happy new year
¡Bienvenido a los Foros de Univision! Participa, intercambia mensajes privados, sube tus fotos y forma parte de nuestra Comunidad. | Ingresa | Regístrate Gratis
Responder
Retirado
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

OBAMA'S MULTI-MILLIONARES DON'T PAY HIS FARE SHARE OF TAXES

OBAMA'S PREFERRED MULTI-MILLIONARE  DON'T PAY HIS FARE SHARE OF TAXES

 

OBAMA USA A AL PRINCIPAL FINANCIERO DE SUS CAMPAÑAS,  DESPUES DE SOROS, COMO PANTALLA PARA AUMENTAR LOS IMPUESTOS SUPUESTAMENTE AL TOP  1% DE LOS CONTRIBUYENTES CUANDO ES LA CLASE MEDIA LA QUE RESULTARA MAS AFECTADA  POR EL AUMENTO DE IMPUESTOS QUE QUIERE IMPONER OBAMA. MIENTRAS TANTO, BUFFET,  COMO TODOS LOS MULTIMILLONARIOS DEMOCRATAS, SE NIEGA A PAGAR SU FAIR SHARE DE  IMPUESTOS Y LLEVA AÑOS PELEANDO CON EL IRS QUE LE RECLAMA $1,000 MILLONES QUE NO  HA PAGADO EN IMPUESTOS POR UNA SE SUS COMPAÑIAS Y EL PROPIO OBAMA SE HA VALIDO  DE CUANTO TRUCO HAY PARA TAMPOCO PAGAR SU FAIR SHARE DE IMPUESTOS Y ASI TENEMOS  AL PUEBLO PAGANDO POR LA EDUCACION FUTURA DE SUS HIJAS Y SUS PRESENTES  VACACIONES CON SEQUITOS DE DAMAS IN WAITING.

 

 

Hay dos  principios éticos básicos que han guiado a Obama toda su vida: "El fin justifica los medios." y "Hagan lo que yo  les ordeno, no lo que yo hago."
Retirado
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

OBAMA'S MILLIONARES DON'T PAY THEIR FARE SHARE OF TAXES

Warren Buffett’s Support for Higher Taxes a Way of Paying Back Politicians for Big-Government  Policies that Line His Pockets?
By Daniel J. Mitchell 2/13/2012
 
Obama, echoed by the establishment media, routinely  trumpets Warren Buffett’s support for higher taxes.

If this rich guy is willing to pay more, the story goes, then surely the rest of us peasants should just roll over and acquiesce to Obama's class-warfare tax policy.  Well, one reason we shouldn’t surrender is that Buffett is  either stu.pid or dishonest. In previous posts, I've exposed his fiscal innumeracy and explained that he is understating his own tax rate.

I also posted a video exposing the hypocrisy of rich  leftists, who refuse to write checks to Uncle Sam notwithstanding their  self-proclaimed willingness to pay more. As far as I’m aware, this also  describes Buffett.

But maybe all this tax talk is a distraction. Perhaps the real  story is that Buffett is a clever political manipulator and that his support for  higher taxes is a way for him to pay back the politicians who have enacted  policies to line his pockets.

Here are some very revealing passages from a new Reason column by Peter Schweizer. We  start with the image that Buffett is creating for himself.

He frequently takes to the nation’s op-ed pages with  populist-sounding arguments, such as his August 2010 plea in The New York Times  for the government to stop “coddling” the “super-rich” and start raising their  taxes.

Schweizer than puts forth an alternative  hypothesis.

Warren Buffett is very much a political  entrepreneur; his best investments are often in political relationships. In  recent years, Buffett has used taxpayer money as a vehicle to even greater  profit and wealth. Indeed, the success of some of his biggest bets and the  profitability of some of his largest investments rely on government largesse and “coddling” with taxpayer  money.

Buffett’s self-interested behavior during the Wall Street  bailout is especially revealing.

…on September 23 that he  became a highly visible player in the drama, investing $5 billion in Goldman  Sachs, which was overleveraged and short on cash. Buffett’s play gave the  investment bank a much-needed cash infusion, making a heck of a deal for himself  in return: Berkshire Hathaway received preferred stock with a 10 percent  dividend yield and an attractive option to buy another $5 billion in stock at  $115 a share. Wall Street was on fire, and Buffett was running toward the  flames.

What’s remarkable is that Buffett basically admitted he was  investing money in the expectation that Uncle Sam was going to make his  investment profitable

But he was doing so with the expectation that the fire  department (that is, the federal government) was right behind him with buckets  of bailout money. As he admitted on CNBC at the time, “If I didn’t think the  government was going to act, I wouldn’t be doing anything this  week.”

Retirado
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: OBAMA'S MILLIONARES DON'T PAY THEIR FARE SHARE OF TAXES

PART 2

QUID PRO QUO

 According to Schweizer’s analysis, Buffett very much needed a  pipeline to the Treasury because of his investments in Goldman Sachs and other  financial institutions.

Buffett needed the bailout. In addition to Goldman Sachs,  which was not as badly leveraged as some of its competitors, Buffett was heavily  invested in several other banks, such as Wells Fargo and U.S. Bancorp, that were  also at risk and in need of federal cash. So it’s no surprise that Buffett began  campaigning for the $700 billion Trouble Asset Relief Program (TARP) that was  being hammered out in Washington... Buffett received better terms for his Goldman  investment than the government got for its bailout. His dividend was set at 10  percent, while the government’s was 5 percent. Had the bailout not gone through,  and had Goldman not been given such generous terms under TARP, things would have  been very different for Buffett. As it stood, the arrangement with Goldman Sachs earned Berkshire about $500 million a year in dividends. “We love the  investment!” he exclaimed to Berkshire  investors.

The same was true for his investment with General  Electric.

The General Electric deal also was profitable. As Reuters  business columnist Rolfe Winkler noted on his blog in August 2009: “Were it not  for government bailouts, for which Buffett lobbied hard, many of his company’s  stock holdings would have been wiped out.” …Buffett did very well with Goldman  Sachs and GE too after they received their bailout money. His net gain from  General Electric as of April 2011 was $1.2 billion. His profits from the Goldman  deal by then had exceeded the gains of July 2009, reaching as high as $3.7  billion. He had bet on his ability to help ssecure the bailout, and the bet paid  off.

I don’t know whether the $1.2 billion and $3.7 billion profits  were for Berkshire Hathaway of for Buffett, but he still would be accumulating  lots of additional wealth even if it was the former.

It also seems that Buffett’s support for the faux stimulus may have been for pecuniary reasons, or at least has a self-interested component.

 

Retirado
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: OBAMA'S MILLIONARES DON'T PAY THEIR FARE SHARE OF TAXES

Part 3

In late 2009, Buffett made his largest investment ever  when he decided to buy Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF). It was not  just an endorsement of the railroad industry’s financials; it was also a huge  bet on the budget priorities of his friend Barack Obama. …the railroad industry  saw Buffett’s involvement as very helpful, precisely because he was so  politically connected. “It’s a positive for the rail industry because of  Buffett’s influence in Washington,” Henry Lampe, president of the short-haul  railroad Chicago South Shore & South Bend, told the Journal. …After Buffett  took over the railroad company, he dramatically increased spending on lobbyists.  Berkshire spent $1.2 million on lobbyists in 2008, but by 2009 its budget had  jumped to $9.8 million, where it more or less remained. Pouring money into  lobbying is perhaps the best investment that Buffett could make. …Buffett also  owns MidAmerican Energy Holdings, which received $93.4 million in stimulus  money. General Electric, in which he owns a $5 billion stake, was one of the  largest recipients of stimulus money in the  country.

By the way, Bloomberg reporte that the President’s decision to  kill the Keystone Pipeline was a boon to Burlington Northern.

Was it part of a quid pro quo? We don’t know, but Schweizer’s  conclusion is right on the mark.

Warren Buffett is a financial genius. But even better for his portfolio, though worse for the rest of us, he is a political genius.

And if you want more info on Buffett’s unseemly connections  with Washington, the invaluable Tim Carney has a column about how the political elite coddles Warren Buffett  and another looking at how Buffett profits from  bailouts.

The bottom line is simple. When people get rich by providing  goods and services in a competitive market, that’s capitalism. When they get  rich because of subsidies, bailouts, preferences, and handouts provided by the  ruling class, that's Argentina.

I have no idea whether Buffett is corrupt, but I know he is benefiting from a corrupt system. So  it’s understandable that people like me suspect that his endorsement of higher  taxes is not because of a mistaken view of fiscal policy, but rather because he  wants to do something nice for the politicians who rig the rules to give him  more wealth.

Daniel J.  MitchellDaniel J. Mitchell is a top  expert on tax reform and supply-side tax policy at the Cato Institute.
 
Hay dos  principios éticos básicos que han guiado a Obama toda su vida: "El fin justifica los medios." y "Hagan lo que yo  les ordeno, no lo que yo hago."
Retirado
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

IT PAYS TO BE CLOSE TO OBAMA, G.E. PAID NO TAXES

IT PAYS  TO BE CLOSE TO OBAMA, G.E. PAID NO TAXES

 

G.E. Paid No U.S. Taxes in  2010

Daniel Halper

March 25, 2011 9:29 AM

 General Electric paid no American taxes in 2010, the New York Times reports:

The company reported worldwide profits of $14.2 billion, and  said $5.1 billion of the total came from its operations in the United  States.

Its American tax bill? None. In fact, G.E. claimed a tax  benefit of $3.2 billion.

That may be hard to fathom for the millions of American  business owners and households now preparing their own returns, but low taxes  are nothing new for G.E. The company has been cutting the percentage of its American profits paid to the Internal Revenue  Service for years, resulting in a far lower rate than  at most multinational companies.

G.E.'s CEO, Jeffrey Immelt, is considered Barack Obama's  favorite businessman and serves as the head of the president's Council on Jobs  and Competitiveness. Fred Barnes wrote about Immelt here.

 

Jeffrey Immelt, Obama’s Pet  CEO

Fred Barnes

January 21, 2011
 

In General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt, President Obama may not have picked the worst possible corporate  executive to head his new panel on job creation. But Immelt is pretty close.

Immelt is a classic example of a rent-seeking CEO who may know what’s good for his own company but not what produces economic growth and private sector job creation. He supported Obama on the economic stimulus, Obamacare, and cap and trade – policies either unlikely to stir growth and jobs or likely to impede faster growth and hiring.

Just before the stimulus was passed in  February 2009, Immelt said in a statement: “Bold, visionary action – like that  we need from Congress today – never comes easy, but we urge Congress to  expeditiously conclude the stimulus package.” GE, he said, favors “swift passage of legislation…that can be promptly signed by the President.”

 

Retirado
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: IT PAYS TO BE CLOSE TO OBAMA, G.E. PAID NO TAXES

PART 2

He got his wish. And two months later,  Immelt told the Cincinnati Enquirer that Obama had “pumped nearly $1  billion into the economy… and my sense is that, over time, these things will  work.” He was wrong. Unemployment has remained well above 9  percent for more than a year and growth has increased slowly and erratically.

On Obama’s health care bill, Immelt said at GE’s annual  stockholders’ meeting last April that he hadn’t personally lobbied for it.  Instead, he said GE’s pposition was covered through the Business  Roundtable, which did indeed lobby Congress to pass the legislation, and later  regretted it.

Roundtable chairman Ivan  Seidenberg declared last June that “Washington” – code for the Obama  administration – had created “a hostile environment” for job creation. Immelt is  a big player in Washington, having been a member of the president’s earlier  Economic Recovery Advisory Board. The new panel he’ll head is the president’s  Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.

Immelt’s support for cap-and-trade was pure rent-seeking. The measure was certain to drive up energy costs and weaken the economy, but GE was expected to benefit enormously. The cap-and-trade bill passed the House, but died in the Senate in 2009. However, the Environmental Protection Agency may, on its own, act to curb greenhouse gases, as cap-and-trade would have.

In an interview on CNBC in 2009, Immelt said he found the  science on global warming to be “compelling. So it’s question of when and not if  there’s going to be something done on carbon. Give us some certainty and let’s  go.”

He said some people argue for a simple tax on carbon. “But I  just think cap and trade is the more practical approach.” Cap-and-trade would let Washington impose a national ceiling on carbon  emissions, and companies could buy or sell emission rights. GE, by gaining  rights in a windfall as a result of the legislation, would have many rights to  sell.

Immelt is Obama’s pet CEO. The  president traveled today to Schenectady, New York, where he toured the site of  the birthplace of GE before delivering a speech.

 

 

They did it again:  General Electric paid no taxes By David  Freddoso Washington Examiner Mar 25 2011

They did it again: General Electric paid no  taxes

Halper points out over at The Weekly Standard  that General Electric paid no taxes in 2010. Importantly, they paid no taxes in 2009, either. This year, they are actually claiming a $3.2 billion tax  benefit.

Our own Timothy P. Carney wrote an entire chapter on GE in his book Obamanomics, which the best available study of corporate welfare in the age of Obama. The company serves as proof that big  government inevitably works in favor of companies that are best positioned to lobby it.

The bigger government gets, the  greater the advantage it will provide for politically connected corporations.  The only thing that can solve the problem is smaller  government.

 

Retirado
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: IT PAYS TO BE CLOSE TO OBAMA, G.E. PAID NO TAXES

G.E. AND OBAMA  ADMINISTRATION

 

In February 2009, Immelt was appointed as a member to the President's Economic Recovery  Advisory Board to provide the president and his  administration with advice and counsel in fixing America's economic downturn.[10]

On January 21, 2011, President Obama announced Immelt's  appointment as chairman of his outside panel of economic advisers, succeeding  former Federal Reserve  chairman Paul Volcker.[11] The New York Times reported that Obama's  appointment of Immelt was "another strong signal that he intends to make the  White House more business-friendly."[11] Immelt will retain his post at G.E.  while becoming "chairman of the Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, a newly  named panel that President Obama is creating by executive order."

Compensation

 

Immelt at U.S. Climate Action Partnership event in  2007

As CEO of General Electric in 2007, Immelt earned a total  compensation of $14,209,267, which included a base salary of $3,300,000, a cash  bonus of $5,800,000, stocks granted of $4,713,000, and options granted of $0.[12] In 2008, he earned a total compensation of $5,717,469,  which included a base salary of $3,300,000, stocks granted of $2,044,650, and  other compensation of $372,819. He waived his bonus in 2008.[13] In 2009, Immelt earned a total  compensation of $5,487,155, which included a base salary of $3,300,000, a cash  bonus of $0, stocks granted of $1,791,000, and options granted of $0.[14]

Retirado
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

POLL: Romney holds massive lead on economy...

[ Editado ]

POLL: Romney holds massive  lead on economy...

 

OBAMA JOBS PLAN: WORK AND GET UNEMPLOYMENT

 

Romney scores on  economy

 

4/19/2012

President Obama holds a thin 46 percent to 42 percent lead  over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in a Quinnipiac University national  poll released Thursday, even as voters give the Republican a major edge on such  key issues as the economy, jobs and gas prices.

Mr. Romney is viewed as better on a number of pocketbook  issues that both sides agree could be critical come November. Voters disapprove  of Mr. Obama's handling on the economy by 56 percent to 38 percent.

"Republican Romney seems to hold an edge on the economy — the  top issue of the campaign — and holds his own against the incumbent on being a  strong leader," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac  University Polling Institute.

 



 

OBAMA SE NIEGA A PERMITIR CONSTRUIR EL OLEODUCTO DE CANADA A  HOUSTON OBLIGANDO A CANADA A VENDER SU PETROLEO A CHINA, PETROLEO QUE HUBIERA  LIBERADO A U.S. DE COMPRARLO A CHAVEZ.... ASI OBAMA CASTIGA A LOS AMIGOS Y AYUDA  A LOS ENEMIGOS DE U.S. A LA VEZ QUE LE NIEGA EMPLEO BIEN REMUNERADO A MAS DE  20,000 OBREROS AMERICANOS QUE TRABAJARIAN EN LA CONSTRUCCION DEL  OLEODUCTO

OBAMA"Wanted Higher Gas Prices, and He Got  Them" LA GUERRA DE OBAMA CONTRA LA INDUSTRIA DOMESTICA DEL PETROLEO  ES RESPONSABLE DE QUE EN CALIFORNIA YA ESTA A $7 EL GALON.Soros.jpg Soros image by ostracon321

 

MIENTRAS OBAMA SE ENFRASCA EN UNA GUERRA SIN CUARTEL PARA DESTRUIR LAS INDUSTRIAS DEL CARBON Y DEL PETROLEO DOMÉSTICAS, EL PRESIDENTE ENTREGÓ A LA EMPRESA PETROLERA BRASILEÑA PETROBRAS, $2 BILLONES PARA EXPLOTAR UN ENORME YACIMIENTO DE PETROLEO A GRANDES PROFUNDIDADES EN LAS COSTAS DE BRASIL, ENRIQUECIENDO AUN MAS A SU FINANCIERO, EL MULTI-BILLONARIO GEORGE SOROS QUIEN ES UNO DE LOS PRINCIPALES ACCIONISTAS DE PERTROBRAS.  PARA MAYOR ESCARNIO, EL PETROLEO QUE SE EXTRAIGA NO SERA PARA ASEGURAR  EL ABASTECEMIENTO PARA LAS NECESIDADES ENERGÉTICAS DE U.S.; SINO QUE BRASIL TIENE CONTRATADO CON CHINA VENDERLE TODO EL PETROLEO QUE SALGA DE ESE YACIMIENTO QUE HA SIDO FINANCIADO CON EL SUDOR DE LOS TRABAJADORES AMERICANOS!!! 

 A SU VEZ, EN OTRO EJEMPLO DE LA LARGUESE DE OBAMA CON EL DINERO AJENO, SOBRE TODO SI ES DE LAS ARCAS DEL TESORO DE U.S., OBAMA ENTREGÓ $1 BILLÓN PARA CONSTRUIR UNA NUEVA REFINERIA DE PETROLEO.  POR MAS DE 25 AÑOS EL EJE DEMOCRATAS/ENVIROMENTALISTAS NO HA PERMITIDO LA CONSTRUCCION EN U.S. DE UNA SOLA NUEVA REFINERIA DE PETROLEO.   GRACIAS A OBAMA YA SE VA A CONSTRUIR UNA NUEVA REFINERIA CON EL DINERO DE LOS TAXPAYERS...   PERO NO EN U.S., SINO EN COLOMBIA!!!

Retirado
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

Re: IT PAYS TO BE CLOSE TO OBAMA,

Unbelievable: Jon Corzine still bundling mega-bucks for  Obama’s campaign

 04/20/2012 | AllahPundit

 

The information's hiding in palin sight but it’s still a nifty  catch by the Standard’s Daniel Halper.  You know why? Because the  idea  that Jon Corzine is still raising hundreds of thousands of dollars for The One is so insane and implausible, virtually no one would have thought to check. Of coursethat's not happening. Of course.

And yet.

He's in the $500,000+ club for the first quarter of this  year,  the most elite group there is among O's cash cows. You know what else happened  during that quarter? News broke that more than a billion dollars in MF Global  client funds had apparently been "vaporized" in the firm’s collapse, with investigators clueless as to where the money might have gone. As recently as last month,  new evidence emerged pointing to Corzine's diredt involvement in using clients’ cash to cover the firm’s debts. And yet, presumably, he was squeezing his rich friends for dough for Obama the whole time. Ace asks a good question: “Why is a man under  investigation by a government agency permitted to raise money for the man who controls that agency?” Wouldn’t be the first time Corzine’s used his political leverage to personal advantage.

If you missed it a few days ago, read Ed’s post on  Patrick  Kennedy claiming that the White House rewards its rich donors with certain quid pro quos. Can’t wait to see what Jon Corzine gets in return for his extreme diligence on behalf of the “Not a Republican” reelection effort. Exit question:  Does  Team O understand that transparency is supposed to act as a deterrent  to  impropriety or the appearance of impropriety? They love to pat themselves on the  back for voluntarily disclosing the names of their  bundlers, but the point of  disclosure is that it dissuades you, at least  in theory, from dealing with  cretins lest you be scrutinized for it.  Where’s the dissuasion, guys?

 

LA MADRE DE TODOS LOS DEFALCOS,  CORZINE DONA MILLONES A OBAMA MIENTRAS DEFRAUDA ¡$1,800 MILLONES A SUS  CLIENTES!!!

 



 

 

OBAMA/ CORZINE, UNA MANO LAVA  LA  OTRA...

LA MAFIA DEMOCRATA EN PLENA ACCION

 

 

QUID PRO QUO...  LA MAFIA DEMOCRATA

 

Retirado
siboneyes
Mensajes: 90,636
Registrado: ‎06-03-2009

IT PAYS TO BE PETIT TYRANT WITH ILIMITED POWER AND MONEY

Media Ignoring Michelle Obama’s  Expensive Wardrobe

 

by Andrea Ryan May 2, 2012

 

By: Andrea Ryan

Unreal. Last month at the Kids’ Choice Awards, Michelle Obama wore an outfit designed by New  York-based, uber-expensive designer, Wes Gordon. His clothing  commands prices in the thousands of dollars and can only be  found in the elite stores of the super wealthy. If you enjoy spending more than  $4,000 on a pair of shorts…yes that is three zeroes after the comma…then you  might like this little jacket from one of Michelle Obama’s favorite designers.  It’s a steal for only $2,250. Of course, we never heard one  peep out of the Liberal mainstream media on Michelle Obama’s high-priced  clothing.

But, that all changed now that Mitt Romney has become the  presumptive Republican nominee for president.

Suddenly, the media is very interested in Ann Romney’s choice  of pricey clothes…

The fashion house that makes the nearly $1,000 blouse worn by  Ann Romney on morning television earlier this week tells ABC News that they had  nothing to do with the wardrobe choice, remarking that they’d prefer to stay out  of politics.

“We had nothing to do with it,” a rep for designer Reed  Krakoff said. “She must have bought it from Saks or Bergdorf’s, we definitely  didn’t send it to her.”

“It’s 100 percent a Reed Krakoff shirt, but we 100 percent  didn’t send it to her,” the rep added. “We don’t get involved  politically.”

The shirt, an item in the label’s 2012 Spring/Summer  collection, retails for $990, and for those shopping, is called the “The Reed  Audubon Silk Shirt.”

The price of the shirt was first reported by  Stylite.com.

Mrs. Romney does not have a stylist, according to an aide with  the Romney campaign, and is likely to have purchased the shirt on her  own.

A spokeswoman for the Romney campaign declined to comment on  Mrs. Romney’s fashion choices.

This isn’t the first time that Mrs. Romney has been tweaked on  her fashion choices.

In March, a little girl on the ropeline at a campaign event in  Illinois asked Mrs. Romney if her watch was “real.”

Since the MSM has developed a new interest in high-end  clothing, here’s a glimpse of Michelle expensive, designer wardobe worn during her $4M tax payer-funded jaunt to Hawaii last December.

 

So what's the special occasion this time and why is she  overdressed for it?

 MIENTRAS LOS OBAMA DILAPIDAN EL DINERO DEL PUEBLO,  AUMENTA EL DESEMPLEO Y ROMPE RECORDS EL INDICE DE MISERAI!!!