Obama’s Budget – Kids in The Candy Store


First download the wonderful new nugget of‭ ‬$3,600,000,000,000‭ ‬budget from:


Next,‭ ‬and this is just to get an idea how Obama and his White House look at funds,‭ ‬do a search for the word‭ “‬leverage‭” ‬and note how it is used throughout the document.‭ ‬In this you’ll find the exact means of the federal reserve system being asserted as a means to achieve universal health care coverage,‭ ‬the same system that has been instrumental in causing The Great Depression and every other economic downturn,‭ ‬including our current one.

After this search please initiate a new search through this pdf file for‭ “‬250.‭” ‬Numerous things were found,‭ ‬and this is what I found of interest:

On‭ ‬Page‭ ‬28‭ (‬reviewed after findings on page‭ ‬29‭)‬:

‭”‬Financing health Care Reform. ‭The reserve fund is financed by a‭ combination‭ ‬of rebalancing the tax code so that the wealthiest pay more as well as specific health care savings in three areas:‭ ‬promoting efficiency and accountability,‭ ‬aligning incentives toward quality,‭ ‬and
encouraging shared responsibility‭ (‬see Table‭ ‬1‭)‬.

“‭Taken together‭‬,‭ ‬the health care savings would
total‭ ‬$316‭ ‬billion over‭ ‬10‭ ‬years while improving
the quality and efficiency of health care,‭ ‬without
negatively affecting the care Americans receive.‭”

On Page‭ ‬29‭ ‬we find Table‭ ‬1,‭ ‬I am posting the information of the table and not its formatting:

‭”‬Table‭ ‬1.
Reserve for Health Reform

$‭ ‬in billions‭ ‬2010‭ ‬2011‭ ‬2012‭ ‬2013‭ ‬2014‭ ‬2010-14‭ ‬2010-19
‭Federal Health Savings‭ ‬………………………….‭ ‬-1.8‭ ‬-5.1‭ ‬-18.0‭ ‬-24.5‭ ‬-34.3‭ ‬-83.7‭ ‬-316.0‭
Aligning incentives toward quality‭ ‬………………………..‭ ‬0.0‭ ‬-0.4‭ ‬-1.3‭ ‬-1.7‭ ‬-2.1‭ ‬-5.4‭ ‬-20.5
Promoting efficiency/accountability‭ ‬……………………..‭ ‬-1.8‭ ‬-4.3‭ ‬-16.2‭ ‬-22.2‭ ‬-31.5‭ ‬-75.9‭ ‬-287.4
Encouraging shared responsibility‭ ‬……………………….‭ ‬0.0‭ ‬-0.4‭ ‬-0.6‭ ‬-0.7‭ ‬-0.8‭ ‬-2.4‭ ‬-8.1
‭New Revenues‭ ‬……………………………………………….‭ ‬……..‭ ‬-11.1‭ ‬-30.8‭ ‬-33.5‭ ‬-35.5‭ ‬-110.8‭ -317.8‭
Subtotal:‭ ‬Reserve for Health Reform‭ ‬……….‭ ‬-1.8‭ ‬-16.2‭ ‬-48.8‭ ‬-58.0‭ ‬-69.8‭ ‬-194.6‭ ‬-633.8
Additional resources and new benefits,‭ ‬to
be determined with Congress
Net Cost—Reserve Fund‭ ‬…………………………….‭ ‬0.0‭ ‬0.0‭ ‬0.0‭ ‬0.0‭ ‬0.0‭ ‬0.0‭ ‬0.0‭”

The italicized portion is what I find intriguing because the primary source is:

‬”Reducing Itemized Deduction Rate for Families With Incomes Over‭ ‬$250,000.‭ ‬
Lowering‭ ‬health care costs and expanding health insurance coverage will require additional
revenue.‭ ‬In the health reform policy discussions that have taken place over the past
few years,‭ ‬a wide range of revenue options have been discussed—and these options
are all worthy of serious discussion as the Administration works with the Congress to
enact health care reform.‭ The Administration’s Budget includes a proposal to limit
the tax rate at which high-income taxpayers can take itemized deductions to‭ ‬28‭ ‬percent‭—
and the initial reserve fund would be funded in part through this provision.‭ This
provision would raise‭ ‬$318‭ ‬billion over‭ ‬10‭ ‬years.‭”

Okay now let’s look at Page‭ ‬123,‭ “‬Table S-6‭ Mandatory‭ ‬and Receipt Proposals‭” ‬and you’ll find the follow verbage

“upper-income tax provisions‭ dedicated‭‬to
deficit reduction:

‭”reinstate the‭ ‬36‭ ‬percent and‭ ‬39.6‭ ‬percent rates for those taxpayers earning over‭ ‬$250,000‭ (‬married‭) ‬and‭ ‬$200,000‭ (‬single‭)

“reinstate the personal exemption phaseout and limitation on itemized deductions for
those taxpayers earning over‭ ‬$250,000‭ (‬married‭) ‬and‭ ‬$200,000‭ (‬single‭)

“Impose‭ ‬20‭ ‬percent rate on capital gains and dividends for those taxpayers earning over‭ ‬$250,000‭ (‬married‭) ‬and‭ ‬$200,000‭ (‬single‭)”

And this is the most interesting,‭ ‬which I present in my own manner here (My limited html is about to show):

Column A

‭‬Total,‭ ‬upper-income
tax provisions‭
dedicated to‭
deficit reduction

2009:‭ ‬182
2010:‭ –‬1,102
2011:‭ –‬28,461‭
2012:‭ –‬49,012‭
2013:‭ –‬58,153
2014:‭ –‬67,271‭
2015:‭ –‬74,595‭
2016:‭ –‬80,559‭
2017:‭ –‬86,638‭
2018:‭ –‬92,333‭
2019:‭ –‬98,600
2010-2014:‭ –‬203,999‭
‬2010-2019:‭ –‬636,724‭

Column B


2009: 28,627
2010:‭ 46,915
2011:‭ -25,784
2012: 13,289
2013: 1,091
2015:‭ -10,015
2017: -15,058
2018: -18,295
2019: -22,419
2010-2014:‭ ‬27,599
‭‬2010-2019:‭ ‬-49,964

So now if we take the‭ ‬2010-2019‭ ‬total of‭ “‬-636,824” ‬from colum A, the above suggests that‭ ‬50%‭ ‬of the tax increases on the wealthy (318 billion) will be used solely for health care reform over the next‭ ‬10‭ ‬years,‭ ‬at least in regard to starting a‭ “‬reserve fund‭” ‬for health care.

The reserve,‭ ‬which will be‭ ‬50%‭ ‬funded by‭ ‬50%‭ ‬of the‭ “‬increase in taxes on the wealthiest Americans‭” ‬will never work,‭ ‬never happen,‭ ‬never appear,‭ ‬for contingencies will occur,‭ ‬contingencies beyond this budget’s numbers,‭ ‬contingencies made by those who control the purse,‭ ‬Congress.‭ ‬Imagine after‭ ‬663‭ ‬billion dollars,‭ ‬or any portion thereof,‭ ‬is collected in a health care reserve what Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi will do with that‭ “‬leveraged‭” ‬fund‭ (‬as though we do not know on the basis of how the Social Security‭ “‬Trust‭” ‬fund is handled‭)‬.‭ ‬And Obama will be powerless to stop them,‭ ‬if he wishes to win re-election.‭ ‬That my friends is what this health care‭ ‬plan and every reserve in this budget means to Congress,‭ ‬and is setting up in the failure of America.


The following section may seem confusing,‭ ‬and is intended for those who’ve an idea about bookkeeping,‭ ‬yet I find it necessary to preface. ‬To say that‭ “‬Federal Health Saving‭” ‬in a budget is to compare‭ ‬the numbers budgeted at this time to a time previous,‭ ‬and,‭ ‬in this way savings is merely amounts not spent.‭ ‬Thus there is no‭ accumulation‭ ‬of these funds,‭ ‬they merely are not spent.‭ ‬There is no appropriation of the amounts from last year to then spend what is intended on the budget this year and accumulate the year-to-year balances over the given period,‭ ‬here‭ ‬10‭ ‬years.‭ ‬Particularly in government this just does not happen,‭ ‬especially when the environment,‭ ‬the economic environment will present its own contingencies which require any‭ “‬excess‭” ‬be spent.‭

And this is not to take into considerations that‭ “‬New Revenues‭” ‬is that portion taken in by taxes.‭ ‬These‭ “‬Federal Health Savings‭” ‬are being positioned as an add on to the new revenues to form a reserve fund,‭ ‬but,‭ ‬they cannot be in light of merely being amounts not spent.‭ ‬The only money going into a reserve fund according to this budget will be the increased taxes through lowering the taxable deductions to‭ ‬28%,‭ ‬which lowers the amount given to charity.‭ ‬Many hospitals,‭ ‬their life blood,‭ ‬is charitable giving.‭ ‬Loss of amounts given due to a lesser amount being subject to tax deduction shifts the burden of funding the hospital from the hospitals own ability and responsibility to the government.‭ ‬Note Michelle Obama’s increased salary after her husband became a U.S.‭ ‬Senator‭ (‬See‭ http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2006/09/hospital_offici.html‭)‬,‭ ‬that,‭ ‬in light of this setting of salaries for those financial institutions taking government bailout money,‭ ‬General Motors,‭ ‬and others to salaries far below the worldwide standard for bank executives,‭ ‬it only stands to reason that shifting the health care community’s source of funds from private to government,‭ ‬should result in a reduction in the salaries of hospital executives as well‭ (‬i.e Michelle and her other‭ ‬12‭ ‬Vice Presidents, friends at the hospital would, receive less than‭ ‬$316,000‭ ‬a year,‭ ‬less than they do right now as a non profit organization,‭ ‬or at least they should if they are getting government money to offset government taxation of the wealthy.‭ ‬This certainly doesn’t appear to be‭ “‬Aligning incentives toward quality‭” ‬as this‭ ‬budget claims it is proposing.‭)

Ambiguity in Posting Expense Saving‭ ‬+‭ ‬Revenues‭ = ‬Reserve‭

The total amount claimed to be raised as‭ “‬New Revenues‭” ‬in the health care portion on page‭ ‬29‭ ‬is‭ ‬318‭ ‬billion‭ (‬317.8‭ ‬in Table‭ ‬1‭ ‬above‭) ‬while the‭ “‬Federal Health Savings‭” ‬claimed is‭ ‬316‭ ‬billion.‭ ‬So now how is it‭ “‬the initial reserve fund would be funded in part through this provision‭” ‬in light of the text stating‭ “‬318‭ ‬billion‭” ‬after Table‭ ‬1‭? ‬Wouldn’t this reserve fund be entirely funded by these assumed government revenues to be gained by higher taxes‭? ‬I wouldn’t be asking but for the fact this total amount of new revenues from‭ “‬taxes on the wealthiest Americans‭” ‬is later stated far in excess of the amount claimed for health care,‭ ‬and is in fact‭ ‬50%‭ ‬of the total revenues from this new taxation,‭ ‬636‭ ‬billion.

Apparently either someone doesn’t understand math,‭ ‬this proposal is nothing more than a spin by saying‭ “‬partial‭” ‬to minimize the impact of raising these taxes,‭ ‬or we are just being outright lied to by Obama once again‭ ‬–‭ ‬as though he’s still running for office.‭ ‬Does the White House have a clue what they are doing‭? ‬I mean the only thing that is transparent here is their incompetence.‭

How many people really believe the wealthy are just going to go along in‭ “‬business as usual‭” ‬fashion when their itemized deductions have been lowered‭? ‬What I mean is:‭ ‬It seems Obama and his people believe the wealthy will just sit around,‭ ‬will just leave their money subject to the new increased taxes.‭ ‬People do that when taxes go down,‭ ‬but not when they go up.‭ ‬Then the money is moved,‭ ‬even entirely out of the marketplace.‭ ‬Now that of course creates a lowering of available credit.‭ ‬Is Obama trying to help America recover or just bring this country down by destroying its economic system,‭ ‬capitalism,‭ ‬established by the founding fathers‭? ‬His policies appear geared to make America fail,‭ ‬the proverbial‭ “‬kick in the ribs‭” ‬while we and every other nation in the world are down on the ground already.

‭Of Course Obama is Prepared‭

The above misrepresentations and political positioning,‭ ‬to be able to say‭ “‬50%‭ ‬of the new taxes pay for universal health care‭” ‬next election,‭ ‬is on top of codifying the the‭ “‬Economic Substance Doctrine,‭” ‬a dangerous doctrine that is itself not judicially resolved.‭ (‬See‭ http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/pub/irs-utl/economic_substance‭_(‬1‭_‬25‭_‬05‭)‬.pdf‭)

Basically the government gets to determine if your money was invested in an investment for an economic purpose,‭ ‬the‭ “‬economic substance.‭” ‬Up to this point in time this was used to attack tax shelters.‭ ‬However,‭ ‬imagine this in your day to day life.‭ ‬For example a family member asks you to invest in a business with them,‭ ‬it may be a few hundred dollars to help them get their website up or something similar.‭ ‬Later your relative contacts you in regard to the IRS contacting them,‭ ‬notifying them that due to the nature of this transaction,‭ ‬that the amount invested by you appears to have been made to bring your tax liability within a lower tax bracket,‭ ‬and:

‭”‬Pursuant to the economic substance doctrine,‭ ‬T26,‭ ‬Section‭ ‬####,‭ ‬the IRS is authorized to audit and review your accounts to determine if your business is viable to be a business in an overall review of your brother’s deduction meeting the economic substance test.‭”

Business according to government’s whim,‭ ‬at their pleasure and determination of what is the‭ “‬economic substance‭” ‬of your acts solely to assure their revenues do not decrease.
President Obama,‭ ‬in his need to make every first he can has provided for codification of‭ “‬The Economic Substance Doctrine,‭” ‬in this budget proposal on page‭ ‬122,‭ “‬Table S-6.‭ Mandatory‭ ‬and Receipt Proposals.‭”

Again in the past this doctrine has been used against tax shelters,‭ ‬which,‭ ‬when you look at his increased taxation of the wealthy,‭ ‬will be the natural course of the wealthy,‭ ‬to assure they do not use their‭ principal‬,‭ ‬and instead,‭ ‬make money from their‭ principal‬,‭ ‬their property.‭ ‬As with housing Lawyer Obama did not agree that banks should lend money on the basis of the loan being paid back‭ (‬i.e.‭ ‬at interest,‭ ‬with a down payment,‭ ‬to people who have a job and will pay it back‭)‬,‭ ‬so too it appears he feels the wealthy should not make as much as possible on their capital,‭ ‬that their profit is public excess‭ ‬to be used at the‭ ‬government’s whim.‭ ‬This is very disconcerting because it‭ ‬trespasses upon equal opportunity.‭ ‬Every American can be wealthy,‭ ‬why should those who were wealthy before an up and coming generation of Americans,‭ ‬who worked hard for their wealth,‭ ‬have had any greater benefit‭? ‬If anything the greater benefit should fall to the following generations as even further incentives for future generations.

Yet for Obama,‭ ‬The Economic Substance Doctrine appears to be his silver bullet against the Were Wolf Wealthy,‭ ‬to assure collection of those taxes on the wealthy at every turn,‭ ‬every corner.‭ ‬Their money is treated as government property and this my friends will lead to their money stored for no return on principal and just spent,‭ ‬not invested to produce anything beyond its own value,‭ ‬to produce inventions,‭ ‬jobs,‭ ‬and a better life for Americans.‭ ‬No instead it will just be taken out of circulation,‭ ‬our reward for electing a President whose socialist policy is punishing them for having played by the American Capitalist Rules of Freedom.‭ ‬To them it is better that we who worked for the money,‭ ‬or our heirs,‭ ‬spend it than hand an ever increasing portion of the residual profit derived from our wealth to government.‭

Now of course the wealthy could maybe challenge this codification of a court doctrine,‭ ‬particularly an unsettled one,‭ ‬but challenging taxation has always been a sticky mess,‭ ‬our government believes it is guaranteed an income that is ever increasing,‭ ‬irrespective of‭ everyone else’s income falling,‭ ‬but that’s how you afford endless government expansion,‭ ‬ask anyone from an Eastern Block Country who has migrated to America,‭ ‬they’ll explain.‭ ‬In any event,‭ ‬should the wealthy,‭ ‬or anyone else who needs to,‭ ‬want to challenge this codification of the‭ “‬Economic Substance Doctrine,‭” ‬see Title‭ ‬42,‭ ‬Section‭ ‬2000bb,‭ ‬The Religious Freedom Restoration Act,‭ ‬legislating a court doctrine which later the court strikes as Unconstitutional per The Separation of Powers,‭ ‬Title‭ ‬42‭ ‬Section‭ ‬2000bb has since been repealed by Congress.

Maybe all of this is due to Obama financial backer George Soros,‭ ‬and his claimed belief that consumerism is the engine of the American economy,‭ ‬and that this engine is dead‭ (‬see‭ http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/10102008/watch.html‭)‬.‭ ‬Apparently,‭ ‬the wealth of this nation,‭ ‬whose volume of dollars has grown along with the number of people they employ,‭ ‬is of no significance as opposed the number of wealthy in Romania,‭ ‬Russia,‭ ‬Venezuela,‭ ‬Saudi Arabia,‭ ‬China,‭ ‬Cuba and every other nation in the world,‭ ‬where a literal handful or less of citizens have‭ “‬wealth‭” ‬and the remainder is in poverty,‭ ‬with a miniscule few slightly more comfortable so long as they are subject to the whim of the wealthy alone.‭ ‬This is a true‭ “‬earmark‭” ‬of liberalism,‭ ‬the new brand name of feudal rule after Marxism,‭ ‬communism,‭ ‬socialism,‭ ‬and fascism didn’t work‭ (‬Why I will occasionally refer to George Soros as‭ “‬The new King George.‭”)‬.

By the way,‭ ‬another good one to search this budget for is‭ “‬reserve.‭” ‬Which makes sense when you are designing the entire budget on the basis of leveraging funds,‭ ‬just like The Federal Reserve System.

Thank you for reading,

Toddy Littman


No Responses Yet to “Obama’s Budget – Kids in The Candy Store”

  1. Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: