Barack Obama the Marxist


Read the title carefully, it has Marxist in it, not Progressive, although the Americanized word for Marxist and Democrats is PROGRESSIVE. Notice how common the usage is today, it sounds so forward thinking, so positive, so modern. Yet, the term really came to the American forefront during a failed run for President by Theodore Roosevelt. Imagine that!

Woodrow Wilson is the first true Marxist, er, uh, Progressive POTUS but I’m here to focus, once again, on Barack Obama, current occupant of the White House and his policies. However, I’m going copy some source material provided by Peter Ferrara of the Heartland Institute writing at Forbes below. It’s lengthy but the argument is excellent and true. Please note, the article was written in December of 2012 but it could have been written yesterday.

President Obama says that income taxes must be raised on the rich because they don’t pay their fair share. The indisputable facts from official government sources say otherwise.

The CBO reports based on official IRS data that in 2009 the top 1% of income earners paid 39% of all federal income taxes, three times their share of income at 13%. Yet, the middle 20% of income earners, the true middle class, paid just 2.7% of total federal income taxes on net that year, while earning 15% of income. That means the top 1% paid almost 15 times as much in federal income taxes as the entire middle 20%, even though the middle 20% earned more income.

Moreover, the official data, as reported by CBO and the IRS, show that the bottom 40% of income earners, instead of paying some income taxes to support the federal government, were paid cash by the IRS equal to 10% of federal income taxes as a group on net.

Any normal person would say that such an income tax system is more than fair, or maybe that “the rich” pay more than their fair share. So why does President Obama keep saying that the rich do not pay their fair share? Is he ignorant? Wouldn’t somebody in his Administration whisper to him that he is peddling nonsense?

The answer is that to President Obama this is still not fair because he is a Marxist. To a Marxist, the fact that the top 1% earn more income than the bottom 99% is not fair, no matter how they earn it, fairly or not. So it is not fair unless more is taken from the top 1% until they are left only with what they “need,” as in any true communist system. Paying anything less is not their “fair” share. That is the only logical explanation of President Obama’s rhetoric, and it is 100% consistent with his own published background.

Notice that Obama keeps saying that “the rich,” a crass term implying low class social envy, don’t “need” the Bush tax cuts. That is reminiscent of the fundamental Marxist principle, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”

Good tax policy is not guided by “need.” It is guided by what is needed to establish the incentives to maximize economic growth. The middle class, working people and the poor are benefited far more by economic growth than by redistribution. That is shown by the entire 20th century, where the standard of living of American workers increased by more than 7 times, through sustained, rapid economic growth.

But President Obama’s tax policy of increasing all tax rates on savings and investment will work exactly contrary to such economic growth. It is savings and investment which creates jobs and increases productivity and wages. Under capitalism, capital and labor are complementary, not adversarial, exactly contrary to the misunderstanding of Marxists. More capital investment increases the demand for labor, bidding up wages to the level of worker productivity, which is enhanced by the capital investment.

Increasing marginal tax rates on savings and investment, however, will mean less of it, not more. That will mean fewer jobs, and lower wages, just as we have experienced so far under President Obama, with median household incomes (hello middle class) declining by 7.3% (a month’s worth of wages) during his first term, even faster after the recession supposedly ended in 2009. That will only get worse in Obama’s unearned second term, which can only be explained as “democracy failure” analogous to “market failure.”

If the tax increases are limited to those who earn $1 million or more, I don’t know if that alone will be enough to create a recession, as I am certain would be the result with Obama’s original policy of targeting couples making over $250,000 a year, and singles making over $200,000.

But there is so much in the Obama economic program that is contractionary. His second term promises enormous new regulatory burdens and barriers. The EPA is shutting down the coal industry, and Interior will join with it to sharply constrain oil production further, despite Obama’s duplicitous campaign rhetoric taking credit for the production produced by the policies and efforts of others. I expect Obama’s EPA to burden natural gas fracking until it goes the way of the coal industry as well, stealing new found prosperity for many Americans. All of this will sharply raise energy prices, which will be another effective tax on the economy.

Moreover, President Obama has said that a priority in his second term will be global warming, even though global temperatures have not been increasing for 16 years now, and the developing world led by Brazil, Russia, India and China (the BRIC countries), which are contributing to “greenhouse gases” at a much greater accelerating rate than the U.S., have rejected sacrificing any slice of their economies to that ideological phantom. While even the Democrat Congress of Obama’s first term failed to adopt “cap and trade,” EPA is advancing with global warming regulations that will cost the economy trillions in still another effective tax.

Then there are the onrushing regulatory burdens of Obamacare, including the employer mandate, which will require all businesses with 50 employees or more to buy the most expensive health insurance available. That will be an effective tax on employment. As Obamacare forces up the cost of health insurance, that will be still another effective tax increase on all employers already providing health coverage. Hundreds of regulations still in the pipeline under the “Dodd-Frank” legislation are already forcing the financial sector to contract, and threaten the business and consumer credit essential to full recovery.

In addition, few are adequately considering the longer term contractionary effects of the Fed’s current policy mischief. For years now, businesses and investments have been launched all over the country based on the near zero interest rates, and even below zero real rates, that Fed policies have perpetuated, along with the easy free money . When those rates inevitably rise back to normal, most likely after these Fed policies have resparked inflation, the basis for those businesses and investments will be gone, and many if not most will go into liquidation, which will be highly contractionary as well.

However, I am certain in any event that the Obama tax increases will result in less revenue rather than more. Obama has been proposing to increase the capital gains tax rate by 58% on the nation’s job creators, investors and successful small businesses, counting his Obamacare tax increases that take effect on January 1 as well the expiration of the Bush tax cuts. While his misleading talking points say there will be no tax increases for 97% of small businesses, that counts every Schedule C filed for every part time or hobby sole proprietorship, however marginal the earnings. The small businesses that would bear President Obama’s originally proposed tax increases earn 91% of all small business income, and employ 54% of the total private sector U.S. work force, as reported in Investors Business Daily on November 9.

Over the last 45 years, every time capital gains tax rates have been raised, revenues have fallen, and every time they have been cut, revenues have increased. The capital gains rate was raised 4 times from 1968 to 1975, climbing from 25% to 35%. The 25% rate produced real capital gains revenues in 1968 of $40.6 billion in 2000 dollars. By 1975, at the higher rate, capital gains revenues had plummeted to $19.6 billion in constant 2000 dollars, less than half as much.

After the capital gains rate was cut from 35% to 20% from 1978 to 1981, capital gains revenues had tripled by 1986 compared to 1978. Then the capital gains rate was raised by 40% in 1987 to 28%. By 1991, capital gains revenues had collapsed to $34.4 billion, down from $92.9 billion in 1986, in constant 2000 dollars adjusted for inflation.

Obama’s capital gains tax increase next year will reduce capital gains revenues again as well.

Similarly, when President Bush slashed the income tax on corporate dividends, dividends paid soared, and revenues from taxation of those dividends soared along with them. With Obama’s tax on dividends reversing that Bush tax cut, those revenue gains will also be reversed.

Finally, those earning over $1 million are the most financially agile of all taxpayers. They can move, shelter, and transform income more easily than anyone else. Most likely, the number of American millionaires, or at least American taxpayers reporting a million in income, will plummet after the Obama tax increases, and so will income taxes paid by millionaires.

Of course, if the tax increases and other policies of Obamanomics push the economy back into recession, total federal revenues will decline rather than rise. Federal deficits and debt will soar further, along with unemployment and poverty, while jobs, wages and incomes decline further. That is what happened the last time federal economic policy followed the preferred prescription of the Washington Establishment, and also adopted a package of tax increases, in return for chimerical spending reductions, when George H.W. Bush was President.

Can such public policy malpractice make any sense? President Obama says it is “fair” in his redistributionist sense of fairness. But what is fair about fewer jobs, lower wages, and higher unemployment, poverty, federal deficits, and national debt, at the price of higher taxes, for anybody?

What is fair is a flat tax, where everyone pays the same tax rate, which is true equality. Under such a tax system, if you dear reader make 10 times what I do, then you pay 10 times what I do, not 20, 30 or 40 times, as advocated by so-called “progressives,” (a polite, Americanized term for Marxist). If President Obama wants Warren Buffett to pay the same tax rate as his Secretary, he can adopt that flat tax, and the economy will boom. But President Obama seems to think that the increased dependence of further recession best suits his political interests, and those of the Democrat Party, rather than the independence fostered by a booming economy. See what I mean by “democracy failure?”

I’m a little late to this dance but the article was spot-on, much of what I said, wrote about and thought when Obama first came onto the national scene I find here. When I first saw Obama linked to “just another guy in the neighborhood” of Chicago’s Hyde Park, one Bill Ayers, I began my research in earnest.

I’m amazed that in 2015 it’s rare to find the use of “Progressive” as equal to “Marxist” definition and call out Obama for what his ideology is and represents. Not many, only a small handful in the media, will do so.

Mr. Ferrara has done anyone reading this article a huge service by not just calling Obama a Marxist but providing detailed reasons and evidence why this is so.

Unfortunately, 2+ years later Obama is now on a bullet train, utilizing executive orders, promising more to include the tax code, and his regulatory agencies to further his quest, as promised, to fundamentally transform America. All while the GOP establishment and Congressional majority remain feckless and without the intestinal fortitude to stand by the principles they promised to voters who gave them that majority. We are doomed as a country with Obama moving forward on his promise with zero opposition.

And the future only holds more “progressives” like Hillary Clinton or now, Martin O’Malley, who calls himself a “proud progressive.” I’m amazed how low information and ignorant our society has become. Is it any wonder were are not a growth country but a welfare state? The government lies about unemployment, job growth, welfare rolls, food stamp rolls, enrollee’s to Obamacare and a host of other statistics to make themselves look successful while we continue to drown as a country. And that so-called 11 million illegal immigrants is more like 23.5+ million, and that number was quoted over 2 years ago and is reliable.

America is currently playing out the sequel to “Silence of the Lambs”, when does full blown anarchy begin or will the societal carnage continue?

Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by Don Anastas - March 5, 2015 at 1:56 pm

Categories: Business, Economics, Global Warming, Govt. Regulation, Health Care, Investing, Politics, Rules for Radicals, Society, Taxes, U.S. Constitution   Tags: , ,

Fannie and Freddie Redux


A Housing Bubble

Remember the housing market meltdown and the financial crash of that a carried a huge recession into 2009? Blame Bush? Well, I blame all the political class who allowed this housing shell game exist and grow over the years.

Barack Obama is busy as ever with his Marxist minions working hard to bring more “affordable” housing to the people who can’t afford it, all the the backs of taxpayers which will eventually melt the markets once again.

With all the current attention on immigration and Obamacare few in the public are paying attention to any news on the behind the scenes market manipulation and law changes via agencies that will have an enormous negative effect on the economy.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are the culprits, besides the political forces running this enterprise. There participation in “sub-prime” loans which defaulted are the primary reason markets folded like house of cards. Any new attempts at making loans coming out of FMFM may very well stall in the Senate or face the veto pen of Barack Obama. Taxpayers handed over $188 billion in 2008 to save Fannie and Freddie.

Some experts say another default may not be imminent until 2017 but this can be postponed or halted. Fannie, Freddie and other government agencies currently buy up 90% of mortgage loans. And now we may be facing another crisis as the companies’ regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), sparked a backlash last month when it announced that it would soon lower lending standards for mortgages by permitting smaller down payments.

It’s not just the politicians who wish to play with a poor system to make it worse but a coalition of affordable housing advocates, lenders, realtors, homebuilders, and sympathetic lawmakers. The group supported some of the government’s affordable housing goals that critics say lowered lending standards, and led to numerous mortgage defaults, before the 2008 downturn.

As long as Fannie and Freddie are not held to lending standards of banks and other mortgage companies the economy and financial markets will repeat the history of 2008-9. Pressure from outside groups and weak politicians don’t care about your future, only their own.


Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by Don Anastas - November 17, 2014 at 10:30 am

Categories: Business, Economics, Investing, Politics   Tags: , ,

Obama’s Tax Increases

Obama's Tax Increase

Maybe you haven’t noticed how prices keep going up on things you buy at the grocery store or on other goods purchased elsewhere.

Oh that pesky Barack Obama and his regime have been very busy avoiding the purse strings and Constitution bypassing the House of Representatives and still managing to put the hurt on your pocketbook.

In fact, the Obama administration has managed 13 tax increases to the tune of $3 Trillion.

If you take time to watch the short video below you’ll see how subtle your taxes go up until you begin to notice it’s not just your paycheck, it’s about how you live and breathe.

Just in your day-to-day living things are costing you more, many times when you’re not prepared for a break to your personal budget.


Here’s the skinny from

13 Tax Increases That Started January 1, 2013

Tax increases the fiscal cliff deal allowed:

1. Payroll Tax: increase in the Social Security portion of the payroll tax from 4.2 percent to 6.2 percent for workers. This hits all Americans earning a paycheck—not just the “wealthy.” For example, The Wall Street Journal calculated that the “typical U.S. family earning $50,000 a year” will lose “an annual income boost of $1,000.”

2. Top marginal tax rate: increase from 35 percent to 39.6 percent for taxable incomes over $450,000 ($400,000 for single filers).

3. Phase out of personal exemptions for adjusted gross income (AGI) over $300,000 ($250,000 for single filers).

4. Phase down of itemized deductions for AGI over $300,000 ($250,000 for single filers).

5. Tax rates on investment: increase in the rate on dividends and capital gains from 15 percent to 20 percent for taxable incomes over $450,000 ($400,000 for single filers).

6. Death tax: increase in the rate (on estates larger than $5 million) from 35 percent to 40 percent.

7. Taxes on business investment: expiration of full expensing—the immediate deduction of capital purchases by businesses.

Obamacare tax increases that took effect:

8. Another investment tax increase: 3.8 percent surtax on investment income for taxpayers with taxable income exceeding $250,000 ($200,000 for singles).

9. Another payroll tax hike: 0.9 percent increase in the Hospital Insurance portion of the payroll tax for incomes over $250,000 ($200,000 for single filers).

10. Medical device tax: 2.3 percent excise tax paid by medical device manufacturers and importers on all their sales.

11. Reducing the income tax deduction for individuals’ medical expenses.

12. Elimination of the corporate income tax deduction for expenses related to the Medicare Part D subsidy.

13. Limitation of the corporate income tax deduction for compensation that health insurance companies pay to their executives.

While Barack Obama looks the American public straight in the eye, via his teleprompter, he lied to all of us over and over and over again. But we know that Barack Obama demanded these changes, these regulations set by his agencies that would raise taxes on everyone paying taxes or spending money in some way.

The United States has a $17 Trillion budget crisis and Barack Obama has caused every American to have their own personal budget crisis, one nearly impossible to manage.

Be the first to comment - What do you think?
Posted by Don Anastas - October 30, 2013 at 1:07 pm

Categories: Govt. Regulation, Health Care, Investing, Politics, Taxes, U.S. Constitution   Tags: ,

Next Page »