IRS is buying more shotguns

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) intends to purchase sixty Remington Model 870 Police RAMAC #24587 12 gauge pump-action shotguns for the Criminal Investigation Division. The Remington parkerized shotguns, with fourteen inch barrel, modified choke, Wilson Combat Ghost Ring rear sight and XS4 Contour Bead front sight, Knoxx Reduced Recoil Adjustable Stock, and Speedfeed ribbed black forend, are designated as the only shotguns authorized for IRS duty based on compatibility with IRS existing shotgun inventory, certified armorer and combat training and protocol, maintenance, and parts.

Taxation is a violent act perpetrated to confiscate private property from private citizens and organizations. The IRS occasionally needs to cap some mothafuckas in order to keep the funds rolling in.

I’ve never really thought of the IRS as a law enforcement organization. In my mind, they’re accountants. I figured if someone was breaking the law, they’d get the FBI involved. You know, real cops. The collection of taxes is so essential to tyranny, though, that it does makes sense for them to arm the accountants.

This story was published and then pulled by Reuters. I wonder why?

Backdoor taxes to hit middle class

By Terri Cullen Terri Cullen Mon Feb 1, 4:09 pm ET

NEW YORK (Reuters.com) –The Obama administration’s plan to cut more than $1 trillion from the deficit over the next decade relies heavily on so-called backdoor tax increases that will result in a bigger tax bill for middle-class families.

In the 2010 budget tabled by President Barack Obama on Monday, the White House wants to let billions of dollars in tax breaks expire by the end of the year — effectively a tax hike by stealth.

While the administration is focusing its proposal on eliminating tax breaks for individuals who earn $250,000 a year or more, middle-class families will face a slew of these backdoor increases.

The targeted tax provisions were enacted under the Bush administration’s Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001. Among other things, the law lowered individual tax rates, slashed taxes on capital gains and dividends, and steadily scaled back the estate tax to zero in 2010.

If the provisions are allowed to expire on December 31, the top-tier personal income tax rate will rise to 39.6 percent from 35 percent. But lower-income families will pay more as well: the 25 percent tax bracket will revert back to 28 percent; the 28 percent bracket will increase to 31 percent; and the 33 percent bracket will increase to 36 percent. The special 10 percent bracket is eliminated.

Investors will pay more on their earnings next year as well, with the tax on dividends jumping to 39.6 percent from 15 percent and the capital-gains tax increasing to 20 percent from 15 percent. The estate tax is eliminated this year, but it will return in 2011 — though there has been talk about reinstating the death tax sooner.

Millions of middle-class households already may be facing higher taxes in 2010 because Congress has failed to extend tax breaks that expired on January 1, most notably a "patch" that limited the impact of the alternative minimum tax. The AMT, initially designed to prevent the very rich from avoiding income taxes, was never indexed for inflation. Now the tax is affecting millions of middle-income households, but lawmakers have been reluctant to repeal it because it has become a key source of revenue.

Without annual legislation to renew the patch this year, the AMT could affect an estimated 25 million taxpayers with incomes as low as $33,750 (or $45,000 for joint filers). Even if the patch is extended to last year’s levels, the tax will hit American families that can hardly be considered wealthy — the AMT exemption for 2009 was $46,700 for singles and $70,950 for married couples filing jointly.

Middle-class families also will find fewer tax breaks available to them in 2010 if other popular tax provisions are allowed to expire. Among them:

* Taxpayers who itemize will lose the option to deduct state sales-tax payments instead of state and local income taxes;

* The $250 teacher tax credit for classroom supplies;

* The tax deduction for up to $4,000 of college tuition and expenses;

* Individuals who don’t itemize will no longer be able to increase their standard deduction by up to $1,000 for property taxes paid;

* The first $2,400 of unemployment benefits are taxable, in 2009 that amount was tax-free.

Senator Murray’s Pigshit

A bill that includes more than $4.5 million in funding for a new waterfront market, new buses and a Wenatchee hospital passed the U.S. House Wednesday.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-WA, said Wednesday that she also expects the final version of the transportation and economic spending bill to pass the U.S. Senate before being sent to President Barack Obama for his signature.

The bill earmarks $1.4 million to help provide for the acquisition and renovation of the Pybus building on Worthen Street. The Pybus building will be home to the regional farmers market and the Wenatchee Food Bank and Distribution Center.

Nearly $2.5 million is included for Link Transit to purchase eight 40-foot, low-floor commuter buses and one 35-foot urban bus. A news release from Murray said the buses would allow Link to expand transit services to seven days per week and expand current operating hours.

Why should federal money (money that comes from people who definitely don’t live in Wenatchee, Washington) be spent on farmers’ markets and commuter buses in Wenatchee, Washington?

If farmers in Wenatchee want a market, shouldn’t farmers and the City of Wenatchee deal with that? Why should people in St. Louis or Miami or even Tacoma be on the hook for commuter buses in Wenatchee?

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9BNKH3O1&show_article=1

CHICAGO (AP) – Nearly half of all U.S. children and 90 percent of black youngsters will be on food stamps at some point during childhood, and fallout from the current recession could push those numbers even higher, researchers say.

The estimate comes from an analysis of 30 years of national data, and it bolsters other recent evidence on the pervasiveness of youngsters at economic risk. It suggests that almost everyone knows a family who has received food stamps, or will in the future, said lead author Mark Rank, a sociologist at Washington University in St. Louis.

"Your neighbor may be using some of these programs but it’s not the kind of thing people want to talk about," Rank said.

The analysis was released Monday in the November issue of Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. The authors say it’s a medical issue pediatricians need to be aware of because children on food stamps are at risk for malnutrition and other ills linked with poverty.

"This is a real danger sign that we as a society need to do a lot more to protect children," Rank said.

Hold on there, Rank. Aren’t we doing a lot already by feeding these kids? What more are we expected to do as taxpayers beyond providing their basic needs?

The real danger sign is that half of all parents can’t feed their own children, and rely on the government to provide for their families. I’m not getting into WHY these parents can’t feed their kids. The point is that they’re apparently just unable to. And they’ve been told that whatever happens, the nanny-state will be there to provide for their needs. It’s Hurricane Katrina times a thousand, just waiting to happen.

I’m not rich, and every month is a little tight, but I’m still among the minority of people who pay taxes. And every paycheck a chunk of my money is taken for the purpose of feeding some other poor schmuck’s kids without my having a say in it. It’s not charity, since I have no choice. Nobody ever has to ask me to contribute or donate, they just go to the government. Since it’s taken from me against my will, it’s theft.

I have bankers and politicians stealing from my ass in one direction, and half of the rest of the country stealing from my ass in the other. And yet we wonder why the “middle class” is shrinking?

Here’s the modern truth: there is no middle class. There are producers and looters. There are rich looters, and poor looters, and a few of us in the middle who they feed off of. And when the SHTF, these food-stamp parents are the people who are literally going to be trying to feed off of me. A bunch of dependent, brain-eating, zombie bastards.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was visiting Pakistan this week. Drudge picked up on this choice quote:

“The percentage of taxes on GDP (in Pakistan) is among the lowest in the world… We (the United States) tax everything that moves and doesn’t move, and that’s not what we see in Pakistan,” she said.

“You do have 180 million people. Your population is projected to be about 300 million. And I don’t know what you’re going to do with that kind of challenge, unless you start planning right now,” she said.

“If we are going to have a mature partnership where we work together” then “there are issues that not just the United States but others have with your government and with your military security establishment”.

Let’s start with that last part. In order to effectively "work together" with Pakistan, Hillary believes that they need an empowered central government and an effective "military security establishment." I can understand her point there. The state department would like to negotiate with one party rather than a bunch of tribal leaders and various corps of Islamic nutballs who integrate seamlessly into Pakistani life. But the interesting part is how she thinks a loose confederation of tribes and religious factions are supposed country is supposed to get to that point.

Her answer is by raising taxes. America taxes "everything that moves and doesn’t move." Pakistan doesn’t. Therefore, Pakistan is a mess, while America is strong. It’s about taxes, and taxes are about government control. It’s not about the character of the people, or their shared culture, or their ties to the land, or their recognition of natural law. It’s about taxation and government control.

I mean, surely she intended a nuanced interpretation of her statement, in which we’re supposed to take into consideration that the result of taxation will be the development of a vast bureaucracy to provide government-run education, press, banking, manufacturing, health care, retirement and jobs as a result of the collection of those taxes. But that’s not what she said, and what she said has meaning. It’s great when, once in a while, a liberal lets a little light shine in on the truth that lies within their cores.

In this case, liberals believe that government makes nations, whereas more enlightened people believe that a nation establishes a government for itself. It’s an important distinction. A nation is made up of people with a common language, common culture, and a historic claim to the land on which it exists. Pakistan is not a nation in the same way that America is a nation. There are over 60 different languages spoken by its population. It’s official language is English, but its national language is Urdu which less than 10% if its population speak. It’s 96% Islamic, but there’s the usual hateful split between Shia and Sunni among the population, which pretty much guarantees perpetual cultural violence and conflict. And up until 1947, there had never been a historical "Pakistani" state. It was created by the ever-disastrous British border-drawers who just flat-out made stuff up because they didn’t know what else to do with all the land that their empire couldn’t control.

But all that is secondary in importance. What REALLY matters, in the Clintonian, progressive world-view, is the ability of the the central government to impose top-down, bureaucratic, central planning and control. In other words, they want to apply to Pakistan the same liberal fascist form of government that they’re building here.

Taxation to a conservative is a necessary evil to be avoided when possible, used only to ensure the liberty of its citizens. To a progressive, taxation is an essential tool of authoritarianism used for the advancement of government power.