed in 1999, but are an attempt to reinstate “the spirit of Glass-Steagall.”

Again, you’ve got two policy choices. If some banks truly are too big to fail — a concept that the banks themselves admit is correct — you can let them fail anyway. But economists and banking experts from the left and right agree that’s a policy leading to disaster. As bad as this recession is, it pales in significance to what would have happened if we allowed the Wall Street dominos to topple one after the other. There’s really not much debate about that.

And if you’re NOT willing to let them fail — if government is going to intervene on their behalf in a crisis — then government has not just the right but the obligation to try to ensure that crisis never comes. To do anything less would be grossly irresponsible.

176 comments Add your comment

FinnMcCool

January 21st, 2010
8:22 am

The banking industry was sound for 50 years after Glass-Steagall was first put in place. When we started deregulating in the 80’s the problems began.

Time to make banking boring and staid once again.

FinnMcCool

January 21st, 2010
8:23 am

firstest with the mostest!

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
8:25 am

Cool, when can we restrict the size of government? We don’t want it to become “too big to fail” now do we?

Peadawg

January 21st, 2010
8:26 am

There’s certain things the government should and shouldn’t stick their nose into. Regulating greedy banks is good. Regulating greedy insurance is alright. Slapping a higher tax on cancer-sticks is excellent!!!!! Attempting to run another health care plan when Medicaid is already SERIOUSLY flawed is bad.

Doggone/GA

January 21st, 2010
8:28 am

I think they just need to repeal the laws that gutted Glass-Steagall

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
8:30 am

When can we start regulating the greedy government that makes us work until June of every calender year to pay all our taxes?

Jay

January 21st, 2010
8:36 am

NRB2, federal revenue in fiscal 2009 was 15.1 percent of GDP; this fiscal year it will be 15.8 percent of GDP.

Those are the lowest levels we’ve seen since 1950.

Doggone/GA

January 21st, 2010
8:38 am

“When can we start regulating the greedy government that makes us work until June of every calender year to pay all our taxes?”

It is perfectly possible to live in the USA and pay NO taxes. It’s not easy, but it can be done. If you care that much, start now.

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
8:39 am

Apples and oranges Jay. Revenue is down because more people are out of work and/or spending less money.

Again. We all work until June to pay our tax burden. So, Jay…how much is enough? How many months out of the year should we work to pay our tax burden?

We already do 6 months of work each year to fund the government. Should we work 7? 8? 12?

Anything less than 12 would be Greeeeeeeeeeedy, right?

Lord Help Us

January 21st, 2010
8:41 am

NRB2, it’s called V-O-T-I-N-G…that’s how we ‘regulate’ our gov’.

Geez, is it remedial ‘factually challenged dittohead’ day again today?

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
8:42 am

It is perfectly possible to live in the USA and pay NO taxes. It’s not easy, but it can be done. If you care that much, start now.
——————————–
Nice straw man. I never said “NO taxes”.

But since it’s easier to argue against an absurd (and fabricated on your part) idea like “no taxes”, as opposed to the real argument…which is: we’re already taxed to death by a government that overspends and funds programs that shouldn’t even exist. When is enough enough?

Jay

January 21st, 2010
8:43 am

Sorry NRB, incorrect again.

Even before the downturn, federal receipts were averaging 17 to 18 percent of GDP, pretty much the same level they’ve been at since 1950.

You keep peddling the mythology, I’ll keep providing the facts.

Doggone/GA

January 21st, 2010
8:43 am

“When is enough enough?”

Whenever you decide it is. If you don’t want to go the “no taxes” route, you can always scale it back to what you want to pay. Again, it’s not easy…but it can be done. And it can be done legally.

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
8:44 am

NRB2, it’s called V-O-T-I-N-G…that’s how we ‘regulate’ our gov’.
————————————————-
The problem with voting is that we allow anyone to do it. It became mob rule once people figured out that they could use the government to just steal from others so that they don’t have to exert any effort on their part.

We’ve been voting for quite some time, yet taxes are still too high and the government has become “too big to fail, and we all pay nearly half of our income in taxes while seeing nothing for it.

Jay

January 21st, 2010
8:45 am

Go here (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historicals/), click on Table 1.2.

Actual real facts.

stands for decibels

January 21st, 2010
8:45 am

Aside from my first reaction: “Duh!”…

this would be smart populist politics, at least. We could use some of that.

Doggone/GA

January 21st, 2010
8:46 am

“The problem with voting is that we allow anyone to do it”

Bring back the POLL TAX!

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
8:46 am

Sorry NRB, incorrect again.

Even before the downturn, federal receipts were averaging 17 to 18 percent of GDP, pretty much the same level they’ve been at since 1950.

You keep peddling the mythology, I’ll keep providing the facts
——————————————————-
The only fact I care about is losing half my income to the nitwits in Washington.

That’s why you libs are so out of touch. You want to pound your chest about “GDP” while the middle class works 6 months out of the year so Pelosi can ride around in a limo and eat steak every night.

Gimme a break.

Doggone/GA

January 21st, 2010
8:48 am

“so Pelosi can ride around in a limo and eat steak every night. ”

JUST her? WOW, now that’s a gig worth having!

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
8:48 am

404 not found Jay. And something tells me you’re just posting federal numbers while ignoring state.

Again: we lose half of our income to taxes. If you can provide proof that this was also the case in 1950, I’ll concede.

Jay

January 21st, 2010
8:50 am

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
8:51 am

Last time: we lose half of our income to taxes. If you can provide proof that this was also the case in 1950, I’ll concede.

Lord Help Us

January 21st, 2010
8:52 am

NRB2, okay, here is your lesson for today…

You see, the gov’t does too much and does too much fairly inefficiently (I am being kind because there is lots of incompetence too).

Now, bear with me…the gov’t needs revenue to cover the expenses of these inefficiently provided services.

Thirdly, in the real world, revenue and expenses should be somewhat in line.

With me so far???

Now, starting with the Reagan Administration, the GOP has run on a platform of lowering taxes (we all like that). Unfortunately, both GOP and Dem administrations and Congress have done almost nothing to control expenditures or efficiency…the opposite, actually.

Now the close…until we elect representatives that care about both the revenue AND cost/efficiency sides of the equation, the fiscal disaster we call economic policy will only get worse…

Running on a platform of simply lowering taxes is just how the GOP gets its sheep to the voting booths…

Taxpayer

January 21st, 2010
8:52 am

Now NRB2 is losing a full 50 percent of his income to the folks in Washington. It’s a wonder he has anything left to pay his state and local taxes at the end of the day.

FinnMcCool

January 21st, 2010
8:53 am

NRB, if you are paying close to 50% of your income in taxes, you might want to find another accountant or get one of those computer programs like TurboTax.

That is clueless, to say the least. The whole tax industry is huge – consultants, accountants, lawyers, software firms. People and companies pay big money to keep from paying taxes. You have to be able to find SOMETHING to help maximize your return better than 60-70%.

Granny Godzilla

January 21st, 2010
8:53 am

“we lose half of our income to taxes”…….you do?

we don’t.

Southern Comfort

January 21st, 2010
8:54 am

Half of income lost to taxes…

That’s kinda stretching it just a little isn’t it?

Drain The Swamp (NIF)

January 21st, 2010
8:54 am

As I have said several times, if Bank of America fails today, I’m celebrating until March. So in spite of the fact that I am strongly against internal meddling into bonus payments, etc. the purpose of the government in a capitalistic system is to prevent the monopoly of a specific business over an industry.

I have no problem with this.

Ridgerunner

January 21st, 2010
8:55 am

The problem is ………. I don’t trust Obama to tackle any “problem” we have. I say tread water for three years, replace him and move on.

Doggone/GA

January 21st, 2010
8:56 am

“It’s a wonder he has anything left to pay his state and local taxes at the end of the day”

Oh, it’s worse than that. He thinks ALL his taxes go to Washington, and all to Nancy Pelosi to boot.

Taxpayer

January 21st, 2010
8:56 am

So, are the Dems and Reps getting all this financial industry evaluation stuff publicized enough to keep everyone happy so far. Is C-Span doing their job or are they slacking off again.

FinnMcCool

January 21st, 2010
8:56 am

NRB writes: That’s why you libs are so out of touch.

hehehe. yeah. we’re all socialists, too right? But we aren’t the ones paying 50% of our income in federal taxes. mwuahahahaha

stands for decibels

January 21st, 2010
8:58 am

I say tread water for three years, replace him and move on.

Great strategery. Ladies and Germs, we have found an Honest Republican!

Bud Wiser

January 21st, 2010
8:59 am

My guess is that Obowo’s interpretation of “too big to fail” will play out along his current crony ‘capitalism’ structure… you know, similar to the going green gang (ggg) that currently has the head of one of the alleged weatherstripping groups sleeping with the head of some window company dude, which is okay since they are married. Cronyism at its worst, business as usual at its finest.

Obowo the SAP (Short Attention-span President) is waiting until Thursday because as is the way of the elitist socialist, he has figured all of the attention from the Mas senate race will be elsewhere by then. Plus, it will give his hydra (Pelosi, Reid, Emanuel, Stern, Frank, Clinton , Geithner, Axelrod and Jarrett) enough time to come up with more new and innovative ways to screw the public as well, while telling them that they are ‘protecting’ them. There is not a more collective serpentine group in Washington to be found.

BTW, I think it was revealed this week that at least 12 GA legislators failed to file income tax returns for the previous tax year; taking their cue from Rangel and fellow tax cheat Geithner, I suppose.

And one last thought; after the dead in Haiti are buried, after those remaining are fed, watered, and supported for a few months, after the rubble has been cleared, what then? These poor people had no jobs, no infrastructure, no industry, little education, and even littler hope or skills. They have no homes to go back to, no work, families shredded, what then?

Indeed, what then?

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
9:00 am

For anyone who doubts that we all pay 40 to 50% of our income in taxes:

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Taxes/Advice/YourRealTaxRate40.aspx

In a study for the National Bureau of Economic Research, Boston University economists Laurence J. Kotlikoff and David Rapson have found that our all-in marginal tax rate is 40%, give or take a bit. Yes, you read that right: 40%.

jt

January 21st, 2010
9:00 am

” There’s really not much debate about that.”

Where have I heard that before?

TARP babies (and those that believed in it) were just concerned about their respective 401K balances. So they bailed the coorperate/government crooks out with the money of their children and grand-children, enabling the same players to play again.

And no one went to jail.

md

January 21st, 2010
9:00 am

“Now the close…until we elect representatives that care about both the revenue AND cost/efficiency sides of the equation, the fiscal disaster we call economic policy will only get worse…”

May be wise economic policy to then concentrate on the cost/efficiency side of the equation until that is brought in line.

Why is it posters from both “sides” admit to a problem of waste/inefficiency/fraud/etc (even Jay), yet none seem too concerned about DC not doing anything about it? Its been a year that 400 billion of waste and fraud have been identified to exist in medicare, yet it can only be corrected within a healthcare bill? Hardly.

Time to hold the gov’t accountable as much as the banks.

FinnMcCool

January 21st, 2010
9:01 am

the purpose of the government in a capitalistic system is to prevent the monopoly of a specific business over an industry

well said NIF

Jay

January 21st, 2010
9:01 am

Even under your revised claim, you are incorrect again, NRB2. The Tax Foundation, the folks who bring you Tax Freedom Day, report that total taxes have been averaging about 30 percent of income. That’s approximately the level they’ve been at for 40 years.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/93.html (pages 3, 4)

Again, you keep peddling the mythology of aggrievement, and I’ll keep posting the actual data.

Drain The Swamp (NIF)

January 21st, 2010
9:02 am

Lord Help Us

**Running on a platform of simply lowering taxes is just how the GOP gets its sheep to the voting booths…**

I didn’t know that JFK was a Republican.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEdXrfIMdiU

Lowering taxes spur spending which improves the economy. When the economy improves, more people have jobs, thus more people pay taxes and more people are given salary increases which all result in more taxes being collected.

This is not a theory, it is a fact.

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
9:02 am

I never said anything about just paying federal tax.

When I say that we lose half of our income to taxes, I’m talking about federal taxes, social security tax, state taxes, medicare, embedded taxes, utlitlity taxes, property taxes, phone taxes, etc. etc. etc.

Add it all up and see, or read the MSN Money article I posted and do the math yourself. Or you could likely run everything through Quicken and figure it out for yourself if you’re anal and keep receipts for everything.

So again, Jay. Since we lose 40% of our income to taxes…was this also the case in 1950?

FinnMcCool

January 21st, 2010
9:03 am

Bud (or, Belgian Beer Man),

So, Obama trying to reign in Wall St is good or bad? Or it doesn’t matter cause he will mess it up for you?

And what does this have to do with Haiti, exactly?

Doggone/GA

January 21st, 2010
9:03 am

“The only fact I care about is losing half my income to the nitwits in Washington”

You need to brush up on your math skille. 40% is not “half”

“our all-in marginal tax rate is 40%, give or take a bit. Yes, you read that right: 40%”

danjonglee

January 21st, 2010
9:03 am

For high income self employeds – Top Federal – 35%, SS 12.4% on 1st 106,800 plus 2.9% on all with no cap. Georgia income tax 6%, State and Local Sales Tax, City of Atl Business Tax, Fulton county personal property tax…….

Jay

January 21st, 2010
9:04 am

NRB2, two points:

– 40 percent is not half, despite your cute “40 to 50 percent” little trick.

The data you reference is MARGINAL tax rate. The MARGINAL tax rate is 40 percent. Not the actual, paid tax rate. You do know what marginal means, I’m sure.

FinnMcCool

January 21st, 2010
9:05 am

Or you could likely run everything through Quicken and figure it out for yourself if you’re anal and keep receipts for everything.

“…or if you can do simple math and realize I haven’t a clue as to what I’m talking about”

mwuahahaha

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
9:05 am

Jay, assuming that report is accurate, is 30% still reasonable? Is it necessary?

jt

January 21st, 2010
9:06 am

NRB-

Typical Democrats do not understand the term “hidden taxes”.

The government loves Democrats.

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
9:08 am

40% ain’t half but it’s still robbery. And I’m still waiting to hear why this level of theft is reasonable.

Jay

January 21st, 2010
9:09 am

It’s been roughly that level since 1970, NRB2. Forty years.

So all this caterwauling about being suffocated by new taxes is absolute fiction.

md

January 21st, 2010
9:09 am

Is there a chart somewhere that shows the amount we all pay in corporate taxes?

Every product/service we buy has tax hidden in it, anybody ever added it all up?

Drain The Swamp (NIF)

January 21st, 2010
9:11 am

Finn

This is old school government. The only thing new is that there will be several large banks to regulate. Too large to fail is nonsense. If they are too large, make them stop growing. Once capitalism stops working and competition is no longer determining policies, the system ceases to work.

As you probably know, I am a strong proponent of capitalism. When it is administered correctly, it is the best economic system.

Lord Help Us

January 21st, 2010
9:11 am

LA, of course, you missed the point (yawn…)

Fiscal policy that ONLY focuses on lowering taxes is a fools errand (guess where you fit in this equation…)

That was the fiscal policy of GWBush and his Republican Congress. How did that work out? (I’ll give you the answer: A Dem in the Whitehouse with a clear majority of Dems in Congress)

Any politician (or dittohead) that only speaks of lowering taxes as the panacea for fiscal policy is not fit for office (or in the case of the dittohead, not fit to vote)

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
9:11 am

Jay I don’t recall saying anything about it being “new”. My main point, and question, is why is it acceptable for the government to steal that much from us?

Why is it okay for the government to steal 40% of our money, and when can we regulate the size of government and put caps on what they can spend.

Jay

January 21st, 2010
9:14 am

All gov’t revenues are included in those figures, md.

Corporate income taxes have been averaging about 2 percent of GDP in recent years, roughly half what they were in the socialistic ’50s.

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
9:14 am

LOH, you’re correct.

And once we can eliminate ALL entitlement programs, eliminate foreign aid, and put a cap on the payrate of government workers/politicians, maybe we can get to a more reasonable overall tax rate…like maybe 10%.

Think of how good the economy would do if we were all given a 30% take home “pay raise”.

I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm!

January 21st, 2010
9:14 am

The banks took the Tarp funding and turned a profit, which they returned to the government. Government Motors took Tarp money, dutifully passed it along to the Unions, which in turn squandered it and/or gave it to the dummycrats in kampaign contributions.

So obozo cracks down on the……….banks.

Bud Wiser

January 21st, 2010
9:14 am

Finn, so far all Obowo has shown is a sort of midas touch… in reverse… everything he touches turns to sh**.

As far as Haiti, it has nothing to do with it, surely even you can figure that out, but I was just speculating out loud about what future awaits those affected by this horrific natural disaster. It was just a musing out loud since no one has addressed it all all yet; but I can see why there as well because it is not important right now .

jt

January 21st, 2010
9:15 am

Every product/service we buy has tax hidden in it, anybody ever added it all up?

No. If so, you would find that you do indeed pay OVER 40% of your income to taxes.

Without hidden federal taxes, a 80$ dollar pair of Birkenstocks would probably be around 20 dollars.

It just doesn’t compute to most liberals.

stands for decibels

January 21st, 2010
9:15 am

I didn’t know that JFK was a Republican.

JFK’s efforts reduced the top marginal rate from 90% to 70%.

Had you proposed lowering it all the way down to, say, 39.6%, JFK would probably call you bat-crap crazy.

Jay

January 21st, 2010
9:16 am

Your 40 percent figure is bogus, NRB. Again, that is a MARGINAL tax rate.

The real figure is 30 percent, and it’s been that way for 40 years.

Jay

January 21st, 2010
9:16 am

jt, you’re just making stuff up to suit your preconceived notions. Cite actual data, and we can have an actual debate.

Lord Help Us

January 21st, 2010
9:17 am

NRB, now all you need to do is find an honest GOP politician that says, ‘I want to take away your social security, medicare and welfare AND give you a huge tax cut.’

Good luck with that…

Drain The Swamp (NIF)

January 21st, 2010
9:18 am

Lord Help US

**A Dem in the Whitehouse with a clear majority of Dems in Congress)**

When the Democrats took over Congress unemployment was 4.4% and the DOW was through the roof. We were told the entire time Bush was in office that the economy was in horrible shape but the numbers say otherwise, but most of the electorate doesn’t know those numbers. They only know what people like Katy Couric tell them.

The power flip in 2006 was much ,more related to the Iraq war than the economy. But once the dims started their power grab, they also started tearing down the capitalistic system and so far it has worked really well, for them. They have created this crisis and are taking full advantage of it.

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
9:18 am

Jay, like the other poster said you’re ignoring embedded taxes. But let’s pretend your 30% figure is real. It’s still 20% higher than it needs to be. We pay too much in tax, and the government is too big and needs to be capped in growth.

I don’t get it Jay. How come you’re so much in favor of capping growth for everything BUT the government?

Drain The Swamp (NIF)

January 21st, 2010
9:19 am

Lord Help US

Well, actually they WERE taking full advantage of it and then Scott Brown happened.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

January 21st, 2010
9:20 am

Bring back the POLL TAX!

Heck, bring back the reading tax too, like making Those People recite the Declaration of Independence from memory. We had it pretty good down here back in those days. They wasn’t able to vote in people that would give them welfare and we could elect people that give us what we want.

I’m with Dave R. and the rest of the Conservatives. Taxes is just stealing from my paycheck. It ain’t fair to take my money before I even get my hands on it so I can hide it from them. Anyhow, it’s a jungle out there and all the weak people that don’t make any money need to get eat up by the strong people so they won’t be a burden on the rest of us.

And I say let the big banks alone. They know how big they need to be and if any of them go under, well, that’s the only thing the federal guvmint is good for, bailing out the big banks. That and fighting wars.

And one more thing. I’m good and mad this a.m. I see they’re reporting that Tiger Woods is in some clinic in Miss. being treated for being addicted to You Know What. What a rip-off! If a guy’s got that kind of problem, I got two words for him that will make his addiction go away lickety-split: Sister Dusty.

Have a good day everybody.

stands for decibels

January 21st, 2010
9:22 am

But let’s pretend your 30% figure is real. It’s still 20% higher than it needs to be.

What nation on earth manages to fund any kind of functional government with a 10% top marginal income tax rate?

Lord Help Us

January 21st, 2010
9:22 am

Great Nuthin…the takeover of Congress by the Dems in ‘06 is the reason the economy damn near collapsed in ‘08 and Obama inherited two grossly mismanaged wars.

Can you tell me what actions Congress took in ‘06, ‘07 or ‘08 that led to this situation? Cuz, otherwise…you got Nuthin…

Good luck…

Jay

January 21st, 2010
9:23 am

Foreign aid, NRB?

Off the top of your head, what percentage of the federal budget is spent on foreign aid?

Taxpayer

January 21st, 2010
9:23 am

In order to address the “reasonableness” of taxes (and let us not forget those fees), one must first segregate said taxes into separate classes. One approach would be to first differentiate between Federal, State and Local taxes and then address each of these classes separately. Trying to lump state and local taxes into a discussion of Federal taxes (although granted there is a higher order interaction) simply confounds the issues surrounding the notion of said “reasonableness” — reasonableness needs to be addressed by those affected at each level. Anyway, I assume that to be the case since folks in Montana might have a completely different perception of a FairTax™ for example than someone in New York city.

Lord Help Us

January 21st, 2010
9:24 am

LA, back on the backhoe this am?

Vinny

January 21st, 2010
9:24 am

If the government is so good at handling money, how come my SS statement over the past 5 years has stated that I am only going to get 0.75 cents on the dollar for every dollar that I have “contributed” to the SS system?

Doggone/GA

January 21st, 2010
9:24 am

“Off the top of your head”

Jay, remember…ideas “off the top of your head” are like dandruff: small and flaky

Southern Comfort

January 21st, 2010
9:25 am

jt

There’s an easy way around those hidden taxes in products like you mention. Buy American. There’s no hidden taxes or tarrifs added on anything manufactured here. The problem you end up with, however, is what is actually manufactured here anyway?

Also, tarriffs on most imports have been pretty much done away with due to free trade acts. That’s why most companies moved manufacturing overseas. They could make the same product with much lower labor costs but did not have to pay any additional taxes to import the product here.

TnGelding

January 21st, 2010
9:25 am

I think the GOP would debate that. But I agree with you and most others. We need to take the fear of risks out of the system by forcing them to liquidate their derivatives in an orderly manner before it happens again. If you can’t take the heat stay out of the kitchen. It’s just like gambling in Vegas. Every bet you make to cover your previous bets only increases your chances of losing.

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
9:26 am

What nation on earth manages to fund any kind of functional government with a 10% top marginal income tax rate?
————————————————————
Let’s be the first. All we need are roads, public schools, a sound defense, and courts. Everything else is crap, waste, and handouts to the lazy. 10% flat tax can fund all of that.

jt

January 21st, 2010
9:27 am

From the same link. This subsidy also screws Haiti—-

A recent government report estimates that consumers pay between $400 million and $1.9 billion a year to fatten the sugar industry with federal subsidies and artificially inflated prices.

TnGelding

January 21st, 2010
9:27 am

“Obama to embrace ‘the spirit of Glass-Steagall’ banking”

Why not just bring back Glass-Steagall?

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
9:28 am

Off the top of your head, what percentage of the federal budget is spent on foreign aid?
————————————–

Good lord, Jay. I know it’s miniscule. It does not detract from the fact that we shouldn’t be giving any, though. We can start there then move on to get rid of social security, medicare, and all other entitlement scams and shams.

Just gutting out SS alone is a nice instant 7% pay raise. I’ll take it.

jt

January 21st, 2010
9:28 am

Ask me if I am making this up. It is easy to check. I don’t think these “taxes” were present in 1950.

* Here’s what you pay for a flight: a 7.5% tax on a domestic ticket, a $3.60 tax for each segment of a flight and, since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, a $2.50 security charge on every segment. That’s in addition to a $16.10 international arrival/departure tax and a passenger-facility charge of up to $4.50.

jt

January 21st, 2010
9:30 am

* Buyers of handguns pay 10% of the sales price to the feds; other firearms, along with ammunition, are taxed at 11%.

You can confirm this at your nearest .gov website. Also 40% on arrowheads.

Drain The Swamp (NIF)

January 21st, 2010
9:30 am

Lord Help US

The very first thing they did when they entered office was to raise minimum wage the most it had ever been raised at any one time.

As far as “You Got Nuthin”, this is not a contest. But if it is, looks like you lost it all on Tuesday Night.

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
9:30 am

We can solve the problem by capping spending and growth of government. And yet, the same people screaming that the banks be capped are silent when the idea of capping government comes up…even though they steal “30%” of our income. Interesting.

jt

January 21st, 2010
9:31 am

Southern Comfort -

See above. I could go on forever about federal taxes on domestic manufactored items. Have you ever looked at your phone bill?

NRB2

January 21st, 2010
9:31 am

Let’s not forget:

•Accounts Receivable Tax
•Building Permit Tax
•Capital Gains Tax
•CDL license Tax
•Cigarette Tax
•Corporate Income Tax
•Court Fines (indirect taxes)
•Deficit spending
•Dog License Tax
•Federal Income Tax
•Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
•Fishing License Tax
•Food License Tax
•Fuel permit tax
•Gasoline Tax
•Hunting License Tax
•Inflation
•Inheritance Tax Interest expense (tax on the money)
•Inventory tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax)
•IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
•Liquor Tax
•Local Income Tax
•Luxury Taxes
•Marriage License Tax
•Medicare Tax
•Property Tax
•Real Estate Tax
•Septic Permit Tax
•Service Charge Taxes
•Social Security Tax
•Road Usage Taxes (Truckers)
•Sales Taxes
•Recreational Vehicle Tax
•Road Toll Booth Taxes
•School Tax
•State Income Tax
•State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
•Telephone federal excise tax
•Telephone federal universal service fee tax
•Telephone federal, state and local surcharge taxes
•Telephone minimum usage surcharge tax
•Telephone recurring and non-recurring charges tax
•Telephone state and local tax
•Telephone usage charge tax
•Toll Bridge Taxes
•Toll Tunnel Taxes
•Traffic Fines (indirect taxation)
•Trailer Registration Tax
•Utility Taxes
•Vehicle License Registration Tax
•Vehicle Sales Tax
•Watercraft Registration Tax
•Well Permit Tax
•Workers Compensation Tax

Outhouse GoKart

January 21st, 2010
9:32 am

More yummy goodness…

Senate Democrats Propose $1.9T Increase to U.S. Debt Limit
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/20/senate-democrats-propose-t-increase-debt-limit/

Jay

January 21st, 2010
9:33 am

Ignoring embedded taxes?

No. These are total government receipts, from all sources.

And as I’ve pointed out, government growth has in effect been capped at about 30 percent of income for 40 years now, just as you wish.

You are peddling mythology without a basis in fact, NRB. Let me rephrase: You’ve been SOLD a mythology without a basis in fact. You started out claiming that we pay 50 percent of our income in taxes and that it’s growing by leaps and bounds, and that has been demonstrated to be absolutely false on both counts.

Would I like a great big tax cut? Sure, and I’d money to fall from the sky. But if we cut the federal budget by two-thirds, as you claim to want, we’d have the Pentagon and Social Security. That’s it. No roads, airports, air traffic control, pollution control, Medicare for old people, prisons, FBI, unemployment benefits — all gone.

So you go right ahead and see if you can sell that to the American people.

As to

Jenifer

January 21st, 2010
9:33 am

Jay,

You’re providing a heap o’ facts this morning. Gotta hand it to you, you try.

Southern Comfort

January 21st, 2010
9:33 am

jt

I know. That’s why I don’t have it if I don’t need it. Hard to charge me a fee or tax on a service that I don’t use.

Soothsayer

January 21st, 2010
9:34 am

The goal is clear: don’t step on any toes of entrenched special interests and powerful cartels. Placate every major player and every ideological camp. Manipulate public opinion via a stock market which melts ever higher, statistical legerdemain (the recession is over, GDP is growing at 2.2%–but sales and income taxes are still falling by 7% in December….hmm) and other “green shoots” propaganda in the hopes that a real, “organic” cycle of growth and hiring will actually take hold from the trillions squandered on “saving the status quo.”

The game plan: To confuse the rising populist anger at your bailout of the Power Elites, impose a pathetic wrist-tap tax on the financial Elite: a tax which will supposedly raise $90 billion in a decade. (One wonders what will happen once the lobbyists finish licking the bones of this “tax” clean; it will probably emerge as a tax credit which costs the Treasury an additional $90 billion in lost revenue.)

And we’re supposed to be soothed by what amounts to a $9 billion annual tax (assuming it won’t be watered down–a faint and foolish hope) after handing the financial Elites $3 trillion in backstops, guarantees, no-interest loans, full redemptions of AIG credit-default swaps, and countless other giveaways?

President Obama (or perhaps the entire Administration) is either tone-deaf or calculating in an admirably Machiavellian way: by now, everyone in a position of power knows the public’s memory spans a few weeks at best, and that its capacity for self-delusion, media distraction, self-pity, denial and permanent adolescence are essentially limitless. All the manipulator need do is wait the public out until it forgets.

Unfortunately for the Obama Administration and its Masters in the Power Elite, it’s difficult to forget that your unemployment is running out, that you no longer have health insurance (or can’t afford the insane COBRA payment), that costs for essentials keep rising despite the “news” that “there’s no inflation,” and that your child or family member is stationed in a no-win, dead-end war in Afghanistan.

So far, the Administration’s strategy is still working because there are no visible consequences of borrowing $1.5 trillion a year to fund all the special interests and cartels. But if the wheels fall off any of the simulacra, or if rising interest rates or some other disruption in the global shell game triggers some real-world consequences to that stupendous borrowing, then the public’s distraction and denial might dissipate, leaving a hard, cold anger at the deception and manipulation at the heart of their State–not just the Federal government, but state and local governments as well.

Were that awakening to occur prior to early November, 2010, the politicos and Power Elites who issue their marching orders might be surprised to find that their simulacra and con games failed.

Perhaps this too is a vain hope.

jt

January 21st, 2010
9:34 am

“So all this caterwauling about being suffocated by new taxes is absolute fiction.”

No it isn’t Jay.

To ignore the insidious increase of federal taxes is absolute ostrich-like.

Lord Help Us

January 21st, 2010
9:35 am

Let’s try it again w/o the moderator…

Nuthin, raising the minimum wage caused a darn near economic meltdown?

Get real dude…that is so intellectually vacuos I can’t even believe you posted it…

Jay

January 21st, 2010
9:36 am

That insidious increase is so insidious that it does not exist, jt.

If you can find the facts to refute it, present it. It is the mythology you have been fed and have swallowed, but it has no basis in actual fact. The federal government collects about the same amount of GDP as it has since1950.

Fact.

stands for decibels

January 21st, 2010
9:37 am

Just gutting out SS alone is a nice instant 7% pay raise.

[...]

10% flat tax can fund all of that.

They’re so cute when they get together and play dress-up, aren’t they?

Later, kids.

Disgusted

January 21st, 2010
9:37 am

If the government is so good at handling money, how come my SS statement over the past 5 years has stated that I am only going to get 0.75 cents on the dollar for every dollar that I have “contributed” to the SS system?

Well, it’s an insurance scheme, one that’s back-weighted to give lower-income people higher payments than their contributions would ordinarily merit; conversely, it gives higher-income people lower payments than their contributions would ordinarily merit. It is not a savings account.

SS is one price we pay to live in a civilized society, one in which old people aren’t turned out to forage on their own or move in with their children once they become too old to be productive. Think of it as a personal version of the corporate subsidies that conservatives love.

Jay

January 21st, 2010
9:37 am

All those taxes you cite are in the federal revenue numbers, NRB. And as a percentage of GDP, the total numbers are stable.

Dodge all you want.

Bosch

January 21st, 2010
9:38 am

Wow, this new kid is peddling hard, and digging deep.

Lord Help Us

January 21st, 2010
9:41 am

Looks like the last Limbaugh Letter had an advertisement for shovels…(right next to the one for the ‘newly minted gold coins’)

Jay

January 21st, 2010
9:41 am

If the government is so good at handling money, how come my SS statement over the past 5 years has stated that I am only going to get 0.75 cents on the dollar for every dollar that I have “contributed” to the SS system?

The real answer is that it doesn’t say that in the first place.