Liked on YouTube: Blindsided! You’ll Never Believe How They’re Taking Away Obama’s Pension — Barack Is Livid
Blindsided! You’ll Never Believe How They’re Taking Away Obama’s Pension — Barack Is Livid
SOURCE : https://goo.gl/hmd6aY Blindsided! You’ll Never Believe How They’re Taking Away Obama’s Pension — Barack Is Livid Political progressives love the progressive income tax. This is the system under which we operate and by which the tax rate increases as one’s income increases. This is based on the idea that the wealthy can afford to pay a higher percentage of their income as taxes, and thus the tax code should compel them to do so. A different perspective would be to see it as a penalty for being financially successful. The issue for liberals is that it is a powerful vote recruitment tool among working Americans who never expect to be that successful. As such, the progressive income tax works to transfer money from the wealthy to those less fortunate. But, if you extend this theory of “soaking the rich” to other areas, there’s a problem for the left. Should the wealthy still be eligible for lavish government stipends and subsidies? If you believe in progressive taxation, the answer should be no. So why do former presidents receive lavish pensions? They can give speeches for a quarter-million a pop at least. So what do they need any subsidies for, let alone a pension? The Senate has seen this inconsistency and is preparing to pass a bill to lower all presidential pensions. Mr. Obama isn’t happy. That’s too bad. He should be glad Congress doesn’t just end all presidential pensions and subsidies as they should. Secret Service protection for the rest of his life ought to be enough.A Senate committee approved a bill Wednesday to reduce the salary former presidents can make, years after former President Barack Obama vetoed similar legislation in 2015. “The update to the Former Presidents Act would reduce how much former presidents receive in pension from the taxpayers and reduce total amount of money taxpayers contribute to former commanders in chief. “‘Our national debt now exceeds $20 trillion; this bipartisan effort is another important step toward reigning in Washington’s out-of-control spending,’ Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst, sponsor of the Senate legislation, said in a statement. “‘It is ridiculous to continue asking taxpayers to help foot the bill for former presidents’ perks at a time when they already rake in millions of dollars from book deals, speaking engagements, and more.'”
via YouTube https://youtu.be/LRiU87IEZE8
SOURCE : https://goo.gl/hmd6aY Blindsided! You’ll Never Believe How They’re Taking Away Obama’s Pension — Barack Is Livid Political progressives love the progressive income tax. This is the system under which we operate and by which the tax rate increases as one’s income increases. This is based on the idea that the wealthy can afford to pay a higher percentage of their income as taxes, and thus the tax code should compel them to do so. A different perspective would be to see it as a penalty for being financially successful. The issue for liberals is that it is a powerful vote recruitment tool among working Americans who never expect to be that successful. As such, the progressive income tax works to transfer money from the wealthy to those less fortunate. But, if you extend this theory of “soaking the rich” to other areas, there’s a problem for the left. Should the wealthy still be eligible for lavish government stipends and subsidies? If you believe in progressive taxation, the answer should be no. So why do former presidents receive lavish pensions? They can give speeches for a quarter-million a pop at least. So what do they need any subsidies for, let alone a pension? The Senate has seen this inconsistency and is preparing to pass a bill to lower all presidential pensions. Mr. Obama isn’t happy. That’s too bad. He should be glad Congress doesn’t just end all presidential pensions and subsidies as they should. Secret Service protection for the rest of his life ought to be enough.A Senate committee approved a bill Wednesday to reduce the salary former presidents can make, years after former President Barack Obama vetoed similar legislation in 2015. “The update to the Former Presidents Act would reduce how much former presidents receive in pension from the taxpayers and reduce total amount of money taxpayers contribute to former commanders in chief. “‘Our national debt now exceeds $20 trillion; this bipartisan effort is another important step toward reigning in Washington’s out-of-control spending,’ Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst, sponsor of the Senate legislation, said in a statement. “‘It is ridiculous to continue asking taxpayers to help foot the bill for former presidents’ perks at a time when they already rake in millions of dollars from book deals, speaking engagements, and more.'”
via YouTube https://youtu.be/LRiU87IEZE8
Comments