flstf

I don't believe that someone with his knowledge and backround did not know he owed the taxes. As I understand it the I.M.F. does not withhold payroll taxes for SS and Medicare but gave him an amount equal to the employer's half with the expectation that honest people will use that to pay the I.R.S.. He not only did not pay his half but kept the amount they contributed toward his liability. I think he and his accountant figured they were too smart to get caught and when they were he only paid the taxes owed for 2003 and 2004 because 2001 and 2002 were past the statute of limitations. Only after being vetted for Treasury Secretary did he pay for 2001 and 2002. Now he is the head of the I.R.S., you can't make this stuff up.

Unless the money allocated in the bill comes directly to us it is trickling down from somewhere. Our polititians are good at trickling down to their contributors, friends and family but not so much the rest of us.

Derwood

wait, raising taxes on cigarettes is the same as raising them on all of the lower class? pardon me if I have no sympathy; a group of people with limited income spending $3000-$5000 a year on a bad habit is getting taxed more? boo hoo. they're a drain on the health insurance industry.

and this is coming from a guy who is a bleeding heart liberal

flstf

The average pack a day smoker pays about $900 per year in federal and state tobacco taxes, The tobacco industry has settled suits for about $250 billion so far. Together this probably more than offsets the increased cost of smoker's healthcare. Plus when you buy healthcare insurance they already charge smokers for the additional required. When added together smokers already pay more than they cost society for healthcare.

The government knows this so why should they put an additional burden on smokers especially since the majority of the money will come from the lower income groups? If we are really concerned about tobacco users healthcare costs then why not use the money for this instead of paying for other people's kids?

Obama should have insisted that the SCHIP funding come from the higher income groups. A sin tax increase on the lower income groups is still a tax increase.

Derwood

It's a tax increase on a non-necessity. It's not like he's increasing the taxes on rent, milk, etc. If a lower income person doesn't like the tax increase, then quit smoking.

Also, I don't know a single smoker who actually admits to being a smoker on their health insurance applications

robot_parade

Well, that's certainly a possibility, and I don't have any evidence to prove my interpretation over yours...so I'm willing to call this one a draw. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, and you aren't. Furthermore, I don't find his tax issues to be that big a negative influence on my opinion of O'Bama, while you do. Just a difference of opinion. No problem. :-)

Ok, but that's not what the term 'trickle down economics' means in common parlance. If you make up your own definitions for words, you're going to be misunderstood.

Quite a lot of the bill is in the form of tax cuts, which I guess fits your definition of coming directly to 'us'. Other parts of the bill go directly towards things that benefit those who are most in financial need, like funding for state unemployment insurance programs. Other parts go to encouraging 'green' technologies, which help directly by stimulating those businesses and thus providing jobs, improving the long term environmental outlook, and helping the US maintain it's technological edge.

boatin

I voted more than, because although I expected him to keep his promises and begin the processes of fixing things, he's moving MUCH faster than I thought possible. I'm very impressed.

In related news, I'm constantly amazed at people that bitch about the scope of the problems and then aren't interested in uncomfortable change. Obama has a long uphill climb, that's for certain.