Job Security for Bureaucrats
Today President Obama floated a budget idea to spend $634B over 10 years to “start a dialogue with Congress over how to provide coverage for an estimated 48 million uninsured.”
Whatever happened to “talk is cheap?”
Buried at the end of the article is this nugget:
The health care proposal would also limit tax deductions for upper-income individuals and families, raising about $318 billion over 10 years. Married couples making more than $250,000 would get a limited deduction for charitable contributions, local taxes and other expenses. Rather than reaping close to 40 cents on the dollar, they would be limited to 28 cents.
Such proposals are deeply controversial, particularly with nonprofit institutions that depend on wealthy donors.
Why would the state remove tax incentives for private charity? The ostensible reason is to raise funds. It’s just a convenient side effect, beloved by collectivist authoritarians, that the more charity laundered through the state, the better the elite central planners can direct it, and the more bureaucrats the state can hire to manage it. Wealth redistribution is their job, after all, and they’re jealous to keep it.
Beats working for a living, I guess.
Watch the Dow Jones on February 26, 2009! It will along side the “Andrea Doria”, and the “Titanic.”
And The Anointed One’s Knee-Jerker-In-Chief, David Axelrod says, “..The Government won’t be swayed by the Stock Market.”
I’d like to hear him explain that statement to all the financial pros at Union Investment offices where the portfolios are tanking and pensions are at real risk.
llabesab
February 26, 2009 at 3:05 am