Thursday, December 13, 2012

BloggeRhythms 12/13/2012

I’ve written often lately about how hard it is to figure out if the incumbent’s a fanatical zealot who doesn’t care how much damage he does to the nation’s economy while pursuing his socialist agenda or is simply someone holding a job that’s so far over his head he doesn’t know which way is up. But, either way his tenure so far is an abject total financial disaster.
 
In article today on Fox on-line by Judson Berger titled “Medical companies brace for 'devastating' ObamaCare tax, prepare for layoffs” Berger writes that “The Affordable Care Act imposed the 2.3 percent tax on medical devices with the goal of raising nearly $30 billion over the next decade. Manufacturers say the impact of the tax is far greater than meets the eye -- the 2.3 percent tax is on gross sales, meaning it's a much greater percentage of net income.” 
 
One business owner says his total tax burden on profits will rise from 43 percent to 65 percent next year, while The Advanced Medical Technology Association estimates that the tax ultimately could cost up to 43,000 jobs. 
 
So here we have another example of how health care reform is doing exactly what it’s title says, however the reformation is taking the greatest medical system in the world and gutting it to the extent that quite soon people will be leaving here to get treated in Canada, or maybe Venezuela, because what’s been built in the U.S. will no longer exist.
 
And the most remarkable part of it all is the consistency of Democrat’s inability to grasp, or unwillingness to accept, fundamental economics. Because it doesn’t take very much sense to realize that if you give productive people’s money away the shortfall created has to either be replaced through growth or else there have to be cutbacks in spending.
 
And since businesses aren’t like the government, they can’t simply write themselves checks to cover what’s been lost. What’s more and worse is, that increasing businesses’ costs via taxes not only takes away their expansion potential, but likely reduces their total income creating a “Catch 22” and spurring a downward financial spiral for all.
 
Which leads me to the bottom line of this which is that I really don’t think that one who wants to re-test an economic theory that's never worked throughout history should do it as POTUS. Because the White House just doesn’t seem the right place for learning fiscal fundamentals the hard way, and besides that puts the costs of the huge pile of mistakes on those fortunate enough to be making a few bucks, but apparently won’t be for very much longer.
 
On another subject, I have to add the following because the timing’s perfect considering what I wrote yesterday about that two-bit phony, Warren Buffet.
 
According to Reuters via Drudge, “Warren Buffett's $1.2 billion share buyback from a single unnamed investor likely helped that person's estate save substantially on taxes, just one day after the Berkshire Hathaway CEO said the rich should actually be paying more, not less, when they die.
 
With the "fiscal cliff" looming and estate taxes set to rise dramatically in less than three weeks, the timing was seen as advantageous - and, according to Berkshire watchers, also out of place in the context of Buffett's recent tax activism.”
 
Anthony Sabino, a professor of business at St. John's University stated that ."I would say 'Warren, would you please just keep your nose out of this.' He's not in a position to criticize what's good for America and for everyone else's estate. He's no doubt utilized the present tax code to maximum effect."
 
Berkshire said it bought 9,200 Class A shares from "the estate of a long-time shareholder," whom it did not name, at $131,000 per share, a price in line with where Berkshire has traded in recent weeks.
 
So, here we have a case where my suspicion was right on the money (no pun intended.) I’ve felt for quite a while now that Buffet’s no more than a self-serving shark who backed POTUS due to receiving favorable insider status in D.C. And I also think his premise of giving all his assets away on demise was based on the simple fact that he doesn’t really believe he’ll ever expire, he’s far too wealthy for that. Dying and giving fortunes away is for little people, not him.
 
That’s it for today folks.
 
Adios

No comments:

Post a Comment