CORALVILLE, Iowa (AP) — Police closed down a lemonade stand in Coralville last week, telling its 4-year-old operator and her dad that she didn't have a permit.
An officer told Abigail Krutsinger's father Friday that she couldn't run the stand as RAGBRAI bicyclers poured into Coralville.
A city ordinance says food vendors must apply for a permit and get a health inspection.
Abigail's dad, Dustin Krutsinger, said the ordinance and its enforcers are going too far if they force a 4-year-old to abandon her lemonade stand. READ MORE HERE
This is at least the third time in recent history that this sort of lawlessness has been addressed by local authorities. The threat of overly sour lemonade has been thwarted by a SWAT team in full combat gear. The little girl in question has been whisked away by black uniformed, heavily armed, Department of Homeland Security forces, under the Rendition program authorized under the Patriot Act, to an undisclosed country for further "enhanced interrogation" to discover the nefarious nature of not adding enough sugar to the sticky concoction....... OK, that's just a bit of satire, but you see where this could be headed.
Under the "Food Safety and Modernization Act", local authorities are tasked by the FDA to enforce regulations concerning unregulated food production and sales.
At what point does the average American wake up and scream, "Enough is Enough!" ?
Our Liberties guaranteed by the Constitution have been eroded to the point that the USA looks nothing like the country I grew up in, just a few decades ago. Here are just a few of the most heinous assaults on our Liberties which are helping to establish a new police state:
The Patriot Act: Which, among other things has completely gutted the 4th Amendment
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 Which has been challenged on Constitutional grounds as to it's legality under the "commerce clause" by forcing people to engage in not necessarily interstate commerce, not to mention all of the tax hikes, kick backs and special favors done for "friends of the administration"
The TSA and what amounts to being technically under arrest and being forced to submit to searches that would land a civilian in jail if conducted outside of an airport.
Showing posts with label ObamaCare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ObamaCare. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Thursday, January 20, 2011
The Hits Keep Coming - More Taxes Under ObamaCare
“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes,” President Obama, September 12, 2008
Beginning January 1, 2013, ObamaCare imposes a 3.8% Medicare tax on unearned income, including the sale of single family homes, townhouses, co-ops, condominiums, and even rental income. In February 2010, 5.02 million homes were sold, according to the National Association of Realtors. On any given day, the sale of a house, townhome, condominium, co-op, or income from a rental property can push middle-income families over the $250,000 threshold and slam them with a new tax they can’t afford.
This new ObamaCare tax is the first time the government will apply a 3.8 percent tax on unearned income. This new tax on home sales and unearned income and other Medicare taxes raise taxes more than $210 billion to pay for ObamaCare. The National Association of Realtors called this new Medicare tax on unearned income “destructive” and “ill-advised” and warned it would hurt job creation.
Beginning January 1, 2013, ObamaCare imposes a 3.8% Medicare tax on unearned income, including the sale of single family homes, townhouses, co-ops, condominiums, and even rental income. In February 2010, 5.02 million homes were sold, according to the National Association of Realtors. On any given day, the sale of a house, townhome, condominium, co-op, or income from a rental property can push middle-income families over the $250,000 threshold and slam them with a new tax they can’t afford.
This new ObamaCare tax is the first time the government will apply a 3.8 percent tax on unearned income. This new tax on home sales and unearned income and other Medicare taxes raise taxes more than $210 billion to pay for ObamaCare. The National Association of Realtors called this new Medicare tax on unearned income “destructive” and “ill-advised” and warned it would hurt job creation.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Some New Taxes In Obamacare
The new utopia of Obamacare is rife with new ways to seperate you from your wealth. Of particular interest to me is the government forcing "Charitable Hospitals" to cough up $50, 000 each to the government. Now, where did that money come from? Charity hospitals are "non profit". So, if they don't produce an income and a profit, where does that money come from? Charitable contributions from individuals primarily. Contributions from post tax incomes. Keep that in mind. All of these taxes are being paid with money that has already been taxed.
$50,000 per hospital. This is likely the margin between keeping a "Shriner's Hospital for Children" or "Scottish Rite" hospital in business or closing their doors. It may seem like a trivial amount of money per hospital to some people, but to the men that stand on busy street corners with a bucket, collecting donations and giving their time and effort, this is more like felony grand theft.
Medicine Cabinet Tax($5 bil/Jan 2011): Americans no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin)
HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike($1.4 bil/Jan 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.
Flexible Spending Account Cap – aka“Special Needs Kids Tax”($13 bil/Jan 2013): Imposes cap of $2500 (Indexed to inflation after 2013) on FSAs (now unlimited). . There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education.
Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers($20 bil/Jan 2013): Medical device manufacturers employ 360,000 people in 6000 plants across the country. This law imposes a new 2.3% excise tax. Exemptions include items retailing for less than $100.
Raise Threshold for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI($15.2 bil/Jan 2013): Currently, those facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction for medical expenses to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI). The new provision imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI; it is waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only.
Tax on Indoor Tanning Services($2.7 billion/July 1, 2010): New 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons
Elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D($4.5 bil/Jan 2013)
Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike($0.4 bil/Jan 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services
Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals(Min$/immediate): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new "community health assessment needs," "financial assistance," and "billing and collection" rules set by HHS
Tax on Innovator Drug Companies($22.2 bil/Jan 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year.
Tax on Health Insurers($60.1 bil/Jan 2014): Annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year. The stipulation phases in gradually until 2018, and is fully-imposed on firms with $50 million in profits.
$500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives($0.6 bil/Jan 2013)
Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2(Min$/Jan 2011): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns.
Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting($17.1 bil/Jan 2012): Requires businesses to send 1099-MISC information tax forms to corporations (currently limited to individuals), a huge compliance burden for small employers
“Black liquor” tax hike(Tax hike of $23.6 billion). This is a tax increase on a type of bio-fuel.
Codification of the “economic substance doctrine”(Tax hike of $4.5 billion). This provision allows the IRS to disallow completely-legal tax deductions and other legal tax-minimizing plans just because the IRS deems that the action lacks “substance” and is merely intended to reduce taxes owed.
I thought that this was supposed to lower costs? Looks more like finding more ways to steal from the American people.
$50,000 per hospital. This is likely the margin between keeping a "Shriner's Hospital for Children" or "Scottish Rite" hospital in business or closing their doors. It may seem like a trivial amount of money per hospital to some people, but to the men that stand on busy street corners with a bucket, collecting donations and giving their time and effort, this is more like felony grand theft.
Medicine Cabinet Tax($5 bil/Jan 2011): Americans no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin)
HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike($1.4 bil/Jan 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.
Flexible Spending Account Cap – aka“Special Needs Kids Tax”($13 bil/Jan 2013): Imposes cap of $2500 (Indexed to inflation after 2013) on FSAs (now unlimited). . There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education.
Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers($20 bil/Jan 2013): Medical device manufacturers employ 360,000 people in 6000 plants across the country. This law imposes a new 2.3% excise tax. Exemptions include items retailing for less than $100.
Raise Threshold for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI($15.2 bil/Jan 2013): Currently, those facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction for medical expenses to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI). The new provision imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI; it is waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only.
Tax on Indoor Tanning Services($2.7 billion/July 1, 2010): New 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons
Elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D($4.5 bil/Jan 2013)
Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike($0.4 bil/Jan 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services
Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals(Min$/immediate): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new "community health assessment needs," "financial assistance," and "billing and collection" rules set by HHS
Tax on Innovator Drug Companies($22.2 bil/Jan 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year.
Tax on Health Insurers($60.1 bil/Jan 2014): Annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year. The stipulation phases in gradually until 2018, and is fully-imposed on firms with $50 million in profits.
$500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives($0.6 bil/Jan 2013)
Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2(Min$/Jan 2011): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns.
Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting($17.1 bil/Jan 2012): Requires businesses to send 1099-MISC information tax forms to corporations (currently limited to individuals), a huge compliance burden for small employers
“Black liquor” tax hike(Tax hike of $23.6 billion). This is a tax increase on a type of bio-fuel.
Codification of the “economic substance doctrine”(Tax hike of $4.5 billion). This provision allows the IRS to disallow completely-legal tax deductions and other legal tax-minimizing plans just because the IRS deems that the action lacks “substance” and is merely intended to reduce taxes owed.
I thought that this was supposed to lower costs? Looks more like finding more ways to steal from the American people.
Monday, December 13, 2010
"I will be happy to see the Republicans test whether or not I'm itching for a fight on a whole range of issues," Obama said last week.
Just love the NoBama idea that he can actually be part of a fight next year. His poll numbers continue to slide, and his "Greatest Triumph" has been deemed unconstitutional.
This is a world away from the 2008 campaign of "hopey changey horse dung" that so many people glomed onto, thinking something was really going to happen that would improve anyone's life. I'm saddened that in what has been called the greatest country in the world, sixty two million people were fooled into thinking this man was going to deliver something good. Well, he did make good on his promise. He "fundementally transformed" the United States. We are now on our way out of number one nation status and on our way to bananna republic status. Thanks Mr. President, for runining my country, mine and my parents net worth and my children's future possibilities.
This is a world away from the 2008 campaign of "hopey changey horse dung" that so many people glomed onto, thinking something was really going to happen that would improve anyone's life. I'm saddened that in what has been called the greatest country in the world, sixty two million people were fooled into thinking this man was going to deliver something good. Well, he did make good on his promise. He "fundementally transformed" the United States. We are now on our way out of number one nation status and on our way to bananna republic status. Thanks Mr. President, for runining my country, mine and my parents net worth and my children's future possibilities.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
DEMOCRATS HID DAMNING HEALTH CARE REPORT FROM PUBLIC UNTIL A MONTH AFTER VOTE
via Gateway Pundit
More hope and change–A damning health care report generated by actuaries at the Health and Human Services (HHS) Department was given to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius more than a week before the health care vote. She hid the report from the public until a month after democrats rammed their nationalized health care bill through Congress.
The results from the report were troubling. The report released by Medicare and Medicaid actuaries shows that medical costs will skyrocket rising $389 billion 10 years. 14 million will lose their employer-based coverage. Millions of Americans will be left without insurance. And, millions more may be dumped into the already overwhelmed Medicaid system. 4 million American families will be hit with tax penalties under this new law.
Of course, these were ALL things that President Obama and Democratic leaders assured us would not happen.
More hope and change–A damning health care report generated by actuaries at the Health and Human Services (HHS) Department was given to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius more than a week before the health care vote. She hid the report from the public until a month after democrats rammed their nationalized health care bill through Congress.
The results from the report were troubling. The report released by Medicare and Medicaid actuaries shows that medical costs will skyrocket rising $389 billion 10 years. 14 million will lose their employer-based coverage. Millions of Americans will be left without insurance. And, millions more may be dumped into the already overwhelmed Medicaid system. 4 million American families will be hit with tax penalties under this new law.
Of course, these were ALL things that President Obama and Democratic leaders assured us would not happen.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
A few of the new taxes, etc under the new Obamacare Act
• There is a new tax on home sales of 3.8%. This will hit middle-income people who are "'rich' for only one day" as they sell a house and buy a new one.
• There are $15.2 billion in new taxes on the middle class as DemCare severely restricts the medical expense deduction, which is widely used by families who have a serious illness or are elderly.
• According to Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA), there is a huge new loophole in the bill as nothing prevents health care companies from raising rates by any amount.
• The bill will lead to a dramatic shortage of doctors -- around 150,000 doctors almost immediately -- because the pool of newly insured welfare DemCare recipients has expanded so dramatically.
• There are $15.2 billion in new taxes on the middle class as DemCare severely restricts the medical expense deduction, which is widely used by families who have a serious illness or are elderly.
• According to Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA), there is a huge new loophole in the bill as nothing prevents health care companies from raising rates by any amount.
• The bill will lead to a dramatic shortage of doctors -- around 150,000 doctors almost immediately -- because the pool of newly insured welfare DemCare recipients has expanded so dramatically.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
American Thinker: The Perfect Constitutional Storm
American Thinker: The Perfect Constitutional Storm
Larry Anderson does a great job of explaining why the "Commerce Clause" argument being made by several states against ObamaCare will fail. He also points out several arguments that can be made by "the people" that will certainly see the law repealed. My favorite is the Griswold vs Connecticut argument:
What is interesting about the possibility of a 9th Amendment challenge to ObamaCare is that previous "progressive" decisions issued by the Supreme Court could offer some of the best ammunition for the case that the legislation is unconstitutional.
Of particular importance is Griswold v. Connecticut. This poorly decided Supreme Court case (written in 1965) has become the heart and soul of the judicial "reasoning" behind Roe v. Wade (legalized abortion), Planned Parenthood v. Casey (husband need not be notified if wife has an abortion), and Lawrence v. Texas (Texas sodomy law ruled unconstitutional).
It would be the irony of ironies if Griswold v. Connecticut were used by the Supreme Court to overturn Obamacare -- and it just might be.
Justice Douglas, who wrote Griswold, found that "... specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance. Various guarantees create zones of privacy."
We could debate all day about what this gibberish means. But the Supreme Court has found it to be of the utmost importance. Griswold held that the state could not prevent a married couple from purchasing contraceptives. One would assume that the opposite would also be true -- that the state cannot force a married couple to buy and use contraceptives. Substitute "health insurance" for "condoms" and Griswold gives us an argument against the constitutionality of ObamaCare.
Douglas noted in his Griswold decision, "In NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449, 462, we protected the 'freedom to associate and privacy in one's associations.'" One would think that it follows that the freedom to associate or not with an insurance company would be up to the individual citizen.
Douglas also declared, "Such a law cannot stand in light of the familiar principle, so often applied by this Court, that a 'governmental purpose to control or prevent activities constitutionally subject to state regulation may not be achieved by means which sweep unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade the area of protected freedoms.'"
Like whether or not to buy health insurance? Free to choose a level of coverage? And to be able to buy such insurance from whatever source a person desires -- free from the interference of the government?
Larry Anderson does a great job of explaining why the "Commerce Clause" argument being made by several states against ObamaCare will fail. He also points out several arguments that can be made by "the people" that will certainly see the law repealed. My favorite is the Griswold vs Connecticut argument:
What is interesting about the possibility of a 9th Amendment challenge to ObamaCare is that previous "progressive" decisions issued by the Supreme Court could offer some of the best ammunition for the case that the legislation is unconstitutional.
Of particular importance is Griswold v. Connecticut. This poorly decided Supreme Court case (written in 1965) has become the heart and soul of the judicial "reasoning" behind Roe v. Wade (legalized abortion), Planned Parenthood v. Casey (husband need not be notified if wife has an abortion), and Lawrence v. Texas (Texas sodomy law ruled unconstitutional).
It would be the irony of ironies if Griswold v. Connecticut were used by the Supreme Court to overturn Obamacare -- and it just might be.
Justice Douglas, who wrote Griswold, found that "... specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance. Various guarantees create zones of privacy."
We could debate all day about what this gibberish means. But the Supreme Court has found it to be of the utmost importance. Griswold held that the state could not prevent a married couple from purchasing contraceptives. One would assume that the opposite would also be true -- that the state cannot force a married couple to buy and use contraceptives. Substitute "health insurance" for "condoms" and Griswold gives us an argument against the constitutionality of ObamaCare.
Douglas noted in his Griswold decision, "In NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449, 462, we protected the 'freedom to associate and privacy in one's associations.'" One would think that it follows that the freedom to associate or not with an insurance company would be up to the individual citizen.
Douglas also declared, "Such a law cannot stand in light of the familiar principle, so often applied by this Court, that a 'governmental purpose to control or prevent activities constitutionally subject to state regulation may not be achieved by means which sweep unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade the area of protected freedoms.'"
Like whether or not to buy health insurance? Free to choose a level of coverage? And to be able to buy such insurance from whatever source a person desires -- free from the interference of the government?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)