Breakthrough Web Design - 515-897-1144 - Web sites for businesses
News & Entertainment for Mason City, Clear Lake & the Entire North Iowa Region

Founded October 1, 2010

Op-ed: TAXES! When is enough, enough?

This news story was published on January 2, 2012.
Advertise on NIT Subscribe to NIT

(by Otis Lewis)


They say they will cut taxes, but never do.  They say they will cut spending, but never do.  They say they will get us off our dependency on foreign oil, but they never do.

With over $15,000,000,000,000 (I repeat, dollars) of debt, President Obama is going to ask for another $1,200,000,000,000 because he is going to run out of the last increase in the debt level.

Remember while running for President, Obama said Bush raised the debt 4 trillion dollars over his 8 years as President and put us all in debt another $30,000 each.  He said he was going to stop the spending and borrowing money from China

Well, President Obama has raised the debt 4,000,000,000,000 dollars in only 3 years.  Something wrong with this picture here, folks.  This President now wants more!

Remember, last July the big fight over raising the Debt Ceiling when President Obama threatened Social Security Checks would be halted!  Well, here we go again!

At Christmas the President and Congress caused a big stir over not letting a temporary tax cut expire.  They voted not to pay the bills and instead extend the temporary tax cut for Social Security.  How stupid is that?   The Government has now put an already cash strapped program in more financial peril.

Our Federal Government has become dysfunctional.   The voters have no voice in what the elected officials do once in office.  We have had months of debate by Republican candidates and not a single question asked of them about how much is enough?

We are all paying somewhere around the 50% level of our income for taxes now.  I recall John Kerry and Al Gore AGREEING while debating in their Democratic Primary in 1998 that 67% taxation should be the level of taxation the American people should pay.  It’s clear to me that the Democrats are pushing us toward that level, without saying a word about it.

In working terms, that means we all go to work for 5 ½ hours a day for someone else before we start earning money for ourselves.  How insane is that?

The Tea Party is speaking out.

Occupy while foolish in their approach is trying to speak out.

The voters are trying to speak out by showing up and listening to the candidates and going to their respective caucuses or voting places.

Before I go vote in the Iowa caucus, I have a question for the candidates running for President:

How much are you going to expect the taxpayers to cough up to bail our country out?   How much are you willing to cut spending and keep your word on it? 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

 characters available

17 Responses to Op-ed: TAXES! When is enough, enough?

  1. Avatar

    Watchdog Reply Report comment

    January 4, 2012 at 2:36 am


  2. Avatar

    Don't make 89,000 jointly but pay more than 5000! Reply Report comment

    January 3, 2012 at 4:06 pm

    If you jointly file 89,000 dollars a year and, you are paying a hell of lot more than 5,000 dollars or you are a good tax cheat.

    Best answer: TOO MUCH!

    • Avatar

      anonymous Reply Report comment

      January 3, 2012 at 4:17 pm

      What are you talking about? You failed to answer the question correctly. Back to high school for you.

  3. Avatar

    Aspirin Reply Report comment

    January 3, 2012 at 1:03 pm

    FLAT TAX…. a wonderful concept proposed by Forbes, makes way to much sense, but would be the most fair game to all Americans. The rich would pay more no matter what! Currently 47% of Americans pay absolutley no taxes – now that is unfair! Even a national sales tax would be more fair than the current system and again the rich would pay more because they have more buying power – but these concepts are way too simple for most Americans to understand.
    D.C. needs to clean house. TERM LIMITS for Congress & Senate. NO LIFETIME benefits for those “do-nothing” folks as well! Dems. + Reps. = liars, cheats, crooks! God help America!

  4. Avatar

    Let's play Reply Report comment

    January 3, 2012 at 8:39 am

    Let’s play a game. If you can’t answer this question correctly, you can never complain about taxes again.

    Let’s say you and your wife make 89,000 a year total. The tax brackets for married filing jointly are at $17,000 a year for the start of the 15% bracket, and the 25% bracket starts at 69,000. How much of your wages are taxed at 25%?

  5. Avatar

    Hope the Cadidates Read North Iowa Today. com Reply Report comment

    January 2, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    Good points Mr. Lewis, I hope those elected and those wanting to be elected read this.

  6. Avatar

    Observer off the mark Reply Report comment

    January 2, 2012 at 6:52 pm

    Vander Platts is clearly mainstream. There is nothing that is religions or radical in his beliefs when it comes to the mainstream thinking.

    He may be a religions man but his views are mainstream and every where I go and in every walk of life he has support for one man and one woman as a definition of marriage.

    If anything is radical, it is the homosexual movement.

    Most Democrats support the one man one woman marriage concept too. Only the radial left supports the homosexuality as a norm. Mainstream Democrats are very much like mainstream Republicans on this issue.

    Be aware: the media says if the way you do but in reality it isn’t so..

    • Avatar

      Observer Reply Report comment

      January 2, 2012 at 11:21 pm

      When someone tell me a person is mainstream, I conjure up a picture of a person who upholds law, and believes in equal treatment of all people as is stated in the Declaration of Independence, and supported by our U.S. and Iowa Constitution.

      Mr. Vander Platts, is hardly an example of that. His support of withholding equal treatment to certain groups is anything but mainstream. His belief is that those certain groups are lesser citizens, and should therefor be deprived of what the rest of us take for granted. That is radical. It goes against what our country was founded upon, freedom.

      What is mainstream, is the desire that all people should be treated the same way. In fact, that is law, proved over and over again in our courts.

      There is no happy medium here, either you support personal liberties, or you are not. We all know where Mr. Vander Platts stands.

  7. Avatar

    Echo Reply Report comment

    January 2, 2012 at 5:21 pm


  8. Avatar

    Jim Reply Report comment

    January 2, 2012 at 1:00 pm

    Why do they not promise to lower their own pay scale? They all want to lower the adverageworkers pay.

  9. Avatar

    Aspirin Reply Report comment

    January 2, 2012 at 11:29 am

    It’s called SOCIALISM and we soon will have a Dictator for a leader instead of a President! The liberal machine is a SOCIALISM Machine. I fear it is too late to change America as we have gone overboard for way too long. 40% of Americans are dependent upon the Government for survival and it is only going to get worse, as this is how the LIBERAL machine thrives…. make Americans dependent upon the Government and then they are guaranteed the “dependees” vote ! We lose freedoms every day and our rights to earn a comfortable living are on the way out as well. Government will take all your earned income and disperse it according to their SOCIALISTIC plan ! Americans should be thanking the wealthy folks that cover 96% of the nations tax bill, because without them what happens to the welfare system????

  10. Avatar

    Echo Reply Report comment

    January 2, 2012 at 10:30 am

    I agree we would all like to pay no taxes but in reality we are paying less in taxes then we did 30years ago. President Bush got us involved in two wars that were entirely unfunded but then he lowered taxes on the wealthy. I think this was one of the dumbest things he did. All the polls show the american people want their services that government provides but it does come at a cost. Listening to the canidates for president you can tell its going to be the same old same old if they get elected. We need to stop catering to the religous groups and keep our separation from church and state intact for this country to move forward.

    • Avatar

      Observer Reply Report comment

      January 2, 2012 at 11:21 am

      Echo, you have hit upon a raw nerve of mine, and your advice is a welcome tone. Keep religion out of elections. I have no problem with a candidate speaking to a church congregation, but to cater to one group, who may not reflect the beliefs of others, is inappropriate.

      Our government has been, and is sectarian. That some laws reflect religious beliefs is not unusual. Yet, we cannot fall into the trap of one sect or set of religious beliefs becoming the standard for everyone. And that is exactly what some on the far right desire. Candidates for example, who embrace the likes of Mr. Vander Platts, and speak his style of radicalism¹, should be red-flagged. This is where voters really need to be educated on current events.

      As voters, most of us want someone in charge who can balance needs and revenue. Someone who will not place a choking yoke upon it’s citizens who must pay for government, yet provide meaningful programs.

      ¹ Radicalism in this case, is the proposition that not all people are created equal, nor deserving of equal treatment under the law. A neanderthal belief in this day and age.

  11. Avatar

    Peter Reply Report comment

    January 2, 2012 at 10:24 am

    I support an abolishment on personal income taxes. It’s reasonable to procure taxes from purchases, and personal property owned. I believe taxes should be situation specific. If you ride a bicycle your taxes to support road repair should be lower than if you own a Hummer. If you have no children, then you pay no school tax. If you own a home then you pay property tax. If you rent then you pay a renters tax. I don’t believe landlords should pay taxes for renters, since renters need the to pay for city services also, and that money needs to come from somewhere other than personal income tax.

    • Avatar

      Landlord Reply Report comment

      January 2, 2012 at 12:18 pm

      Because the Landlord themselves own the property that they rent out to tenants, WRONG……..The landlord should be responsible to pay the property taxes on that land, not the tenant. They chose to be a landlord, so it’s their problem. Insight. More than likely they are making a killing on that property anyway, and their property taxes have been figured into the monthly rate of rent.

    • Avatar

      Peter Reply Report comment

      January 2, 2012 at 9:25 pm

      I’m assuming on my other points you concur.

    • Avatar

      Landlord Reply Report comment

      January 2, 2012 at 9:49 pm

      More so the idea of not paying school tax if you have no children. I agree, if it is a program you are taking part in, then you pay. If you don’t participate, then you don’t. Not a bad idea. Americans are taxed enough already. You get your paycheck, it has been taxed. Then you go to the store, your money gets taxed again. Something isn’t right, and something isn’t fair. All the mean while, politicians in Washington DC are voting themselves pay raises at the expense of the working men and women. And those wages are for life, for them!! Don’t get me started, this is a sore subject for me.