'Hater' Rationale Revises World History

Who Are We, When We Hate On Our Own Wins?
Take a gander at a quote floating around the Facebook News Feed today. I've been rustling about this since the minute I saw it... just ask my wife. “Let’s be clear on this ... Obama did NOT kill Bin Laden. An American soldier, who Obama just a few weeks ago was debating on whether or not to PAY did. Obama just happened to be in office when USA soldiers finally found and took him out. This is NOT an Obama victory, but an AMERICAN victory. Repost if you agree.” Confuse me?

Thought 1: What good (again, for emphasis)... What GOOD, could an American achieve by projecting such a thought. Why even think like this, much less advertise it? No duh its an American victory, but why any of the awful hate?

Thought 2: Given the premise above, world history has a serious problem. Let's see... should George Washington be considered the, 'Father Of Our Country?' After all, he worked hard, sat in a hot room, had some insight, signed some docs, dressed up, rode in boats and mounted horses. Further, did Henry Ford actually ever hammer out a car? Did Hitler kill millions with his 'actual' pointer finger? Did Phil Jackson or Vince Lombardi have a dunk, throw a pass, or score any points in their team's championships? How many slaves did President Abraham Lincoln free by bending bars with his own two hands, or was this just "timing?" I know this is sensitive, but go with me here... did President Reagan reeeally tear down any walls????

Now, I'd like to be clear. Sunday night was a big night for our beloved USA, and the globe. Was Barrack Obama the President when it happened? Yes. Did he pull the actual trigger that tapped Bin Ladens skull? No. Conversely, did Bin Laden fly the planes into the World Trade Center?

Whether you enjoy and/or like the sequence of events that led to this victory is on you. I simply don't understand the obvious but completely unessessary (and rather unpatriotic) partisan tone.
Want to get an American point across? Get out of bed, and try your best to produce something... and stop hating.

Secretary's Tax Rate is Perfect Spin Job

If you open your laptop to any news website, or turn on your TV to any 6:30pm news channel, or follow a bunch of cable news "talking heads" on Twitter, you're sure to have heard about The President's Plan or Economic Growth and Deficit Reduction. Love it or hate it, it's what's going on in Washington, DC right now, and Republicans and Democrats are dealing with it how they may.

In this initiative, President Obama is using a capitalistic American hero as an incredibly popular prop. Given that Warren Buffet feels the uber rich need to be taxed more, I'd use it too. I think they're calling it "The Buffett Rule."

Within this prop however, is a very compelling illustration. An illustration so perfect, that, when I read it, made me let go of my mouse and throw a few comments Amanda's way. I suppose it's all over the place now, but on page 46 of Obama's report, he exclaims, "As Warren Buffet has pointed out, his effective tax rate is lower than his secretary's." BOOM. Perfect illustration to prove a point.

Thinking a few steps further, however, reveals that things aren't as simple as the quote may hope. First, Buffet's taxes are a red hot rich mess. He's wrapped up in investments, which are taxed at a lower rate than income (Remember, the President is talking "rate" only). Second, Social Security somehow plays into his rate.

Moving along, here's my bigger thought regarding the secretary illustration. How many jobs does Warren Buffett supply? For simplistic reasons, let's say 10. If Buffett supplies 10 American jobs that receive W-2s, who pays the taxes? I suppose the short answer is that the employees do. I mean, after all, it is taken out of their paycheck.

Well, actually, it seems to me Buffett pays the taxes. Here's the rub. The taxes exist, only because a job opportunity exists (and is placed). In short, the job comes first, which is at the pleasure and opportunity born from Mr. Buffett. Sure, a tax rate may come before the job, but no one pays "tax rates." Taxes are paid, for a job a person is employed in and performs, at a rate. Taxes are paid, not tax rates.

No doubt, I'm not a tax expert. Far from it, actually. Further, I'm not a "hater," as exemplified by previous posts. No one wants the President to succeed more than me. Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama... Let's go! I'm an American, just like you.

This all said, the kabillionaire vs. secretary tax rate seemed like the perfect microcosm of what's wrong with our tax system. After all, it'll probably be a VERY effective "play" with the casual voter. Who knows, that may be the point...

Why did I post a pic of the young Warren Buffet, you ask? I can't help but wonder if the Buffett above would preach the same message we're hearing from the billionaire of today. Yesterday's Buffet had cleats on his wingtips, hustling and hoping someone would listen. Today's Buffett could wear Umbros and a Michael Jackson zipper jacket, and people would listen. Point? It's a little different once you've made it.