Why let Washington spend our money?
Here’s a great idea proposed by a conservative Texas congressman to let individual taxpayers control the remaining $350,000,000,000 allocated in the so-called bailout bill.
Somebody should get to Saxby on his last day of campaigning and see if he will sponsor the Gohmert Bill in the Senate…he would ensure victory by stepping up to correct his previous mistake by voting for the bailout.
Gohmert’s Cure for Bailout Fever
by Jed Babbin (more by this author)
Posted 12/01/2008 ET
Washington is dizzy with a bad case of bailout fever. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been dispensed by Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson without apparent success in reviving the financial markets. Now one Texas conservative is challenging Congress and the White House with a common-sense plan that is much more likely to help our economy recover more than bank bailouts or any handouts to carmakers.
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), a member of the conservative House Republican Study Committee, proposes to use the $350 billion left of the $700 billion bank bailout to fund a two-month tax holiday that would put money in the pockets of American taxpayers.
Gohmert is a work horse, not a show horse. He went to Texas A&M on an Army scholarship and then to Baylor Law School. He served in the Army JAG and practiced law, eventually becoming a judge and then chief justice of the local appeals court. Elected to Congress in 2004, he’s not been in Washington long enough to be entirely jaded.
“The judge” is smart, tough and relentlessly conservative.
Most Americans were opposed to the bank bailout last fall, and neither they nor the markets themselves have confidence that any of the bailouts or “stimulus packages will work. They will have confidence in Gohmert’s plan because it is an economic stimulus that has been proven by history: tax cuts mean more spending, saving and investment. They pave the way to economic recovery. Government bailouts do not.
Gohmert’s tax holiday plan is elegant in its simplicity: every American taxpayer would pay no federal income or FICA taxes for the first two months of 2009. For the typical American family — earning about $50,000 a year — that would mean they would keep about $2000 that would otherwise be paid to the government.
Gohmert’s plan doesn’t pay for Wall Street bonuses or let banks use bailout money to buy other banks or pay dividends. It doesn’t rely on bureaucrats to pay money out to the right people at the right time or try to stimulate the economy with token payments to people who don’t pay taxes.
Most Americans pay about 25 percent of their income in federal income tax and another 7.25 percent in FICA (social security and Medicare taxes). Computing how much money Gohmert’s tax holiday would leave in your family’s checkbook is very simple.
Take your monthly income (the gross amount shown on your pay stubs before tax and any other withholding) and multiply it by .66. That amount is roughly what Gohmert’s two-month tax holiday will leave in your pocket.
According to American Solutions — Newt Gingrich’s group — Americans pay over $101 billion in income taxes and another $65.6 billion in FICA taxes each month. Under Gohmert’s plan, all of that money would — for two months, totaling about $332 billion — be left in voters’ pockets to spend however they choose to meet their families’ needs.
Gohmert doesn’t plan to include corporations in the tax holiday. But, as he told me, if employees don’t have to pay FICA for two months, the employers’ portion of that would also be eliminated, giving corporations some relief of about $65 billion over the two months.
Gohmert is preparing legislation to declare the tax holiday for January and February of 2009 and plans to introduce it as soon as Congress is back in session next week.
In an interview yesterday, Gohmert told me that Treasury Secretary Paulson hasn’t succeeded with the approximately $350 billion already paid out because his predictions of coming disaster had more credibility than his bailout plans.
Gohmert said, “The bailouts haven’t worked so far because, for one thing, Paulson created a self-fulfilling prophecy of doom and gloom in the stock market. When the Secretary of the Treasury announces, for two weeks, that we could have a depression worse than the 1930’s then, even though he spends the next six weeks saying ‘no, it’s not going to be that bad,’ he has already created schizophrenia within the stock market.”
Gohmert’s plan is limited to individual taxpayers and doesn’t include a capital gains tax holiday. He told me that he’d like to do that too but — given the current Congress — it’s probably a bridge too far. He recognizes, too, that if we really want to bring jobs back from overseas, we’d lower corporate tax rates.
Freeing individuals from two months of federal taxation would be a substantial benefit to families and the economy. “Those who can’t catch up on their mortgage get one-third of their money back each month and then they’ll be able to catch up on their mortgages. They’ll be able to refinance their mortgages, they’ll be able to buy stock that they can’t currently buy,” Gohmert said.
He added, “Somebody earning $72,000 would get a couple of thousand dollars back a month if we allow them to get back both income tax and FICA.”
“It would be extraordinary. New cars bought, stock purchased, new homes, new buildings being built.” Gohmert believes that his plan — which would leave the spending decisions to individual taxpayers — would be much more effective in reviving the economy than the centralized power given the Treasury Secretary because people “always do better with their own money than the government does.” He said, “It would be so much more valuable to the economy than having one person who’s been wrong on just about everything they’ve predicted or said having that much power.”
Gohmert quoted the late John Kenneth Galbraith who said there are only two kinds of economists: those who don’t know and those who don’t know they don’t know. He placed Paulson in the latter category. The Treasury Secretary was absolutely certain that the mortgage-backed securities needed to be bought by the government and predicted disaster if he wasn’t given authority to buy them up. But — given his more recent statement that he knew at the moment the legislation was being passed by Congress that that strategy wouldn’t work — Gohmert’s judgment seems entirely justified.
This week, automakers will come back to Congress with their plan to justify a $25 billion bailout for their companies. One thing is certain: the plan won’t include a solution to the problem of their industry-killing labor agreements. Their plan will certainly bail out the United Auto Workers union and leave the car companies in the same mess they are in now. Gohmert’s plan wouldn’t throw good money after bad: it would give our economy a badly-needed boost.
When Congress returns next week to consider the automakers’ bailout, it’s unlikely that Speaker Pelosi will allow Gohmert’s bill to come to the floor. But between now and then conservatives can rally to it, and perhaps — just perhaps — push the White House to support it and gain the chance of a House vote.
Even President-elect Obama should support Gohmert’s plan. Wasn’t he proposing a tax cut for the middle class?
December 1st, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Considering the fact that people are so deep in debt it probably won’t help much at all. Why not use the money to pay off the national debt instead? Set an example. Of course, we know the conservative mantra is “debt doesn’t matter” but I thought I’d throw it out there anyway.
December 1st, 2008 at 2:06 pm
caroline,
The money for the bailout is being printed…it is not sitting in some reserve waiting to be used.
I know this is hard for you to grasp, but it boils down to either the borrowed funds will be spent by your favorite dems or if Gohmert has his way, those who actually earn it.
December 1st, 2008 at 2:10 pm
I am not as liberal as you Bart. Caroline is right we cannot afford any more debt!
December 1st, 2008 at 2:15 pm
John,
Are you really that oblivious to what is going on? The bailout WILL happen and the money will be borrowed. The only question is how it will be distributed.
According to you and caroline, the better method of distribution is to allow the Obama administration to divvy it up through Citigroup, AIG and other big conglomerates.
Gohmert is simply proposing it stay in the hands of those who earn it.
Most people with a lick of common sense would agree Gohmert’s idea is far more conservative than your big government re-distribution plan.
December 1st, 2008 at 3:10 pm
bb,
The money is being borrowed from places like China. If they were printing money like you’re talking about we would be having huge inflation problems instead of deflation. Did you take a basic economics course or are you too wedded to the Milton Friedman school of supply side pretend economics?
December 1st, 2008 at 3:14 pm
bb,
So you’re predicting that the Dems are going to act like conservatives and run up the debt? Remember borrow and squander is the mantra of the GOP no matter how much they talk about how much it’s “your money” they seem to conveniently ignore the fact that it’s “your debt” too. You guys couldn’t manage $10.00 given to you. And the debt is going to cost people more money than any short term benefit of not paying taxes. Do you understand the basic fact that there are costs associated with borrowing money? It’s a fact that you continually ignore.
December 1st, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Bart
What I am saying is financing tax cuts or spending is not a good idea unless the revenue grows quicker than the debt payment.
The bailout issue is a strange problem. As I warned you in the past the tax payers are on the hook via guarantees on the loans. Maybe next time you will listen.
December 1st, 2008 at 4:49 pm
There’s got to be some medication for the Bart’s of the world—to address their compulsive tax obsession.
Taxes are only the answer to every economics-related question if you’re too lazy or ignorant to actually THINK.
How will a tax holiday recapitalize financial institutions? How will it shore-up strained mortages?
Bart, next time you go to your gyno for itching, ask her if a tax cut might not work better than the perseciption she’s writing.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:06 pm
To all you liberals…caroline, John and Lefty,
I know frequent hits on the bong harm your capacity for short term memory. So a quick history lesson from a month ago — CONGRESS PASSED THE $850,000,000,000 BAILOUT — the train already left the station folks.
Now the only question left to decide is how the money will be allocated. Do you want Hank Paulson handling it or those who actually earn it…that is the only question left to answer.
I know it is hard to imagine a world where earners actually get to keep their earnings instead of sending it to DC for redistribution, but that is the point of Gohmert’s bill. It is understandable that die hard big spending liberals like you guys would oppose such a foreign concept, but it is a good idea compared to the alternative.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Any of you big govt. folks want to take a wag at where the first $350,000,000,000 was spent? And what effect it had on the economy?
The Gohmert Bill has little chance of passing, but it will serve to expose those like yourselves who always look to big nanny first.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Bart
Explain how financing tax cuts that produce a larger debt payment than revenue is conservative? Do you think devaluing the dollar is conservative?
December 1st, 2008 at 5:25 pm
John,
What part of it’s already done do you not get?
This is not a proposed tax cut…it is a proposal to let taxpayers spend their hard earned money instead of Hank Paulson or Tim whatever his name is that is taking over in January.
Why do you support filtering taxpayer earnings through the alimentary canal of DC vs. just letting taxpayers keep their own money?
December 1st, 2008 at 5:43 pm
I do not support both plans
December 1st, 2008 at 5:45 pm
How will a tax holiday recapitalize financial institutions? How will it shore-up strained mortages?
December 1st, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Great John, stick your head in the sand and just hope it all goes away…Brilliant!
Lefty, How will a bailout handled by the very people who caused the problem recapitalize financial institutions or shore up strained mortgages?
Given a choice, I think most Americans would rather see if they can use their own money to stimulate the economy vs. giving it to the same people who f’d up everything.
December 1st, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Bart, the problem is, given a choice, Americans would ALWAYS rather get more money. But that doesn’t mean it’s the best solution.
Children would ALWAYS prefer candy to vegetables, but that doesn’t mean it’s best for their health.
December 1st, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Bart
Who will pay for all the government guaranteed loan and insurance programs like student loans, FHA, FDIC deposits…….? I will help tax payers. Do you understand the catch 22 I warned you about years ago and you called me chicken little?
December 1st, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Louie Gohmert ? Never heard of him.
But, Google has!
Major legislation: congratulating the FBI on its 100th anniversary; recognizing the energy and economic partnership between the US and Honduras, study to build a memorial to the Space Shuttle Columbia (in Texas, of course); return the District of Columbia to the State of Maryland; increase penalties for crimes against judges; switching from social security numbers to military ID numbers for identification of military personnel; allow taxpayers to pay more tax (yep: HR 3129); and – my personal favorite – move the Guantanamo Bay detainees on to the grounds of the US Supreme Court in Washington, where we “will be able to more effectively micromanage the detainees.”
Off-the-wall stuff: Ban loving couples from being married on the basis of Biblical era mores; make it more difficult for the mentally retarded to avoid the death penalty; “balance” the budget by excluding inflationary projections (not actual money, mind you, just the economic analysis) by the Congressional Budget Office; ban on aid to any nation that in any way does not follow the US in lockstep in the UN (e.g., Great Britain, Canada); and to punish states with oil or gas (regardless of the economic feasibility or ecological viability of such reserves) that do not drill by denying them all other domestically produced oil and gas.
What else? He accused Democratic Representatives and John Murtha in particular of being the reason for the stock market fall (Feb 2007). He had his wife paid $53,261 to serve as his campaign’s assistant manager;
And, he voted for 7 / 10 agriculture subsidies bills, against a woman’s right to choose in 5 / 5 votes on abortion, against 2 / 2 economic rescue packages and 1 / 1 extension of unemployment benefits (these three were between Sep 29 and Oct 3 this year), against paper ballots in election voting, against reforming 527s, against federal regulation of tobacco and against establishing an Office of Congressional Ethics.
What a guy!
December 1st, 2008 at 9:28 pm
Lefty, John,
Do either of you understand that the 2nd tranche is already approved? There is no stopping the expenditure, especially with the liberal administration promising to at least double the amount.
So the only question left to answer is who can better spend the money; those who earn it or the government?
I will always side with those who earn it…can’t help the conservatism in me.
You guys ignore reality.
December 1st, 2008 at 9:32 pm
DOR,
In about the same amount of time of congressional service, Gohmert has done far more than your next president.
And he was too kind when addressing the dirtbag Murtha who has yet to apologize for calling 8 honorable U.S. Marines murderers. Murtha is a corrupt POS who cannot find the exit fast enough.
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:05 am
I love the “we borrowing money from China” bit. Caroline, they’re called Bonds, and you can buy them too.
I also love the confusion that gets dumped into the conversation as soon as John joins in.
I even love O’Rear raising a stink over a Congressman’s opinions because he proposes an idea that he doesn’t like . . . a month after defending a presidential candidate who spent 20 years listening to J. Wright - the same O’Rear who fights racism wherever he finds it (in white people).
December 2nd, 2008 at 1:05 am
“So the only question left to answer is who can better spend the money; those who earn it or the government?”
I would rather see infrastructure projects. Only the government can fund the massive projects that we need to maintain our infrastructure (roads, bridges, energy).
I have no faith that the average American will spend it on anything other than cheap crap from China.
December 2nd, 2008 at 6:32 am
Bart
WHY NOT ANSWER THE QUESTIONS?
Who will pay for all the government guaranteed loan and insurance programs like student loans, FHA, FDIC deposits…….? I will help tax payers. Do you understand the catch 22 I warned you about years ago and you called me chicken little?
December 2nd, 2008 at 9:14 am
John,
As usual, your question is irrelevant to the topic in discussion.
But here is a relevant question for you; Who deserves to be rewarded for work performed, the individual performing the work or your government?
December 2nd, 2008 at 9:41 am
One other question John, is Newt Gingrich a liberal? He is strongly supporting the Gohmert Plan even going so far as to suggest the ‘tax holiday’ be offered through June ‘09 (he expects Obama to at least double the amount of ’stimulus’ which would equal out to 6 months of income/fica/medicare tax revenue).
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:15 am
Bart
Do you understand the tax payers are on the hook for the many of the loans? Can you tell me how we pay for the loans if the banks go down?
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:44 am
John,
I’m still waiting for you to answer my simple question…who deserves to be rewarded for their work, the person performing the work or your bloated, out of control government?
I vehemently opposed the $850B bailout, the $150B AIG deal, the $25B automobile crap and any other socialist move proposed by this govt. But since they all became law, the only thing left to do is figure out who gets the money. As a CONSERVATIVE, I would rather see those who earn it get to keep it vs. giving it all to the very assholes who put their companies in jeopardy.
Why do you support the latter John?
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:26 am
Bart
As you know when you were calling me ‘chicken little” I was warning people tax payers are on the hook for the loans. And since you supported and campaigned for this socialist irresponsible use of tax payers how can you call anyone a socialist?
As I have said I do not support the current structure of the bailout for banks. Yet at the end something has to get done because we are on the hook for the loans, deposits, insurance…….
Do you understand letting them fail means tax payers write a big CHECK!
December 2nd, 2008 at 11:46 am
John,
You were/are chicken little. Taxpayers were not on the hook for the loans at the time just as I proved. The only reason taxpayers will be on the hook is because of the bailout programs that have been subsequently approved by a democrat led congress.
I understand everything just fine John. You support recession for business purposes…that is fine. But it is not OK to force taxpayers to pay for the mistakes of companies like AIG, GM, Ford, Citi, etc. You can make excuses all you want, but a CONSERVATIVE like myself would rather give those who earn the money a chance at bailing out our economy over the dumbasses who failed to run their companies properly.
So again I ask; Is Newt Gingrich a liberal for supporting the Gohmert Plan?
Why do you oppose allowing individual taxpayers being able to keep the money they earn when we all know it will just be wasted if funneled through the DC bureaucracy?
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:00 pm
What is a FHA Loan? Is it the right option for me? We are hear to answer these questions. FHA MortgageCenter.com specializes 100% in government-backed home loan programs.
http://www.fhamortgagecenter.com/fha_guidelines.html
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Federal Student Loans
Along with the non-government-backed Pentagon Federal Education Loan and an Education Line of Credit, you can apply for government-backed loan programs such as the Federal Stafford Loan and the Federal Parent Loan for Undergraduate Students (PLUS).
https://www.penfed.org/productsAndRates/loans/educationLoans/federalStudentLoans.asp
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:02 pm
What Is the FDIC?
The FDIC – short for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation – is an independent agency of the United States government. The FDIC protects you against the loss of your deposits if an FDIC-insured bank or savings association fails. FDIC insurance is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government. The term “insured bank” is used in this brochure to mean any bank or savings association with FDIC insurance.
http://www.fdic.gov/deposit/deposits/insuringdeposits/
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:04 pm
Bush administration addresses risky loans on government-backed …No private mortgage insurance companies back these types of loans. … “The Internal Revenue Service, U.S. Government Accountability Office and our own …
http://e.mortgagepress.com/NewYork/Default.aspx?Id=717A397864766F4377414873455278324B556F67485866634D65666239386D656147616F6A67736D52754D3D
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:04 pm
Bart
Please do not let facts get in the way you feel about the issue!
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Aubrey,
Do you understand that borrowing money has costs associated with it? It seems none of your conservative pals understand that basic principal.
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:54 pm
John,
I am not going to rehash that discussion…I provided factual data showing just how few home loans were guaranteed by the govt. to repudiate your baseless assertion.
I also provided a disclaimer saying that it could happen if the dem led congress decided to bailout the industry…unfortunately that part came to pass and you support it.
Once more, I will try to get an answer from you to a couple of relatively simple questions:
So again I ask; Is Newt Gingrich a liberal for supporting the Gohmert Plan?
Why do you oppose allowing individual taxpayers being able to keep the money they earn when we all know it will just be wasted if funneled through the DC bureaucracy?
December 2nd, 2008 at 1:51 pm
bart
You have hot air and no facts.
December 2nd, 2008 at 2:04 pm
More facts while you spin HOT AIR!
BUSH ADMINISTRATION RENEWS EFFORT TO ADDRESS RISKY LOANS ON GOVERNMENT-BACKED MORTGAGES
Proposal would help stabilize housing market, protect FHA’s financial solvency, and reduce foreclosures
WASHINGTON- The Bush Administration today renewed its efforts to address risky government-backed seller-funded downpayment assistance loans that are significantly more likely to lead to foreclosure. HUD’s Federal Housing Administration (FHA) will reopen the public comment period on a proposed rule that would ban seller-funded downpayment assistance on mortgage transactions insured by the FHA. The proposed rule will be re-published in the Federal Register and comments will be accepted for 60 days following publication. The rule can also be viewed on FHA’s website.
In a speech to the National Press Club, HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner Brian D. Montgomery warned FHA must take action because these loans, which now make up one third of FHA’s portfolio, are causing substantial losses. This year, as a result of its annual re-estimate, FHA had to book an additional of $4.6 billion in unanticipated long-term losses, mostly due to the increased number of certain types of seller-funded loans in the FHA portfolio.
http://www.hud.gov/news/release.cfm?content=pr08-081.cfm
December 2nd, 2008 at 2:39 pm
John,
Although you have strayed far from the topic of this thread in yet another effort to pat yourself on the back (shoulder hurting yet with all that reach around going on?), I will endeavor once more to educate you.
FHA is funded by the homebuyer. From the FHA website — The FHA is funded solely from the income it creates: from the revenue generated by FHA mortgage insurance. This FHA mortgage insurance cost is borne by the homebuyer.
FHA Mortgage Insurance
Mortgage insurance is a policy that protects lenders against losses that result from defaults on home mortgages. FHA loans require mortgage insurance primarily for borrowers making a down payment of less than 20 percent.
Mortgage insurance is charged to the homeowner each month at the rate of .5 percent per year of the total loan amount. FHA also charges an upfront mortgage insurance premium of 1.5 percent.
Now if your dem led congress would have just stayed out of it, we would get through the mess far more quickly than by bailing out mortgage companies. But your guys in congress decided to approve a massive bailout with over half of the $350B already spent.
Getting back on topic, the only thing left to decide now is who is a better steward of the money, those who earn it or your dem led government. The bailout is APPROVED John, there is no turning back.
Why do you oppose letting taxpayers keep what they earn for a couple of months? I would argue this plan MIGHT give those on the brink of losing their homes a chance to make that payment.
December 2nd, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Who do you thinks backs Mortgage insurance policy? I will give one guess? BTW why do you think we bailed out AIG?
December 2nd, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Thanks John…the same entity that backs entitlements. And insurance companies like AIG.
But that is beside the point. The FHA has X amount of money…that should be all that can be accessed, period. Government was not required to bailout AIG or FHA as you imply…they did so only after congress stepped in along with Hank Paulson.
Now how abou answering my questions since I have played along with your back patting games.
Do you agree the bailout is already approved? The only answer is yes.
Now, where is the money coming from…we both agree that taxpayers are on the hook.
So that leaves only one question; Who is a better steward of the money, those who earn it (taxpayers) or those who f’d everything up to begin with…government and certain corporations?
December 2nd, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Bart
You are lost if AIG goes down what is the insurance worth?
December 2nd, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Since you won’t answer the question, we can presume based on your many posts supporting more government that you believe Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barney Frank are better stewards of money than those who earn it…no surprise there.
December 2nd, 2008 at 4:20 pm
From Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House and a liberal according to John Konop:
A People’s Stimulus Package
HumanEvents.com
December 1, 2008
By Newt Gingrich
The bankruptcy of the current Washington political establishment makes Rep. Louie Gohmert’s (R-Texas) new proposal for a tax holiday proposal intriguing.
Rep. Gohmert has calculated that the amount House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson will be advocating for the second installment of the bailout — $350 billion — is more than the amount needed to allow every American to have a two month tax holiday from both the FICA (Social Security and Medicare) and income tax.
Let me repeat that: What Pelosi and Paulson are proposing to pour into crony capitalism is more than what it would cost to give every American taxpayer a total federal tax holiday for two months.
Which do you think would do more to get America growing again? $350 billion to failing managements, “overrated dopes,” and “greedy cynics,” or allowing every American to simply keep all their money for January and February?
The Money You Will Keep? Your Monthly Income Multiplied by .66
For the working poor, a FICA tax holiday (the $350 billion Paulson was going to send to Wall Street would simply be used to cover the revenue losses in the Treasury so Social Security and Medicare would not lose a penny) will be a dramatic increase in take home pay. This one act will save more homes from bankruptcy than any centralized government bureaucratic red tape ridden system.
If you want to figure out how much Rep. Gohmert’s tax holiday would save you, Jed Babbin of Human Events has this advice:
“Most Americans pay about 25 percent of their income in federal income tax and another 7.25 percent in FICA (Social Security and Medicare taxes). Computing how much money Gohmert’s tax holiday would leave in your family’s checkbook is very simple. Take your monthly income (the gross amount shown on your pay stubs before tax and any other withholding) and multiply it by 0.66. That amount is roughly what Gohmert’s two-month tax holiday will leave in your pocket.”
If a Two Month Tax Holiday Sounds Good, Why Not Six Months?
But there’s more.
Speaker Pelosi’s desire for an additional $700 billion Washington centered, government stimulus program would actually create the opportunity to offer an additional four months of FICA and income tax holiday for the American people.
If the American people knew they were going to have no personal federal taxes until July, 2009, how much debt could they pay down? How many mortgages would be saved? How many college tuitions could they pay? How much could they invest to rebuild their retirement accounts?
This is an example of what President Lincoln meant by “thinking anew.”
Send me a note at Newt@newt.org letting me know what you think of the tax holiday idea.
And if you like the idea of not paying federal taxes until July, 2009, please send this article on to your friends and encourage them to speak out on these new solutions.
December 2nd, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Bart
I cannot help you think!
December 2nd, 2008 at 9:19 pm
AIG
Remember all those fancy financial instruments that turned out to be worth nothing? You know, the stuff all the big investment banks held.
Turns out they knew it was risky.
So, what did they do? Why, they turned to the biggest insurance company and took out policies covering each and every one of those little bits of toxic assets.
.
Question: What happens if the insurance company can’t pay?
Answer: Systemic failure.
December 2nd, 2008 at 9:56 pm
John,
There is no doubt you are not in a position to help ANYBODY think…thanks for providing clarity to what most already accept.
December 3rd, 2008 at 6:44 am
David
Thank you for helping Bart!
READ REAL SLOW BART!
Question: What happens if the insurance company can’t pay?
Answer: Systemic failure.
December 3rd, 2008 at 9:15 am
John,
What happens when John or DOR attempts to form a cognitive thought?
Answer: Systemic failure!
December 3rd, 2008 at 9:19 am
What happens if government keeps bailing out every company, state and municipality showing up in DC with their hands out?
Answer: Complete and total meltdown.
December 3rd, 2008 at 9:21 am
What happens if taxpayers get to keep the money they earn?
Answer: Empowerment, consumerism and recovery.
Don’t you just feel all tingly inside John to be on the same side with DOR supporting big give-away government?
December 3rd, 2008 at 10:55 am
Less than a month ago, John Konop was BLAMING Bush (imagine that) for bailing out AIG — “U.S. Boosts AIG Bailout Package…No Bailout Left Behind Via BUSH!”
Now John Konop supports the AIG bailout…amazing!
December 3rd, 2008 at 10:56 am
Failure is the penalty for running a bad business. We have to let these car companies die. To give them billions of dollars and then expect them to change their stupid ways is lunacy. We have bankruptcy laws for exactly this reason: so when GM dies, Joe the Garage Guy can build the next corvette without worry that he’ll die in a debtors prison.
Bush ruined whatever legacy he might have left behind by signing that awful thing and he’s as much to blame as anyone for letting the Democrat Congress get in the business of business.
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:02 pm
I am glad someone has brought this to the media. THis is my idea from several months ago — see note I wrote to Fox News on 10/4/08
Neil,
I had an idea how we might get an economic stimulus without having the government issue any checks.
A Federal Tax Holiday. States do it, why not the federal government? Two weeks or one month of no federal income taxes withdrawn from paychecks. Employers do the work. The government does nothing, and you get an immediate stimulus. A program like this would have a much larger effect on the economy than any stimulus check would, and again, the government does nothing.
At a time the largest consumer spending occurs for the year, why not provide an incentive like this? A temporary shortfall of income to the government is the same thing as a stimulus check, except, the government gets it back on profits from corporations, and municipalities get much needed funds from sales tax revenues.. The market would take off as well.
December 3rd, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Bart
I was the one who warned everyone this was going to happen. And at the end Bart I did not agree with the plan but if we did nothing tax payers would be holding the bag anyways.
Do you not get it yet?
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Thanks Kraig for your input…too bad there are so many big govt./bailout zealots like John who just don’t get it.
Gohmert’s legislation is starting to get legs…FOXNews has regular reports going all day today including interviews with the conservative Texas congressman.
December 3rd, 2008 at 2:04 pm
John says, I don’t agree but do it anyway…yet another flip-flop….sounds like Saxby Chambliss, your mentor on bailing out failed businesses.
Do you ever just stand on principle John…do you even have principles?
December 3rd, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Mr Konop,
We should be kinder to bb.
After all, he’s never been through a financial crisis, has he?
How would he know what systemic financial failure does to people, families, communities, economies and nations?
Unless, of course, he bothered to find out.
.
December 3rd, 2008 at 9:07 pm
I witness systemic failure in your every post DOR…it’s amazing that you keep coming back.
December 4th, 2008 at 4:29 am
I’m all for the tax holiday, whether two months or six months.
But I have a quibble with Newt’s calculations. Right now, my bring home pay is 68% of my gross (fed, FICA, state are the only things withheld from my pay). So if I multiply my gross by .66 like Newt says we get to keep under this tax holiday, I’d bring home less than I do now.
With the fed tax holiday, I would actually multiply my gross by .95 to figure out what I’d actually bring home. That’s my gross amt minus state tax withholding (5%), since nothing would be taken out for federal or FICA.
Newt’s numbers are all screwed up.
December 4th, 2008 at 4:33 am
I especially like it because at the end of the holiday, when the masses are forced to take a “paycut” as federal withholding kicks back in, you’ll see a huge backlash that might actually accomplish something that our legislators ain’t got the guts to do on their own. That’s probably why the big govt liberals hate the idea.
December 4th, 2008 at 4:38 am
One question: does the holiday mean those taxes aren’t due at all? Come April 2010, will we still have to pay the full year’s taxes on all twelve months of income? If so, then the plan sucks. I only like it if those two-to-six months of income are essentially tax free.
December 8th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Hello webmaster! I am thoroughly impressed with your knowledge of le + ‘ - ‘ + basename(imgurl) + ‘(’ + w + ‘x’ + h +’). Your insights into this article about le + ‘ - ‘ + basename(imgurl) + ‘(’ + w + ‘x’ + h +’) was well worth the the time to read it. I thank you for posting such awesome information. I find it on Monday and very happy reading this…
December 9th, 2008 at 10:42 am
Thank you. You have helped someone more than you could know.
December 13th, 2008 at 7:00 am
Max O…
That is all very interesting, but I’m still not totally on board with this….
December 13th, 2008 at 8:19 pm
non government student loans…
Nevertheless there will always be a minority who will not get the point you are trying to make….