Taxpayers Don’t Like Paying for Obama’s Spending Addiction After All

January 11, 2013

Catch All

Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry ReidWhat Spending Problem?

I took a much needed break from blogging this past couple of months and needed a spur to get me back into the saddle. The lighter paycheck this week provided some incentive.

This particular article/comment struck me as a winning message for conservatives when talking to young people. Why don’t we focus on this, instead of every other thing that diminishes our argument?  [emphasis mine]

Gabriella Hoffman’s paycheck is a little lighter today, thanks to a payroll tax increase that is forcing millions of Americans to make the kind of tough budget cuts their representatives in Washington lawmakers seem unwilling to tackle.

Hoffman, a 21-year-old Virginian who works at a nonprofit, estimates her paycheck will be roughly $30 less this biweekly pay period, or about $780 annually, thanks to the end of a two-year cut on payroll taxes, which fund Social Security. The tax has risen back up to 6.2 percent from 4.2 percent, costing someone making $50,000 annually about $1,000 per year and a household with two high-paid workers up to $4,500.

“As a newly-graduated person, someone coming straight out of college, I don’t like the idea of having less money coming to me due to the selfish interests of people in Congress who don’t have any interest in reducing our financial problems,” Hoffman told “This is an impediment for future economic growth. It’s going to make it harder for young people like myself to get married, find a better job, you name it.”

Any tax increase is not good for young people,” she said. “What it does is diminish your hard work and you’re slapped on the wrist. This administration is punishing people who are making money. They don’t like the concept of free enterprise. They think these problems will be solved in Washington by taking away more of people’s incomes.”

Meanwhile at the Pentagon, Leon Panetta is preparing his staff to make drastic cuts in military spending that he says are needed due to the budget crisis. Now why is that we don’t hear similar cries and proposals coming out of all the other government agencies?

Seems like a Progressive’s dream scenario, to me. Cut defense spending, and let the rest of government grow, and grow…..and grow.

, , ,

Go Here Too!

Also Follow Me on:

15 Comments on “Taxpayers Don’t Like Paying for Obama’s Spending Addiction After All”

  1. Scott Sholar Says:

    Sara, Thank you for sharing, and God bless you.


  2. John Boddie Says:

    There is one way to cut the amount of money that the government spends. It is to deny budget allocations for new spending. Congress has done this before and government activity grinds to a halt. This is what is happening to Gabriella Hoffman in your example. This is also what Leon Panetta is talking about. The “sequester” is a reduction in budget allocations for new spending.

    This is different than the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling is a decision by Congress not to pay the bills for what they have already spent. This is a default and it has consequences such as seeing your credit rating lowered so that if you want to borrow again, you’ll pay a higher rate of interest.

    If you are a taxpayer and you decide not to spend money on a new refrigerator, you may be able to save some money and watch your standard of living go up.

    If you already purchased the refrigerator and decide not to pay the installments due, the chance that your standard of living will go up is considerably reduced.

    In simple terms, that’s the choice that’s faced here.


    • Sara Says:

      If you already purchased the refrigerator using your son’s credit card, without his authorization, your son is faced with reaming your ass out for it and and grudgingly, angrily, paying the bill. His standard of living will be considerably reduced, because the payments for that refrigerator were not budgeted. He had other uses planned for that money.

      At the minimum, your son should make sure he locks up that card, and that you never have access to that credit card without permission in the future. You are too irresponsible, if not an outright thief.


  3. John Boddie Says:

    But congress, which did authorize the spending, doesn’t want to pay the bill, even grudgingly.

    Let’s be clear. The money that was spent was authorized by congress. There is no “son who didn’t know his credit card was being used.”


    • Sara Says:



      • John Boddie Says:

        It is congress who decides whether the bill can be paid. Why is this difficult for you to understand?

        Congress (the legislature) told the president (the executive) that it wanted the executive to build an aircraft carrier. The executive signed contracts to have the carrier built. Now the contractors want to be paid and (since revenues are reduced) the executive needs to borrow money to pay the contractors. The legislature is now saying, “No, you can’t do that.” The legislature is telling the executive to stiff the contractors. There is no mystery here and there isn’t anyone who can claim that they didn’t know that the aircraft carrier wasn’t ordered and that it had to be paid for.


        • Sara Says:

          Congress is flying by the seat of its pants, spending willy nilly without a budget. If you want to give Harry Reid a pass, then you have zero credibility. Why don’t you just give him your whole paycheck? Oh wait…..maybe you will, given time.


          • John Boddie Says:

            All spending allocations begin in the House of Representatives, not the Senate. Remember that the money that was spent was approved by both houses of the legislature.

            Nobody gets a free pass on this.

          • Sara Says:

            Oh yeah? Raising the debt ceiling IS a free pass. And Obama wants to raise it at will, whenever he wants to. Harry thinks that’s a grand idea.

  4. John Boddie Says:

    Raising the dept ceiling is not a free pass. It’s an obligation that will need to be paid for, just like the rest of the national debt. It is stepping up to the agreements the congress already made. Congress, not the president, ordered the spending by passing the laws that required the executive to do things like extending unemployment benefits.

    This is basic Civics 101. Didn’t you take that in High School?.

    If you want to control spending, it needs to be done by not allocating the dollars in the first place.


    • Sara Says:

      As long as the debt ceiling continues to be raised, as long as taxpayers are held over the coals and forced to pay for the willy nilly spending, there is a free pass. A free pass on Congress that is – a free pass on not having to make the budget decisions we have to make.

      We – the taxpayers – get screwed either way. Our standard of living doesn’t go up if the debt ceiling goes up and it doesn’t go up if it doesn’t. It’s too late for our standard of living to go up. That is not going to happen. Your argument is illogical. Raising the debt ceiling is like raising your credit card limit when you have no means to pay what you owe. You might think your standard of living is higher, but it’s a mirage, and somebody else is just waiting for the right time to squeeze you for what he’s due.


      • John Boddie Says:

        The argument isn’t illogical, but pretending that we can get this under control by defaulting on our obligations is.

        Like it or not (and I don’t particularly), if we want to get out of debt, we will need to raise taxes on everyone above the poverty line in order to generate a surplus. Can we survive higher taxes? We seemed to be able to that in the Reagan and Clinton years.

        We had the opportunity by just letting the Bush tax cuts expire, but once again, congress blew it.


        • Leah Says:

          Sara isn’t talking about defaulting. She (and I) want all this spending STOPPED! Why should we cut our military? Don’t you think that maybe some of the stupid projects are funding should be stopped? Windows in buildings in the middle of no where that are not even open? Bridges for turtles? Come on! I am not even getting to the other wasteful programs, like welfare … pop out those babies! Suck more money out of those who work. yay! Their standard of living is sure going up. Makes me want to PUKE when I drive by the projects in downtown Richmond. Satellite TV. New cars. Fancy cell phones and sneakers. While the freezer I own is dying and guess what? My husband’s pay check is smaller, and I got canned last month because the school doesn’t have money to pay for my program. So yeah, keep spending. That will get us out of this mess.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: