RUSH: Tom in Maple Grove, Minnesota, you’re next, and it’s great to have you here. Hi.
CALLER: Mega dittos, Rush.
RUSH: Thank you.
CALLER: I just have a general comment on this health care bill. It gets passed, I’m afraid that the language that they use to write these bills is so vague and filled with loopholes. Looking down the road, what happens when lawyers and liberal activist judges start getting involved?
RUSH: Well, liberal lawyers have written this, and so forth. What do you mean?
CALLER: They’re going to start finding a whole host of things in this bill that aren’t apparent right now.
RUSH: Uh, you mean when people take elements of it to court?
CALLER: Yes. Down the road a ways.
RUSH: I don’t know. See, that’s one of the great unanswered questions is: Where can you sue? I think I read something earlier in the week, I don’t think there is an appeals process here. I don’t know that it’s going to end up in court. I guess it could. I mean, if it does, you’re right. Your point is that they’re writing law anyway at the bench. Yeah, I don’t know. It’s a genuine concern, there’s no question. Tom, I appreciate your opinion. Who’s next? Sherry in Quad Cities, Illinois. Hi, and welcome to the EIB Network.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. Mega dittos from the Quad Cities, 200 miles to the west of Chicago, but in no way to the left.
RUSH: Ah, yes. Thank you.
CALLER: I wanted to tell you that I love your use of humor. I am immeasurably appreciative of what you say, how you say it, and when you say it.
RUSH: Well, you know what? I do, too. I love listening to myself talk — and if you were as right as I am all the time, you’d love hearing yourself talk, too.
CALLER: Case in point. Okay. My point is that, Rush. I watched the Montana town hall meeting at which Obama spoke about how he’s going to pay for this health care and a number of the dollars that would come from ‘saved money’ by the limiting deductions.
CALLER: If I could have had a Hugo Chavez moment I would have at a town hall meeting taken him the book by Judge Judy Sheindlin: Don’t Pee on My Leg and Tell Me It’s Raining. I think that sums up a lot of our frustration within this country. My concern has to do with his assumption of income flow. If you lower these deductions on people, I don’t care what their earnings are — $250,000 or more is the limit that he gives so that most of us feel safe — it’s going to divert earnings. People will just divert their earnings. They’ll work to get under that threshold. So he’s saying like we’re all supposed to be mindless sheep that he’s going to lower the rate of deduction, I’m sorry, and that’s going to keep the money coming in. That’s how we’re going to pay for it. We’re not supposed to think for ourselves. Well, guess what? We have brains. We do.
RUSH: This is the static analysis of behavior after tax policy has changed versus dynamic. And Obama does seem to think that there is no end to being able to ‘tap’ the private sector and wealthy people, that they’re always going to be producing wealth, and they’re always going to have it, and there is always gonna be money for him to get. But what he’s really doing with this is just playing the class envy card. He knows, or he thinks that he’ll have a much easier time selling this if he convinces most people it’s going to be free for them; it’s not going to cost them anything. ‘Eh, I’m going to raise taxes on a couple millionaires — and, by the way, we’re going to limit their tax shelters! We’re going to limit their deductions. We’re going to make sure they can’t shield it. We’re gonna soak ’em.’
Now, once he does that… See, that’s not accidental. Remember these people love crisis. They thrive on it. Because crisis gives them an opportunity to propose even more government to ‘fix’ whatever crisis they’ve caused. Now, if they actually do eliminate — for incomes over $250,000 a year — all deductibility of charitable donations, then it’s going to kill charities 50,000 times worse than Bernie Madoff did, because a lot of people do philanthropic works because they just are philanthropic and they like doing good things. But a lot of people do it for the tax deduction. A lot of people buy houses just to get the mortgage deduction. If you take that away, you are going to really harm charities. Fewer and fewer private donations are going to be made, and that’s going to lead to a crisis, and guess what?
Obama will be able to come in and say, ‘Well, we’ll have to fix this problem, too, and we’re gonna raise taxes on people so we can redirect some of that money.’ This is about how to kill the golden goose, and folks, I have said this — I don’t like saying it, but I’ve said this over and over again — this is not accidental. This is not naivete. This is a desire to take the money that exists in the hands of people who have it now and redistribute it to Obama’s friends: the disadvantaged, victims, whoever. Because Obama believes that most people who have a lot of wealth have not come by it honestly, that they’ve done it in a an unjust or immoral way because the American system of capitalism is unjust and immoral. This stimulus bill. It was a purposeful attack on the US economy. Nobody with any economic literacy would propose this kind of stimulus package, Porkulus package thinking that it’s actually going to create jobs or that it’s going to save jobs, especially where the money is going.
And what, 5% of it spent the first year? So here we have close to three million people who have lost their jobs, and they’re talking about doubling down and doing another stimulus. They’re stupid… You know, there’s a term I like to use called ‘educated stupid,’ and these are educated stupid people. They know what they’re doing and they’re just hoping that they’re going to continue to be able to get away with it, because exactly what you said: There are far more people that make less than $250,000 who think they’re not going to get touched. The only problem for those people is they’re losing their jobs left and right, and there aren’t a whole lot of job opportunities for them out there. So this is a willful, purposeful destruction of the capitalist US economy, and health care is the number one thing. Well, maybe the way he’s looking at it it’s the final nail in the coffin. That’s why it’s crucial. To Alexandria, Virginia, next. Maureen, thank you for calling. How are you?
CALLER: I am fine. I was listening to your show yesterday with Mark Steyn, and he was talking about the British health system is the third largest employer in the world. So I was wondering what ours would be in the first place once it went in. But my husband and my daughter both work for the government as contractors, and let me tell you: I think the federal employee has got to be one of the laziest, most uneducated groups of people that work in the United States.
RUSH: Well, I’ll bite. Why?
CALLER: Well, because in the first place, they can’t get fired. There is no way. They get to spend all the money they want — and at the end of the year if they haven’t spent all of their allotment, they go and ask, ‘If you want anything put in your request, because we’ve got all this money yet to spend.’ I think they all probably are pretty well related or they know somebody’s who’s in there and gets the daughter of or the son of or the nephew of somebody they know in there to work. I don’t know how they do their hiring practices, but I don’t think it’s really 100% totally aboveboard. Plus they have so many regulations. And then they’ll get a new supervisor and a new supervisor will come in and want to change everything because of the way it is running. He doesn’t understand or it’s not the way he wants it or he wants to make a name for himself, and they constantly are spinning their wheels. There’s no forward progress. I don’t see how they’re ever going to be able to run something of this size or anything.
RUSH: Well, I know. What do they run efficiently now? I mean, these people can’t even run the Cash-for-Clunkers program. Here’s a measly little $1 billion program, and they can’t even run that.