Real personal income for Americans – excluding government payouts such as Social Security – has fallen by 3.2 percent since President Obama took office in January 2009, according to the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis.
For comparison, real personal income during the first 15 months in office for President George W. Bush, who inherited a milder recession from his predecessor, dropped 0.4 percent. Income excluding government payouts increased 12.7 percent during Mr. Bush’s eight years in office.
“This is hardly surprising,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, an economist and former director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. “Under President Obama, only federal spending is going up; jobs, business startups, and incomes are all down. It is proof that the government can’t spend its way to prosperity.”
According to the bureau’s statistics, per capita income dropped during 2009 in 47 states, with only modest gains in the other states, West Virginia, Maine and Maryland. But most of those increases were attributed to rising income from the government, such as Medicare and unemployment benefits.
And tax hikes are right around the corner, because his massive spending requires it.
Insurer Prudential Financial Inc. said Monday that it will take a $100 million charge in the first quarter in relation to the recent health care overhaul legislation.
The life insurance and annuities provider said in a regulatory filing that it will take the charge against earnings in the first quarter.
Prudential joins a growing list of companies that have said they will take accounting charges because of the health care bills. AT&T said last week it would take a $1 billion charge in the first quarter. AK Steel Corp., 3M Co., Caterpillar Inc., Deere & Co. and Valero Energy have also said they would take smaller charges.
Prudential said in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission that the health bill signed into law by President Barack Obama last week and a companion measure he is expected to sign Tuesday will reduce its tax deduction for retiree health care costs beginning in 2013.
Companies that provide prescription drug benefits for retirees have been getting subsidies covering 28 percent of eligible costs but could deduct everything they spent on the benefits — including the federal money — from their taxable income.
Normally I oppose subsidies, but this one one was keeping the elderly off the even more wasteful Medicare prescription drug plan. (I hate that plan – it was a huge mistake made by an otherwise good president). These companies are going to dump the pensioners onto Medicare and it will cost EVEN MORE to have an inefficient government run the program, with all the waste and fraud that plagues Medicare now.
Ace writes:
That subsidy was to induce companies to keep retirees on their own corporate plans rather than dump them into taxpayer-funded Medicare. Now that they’ve cut the subsidy, not only is it costing these businesses money, but many are thinking of giving up the subsidy and dumping them into government health care.
Remember, if you like your insurance, you get to keep your insurance.
In fact, Waxman doesn’t want an answer to that; what he wants is for companies to hide these new, embarrassing costs illegally, so that Democrats don’t have to answer questions about them. And he figures harassment and the threat of punitive legislative action should be enough to give other companies the hint.
Preemptive Strike? Rich Lowry says it’s part of the Democrats’ plan to claim that all negative consequences of this bill are due to a conspiracy between evil corporations.
Illinois Tool Works Inc. (NYSE: ITW) today announced that as a result of certain provisions in the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care program, future Medicare prescription drug subsidies received by the Company for retiree prescription drug coverage will now be taxable. As a result, the Company expects to record a discrete tax adjustment of $22 million, or 4 cents of diluted income per share from continuing operations, in its 2010 first quarter results to reflect this change in tax treatment. This discrete tax adjustment was not included in the Company’s March 15, 2010 revised earnings forecast.
Wow. We’re in freaking North Korea now. Next time, don’t vote for the radical socialist. Socialism makes jobs go away. This is not a surprise to anyone on the right. We know these things because we’re grown ups. We know how the world works. Happy talk doesn’t grow the economy.
First the video of Democrat Senator Max Baucus explaining what health care reform was really about.
That’s the truth that no one would speak of until the bill had passed. It’s not a bill about health care – it’s a bill about redistributing wealth from rich to poor. The bill’s whole purpose is to capitalize on people’s fears to gain the power to equalize life outcomes by moving money around.
That’s what government-run health care is – it reduces the costs of risky behavior for some people by pushing them onto hard-working people who pay taxes. Those who need abortions, sex changes and in vitro get paid, those who work the hardest and live the cleanest pay. The way to get paid is to engage in risky and/or immoral behavior, and the way to pay is to engage in hard work – like starting your own business to create jobs. Those are the incentives that Democrats create with the government takeover of health care.
And the New Ledger article explains what it means to have the government take care of you.
Excerpt:
America was built on the belief that the dreams of each of us could be achieved through hard work, self-determination, and persistence. Immigrants from around the globe came to these shores to find refuge from the very governmental policies this administration is imposing on its citizens. Many an American has fought and died for our right to live in a nation of self-starters, where your hard work would allow you to provide a better life for your children, and grand-children, where you and your family were able to enjoy the fruits of your labor.
Senator Baucus’ admission reveals the true nature of these policies – create an America where the incentive to succeed is squashed. Those who work tirelessly to provide for their family are not rewarded for their efforts, but penalized. In the Democrat’s America, those who sit lazily on their duff, are the ones who are rewarded.
This approach will not lift up the poor, but enslave them to the tit of federal leviathan. Without an education, or job training, or dream, Americans will be able to sit, aloof in front of their television and drown their sorrows in Big Macs and beer, still assured of their free health care and their government check. They will not earn that money after a hard day’s work…
The Democrats want people who work hard to have less money of their own. That makes it harder for hard-workers to execute their own life plan. So, it means that people who work hard will have to accept what the government gives them instead – public schools, public hospitals, public libraries, public universities, etc. That way everyone will be equal. Equally dependent on the government.
But these public facilities may not always be the best for Christians who have Christian life plans. And if you think that a secular government is going to give you what you need to raise a Christian family, think again. They’ll put Kevin Jennings, Planned Parenthood, the SEIU and Al Gore in the school to teach your children about same-sex marriage, abortion, socialism and global warming. And you’ll have no money left over to resist them.
Republicans want people to get their own jobs and to earn their own income. Pay their own way. Dream their own dreams. And to achieve those dreams. This is a lot better for Christians with a plan to do things in a way that honors Christ.
What do these graphs say to marriage-minded men?
These graphs are a green light to a man. They say to a man: “MARRY AND HAVE CHILDREN NOW”. They say that the harder you work, the more you will be able to provide for your family. That it is safe to take the responsibility for a wife and children, because it is in your power to protect them and provide for them. They mean that a man has nothing to worry about – that he should stop worrying about the future and just go for it! And this isn’t just a blind faith that things will work out – there are reasons to believe that things will work out. More income and more jobs means that things are more likely to work out.
What do 77% of young, unmarried women really want?
77% of young, unmarried women voted for Obama. They don’t really want husbands to protect and provide for them – because they voted for less personal income and fewer jobs. That’s what they’ve voted for, anyway. If they didn’t want to dissuade men from marrying, then maybe they shouldn’t have voted for Obama.
WINTERY KNIGHT 