Spotlight on Non-Profit Work, Obama Calls on “Deep Pockets”

“That’s why I’m glad that there are some deep pockets in the audience here,”
I thought those deep pockets were going to be used for paying taxes, but now they will also be used to support non-profit organizations?
The joke is on us if the country’s problems will be solved by “deep pocketed” citizens. Maybe Obama thinks that it is OK for the average citizen to be indebted to and dependent on others with deep pockets…

Deep pockets, much cash
Green manna to help the poor
Taxes to be hiked

“After the Bush administration ran up the national debt from approx $5 trillion to $10 trillion . .. and left office with the economy in virtual free-fall collapse . . . the money is going to have to come from somewhere.”
You ain’t seen nothing yet…Obama has his sights on spending that will double the national debt to close to $20T in ten years.
When it comes to runaway spending, Bush is a mere amateur compared to The One.

“We’ll examine their data, and rigorously evaluate their outcomes. We’ll invest in those with the best results; that are most likely to provide a good return on our taxpayer dollars. And we’ll require that they get matching investments from the private sector, from businesses and foundations, and philanthropists, to make those taxpayer dollars go even further.”
ACORN anyone?
Not only will ACORN have a role in the 2010 census (that ought to be fun–from the folks who have problems with their hired help committing voter registration fraud), but now they will be at the front of the line to receive billions from the federal government and forced matching billions from the private sector as part of this new program.
Frank Marshal Davis would be so very proud of his protege. Even Saul Alinski would be proud that his principles are going to be used to “change” America.

danita, please don’t forget Obama pushed hard and voted for the 700 billion tarp $. You never mention this in all your posts about Bush’s spending and you never acknowledge obama’s spending, just saying the same ol same ol and it’s getting old. it is now time for Obama to own this ecomony and for you to accept it after all he applied for the job and got it. Stop playing the blame game. Yawn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

notanobamafan . . .
How juvenile to call it a ‘blame game’.
It’s called taking responsibility for what has happened.
President Bush doubled the national debt from $5 trillion to $10 trillion (approx) and left the country in a near free-fall economic meltdown.
This left President Obama quite a mess to deal with.
People who are pounding on Obama for the mess left after the last administration are simply wrong.
And it should be clear that the collapse of the banks, financial institutions, automotive manufacturers and the offshoot industries happened during Bush’s administration, as did the TARP bail outs.
It’s simple, yes President Obama has to deal with this mess, but you cannot blame it on the current President.

tx281 . . .
You have any idea why President Obama had to spend some money?
I’m just looking at the nation debt figures in millions:
national debt on January 31, 2009 – $10,632,080
national debt on May 31, 2009 – $11,321,600
So since President Obama took office, the national debt has gone up by less than about .7 trillion dollars.

This is part of Obama’s program’, tying govt. and liberal/leftist orgs at the hip.

When are we going to see Frank Reines of Freddie Mac and the ones from Fannie Mae go to prison. Oh it must be because all the crooks from those two companies are all from the demothief party who are responsible for the collaspe of the economy. Bush and the Republican party sit back and let the demothieves destroy it and now they,(fannie and freddie employee thieves,) are all in the obama white house living it up while the American people are left to pay for the demothieves mess. Our children and grandchildren are so lucky to have a president and congress and senate who hate America and hate children and hates the Constitution.

And to all, Acorn is up to no good again. They are “protesting” banks that do not give “Loans” to unqualified buyers. Didn’t we get where we are partially for this in the first place. Of course only FOX carried this last night!

Lydia wrote:
“Think about the fact that the top 1% of Americans own 34% of all the wealth in the U.S., the next 19% owns around 50%. That means roughly the top 20% own 84% of everything. They are only paying income taxes on their income, not their wealth. So you can see how they can easily spare money to give to charity or even to pay the extra 3% income taxes on the part of their income that is in the upper brackets.”
First of all, we don’t know how Congress is going to raise the taxes on the wealthy. IF Congress does absolutely nothing, there would be about an 11%-13% federal income tax increase, not a 3% increase. President Obama and the Democrats have said that they want to let the Bush tax cuts expire. So without doing anything the tax brackets would change on January 2011 from the current (2009)–10%; 15%; 25%; 28%; 33%; 35%–to what they were in 2001–15%; 27.5%; 30.5%; 35.5%; 39.1;
In case you are not aware, the American federal income tax is a progressive tax. That means even millionaires pay a portion of their salary at the rate of the first bracket, another portion at the rate of the next bracket, another portion at the rate of the next bracket, etc.
Now then say your are right! If Congress passes a new law that increases the federal income tax on those making over $250,000 by just 3% above what they are currently scheduled to pay that would only add about $16 billion in additional revenue. Do you honestly believe that $16 billion will cover the costs.
Here is the breakdown: Based on the most current IRS statistics–2006–the top 5% of the nation’s wage earners paid a total of $616 billion in federal income tax. 3% of that total equals $18.5 billion
HOWEVER, the top 5% in 2006 were individuals making greater than $153,542. The IRS did not break down the statistics to show those making over $250,000. So an estimate would lower the total by about $2.5 billion. Thus the $16 billion total.
There is NO WAY that just a 3% increase in those making over $250,000 will cover President Obama’s spending. Ultimately EVERYONE will have to pay more. Yes even the poor–their tax credits will have to be lowered or even eliminated in order to pay for this massive spending.
Now let’s talk about the first part of your comment (1% of Americans own 34% of all the wealth; the top 20% own 84% of everything).
In 2006, the top 1% of the nation’s wage earners accounted for 39.89% of the total federal income tax revenue. The top 25% of the nation’s wage earners accounted for 86.27% of the total federal income tax revenue. I find it interesting that the wealthy are paying about the same percentage of the total federal income tax revenues as the percentage of the wealth that they account for.

Posted by: moderate | Jul 1, 2009 8:22:18 AM
Very well stated, moderate. But be prepared to be smeared as a hater, nonetheless. That’s just the way it is here.

Community Organizing has evolved into shake down artists who most often personally benefit from their campaigns (i.e. Rev Jackson boycotting Anheuser-Busch until his son gets a very lucrative A-B distributorship.)
If, “(f)oundations, corporations and individuals, …need to be part of this effort…,” why did Obama float the idea to impose new limits on charitable tax deductions, which will have the direct opposite effect?
Obama’s continued pressure and derisiveness towards those who earn over $250,000 reminds me of two sayings:
“You never miss the water till the well has run dry.” Irish proverb
and
“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” Margaret Thatcher

J House wrote: “Sooner or later he’ll be calling for changes to the U.S. constitution for a 3rd presidential term…”
Rep. José Serrano (D-NY) has already begun the first steps in the legislative process to repeal the 22nd Amendment.

Jen, yeah, I know how it works around here and am prepared for Danita to ramble on about how I’m a right winger who just spews hate and for jhw or ryan_C, whichever one is covering this thread, to spout some quote to dispute a phrase in a single sentence and then claim that negates my entire argument. Par for the course.
Oh, and James Danley, thanks for the support and the excellent reminder of the role of such actors as state governments in our current financial mess. And to save Ryan_C the trouble of snarking at you, I will point out that the proposal to repeal the 22nd amendment has been submitted repeatedly for decades now, during both the Clinton and Bush II administrations. It isn’t new with Obama, as I’m sure you know, but I figure that it will draw a new group of supporters this time around from the Obama fan club.

Projected debt by 2019 by Obama: ~$10T
2019!!! – As far as projecting budgets forward to 2019 – get a grip. Some bills will pass, others might not. There is no way you can accurately project to 2019.
And already you’re blaming Obama for spending that money, and thus spending more than any other President – how sleazy.

James Danley … .
President Bush double the national debt from $5 trillion to $10 trillion. Who did he expect to pay for this? How do you think this can be paid for?

“If you’ve missed the people who come on here every day to call the President names and use cheap-shot insults and petty slogans against him and his family in order to smear the President, then you’re not paying attention.”
Most of us call them Democrats!…Opps, sorry…fell into a time warp there for a moment!
Actually danita, the ONLY ones who come here on a consistent basis attacking a politician’s family are indeed Dems & liberals who seem to have a very scary infatuation with Sarah Palin’s family.
Who exactly here has been “attacking” the First Lady or her kids?

“If you’ve missed the people who come on here every day to call the President names and use cheap-shot insults and petty slogans against him and his family in order to SMEAR the President, then you’re not paying attention.”
Drink!

“From September 2003 through December 2007–in spite of the mainstream media and the Democrats in Congress claiming otherwise–our economy WAS BOOMING! We had record revenues, record employment and even had two quarters where revenues exceeded spending, not to mention a net of 5 million American jobs being created.”
Wages were stagnant, energy costs exploded and a housing bubble imploded.
The only reason revenues exceeded spending was because the Iraq War was no included.
Record employment? How clever and useless since that had much more to do with population increases than a reduction in unemployment.

“Historically speaking those were very good numbers.”
Except when compared with 97 thru 2000.
Also the U6 numbers were not very impressive during this low unemployment time indicating a very high number of underemployed people.

Our founding fathers left us an estate.
It was to rise or fall on its merit,
guided by a constitution. Some elected
executors have husbanded the general
wealth and welfare of the estate and
others have caused some loss in its
value. But NEVER have we handed it over
to a group that plans to dissolve it
to pay off the enablers of the current
leader. Once this happens, there is
no do-over. Your “estate” is dissolving
in front of your eyes while the press
and airwave media hand out blindfolds.
“Nothing to see here…move along..”

Jimbo. . .
“THE SAD REALITY IS THAT IF THE GOV LEFT THE ECONOMY ALONE WE WOULD BE MUCH FURTHER AHEAD THAN WE ARE NOW. OBAMA’S ECONOMIC PLANS ARE NOT WORKING OUT, SURPRISE???”
You’re a brilliant economist . .. brilliant. You should be in charge of the Federal Reserve, clean out those old Prescott Bush banking crowd and German World War II funders.
What a brilliant solution – do nothing. Damn wish I’d thought of that.

toldyaso . . .
You might have missed it, but there was an enormous financial collapse throughout 2008. The Dow Jones lost 7000 points, hundreds of thousands, millions worldwide have lost their employment.

I trust that President Obama can finally shine a little light on the unsung heroes that are overlooked who volunteer and fight for the cause they truly believe in. Non-profits such The Advocates Social Service of San Antonio, Texas which provide advocacy, education, support, and outreach to families and individuals in need of governments assistance in many social service areas. We advocate for those who have wrongfully government assistance or otherwise through our unique comprehensive case advocacy and outreach. Unfortunately, our 30 years of service is not given the respect our AntiHunger and Poverty campaign deserves;therefore we also struggle to provide the essential attention each case requires because there are no funds to pay a staff of caseworkers. We base our belief that “We carry each other’s burdens…” GA 6:2 We pray that President Obama recognizes the many non-profit organizations overlooked by our State and local government officials and representatives.