Obama has stated that he wants to increase rates, even if it means lower revenues. That means he wants to punish, not to improve our balance sheet.

I just stopped by to see what was up. I notice that you must be having a ton of readers and writers today–slow again.

I see no reason to extend any olive branches to Democrats who haven’t reciprocated Bush’s many attempts to make nice with them. I don’t believe I’ll go so far as to fabricate stories about the Left, as they do about us, simply because the “uncommitted” (that we are assured exist) need to know that they can trust our word when they finally realize that the word from the left is self-serving and untrustworthy.

When one considers the fact that anyone who is paying social social security at the current highest rate ($102,000 in 2008) will ultimately receive a NEGATIVE return on “investment” in order to fund the retirement for lower income earners, the tax Obama wishes to place on incomes over $250,000 is just that – a surtax.

He later said he would only go to 4% – which is 8% when the employer match is added.

This means the top rate would be at least 47.9 %.

Yes, during the 70′s, the top marginal rate was 70%, but all of the following was deductible, which isn’t today.

All interest payments, All Sales Taxes, All business Dinners, All Club Dues, The per child deduction … etc …

Much less income was subject to taxation, as so much was deductible.

Remember that the current and proposed rates are very low by 20th century US standards – they were 70% under Nixon, and higher.

The Lord will continue to get my 10%, as well as the ASPCA and the Humane Society (since these are animal charities and probably won’t count under Obama’s plan), but no one else…not for awhile anyway.

At least they did respond! They didn’t even say that they’d be happy to receive/process an individual order to send though.

This “NUTS” thing is still a “cheaper” protest than my other thought… Sending him a “BOOT.” Maybe I should’ve emailed Tom McCann?

Not only will they no longer be making charitable contributions, but the former employees won’t either. Unemployment insurance doesn’t even pay the bills.

Craig, you have it right, and you are not alone.

When businesses give, the charities get most or all of the funds directly. The government will keep/waste at least half of the taxes they collect for these organizations.

I have informed each and every one, using (paraphrasing here, as each response was different, based on the exact activities) their behaviour as a guide, that we will no longer support their organizations.

The City Mission-shelters
The Food Banks
The United Way
American Cancer-Heart … etc … societies.

And a variety of other charities …

The basics of the letter I sent each …

*Dear Sir/Madam:

Ww have supported your causes for many years, but this year, we have declined to continue with our support.

The American people – or 52%, to be exact, have decided that business owners are the problem in our country, and we need to be punished with confiscatory taxes. We were even told that our current tax rate of 37.9 % by the Federal Government alone was not enough, and that we can expect the Federal government to start taking 50-60% of our hard work, in order to give our hard earned money to those who did not earn it.

Further, by voting against this increase, we were told by our newly elected president that we are “selfish”.

As the majority of the American People decided that government was the solution, and that private business was the problem, we are bowing to their wishes.

We wish you the best of luck in getting the required funding for your organization from the Federal Government.

Best Regards,

Craigpennsylvania*

Every business owner I know has severely cut back on charitable giving since 11-04. It is not going to be a good year for charities. Perhaps, in the future, there will be an appreciation for what businesses do for our communities. In the mean time, this is but one weapon we have to fight this trend towards socialism

The response I have gotten back from some of these organizatons led to a phone call. I heard many exclaim thoughts along this line:

I had no idea that the new taxes would hit businesses so hard.

Seriously though. Mentioned it above in a reply, but wanted to expand the thought. The “NUTS” concept works on a few levels. I hope you’ll join me in sending some Peanuts to the WH on 1/20/09 to soon arrive thereafter.

Sends the McAuliffe “NUTS” message and ties-back to Jimmy Carter to boot. Perhaps we can get NutsOnline involved, like they were for the Jericho project (see Michelle Malkin blog here). Anyone have a good email address to get her attention on this!?!?

WE WILL NOT RETURN TO THESE DAYS (Democrat weakness):

Byron MacGregor (Canadian) “Stand Up America” 1979