We may not have agreed on much, but it’s always saddening to see a fellow American and a leader of our republic pass on.  My thoughts go out to you and your family.  Rest in peace.

I sometimes get the impression that, despite age requirements written into the Constitution, this country seems to not be lead by men, but rather by boys. While I appreciate the desire to incorporate some litmus test for maturity and wisdom, those qualities are often completely unrelated to one’s age. “It takes two things to be a man,” the saying goes, “Honor and a penis.” As Chris Rock would say, “the only thing you have to do to be a man is take care of your business.” To put it yet another way, real men own their problems.

One of the few absolutes about Congress is a complete lack of accountability and responsibility. It’s all, well, politics. When a politician votes in favor a failed program, he was part of the majority. Most people made that mistake. Why hold a single person responsible for the mistakes we “all” made? When a politician votes against the program, he’s a visionary. Full credit where credit is due, as they say. Vote for a successful program? Credit. Vote against a successful program? Cautious with taxpayer money. Vote for a program that doesn’t pass? Hamstrung by naysayers. Vote against a program that didn’t pass? Responsible.

Congress seems to believe that there are no wrong answers. There’s no penalty for bad decisions to them personally, so why care? To them, there’s always a way to take credit, declare victory, and rally support – but that’s not how the real world works. When there are consequences to every decision Congress makes, but no consequences for those who make those decisions the system breaks down. The only time the voter’s displeasure ever registers with them is six weeks before an election and when their offices are bombarded with phone calls and town halls are bristling with angry voters.

Perhaps most disturbing of all has been the response to the latest uproar over health care. The liberal supporters of nationalized health care aren’t debating the issue. They aren’t disproving the arguments used against them. They aren’t explaining why we need such an expansion of the federal government, they’re labeling the opposition as phony and unamerican.

It’s childish.

More than that, it’s sad. Does anyone else find it ironic that a community organizer would label opponents of his health care bill organized by other groups as phony? Has everyone forgotten that dissent is among the highest forms of patriotism? Can anyone explain to me the difference between voters that are disgusted with Washington and voters that are supportive of a platform? Do their votes count less because they signed a petition, or because they attended a town hall meeting, or because they dare question their representatives?

The President and the Congress own this bill. It belongs to them. It’s their idea. It’s their proposal. It’s their agenda. It’s their goal. A real man would take responsibility for it. A real man would explain to me why this has to be done. A real man would accept criticism and be able to deal with it. A real man would focus on the business at hand. A real man would work with others, be willing to compromise to accomplish his ambitions, and would do it all with honor and dignity.

Name calling is something children do. Not listening to someone because they don’t agree with you is something children do. Taking your ball and going home when the game turns against you is something children do. Spending money on new toys with no regard for where it’s coming from is something children do. Carrying on in a fantasy world where all problems can be solved with one magical decree is something children do.

I’m not asking for much. If you genuinely believe that we need to expand the federal government’s role in health care to protect the underprivileged, I won’t ask you to change your mind. I’ll disagree with you certainly, but everyone is entitled to their opinions. What I’m asking for is simple: be a man. Tell me, directly, to my face why you disagree with me. Look me in the eye and tell me where I’m wrong. You are my representative. Do your job. Listen to what I have to say. Work with me to get things done. Read the bill. Don’t play games. Don’t give me a wink and a nod. Don’t slide provisions in during closed committee meetings. Don’t try to get something passed and then change the bill in reconciliation. Don’t claim you’re listening when you’re not.

There is cowardice in running away from your problems. There is a willful ignorance in labeling those that disagree with you. There is a supreme arrogance in our elected officials when they believe their constituents don’t matter. There is a shocking hubris expressed when 52% of the vote is interpreted as a mandate for a radical change.

Democrats, you own a majority in both houses of Congress and the Presidency. You proposed this bill. It’s your party. Own it. Take responsibility for it. Act like a adults and treat us like adults. Explain yourselves. Descending to this level of behavior is childish.

Grow up.

I apologize for not posting this week, but I’m afraid I won’t be making any posts next week either. I am currently in the process of moving apartments while trying to keep up with my usual work load and it’s really putting a crimp in my free time. My new place won’t have internet for a few days and it will take me some time to unpack once I do make the move. Don’t expect any new posts until either the 25th or the 27th.

I appreciate your patience and understanding while I quite literally get my house in order.

President Obama is in full damage control mode after members of his administration indicated that raising taxes on the middle and lower tax brackets was a real possibility. Republicans immediately seized on these statements as Obama floating a trial balloon and planting the seeds for tax hikes in the middle of a recession. Democrats scoffed contemptuously, reminded us that the campaigner and chief made a promise (and we all know he’s only broken one or two or three or four or damn near half of them), and touted the $13 a week “stimulus” that the government has decided not to take out of your pay check.

What no one has hitherto mentioned, is that the first salvo of Obama’s tax increases have already been launched. While he hasn’t officially raised the tax rate on anyone since taking office, he has begun implementing policies that have already increased the tax burden on the upper class. He is stealthily increasing taxes without calling it a tax increase – and not just on the wealthy. Once approved by the Senate, bills that have already been passed by the House will massively increase the burden of government on middle and lower class citizens.

While the rich will be paying an estimated $318 billion more this year than they were last year, there have been no tax increases. Instead what he has instead done is put in place a cap on the amount of deductions the wealthy can claim. Because the majority of itemized deductions are either mortgage related or charitable donations, the indirect effect of this cap punishes non-profit organizations that help the poor (they’re estimated to lose another 2% of their annual revenue as a result of this increase alone) and an already weak housing sector that’s been dragging the economy down with it.

Obama has indicated that he will probably not be renewing the Bush tax cuts in 2010. Although he claimed he was considering renewing them until the economy recovered, he campaigned to end them, been pressured by liberal Democrats like Nanci Pelosi, and since reaffirmed his desire to let them expire. The Obama administration will tell you this isn’t technically a tax increase either. We are asked to kindly ignore that that’s been the tax rate for years. We are kindly asked to ignore the fact that every tax bracket received a cut from the Bush tax cuts – meaning that even low and middle class taxes will go up. We are also asked to ignore that the income requirements for each bracket will be reduced – meaning that even though you make the same amount of money you could easily end up in a higher tax bracket. So, if you’re middle class, your “taxes won’t go up a thin dime,” but you’ll be in a higher bracket and back at a higher tax rate.

But it gets better.

If Cap and Trade manages to pass the Senate, the government will begin taxing businesses that will then pass along the price to anyone who uses electricity or depends on an industrial job. Estimates of how much this will cost the average household vary wildly between $100 a year if you’re a liberal mouth piece and $3000 a year if you run a conservative blog. With most reasonable estimates ranging between $500 and $1000 at the onset, and the Congressional Budget Office claiming $175 in 2020 (after 10 years of destroying “pollution”), there’s a pretty clear consensus that everyone will be paying more for just about everything. The kicker to Cap and Trade is that the costs passed on to consumers will most directly affect the lower class. Those who cannot afford energy star compliant homes, state of the art appliances, and hybrid cars will feel the cost of energy go up the most – and these are the same people who can least afford an increase to the cost of living. It also goes after the same manufacturing jobs that keep lower class and lower-middle class households afloat. With increased costs, those employers will have to make up the difference somewhere which will result in higher prices, cut pay, lay offs, or complete failure.

To top it all off, we’re now looking down the barrel of health care reform. Those that currently get health care benefits are mostly middle class, white collar workers. Taxation on those benefits isn’t even being debated. If the bill passes, it’s a done deal. What is still being played around with is exactly how the rest of the program will be paid for. A simple mandate, “give your employees health insurance or else!” will increase the cost of employers. Again, when costs go up, you have to make it up somewhere. The obvious solution is to slash employee pay and give them health insurance. No, you’re not taxed a dime, but your income just dropped significantly. For lower class jobs, the best proposal so far has been to tax employers 8% and give the employees the government option. If you aren’t making minimum wage, it will be passed along. If you are making minimum wage, and you’re making minimum wage for a reason, you’re going to lose your job.

All of this, of course, is being done as the economy is still struggling and unemployment rates are still rising. Obama can claim he’s not raising the tax rate, but I have to call bullshit. He and the Democrats in the House are increasing the tax burden – not just to the wealthy, but to all Americans. Claiming otherwise is a flat lie. Liberals are proving, once again, that tax and spend is their modus operandi and that they either have no concept of economics whatsoever or they’re blatantly lying to the American people.

Mr. Obama, you, together with Ms. Pelosi, are raising taxes on every sector of society in the middle of a recession. Every time you claim you are not raising taxes, you are lying to the American people. I want some fiscal responsibility. I really do. There’s an easy way to stop the deficit from exploding:

Stop spending other people’s money.

The other day I met a gentleman online who believed, amongst other things, that income taxes don’t hurt businesses or the economy because they tax the people and not businesses or industry. Today’s blog entry is another installment of Ask Janus in which I’ll be teaching Economics 101. Today’s class: How Raising Taxes On Individuals Hurts Businesses.

Let’s say, just for the sake of this example, you get paid 100 potato chips a month. Of that, 14 potato chips get taken out of your pay check as state and federal income tax by the government before you even get to cash it and another 6 are taken out for Social Security. You spend 40 potato chips a month on your mortgage and home owner’s insurance; 25 potato chips a month for your car note, car insurance, gas, groceries, and utilities; and you manage to save 10 potato chips a month in your rainy day fund – you know, in case your kid has to go to the doctor, or you have a flat on the interstate, or you actually plan on retiring some day.

What you’re left with is 5 chips a month to buy whatever you want. You can go out to a bar, or buy a new pair of shoes, or get a new game, or go paintballing, or take a vacation, or play a few rounds of golf, or take the boat out, or throw a barbecue, or whatever you want. Whatever you do with it, you stimulate the economy.

If you work as a travel agent, for example, people are giving you their 5 chips to go to the Big City for a while. If you sell furniture for a living, people are giving you their 5 chips to get a new couch every couple of years. If you own a restaurant, or a bowling alley, or a mall kiosk, you need those 5 chips to stay in business.

Now let’s say, for example, that the government is going broke under the weight of it’s increased spending and massive debt. To solve the problem, it increases taxes a mere 3%.

You now pay, alltogeather, 23 chips to the government, 65 in expenses you can’t do anything about, and only have 12 chips a month to split between your savings and your spending. Let’s say you’re saving for a new car. You don’t really need it that badly, but you do want it. You decide to cut back to 8 chips a month on your savings and 4 chips a month for recreational spending. You’ve only reduced your monthly spending by 1% of your total income. Most of the burden of the new tax cut is actually coming out of your savings account.

But what happens to the restaurant that counted on your 5 potato chips a month? Now they have to make due with 4 chips. They don’t lose 1% of their income, they lose a whopping 20%. There aren’t many businesses that can handle that. With fewer customers, the smart thing for the restaurant to do, is to lay off a few waiters – maybe even a cook or two. Now the restaurant isn’t hemorrhaging money, but they just fired a bunch of people. Those people stop contributing to the economy entirely.

Not only are they not feeding money into the system that keeps people employed, but now they need to find jobs of their own. They’re desperate. Let’s say they’re willing to do your job, but for 5% less. 10% less. How desperate are they? How much of a pay cut would you take to get employed again?

Now let’s say your own company is starting to feel the pinch. They need to save money somehow. How are they going to do it? They might cut your department budget – if we pack the employees 2 or 3 to an office, we can close the offices across town. They might cut expenses. You don’t really need a new computer, or a secretary, or an answering service. They might cut your benefits. You don’t need health insurance or free lunch at long meetings. They might cut your pay – after all, someone else will do your job cheaper now. But more than likely, with fewer customers and less money coming in, they’d just lay a few people off.

To make matters worse, the economic damage is not the end of the pain higher taxes bring. Saving 8 potato chips instead of 10 means buying a Volkswagen instead of a BMW. It means buying a nice home in the suburbs with a half hour commute instead of being 5 minutes from downtown. It means having to push off retirement for a few more years. It means your children have to work through college instead of being full time students.

Eventually, of course, things will stabilize. Notice that I didn’t say things would return to the way they were, I said stabilize. People will start to get jobs again, which will push money back into the economy, which will halt unemployment and gradually lead to a recovery. Despite this, however, there will still be lingering traces of damage left on the economy.

Even if you don’t get fired, and even if you don’t have to take a pay cut, and even if you don’t lose your health insurance a week before little Suzie gets hurt, you still can’t afford to go out like you used to. Like it or not, that measly little 3% tax hike just cut your income and someone will still be struggling to put food on their table without it.

I’d like to point out that in my example I only raised taxes by 3% and I generously assumed you were in a position to save money. If you’re already struggling with credit card debt or are behind on your mortgage payments, a tax hike can shut down your spending altogether – if it isn’t the straw that breaks the camel’s back and sends you right into bankruptcy.

Everyone (hopefully) understands the concepts of supply and demand. Taxation reduces the demand for your products. Without demand, jobs are lost.

I hope it’s fairly clear how and why taxing citizens hurts businesses and the economy. If you have a question you’d like to ask, feel free to leave a comment, tweet me @janusthemad, or email me at janus at secular conservative dot net.