SmallGovt

Both Clinton and McCain are calling on congress to temporarily lift the gas tax. The Federal tax on gas is 18.4¢ per gallon. My state gas tax is 23¢ per gallon. My state has gas for about $3.51/gallon as of 4/30/2008.

15 gallons of regular will cost me $52.65. If we lift the Federal and State taxes, I will pay $46.44. this is a savings of $6.21. I would save about $25 a month. Every little bit helps.

Hell, if we are willing to have foreign investors supply the money for my $1500 stimulus package check, I think we can lift $75 or $100 worth of gas tax for the summer.

The biggest savings would be to truckers. They are using thousands of gallons of diesel (currently at $4.26/gallon). Instead of my measly $25/month, they would save thousands. This would lower the transportation cost for everything. This may slow the increasing cost of food at the grocery store. Win-Win.

Why wouldn’t we do this? Some “economists” think it’s a bad idea. They seem to think the prices would remain the same and “evil” oil companies would suck up the tax savings. Wouldn’t happen. If just one oil company kept the price low, the free market would force the others to stay low.

Maybe those economists should spend less time on politics and fire up their calculators (the math wasn’t very hard). The tax cut would be very simple.

The problem would occur when you try to reinstate the taxes. This would cause apathetic Americans to wake up and notice the high cost of hidden taxes and fees.

Here is the obligatory link to the negative Reuters story…

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080430/ts_nm/usa_politics_gastax_economists_dc

Following the Minneapolis bridge collapse, I keep seeing news stories calling for new taxes to repair our sagging infrastructure.  We should now be alarmed at the state of disrepair of our public roads and bridges.  The ONLY solution appears to be a new gas tax.

From a recent USA today article…

The Minneapolis bridge disaster that suddenly is the symbol of the nation's crumbling infrastructure could tip the scales in favor of billions of dollars in higher gasoline taxes for repairs coast to coast.

There are 500 bridges around the country similar to the Minneapolis span, and "these are potential deathtraps," says Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, former chairman of the House Transportation Committee.

"We have to, as a Congress, grasp this problem. And yes, I would even suggest, fund this problem with a tax," he says. "May the sky not fall on me."

What's the big deal?  It's only a 5¢ per gallon increase.  With gas hovering around $3 a gallon, you will hardly notice it.

I object to that line of thinking.  Let me introduce government to a new concept… reallocation. 

You are already familiar with the concept.  When your electric bill spikes with summer air conditioning costs, where does the money come from?  Do you take the bill to your employer and demand funds to cover the increased cost?  No.

In my family budget, the money is taken from other expense categories.  We don't eat out as often.  Our entertainment budget is scaled back.  We may cut back on saving (yes, we run a razor thin surplus in the family budget).  Where has the Federal Government offered to cut back? 

In the FY2008 budget, the Federal Government will spend an estimated $79.282 billion dollars on transportation.  Let's compare this to other spending categories…

There is an estimated 4% growth from FY2007 to FY2008.  If we freeze the cost of government to the FY2007 budget and apply the 4% growth to infrastructure, transportation would be funded at $202.5 Billion.  This is additional funding of %153 to infrastructure.  All other agencies would be funded with the EXACT SAME funds next year as they had this year!

Problem Solved!

It's called… living on a budget.  Congress should be required to listen to Dave Ramsey every day until they get it!  

The budget numbers in this post came from http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2008/pdf/hist.pdf

If the US government was a person, I would advise financial counseling and introduce it to the Dave Ramsey show!!!

Click the following link to find out what the FY2008 Federal Budget would look like on your income….

http://www.smallgovt.org/1/govtspending/federal_budget.html

from http://en.rian.ru/world/20070403/62999935.html

Belgium to impose tax on barbequing to fight global warming
03/04/2007 12:27 BRUSSELS, April 3 (RIA Novosti) – The government of Belgium's French-speaking region of Wallonia, which has a population of about 4 million, has approved a tax on barbequing, local media reported.

Experts said that between 50 and 100 grams of CO2, a so-called greenhouse gas, is emitted during barbequing. Beginning June 2007, residents of Wallonia will have to pay 20 euros for a grilling session.

The local authorities plan to monitor compliance with the new tax legislation from helicopters, whose thermal sensors will detect burning grills.

Scientists believe CO2 emissions are a major cause of global warming.

What is the carbon footprint of a helicopter searching for burgers on the grill?  The environmentalists are all about taxes and controlling your behavior through government.

The President has put through an emergency spending bill to fund the War in Iraq.  The request was for $105 billion.  This is enough money to give a million dollars to every person living in Allentown, Pennsylvania.

Congress has decided that the spending bill wasn't large enough.  They've loaded it with an additional $20 billion.

Read about it at http://www.examiner.com/a-619204~Congress_loads_up__20_billion_in_pork.html

What emergency war spending does the additional $20 billion cover?

From the article…

"We have provided all of the money the president requested- and more," boasted House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer.

That includes $74 million for peanut storage, $25 million for spinach growers and $100 million for citrus growers.

It also includes $16 million to convert the old Food and Drug Administration building in southwest D.C. into more office space for the Capitol. That "emergency" expenditure comes at a time when taxpayers already shell out $600 million "more than double the original estimate" for a mammoth expansion of the Capitol, which includes 160,000 feet of new office space.

Get out your checkbook.  Washington wants your help (or at least your money).

A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon it adds up to real money.

Attributed to Senator Everett Dirksen
US politician (1896 – 1969)
(Quote info)

Halliburton is planning to move it's corporate headquarters to Dubai.  As expected the Libs are livid.  Check out the article here… http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070312/bs_afp/usuaecompany_070312213245

Hillary said…

"Does this mean they are going to quit paying taxes in America?" asked Clinton, a US presidential candidate.

"They get a lot of government contracts, is this going to affect the investigations that are going on? Because we have a lot of evidence of misuse of government contracts and how they have cheated the American soldier and cheated the American taxpayer," Clinton, speaking in New York, said of Halliburton.

Patrick Leahy said…

"It's an example of corporate greed at its worst," said Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"At the same time they'll be avoiding US taxes, I'm sure they won't stop insisting on taking their profits in cold hard US cash," Leahy charged.

Let's look at Halliburton for a minute.  Aren't they a "Big Oil" company? 

There are huge oil deposits in the United States.  Oil was first drilled in Pennsylvania.  It is found in large quantities in Texas and Alaska.  There have been huge strikes in the Gulf of Mexico.  New technologies can allow us to process vast quantities of shale oil from Colorado.  We can produce fuel from coal.  One of the largest coal deposits on the planet is in Ohio.  We have resources here in the good ole USA.  However, environmentalist won't let oil companies drill for oil here.  Drilling for oil will destroy the planet. 

Oil drilling can only occur on the other side of the planet.  I find it ironic that we all live on the same planet.  As long as it is the desert in the Middle East, enviro-weenies are OK with it.  It is important that our security with oil be influenced by people who generally wish us dead (but enjoy our money).

If companies must drill for oil in the Middle East, why shouldn't they be managed from the middle east?  Have you seen Dubai lately?  It is turning into a Las Vegas style resort.   Have you seen the Palm Jumeirah Island?

As for taxes, maybe they will get a break (but I doubt it).  They are still incorporated in the US.  They will still pay US taxes. 

Halliburton has been the focus of a lot of anti-business venom over the last few years.  Maybe they are shifting toward a US exit strategy.   If you don't understand why a US company would look to shift overseas, you should read a "Clear Explanation of Tax Cuts" at…

Socialist politicians hate private business, but they love the tax revenues.  It funds the expansion of government…

"The other day the oil companies recorded the highest profits in the history of the world. I want to take those profits. And I want to put them into a strategic energy fund that will begin to fund alternative smart energy, alternatives and technologies that will actually begin to move us in the direction of independence."

Hillary Clinton
2/2/2007

Watch it at…   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1PfE9K8j0g

Hillary said,"I want to take those profits."  The truth slips out?

When was the last time the US Government produced anything?  The private sector is where innovation occurs.  Clean energy independence will occur when government gets out of the way of private industry.  Vilification and punishing taxes don't help.

What is the true cost of governemt? Take the cost of government and divide it by the population. How much do you owe? Find out here…

 http://www.smallgovt.org/1/govtspending/cost-calculator.html

The following is one of the best explanations of tax cuts that I have ever seen. It is usually attributed to Professor David R. Kamersche, of the University of Georgia’s Economics Department. However, On his personal website, he denies writing it.

CLEAR EXPLANATION OF TAX CUTS

Author: Unknown

Sometimes politicians, journalists and others exclaim; “It’s just a tax cut for the rich!” and it is just accepted to be fact, without questioning it But what does that really mean?

Just in case you are not completely clear and/or do not understand this issue, the following should help, if you are a reasonable person

Let’s put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1…
The sixth would pay $3…
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that’s what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.”Drinks for the ten of you now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

“I only got a dollar out of the $20,” declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,” but he got $10!” ; “Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!”

“That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking somewhere else where the atmosphere is friendlier.