******************** THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO WWW.LEGALINSURRECTION.COM ********************

This blog is moving to www.legalinsurrection.com. If you have not been automatically redirected please click on the link.

NEW COMMENTS will NOT be put through and will NOT be transferred to the new website.

Sunday, February 22, 2009

The Revolt of the Kulaks Has Begun

The beginning of a protest movement against Barack Obama's redistributive policies is underway. Though still small, every movement starts somewhere. While called the "Tea Party" after the Boston Tea Party, this movement is similar to movements throughout history where the producers of society refuse to have their property and income confiscated.

This movement can succeed if it does not stop at protest and includes changes in economic behavior. Obama's redistributive plans require higher taxation, but higher tax plans (to be announced this week by Obama) are based on the fallacy that the "rich" will not change their economic behavior in reaction to higher tax rates.

History tells us, however, that economic redistribution plans fail because the producers of society would rather not produce, than have the fruits of their production taken away and given to others. Obama can raise the tax rates on income, but he cannot force people to generate income to be taxed. People may just say "no." This resistance will not come from evading taxes, but from evading taxable income. In the end, as must all economic redistributors, Obama either will have to resort to repressive measures, or he will have to abandon his redistributive plans.

The best example of this phenomenon is the forced collectivization of farms in the Soviet Union. At the time of the Revolution, Russia was a largely agrarian society which allowed more productive farmers (so-called "kulaks") to prosper. Since the kulaks represented a political threat to communism, the collectivization of farming was a focus of communist policy. From the start, the kulaks resisted, requiring Lenin to resort to repression:
Comrades! The revolt by the five kulak volost's must be suppressed without mercy. The interest of the entire revolution demands this, because we have now before us our final decisive battle "with the kulaks." We need to set an example.

1) You need to hang (hang without fail, so that the public sees) at least 100 notorious kulaks, the rich, and the bloodsuckers.
2) Publish their names.
3) Take away all of their grain.
4) Execute the hostages - in accordance with yesterday's telegram.

This needs to be accomplished in such a way, that people for hundreds of miles around will see, tremble, know and scream out: let's choke and strangle those blood-sucking kulaks.

Telegraph us acknowledging receipt and execution of this.

Yours, Lenin

P.S. Use your toughest people for this.
From 1928-1932, Stalin pressed forward with collectivization. In some circumstances, peasants lost the private ownership of land to the collective, in other instances land owners where forced to give most or all of their production to the state or collective. The forced collectivization was more violent at some times than others, but the consistent theme was the use of government power to force the Kulaks to subsidize less successful farmers and the state (sound familiar?).

"Stalin wanted to transform individual farms into large collective farms because he saw that the government was losing money to private traders. This required that the majority of farmers would have to work and live together on large state-run farms. Through these farms Stalin hoped to increase agricultural productivity, create grain reserves for Russia, and free many peasants for industrial work in the cities. In some cases the collectivization took the form of collective farming, in others forced reallocation of crop production." (Cite)

But the peasants, particularly the kulaks, refused to submit willingly, despite the promise that the contribution of their property would increase the collective good. "How did peasants initially respond to the idea of collectivization? Party agitators sent to the villages to persuade peasants of the benefits of collectivization often met with skepticism and mockery. Peasants who resisted the pressure of regional party officials to enroll in collective farms were labeled as kulaks; those who feared confiscation sold off their property as quickly as they could, in effect self-dekulakizing." (Cite)

In response to resistance, Stalin turned to terror. Yet resistance continued. Most significantly, peasants preferred to burn their crops and destroy their property rather than have it taken over by the government.
"But the peasants objected violently to abandoning their private farms. In many cases, before joining the kolkhozy they slaughtered their livestock and destroyed their equipment, The losses, as well as the animosity toward the Soviet regime, became so great that Stalin decided to slow down the collectivization process." (Cite)
The results of collectivization were food shortages and famine. Peasants preferred starvation and death to property confiscation.
"Peasant resistance to collectivization took many forms: wanton slaughter of livestock, women's riots (bab'i bunty), theft and destruction of collective farm property, and, perhaps most widely spread, an intentionally slow pace in carrying out directives of the kolkhoz administration. The tremendous loss of livestock through slaughter, inadequate fodder, and simple neglect made it virtually impossible for kolkhozes to fulfill their procurement quotas for meat and dairy products." (Cite)
Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress, who are so anxious to raise income taxes on the "rich," will be in for a rude surprise. There is nothing Obama can do about people who would rather not work than have the fruits of their labors confiscated, or who structure their lives to avoid taxation.

In addition to protest, supporters of the Tea Party would do well to change their economic behavior to deprive Obama of what he wants most, your tax dollars. Invest in municipal bonds, carefully manage your investments to minimize taxable income, do everything possible and legal to insulate yourself from creating taxable income. In so doing, you will doom Obama's plans because the inability to raise tax revenues will cause Obama to move to more confiscatory tactics, and then the political revolt really will begin, as it has throughout history. Can you say 1994?
UPDATE: The Soviet-era poster above says "Come, Comrades! With us to the Kolkhoz!"; other posters from the forced collectivization campaign are available here.


  1. Hi Bill,

    I'd be careful if I was you.

    Obama is often compared to Abraham Lincoln, and with good reason.

    Let's review our American History for a moment: Abraham Lincoln, who I greatly admire, nevertheless has the distinction of being the only American President ever to unleash the power of the United States military to kill other Americans whom he disagreed with politically.

    Make no mistake: Barack Hussein Obama, as he looks plaintively across the Mall, wants to be the next president to have a large monument.

  2. "You want to make a protest that is more than symbolic? Want to send a message that goes straight to the heart of what pisses us all off about this bailout?

    "Start making all of your mortgage payments 15 days late. Federal law imposes a grace period of 15 days, and forbids the imposition of late fees or credit reporting on late payments that are made within the grace period. There is no penalty, but if 1 million people did this with an average $1000 mortgage payment, that is like pulling a billion dollars out of the system.

    "To really twist the knife, withdraw permanently $1000 from your checking, savings, or brokerage account. Keep it at home in cash, or buy an ounce of gold with it and hold on to that. Now those "late" mortgage payments are not offset by the cash sitting in an account, they are pulled out of the system altogether.

    "That will not be ignored. Its your money they are screwing with, let them know how it feels when enough people decide to take their ball and go home."

  3. "Invest in municipal bonds, carefully manage your investments to minimize taxable income, do everything possible and legal to insulate yourself from creating taxable income."

    Hey Bill,

    Question for you: What prevents Obama and his Congress from confiscating the investments that you've so carefully structured to not produce any income for him? What law could Congress pass tomorrow, for example, that would confiscate up your 401k. What exactly prevents the Democrats from doing that?

    Nothing doest.

    Make no mistake about it, bub. They will go to any lengths. THAT's the Chicago Way.

  4. I would go so far as to quit my job and make a full withdrawal including penalties of my 401(k). As Florida points out, there is NOTHING keeping the Dems from changing the Roth IRA and/or 401(k) laws. Indeed, my theory is this is the ultimate plan, where else is there trillions in capital sitting in "tax-deferred" accounts just waiting for the government to confiscate. That is one big, juicy golden goose just waiting for the government to strangle it.

  5. Revolt? By who, the derivatives traders?...Seriously I'm not into "re-distribution" but Obama's plans are simply an overreaching RESPONSE to the ORIGINAL "re-distribution" successes of the past 15 years..In that time, more Americans saw they're "earnings" stay flat. They saw they're collective "net worth" RISE due to progressive actions by the Federal Reserve which led to inflated housing appreciation. Now, the "bubble" has burst and we find America "re-distributed" OUT of the middle class and into either lower or higher economic levels. In other words, the Middle Class had already started to vanish. It's now in full acceleration. America was fine with the idea of "small business growth" without accompanying income growth BECAUSE it was "masked" by the bloated appreciation in our individual and collective net worth...Now that the financial ponzi scheme has been exposed, we're dealing with a clusterf*** of grand proportions!...I would be VERY cautious in promoting an uprising. Once the masses find out that YOUR "revolution" and THEIR "revolution" have completely different objectives; you'll find yourself to be in the right place, at the right time - to be beheaded!

  6. I would not be shocked if there were a move to alter 401k's. See my post from back in October, http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2008/10/will-401ks-disappear-in-interest-of.html. When the government gives a tax break, it can take it away. As to outright confiscation of property, I don't think that's in the cards, but apparently others disagree.

  7. FDR did a capital levy, where he confiscated all gold in the country - coins, jewelry over a certain amount, certificates, bullion. No reimbursement, just took it.

    Obama will do the same, I'd wager, from IRAs and 401(k)s to savings acocunts.

    Redistributive policies in the US has been building to this for almost 80 years. We're at a perfect storm.

  8. Ridiculously inaccurate analogy spawned by a ridiculously inaccurate understanding of political economy that conflates mixed-market capitalism with socialism and socialism with state capitalism.

  9. How about April 15th as National Strike Day for U.S. taxpayers and citizens fed up with the current road-to-serfdom government and generational theft? The theme could be-- Atlas will shrug.

    On April 15th all non-essential workers could call in sick from work or school and take to their downtown Main Streets, rally 'round their courthouses or town squares, and make it clear with peaceful demonstrations that they are not going to let their hard-earned achievements and personal property be swindled away by government fiat and these redistributive policies without a fight.

    Without working, willing taxpayers to bilk there is no "stimulus."

  10. The scary thing is that Obama will be careful not to touch the financial devices of the _really_ rich. The bored billionaires who supported him don't want to pay any more in taxes, and they won't.

    He won't touch foundations, trusts, fancy tax shelters, municipal bonds, etc. He will definitely go after earned income, either through 1099 or salary income. After all, the "sweet spot" is decently-paid professionals who don't have enough money to hire wealth management teams - or buy politicians - and who can't restructure their income in complex ways.

  11. "As to outright confiscation of property, I don't think that's in the cards, but apparently others disagree."

    You're a lawyer, right?

    I'd refer you to US v. Kelo, wherein the United States Supreme Court ruled that it's perfectly OK for the US Government to confiscate your property.

    What would prevent Congress from ... just as an example ... saying that you can't cash out your 401k until you're 80?

    Today, you can cash out whenever you want (although you will pay a penalty). What if the Democrats decide tomorrow to take away that right, and use that mountain of savings as collateral?

    They haven't really confiscated it, but they've prevented you from using it, and they've converted it to their use.

    Nothing prevents this,except, of course, you cashing out your 401k today and stashing the cash (in gold, or in matresses).

    Trust me guy, they're coming for your 401k. It's the only pile of money left for them to steal.

  12. TruthHurts,

    The revolt will be by tiny business guys like me who won't hire extra help because of all the extra hassle and expense in collecting money for the OPR (Obama, Pelosi, Reid) boondoggles. It'll be families like mine buying less taxable stuff, making do with what we've got or buying used from private parties for at least a couple of years, or a couple more beyond that.

    What I saw in the past 25 years were attempts by conservatives to allow me to put more of the money that I had earned into my own retirement instead of grabbing it for the biggest ponzi scheme of all time known as Social Security. Now it's too late to prevent the population bubble of Boomers (of which I'm one) to suck that system dry and pile that burden on top of the real estate collapse that underlies the rest of this mess.

    Jacobson has it right, and you've touched a truth that you don't recognize. The middle class will statistically be going away, by our own volition. I can change my behavior to show less taxable income, which will perforce remove me from the "middle class." An army of little Atlases will shrug. It won't change my modest lifestyle. It will keep me from subsidizing the immodest life styles of those who rode these insane easy money policies into the crash. And I can keep making those adjustments faster than Congress can keep up until enough people say "Hey, wait a minute!" and force the confiscation to cease.

  13. Think of restructuring your financial life, or your business, to legally avoid taxable income as an act of lawful civil disobedience.

  14. This post is an even worse joke than the "Tea Party" protests. The vast majority of Americans do support some form of progressive taxation, and the idea that you seemingly want to abolish that is not going to get more than a handful of supporters (those protesting so far are indeed a handful).

    Perhaps saner people could come back with protests that don't have such extreme goals but are simply opposed to massive waste, patronage, redistribution-for-the-heck-of-it, and so on.

    And, perhaps those who actually want to do something effective will help me push this plan.

    Rather than helping plunge us further into Idiocracy with loony protests (that also happen to be good for web views), encourage people to go out and confront their representatives with difficult questions.

    Oddly enough, Insty et al continually refuse to encourage people to go out and exercise their First Amendment right to "petition", instead concentrating on just putting on a show.

  15. Remember that Lening and Stalin won. Obama's ACORN stormtroopers will have you on a lamppost.

  16. Ridiculously inaccurate analogy spawned by a ridiculously inaccurate understanding of political economy that conflates mixed-market capitalism with socialism and socialism with state capitalism.

    The only real difference between those forms of society is time.

    Contrary to one of the Left's oldest lies, economic freedom is not set apart from political freedom; it is a subset thereof. Freedom is freedom; individual rights to not cease to apply when a dollar is involved.

  17. The vast majority of Americans do support some form of progressive taxation, and the idea that you seemingly want to abolish that is not going to get more than a handful of supporters (those protesting so far are indeed a handful).

    The idea that we seek to abolish is that your "vast majority" has no right to force the participation of the minority (the smallest such being the individual).

    After all, if we were really that small a minority, what difference would it make if we simply opted out? Your "vast majority" would be able to get along just fine without us, yes?

    The fact that we are not allowed to opt out is the moral indictment of your system; it is a confession that we ARE important -- that you need our participation for your system to work, and this need transcends our rights.

    So we rightly object to his, and propose to withdraw our sanction by minimizing the available wealth for you to loot.

    As the gunnies like to say, molon labe.

  18. "Think of restructuring your financial life, or your business, to legally avoid taxable income as an act of lawful civil disobedience."


    That's a nice sentiment, but really, it's sophistry.

    The vast majority of Americans work for someone else, and have their taxes removed from their paychecks via withholding long before they ever see it.

    The only way to do what you're suggesting is to already be so rich for it to not really matter what Obama does.

    And if you're that rich ... say if you're Tim Geithner rich ... then you're not paying taxes anyway. You're not even declaring your income, and you're getting away felony tax evasion because you're part of the glitterati.

    The Untouchables (us unwashed masses) don't have the financial options afforded by tenured employment in the academe.

  19. Correction below:

    The idea that we seek to abolish is that your "vast majority" has any right to force the participation of the minority

  20. The vast majority of Americans work for someone else, and have their taxes removed from their paychecks via withholding long before they ever see it.

    It is currently possible to radically minimize withholdings via the W-4(?) form, and states usually have an equivalent.

    I am not so rich that it doesn't matter what Obama does, and yet I am adapting my finances to significantly slice into the State's loot, all by the rules. (Hint: large charitable donations to the organizations fighting for the right ideas work under both regular taxation and the AMT).

    They can change the rules to close off such avenues, of course, but they simply push more activity into the underground market while moving down the wrong side of the Laffer curve.

  21. A bit premature on the kulaks revolting. First it will be necessary to define the Kulak class as well as the podkulachniki (henchmen of Kulaks).

    Then the class warfare can begin.


  22. Per National Taxpayers Union, top 10% (108k threshold) of taxpayers pay 70% of income taxes; top 5% (153k threshold) pay 60%; top 1% (388k threshold)pay 40%. Actions by this small minority (who are the targets of upcoming tax increases) could have a dramatic influence on federal income tax receipts. The administration understands this, which is why Joe Biden sounded the "patriotism" horn as to upper income taxpayers, who do have the ability to restructure their finances. How strange that time and again the administration lambasts the "rich" when it is these very people who pay almost all income taxes. Substitute "kulak" for "rich" everytime you hear Obama or someone in his administration talk about the need to tax more, and it is eery.

  23. Pigilito, thanks for the reference to the podkulachniki. The Ukranian famine as part of collectivization may be the most underreported genocide in history. See http://www.lucorg.com/luc/itemIII4d.php for details.

  24. "Per National Taxpayers Union, top 10% (108k threshold) of taxpayers pay 70% of income taxes; top 5% (153k threshold) pay 60%; top 1% (388k threshold)pay 40%. Actions by this small minority (who are the targets of upcoming tax increases) could have a dramatic influence on federal income tax receipts."

    No, actions by this minority would have no discernable influence on government receipts, because the vast majority of this minority are collected by their employers.

    If this minority began restructuring their incomes to avoid being taxed ... the government would merely change the laws to tax this group via an alternative route. Do you think the government is merely going to stand for your insolence?

    No, they're not going to stand still for it.

    Look at California. Republican Governor. Pledged not to raise taxes when he was running. Today ... is raising taxes.

    So, you can't avoid this even if you vote Republican. Deck is stacked my man, and you're out of cards.

    There's only one way and it's the way of Paul Revere and all of our other forefathers ... be willing to spill tea.

    And blood.

  25. Those last two words are a step too far, and are the type of rhetoric that others will seize upon to argue that the tax protestors should not be taken seriously.

  26. Yes, William ... I agree.

    Nobody took Paul Revere seriously either, until he picked up a weapon and began shooting his countrymen.

    Look ... I'm just giving you a history lesson. The Boston Tea Party was an insurrection against the government. Dumping tea wasn't just symbolic. It prevented tax collection.

    When the armed Redcoats arrived to force the tax collection, they were met by our forefathers, who shot and killed them. They then wrote the Declaration of Independence.

    That's not hyperbole. Or warmongering. It's American History 101. It's what they teach down at the other college at Cornell. Maybe you should walk over there and audit a class.

  27. Florida has it right.

    Nothing changes until the political class is made to suffer.

    We are ruled by a collection of bureaucrats and lobbyists, who occasionally get themselves elected to public office. They live comfortably and believe that their feces has no olfactory footprint. They own my home state of Maryland lock, stock, and barrel.

    Revolution 101: They don't happen until the oppressed don't care any more about the consequences.

    I'm not knocking the Tea Parties; they represent a real frustration. But if we're going to institute real change, we're going to have to suffer, and, as Lenin well knew, we're going to have to make others suffer as well.

  28. Looking at Florida's posts, and Jacobson's response, reminds me about how too many people aren't taking this situation seriously.

    You know what the one business in America that is booming (no pun intended) right now? Retail firearms and ammunition sales. That's right, sales of military style rifles and self-defense handguns is at an all-time high, so high that the BATFE ran out of 4473 forms for a while. Defensive handgun caliber ammo is expensive and hard to get right now. Same with .223, 7.62x39, and .308. Ask yourself, why do so many Americans think they need to be stockpiling guns and ammo? (And these are, by and large, folks who already own guns and have extra ammo on hand.) Whether it's because they're afraid of new pushes for gun control, or for more dire reasons, it is very disquieting.

    There is a tremendous disconnect between the demographic that voted for Obama and the demographic that didn't. I really don't believe that those who are answering the MoveOn emails, egging their representives to support Obama, the stimulus, et al, understand that the Other America will not be led gently into that good night which is the death of capitalism and the rise of socialist America. It's because the self-identified 'elites' who voted for Obama are the type who won't fight, so they don't believe anyone else will fight them. The road to Hell isn't based upon good intentions, it's based on faulty assumptions.

    This, to me, is a LOT more scary than the stock market dropping by 20% since Obama took office. And, what happens when state governments in places like California break under the burden of public assistance payments (welfare)? What happens when people don't get the check they're accustomed to, that they have been told is an ENTITLEMENT? What happens then? Hint: look at Latin America, at Mexico, at 1930s Europe.

    If we ever needed a calming optimistic hand on the tiller, we need it now. Instead, we have Obama, invoking doom and gloom with every speech, deliberately panicking the country to further his Party's agenda. As Rahm Emmanuel said, "Never let a crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before." Stampede the rubes....

    You know why the stock market is down? Because no one believes it is going to get better anytime soon. Indeed, no one believes that anyone in control WANTS it to get better anytime soon.

  29. The Soviet's attack on the Kulak, and the near-Kulak, etc., was awesome in its extent. Having such a target helped explain many Soviet failures (I believe Kulaks were still being blamed for things up until Stalin's death).

    Whether the rich come to occupy the role of the Kulak remains to be seen. Certainly, they have potential to be an all purpose bogeyman. Perhaps their henchman (podkulachniki) will turn out to be the Republican party. Obama is already using them to justify his actions.

    I agre about the Ukranian famine being a form of genocide. Both Lenin and Stalin saw famine as a useful form of terror.

  30. I've got to agree with the doom and gloom guys. I've got a modest 401K (70K) and am just into the top 10% of wage earner brackets. I went to college at age 30 and busted my hump to get a degree and have worked my way up in the company. I had 20% down on my home, made sure that the payments < 25% of my pay.

    And it turns out I was the dumbass for all of it.

    I'm contemplating cashing out the 401K now before the govt. decides to take it. And yes, I applied for my Illinois Firearms Owner ID... I already had my fathers .45 side arm from his service. I will be purchasing an M4 and re-familiarizing myself with it. (US Army).

    I have a hard time seeing my Country going down like this. I cannot imagine the military being used against civilians here... if the govt. REALLY attempts to take 401K's, I think that will be the tipping point to some serious blood shed.

    I wish that political action could change things, but I don't see how that's going to be possible... when 51% realize they can get the other 49% to subsidize their lifestyle, there's nothing left for it but refreshing Jefferson's tree.

    I seriously see that coming within the next few years. The boomers are retiring and they're going to withdraw tons of money from the market. They are also going to expect us fewer number of workers to support ever larger numbers of them.

    Does not Compute.

  31. I think people are missing a vital component here. The current economy isn’t built on people tied to the land. Many of those top 5% are nationals of other countries, here to make a better life because the system has better rules in which to do it, or belong to a set of professionals with a applicable skill set (engineers, programmers, etc.).
    Once the rules are rewritten to make the US not so attractive to those people, the US will experience a brain drain of skill sets that allow for operation in any country, add to that a capital drain as investors see the US as just another country with socialist tendencies.
    Unless the US is going to ban travel, both people and capital are going to seek out other better locations. These people are going to go where the opportunity is, whether they are Indians, Chinese, or Americans. They will not be part of the protests; they will be watching it from abroad.

  32. I'm NO brainiac,
    But it seems to me people better pull back from all the running around and "living it up." We actually may get to the point of putting money in coffee cans and buring them in the rose garden like our grandparents did. Stop going to movies every Friday night and eating out 6 nights a week. A simple and REAL way to revolt is to HOLD ON TO OUR MONEY! Yeah, it won't grow like it would if it were "working for us" in the stock market and yeah it is a hassle staying at home, but we don't need 42 pairs of shoes, or weekend golf games.

    Protest by NOT spending money!

  33. "I wish that political action could change things ..."

    Well, you used to could vote for Republicans. Not so much, any more.

    Look at California. Arnold Hussein Schwarzennegger ran on a no-tax pledge and lo and behold, in the middle of the worst economic crisis ever to hit his state and the nation, the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, what does he do?

    He raised taxes? WTF is wrong with these people?

    Let's also not forget that, but for Republicans, the $787 Billion stimulus bill would have failed to pass.

    So, let's make something clear here: Republicans are working hand-in-hand with Democrats to tax and spend your children's future away.

    I wish that there was a political solution too.

    But there isn't.

  34. The problem with RINO Republicans is that too many are afraid to stand on principle. That's why Arnold caved in on taxes, even though he has fought the good fight against Dems in the executive and legislative branches to furlough workers and cut the state payroll. He needs to let the state run off of the cliff.

    The same is true of the Republican leadership. Steele should not give any support to Snowe, Collins, or Specter, since they voted against the party leadership. More important, we need a GOP version of the 'Kossacks' to run conservative candidates against these three in the primaries. We need to show RINOs there is a price to be paid for bucking the party.

    There is a political solution, but unless we can get enough folks to stick together, like the Democrats have, we won't be able to carry through on it. This (party unity, and standing on principle) has always been the weak spot for the GOP. Just once, I wish they'd all grow a pair.

  35. Talking about politics or public policy at this point is like moving deck chairs on the Titanic. Our economy and political system has hit the ice berg. It's only a matter of time before it sinks.

    Almost no one in the MSM seriously questions our governments ability to increase spending, sell bonds, print money and raise taxes on the rich without consequence. Anyone who says the system is nearing collapse is labeled a kook by the pundits and MSM.

    These are the same pundits and MSM who laughed at the kooks predicting the housing collapse a few years ago.

    Obama's election, class warfare rhetoric, an inability to keep selling our debt, printing a trillion dollars, and the progressive/confiscatory taxation system are creating perfect storm.

    The bottom half want more and more form the top half so they vote to increase taxes and benefits. The top half resist by working a little less. The bottom half will demand more just to keep the status quo and the top half will work even less. The political and economic forces driving us to a collapse are beginning to feed themselves.

    In physics terms, we have reached a critical mass.

    The revolution will not be televised. It will be reported on the last page of the Treasury Departments Monthly Report.


    Employment tax revenue - all of it withheld from paychecks - is relatively flat compared to last fiscal year. This would imply payrolls are relatively the same compared to last year.

    However, income tax revenue - some withheld and some self reported - is down about 10% this fiscal year. The folks at the top who can adjust their income are starting to shrug.

  36. Jester,

    It's not just the "folks at the top."

    For the past 10 years, I've been a net tax payer, to the tune of about $25,000 annually.

    I am now a net tax receiver, to the tune of about $25,000 annually.

    So, the government has seen a net minus of $50,000 a year.

    I intend to continue to consume as many resources as possible for as long as possible, by not working, hiding my cash income, spiriting away my savings and 401k money into places where it can't be counted thus depriving the banks of my capital, and then consuming as many tax dollars as possible in food stamps, EITC, "I'm depressed" Social Security scam money, Obama Mortgage Payments and whatever other money you working suckers will allow your new Messiah to throw my way.

    My new plan: Bankrupt the employed!

    Thanks, Suckers! for hiring such a dumb President!

  37. I have just discovered your blog thru American Daughter. Thank you for providing historical background to bolster your opinions and insights. I am of course no where near your professionalism, in fact I am just a 67 year old battle axe who is trying in my small way to let those who read me know what is happening to our nation and the peril we are in. I too often use history to illustrate my points. Since the 1960's history was replaced by social studies and young people seem not to know there was a world before their time. A world that made mistakes and that we are seeing the results of those mistakes today. Add to this the many distractions of everyday life in the world and young people are even unaware of what is happening today and the historical impact the actions taken today will have on our future as a nation.

    These young people have elected a President who himself has no understanding nor knowledge of history as is witnessed by the many blunders he has made. He does however know exactly where he wants to take our nation and I am so afraid he with the help of a like minded Congress will succeed.

    Well, as you see, I am passionate. I have added you to my blogroll and will visit often. I will at times carry your post to my site for my readers and always giving you credit of course and referring people to your blog as well. Sincerely, Brenda Bowers